jump to navigation

Vast Majority of college-educated democrats think sex not determined at birth November 16, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, huh?, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
7 comments

A recent survey shows that 77% of self-declared college educated democrats do not believe sex is determined at birth, or, for that matter, conception.

Not really a surprise at all.  The core base of the democrat party has shifted from minorities and lower-income whites to brainwashed products of the liberal arts and social science departments of so-called “elite” institutions.  Income matters much less than it used to in political alignment, what is going on in this nation is a culture, not an economic, conflict.  Of course, the super-rich, maybe guilt-ridden, maybe just classist and tribalist cadre makes up a vital part of the democrat base.  But aside from that it’s really much more down to class aspirations and moral turpitude.  Not just lack of faith in, but sneering hostility towards believing Christianity is also key.

Anyway, to the results:

Three out of four college-educated Democrats seem to believe that a man can be a woman if he just says so, regardless of his biology, genetics, and genitalia, according to a skewed survey conducted by the Pew Research Center.

The main question in the August-to-September survey of 4,573 people is built on the phrase: “sex assigned at birth.” But that phrase was invented by transgender activists to help them claim that every person’s sex is independent of their biology and that a newborn’s sex should not be unfairly “assigned” by the doctors and parents who examine the newborns’ biology and visible genitalia. The Pew survey asked:

Which statement comes closer to your views, even if neither is exactly right?

Whether someone is a man or a woman is determined by the sex they were assigned at birth [more on the very loaded phraseology below]

Someone can be a man or a woman even if that is different from the sex they were assigned at birth

According to Pew’s write-up:

The survey … finds that Democrats with a bachelor’s degree or more education are more likely than other Democrats to say a person’s gender can be different from the sex they were assigned at birth. About three-quarters (77%) of Democrats with a bachelor’s degree or more say this, compared with 60% of Democrats with some college and 57% of those with a high school diploma or less. No such [education] divide exists among Republicans.

OK, so democrats, especially college uneducated ones, are crazy.  But what is terrifying is that nearly half the country, at least according to this one survey (skewed as it surely is), think the same:

Now, the survey question that produced the responses below was itself incredibly biased.  It was designed both to confuse and to elicit a biased response.  Some people declaring they do not think sex is determined biologically may have been tripped up on the use of the trans-activist phrase “assigned sex,” which may have caused some people to think of the exceedingly rare situations (one in a million, or less) where some infants are born with malformed genitalia, having some characteristics of both male and female organs.  A DNA test will instantly reveal what sex they are – if there by Y chromosomes, you have a boy, matey.

But at any rate, goodness gracious, 44% of American adults think that whether one is a man or a woman is independent of…..whether they are a man or a woman?!?  Even taking into account the loaded nature of the survey question, anything beyond 15% or so is a travesty.  We are beyond lost.  And amazingly, age is actually only a slight variable in this belief set. It all comes down to cultural-political affiliation, by which we might also infer, possession or lack of orthodox religious beliefs.  Or we can just conclude that 44% of Americans are stark, raving mad.

God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Trinity – These are reality.  Rejection of reality in favor of some fantasy is a rough description of madness. So, in a sense, rejection of Jesus Christ and His Church is tantamount to madness, especially in a culture which was built upon such belief.  Now, the vast majority of people in this country today, even those who call themselves Catholic, have never experienced, nor been taught, real, believing Catholicism.  The reasons for this can be laid directly at the feet of the council fathers and Church leadership who have manifestly failed in their duty to preach the Faith not only to those inside the Church, but to those outside, as well.  Cultures do not fall to this level of madness without first having undergone total moral innervation.  The crisis in the Church is one of the prime – probably THE prime – source of this moral decay.

And so now we have scores of millions of Americans who believe things that simply are not – that two men can be “married,” that killing babies is about “choice,” that individual liberty is the font of fascism, and that a man is not a man simply because he says so.

These are all indicators of extremely late stage moral decadence, of the type that have been universal harbingers of civilizational collapse in the past.  And, it must be said, the Church, in the failures of her leadership particularly but also across the board, has had a huge role in creating the environment ripe for a collapse.

Lord, have mercy on us.

 

Advertisements

Francis – “Denying” Climate Change “Perverse” November 16, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, Francis, General Catholic, Interior Life, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
12 comments

Sodomy – who am I to judge?  Adulterers committing the gravest of sacrilege in sacrilegiously receiving the Blessed Sacrament – no problem.  But denying the sacred doctrine of anthropocentric global cooling warming climate change – such perversion, such heresy!, has no place in the Church.

Rorate nailed it on the day after his election – welcome to the pontificate of Paul VI, redux:

Pope Francis on Thursday rebuked those who deny the science behind global warming and urged negotiators at climate talks in Germany to avoid falling prey to such “perverse attitudes” and instead accelerate efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions. [no major industrialized nation has reduced carbon emissions more over the past 10 years than has the United States. This was just reported a day or two ago.  Even if the United States went back to a 17th century economy with the attendant death of 90+% of the population, carbon emissions worldwide would still grow rapidly due to the unabated output of India, China, and similar nations.  The entire project, then, is just a joke.]

Francis issued a message to the Bonn meeting, which is working to implement the 2015 Paris accord aimed at capping global emissions. [And how many kilotons of carbon were spewed into the atmosphere by thousands of activists, plutocrats, and bureaucrats jetting into Bonn from around the world?] In it, Francis called climate change “one of the most worrisome phenomena that humanity is facing.” He urged negotiators to take action free of special interests and political or economic pressures, and to instead engage in an honest dialogue about the future of the planet. [For the leftist, “dialogue”=doing what I want. By “special interests,” Francis means those with very justifiable concerns not only about the faulty theory of human-caused climate change, but the murderous, impoverishing impact of sudden and draconian limits on emissions of what is an entirely natural substance]

Francis didn’t cite any countries by name, but the United States has announced it is withdrawing from the Paris accord, and President Donald Trump has nominated several people in his administration who question scientists’ conclusions that human activity is behind the global rise in temperatures. At the same time, the U.S. administration has promoted the use of fossil fuels like coal for U.S. energy needs.

In his landmark 2015 environmental encyclical, Francis said global warming is “mainly” due to human activity and he called for fossil fuels to be progressively phased out without delay. [Thus we have a Bishop of Rome, heir of St. Peter, endorsing, in a doctrinal document, a dubious and highly contentious scientific theorem.  This will only turn out badly, and should global warming be decisively refuted by a mass return to sanity and de-funding of government-directed scientific propaganda “research,” it will be used by enemies of the Church forever anon.]

In his message, the Argentine pope denounced that efforts to combat climate change are often frustrated by those who deny the science behind it or are indifferent to it, those who are resigned to it or think it can be solved by technical solutions, which he termed “inadequate.” [Said the doctrinaire liberal with absolutely no scientific training or credibility]

“We must avoid falling into these four perverse attitudes, which certainly don’t help honest research and sincere, productive dialogue,” he said.

Well there you go, you perverts.  You get the sense Francis is building towards something, a great and thorough rebuke of the Church That Was.  I mean, the Vatican is issuing stamps celebrating the worst, most destructive heresy in the history of the Church.  It seems more and more plausible this man wants a decisive, open break with the Church and the Tradition upon which it is founded. I mean much, much further than the things he’s already done.  Something like nailing his own figurative 99 theses on the door of the Vatican, an open, unmistakable embrace of Protestantism and call for the Church to repent of its “errors.”

I don’t mean to become overwrought over this latest, relatively minor upturned middle phalanges at the dwindling number of faithful.  It’s more the whole sweep of this pontificate, nearly 5 years old now, that I’m talking about.

h/t reader TT

A Little Fun Video – I Like Guns November 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, firearms, fun, non squitur, silliness, Society.
4 comments

Man what a lucky guy.  I’ve never heard of this Steve Lee before, but he got access to a mighty collection of uncommon firearms to have a hand at.  Man I would LOVE to have an RPG-7 with real rounds.  I am not sure how one would even obtain the rounds, given that they are explosives.  I do know some guys who have had training RPGs that could not fire, but that’s no fun.  Of course, the machine guns would also be a blast.  And contra those who say automatic weapons have no usefulness, they absolutely do, suppressing fire can be hugely important and they are excellent at just that.  They are also excellent in a static defense role against large numbers and in scaring the jeebers out of the Feds when they come to take your guns away.  Heh.

Anyway, the song is fun and lighthearted and I found it quite entertaining.  Hopefully you will, as well.

USCCB Bishops – Immigration Not a Matter of Prudential Judgment       November 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, error, General Catholic, Immigration, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
16 comments

At least, maybe, when it comes to the canard of instant mass deportation.

But in reality, in their recent confab discussing the hot-button topic of immigration, what was presented an attempt to basically refute lay complaints that the US bishops – reverting to unfortunate, damaging, hurtful stands they took in the 70s and 80s – are infringing upon lay rights by insisting upon specific policy prescriptions as being the only doctrinally acceptable approach.  This echoes the dark days of the “Bernadin”-dominated US episcopate, when supposed paeans to “peace” and “justice” were in reality little more than far left talking points and anti-Reagan, anti-US defense rhetoric.

Well, personnel is policy, and Francis has been busy remaking the US episcopate in his own image and likeness.  With men like Blaise Cupich in positions of great influence, and the sidelining of more (relatively) conservative forces like Conley and  Chaput, this is hardly surprising.  Francis’ influence will likely be felt in the US episcopate for a decade or more to come, depending on how long he reigns, and how replaces him.

At any rate, here’s what the bishops, including the liturgical aesthete Cordileone, had to say about the laity and their uppity opinions regarding prudential judgment. I’ll provide a little color commentary along the way:

As the conclusion of a lengthy discussion on migration, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops decided Monday to draft a statement from their president expressing the need for humane and just immigration reform.

The Nov. 13 proposal was first floated by Archbishop Michael Sheehan, Archbishop Emeritus of Santa Fe. After debating how to go about preparing a statement, it was agreed by oral assent that Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, president of the conference, would issue a statement with the assistance of the Committee on Migration, chaired by Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, assisted by Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles.

The discussion followed brief presentations from Archbishop Gomez and Bishop Vasquez. The Los Angeles archbishop outlined the principles which guide the US bishops’ work on migration, which come from Strangers No Longer, a 2003 pastoral letter issued jointly by the US and Mexican bishops’ conferences……… [That is a poor, and in many ways politically extremist, document.  It is on a par with “Always Our Children,” which tacitly or openly endorsed most of the sodomite agenda, for bad documents written by bishops in the past 20 years.  It insists upon basically a free right for Mexican and other Latin American nationals to have free access, on demand, to US jobs, welfare benefits, and services, with nothing more than lip service, and even that slight, to the extremely negative impact mass immigration of low-skill, benefits-seeking, poorly-educated has on native workers in a post-industrial economy.  This is not 1890.  We don’t have millions of manufacturing jobs suitable for a 3rd grade intellect anymore. The bishops are living in a fantasy land, constructed from their near total disconnect with the flock they lead and their needs.  The robust economy and abundant riches they refer to constantly as the driving moral imperative in favor of ceaseless mass immigration with virtually no limit or control no longer exists.  Trump was elected precisely because millions of Americans, more and more of them formerly solidly middle class, can no longer find work.  Their wages are horribly depressed by competition from illegal and other foreign workers imported into this country specifically for the purpose of driving down the cost of wages. Thus the bishops, contrary to their rhetoric, are not really so concerned about the little man – there are millions of Americans suffering gravely from the immigration pandemic – they are actually carrying water for the transnational globalist elite, who want a large and ignorant labor force that makes little more than $5 an hour. This is an environment in which everyone suffers, including the immigrants, the vast majority of which lose their faith, and generally also their moral compass, in crossing the Rio Grande. I am being harsh, the bishops may simply be naïve and myopic, but a very solid argument can be constructed that they are deliberately acting in behest of powerful interests, all the while clothing themselves in the garment of “friend of the little guy” (so long as he is not a native-born American)].

……..Bishop Oscar Cantu of Las Cruces raised the question of how to counter charges that immigration policy is a matter of prudential judgement, and that the faithful may therefore in good conscience come to a judgement which differs from that of the bishops.

Bishop Thomas Wenski of Miami responded that “we’re making our prudential judgement, too … in the light of Catholic teaching.” He emphasized that “immigrants are not problems, but brothers and sisters; strangers, but strangers who should be embraced as brothers and sisters. We’re offering what we think is best, not only for the immigrants, but for our society as a whole. We can make America great, but you don’t make America great by making America mean.”

Immigration reform, he maintained, must “include the common good of everyone: Americans and those who wish to be Americans.” [OK, that’s your opinion, but many Catholic laity believe it is not only wrong, it is destructive and harmful and in many ways achieves the opposite of its intent (i.e., worse outcomes for Americans AND illegal immigrants).  We can certainly disagree in prudence.]

Bishop Soto responded that deportations do not fall under the category of prudential judgement, but rather were included by St. John Paul II in his 1995 encyclical [sic] Evangelium vitae among the sins which cry out to heaven, and so is not merely “consistent with Church teaching,” but “to discard it as a prudential judgement doesn’t reflect our tradition.” [First of all, this is a red herring. No one is seriously advocating, or seriously expects, mass deportations to begin this year, or next, or the year after that.  I for one am single-minded – build the dang wall, worry about what to do with those here after that.  We must control the situation, the inflow, before we try to reverse it.  Once the crisis is passed, we can talk sensibly about how to deal with those here.  Secondly, there are four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.  An encyclical is an important document but not the place for novel de fide definitions.  Thirdly, Evangelium Vitae, which focused primarily on abortion and contraception as evils against human life, mentions deportation once, in quoting Guadium Et Spes, the 3rd worst document of Vatican II, for a list of evils which are “infamies.”  Whether an “infamy” equals one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for justice is quite unclear.  If so, Vatican II added about 30 other sins to that list, because Guadium Et Spes 27 condemned, equally, and without distinction, everything from genocide and abortion to “living conditions” and “where people are treated as mere instruments of gain rather than as free and responsible persons.”  That is to say, while GeS 27 sounds impressive, it’s theological import and meaning are muddled, at best.  Naturally, then, it would be a favorite of a progressive bishop.]

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco recommended the five principles from Strangers No Longer as a sine qua non, on which “there can be no disagreement” among Catholics. “While there’s room for prudential judgement, it’s not something that can be taken lightly” because it “involves such basic considerations of justice.” [But justice to whom?  Aquinas and Augustine would indicate that justice begins with those closest to home.  When there are periods of abundance, or when economic and cultural circumstances permit, there can be quite liberal approaches to immigration. With prolonged economic depression and cultural disassociation growing to the level of near open conflict, however, prudence would indicate, even demand, a much more conservative approach.  This has been the situation in the US for over 200 years, with periods of mass immigration leading to problems followed by periods of restricted immigration allowing for cultural and economic assimilation.]

———-End Quote————

But let’s be honest, this issue of mass immigration in the present context, is at least as much – and I mean this from the bishop’s perspective, as well – about insuring permanent ascendance for progressive/leftist politics in this country as it is about any purported concern for the huddled masses yearning to breathe free (and is in fact probably much, much more about the former than the latter).

Correspondent MFG sent me this link, and he notes – quite intelligently – that this seems an attempt by the bishops to up their rhetoric and try to squash lay arguments against the bishop’s very liberal pro-immigration stance.  The prudential judgment argument has been a powerful one, and they seem to be trying to take that away.  As MFG notes, the way to combat this attempt is by returning to first sources and principles, going back to Aquinas, Augustine, Peter Canisius, and others to demonstrate the proper Catholic understanding of the role of government, of citizens of a land’s duties to one another and to those of other countries, of Catholic moral principles (in a hierarchical sense), and all such related topics.

Doing this in a systematic fashion will show that Catholics of any stripe, lay, clergy, whatever, are fully  within their rights to advocate for much more limited immigration than the status quo of the past 50 years, and to preserve the culture and heritage of the land they love, which they see slipping away faster and faster all the time.  This latest bit of rhetorical weaponry from the bishops is frankly very ugly, very manipulative and smacks of desperation.

UPDATE: Commenter CMatt makes a great point that I failed to address (in my defense, I covered quite a bit, anyway) – these are bishops talking, yes, but not necessarily YOUR bishop, and their authority over you as a soul is basically non-existent.  It only exists to the extent that the bishops unanimously approve documents or actions of the Conference, and even in that situation it is more of a tacit authority, something novel in the history of the Church and of dubious significance for souls.  That is the huge problem with episcopal conferences, and why Pope Leo XIII found them far from his liking – they muddy the lines of authority greatly and cause tremendous confusion when their actions are contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith.  Much of Testem Benovolentae, Leo XIIIs encyclical denouncing the heresy of Americanism (which the US bishops have never faithfully implemented) has to do with these manifest problems that emerge from such conferences – bureaucratization, secularization, inordinate focus on money/funding, an excessive interest in the material works of mercy vice the spiritual works, etc.

Trump Matters: FBI Investigating Planned Butcherhood Baby Part Bonanza November 14, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, cultural marxism, fightback, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
34 comments

As we lamentably see in the news almost every day, the supposedly apolitical executive branches of government have become wholly politicized special interest groups who view their agenda – constant growth of budgets, personal wealth, and power – as being virtually as one with the democrat party and the establishment class of Repubniks.  This process, which has been underway since at least the early 90s, accelerated and metastasized unbelievably under Obama.

Still, a change of administration can have some impact on federal agencies, especially with the right leadership (I am not saying Sessions as AG is the right leadership).  Under Obama, massive evidence of Planned Barrenhood’s blatantly illegal murdered baby part sales operation was swept under the rug.  In fact, a deeply politicized, hopelessly immoral, and endlessly corrupt political machinery sought to persecute and even jail not Planned Barrenhood, but those who exposed their cynical greed.

Well, things may be changing, if far too little, and far too slowly.  It is reported that the FBI MAY – not is, but MAY – be investigating Planned Murderhood for illegally profiting from the sale of the children they callously murder in their hundreds of thousands every year.  Which, even if true, is really very late in the game and will probably not go anywhere, but it is perhaps a hopeful indication that the ceaseless leftist bent in the federal government may be softening a bit:

The FBI signaled this week agents may be investigating whether Planned Parenthood’s dealings in fetal tissue were legal.

Sources told The Hill the FBI has requested documents from the Senate Judiciary Committee obtained from the committee’s investigation into Planned Parenthood’s fetal tissue dealings. The investigation came after the Center for Medical Progress published a series of explosive videos in 2015 revealing the abortion giant was harvesting and distributing aborted baby parts for researchers. [Yes, and numerous even more damning videos from this and other exposes put together by CMP remain unreleased, as David Daleiden and other CMP members are under indictment and gag order in the Republik of Kalifornia]

CMP alleges Planned Parenthood was illegally profiting from the exchange of limbs and organs, and the House and Senate launched investigations into the non-profit’s practice. Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley referred Planned Parenthood to the FBI at the conclusion of that investigation, saying his committee found evidence indicating the group was profiting.

Planned Parenthood told The Hill none of its affiliates have been in contact with the FBI. [so maybe this isn’t a big thing after all?  Far be it from Planned Parenthood to lie, after all]

So on a tangential note, what do you guys make of this Roy Moore imbroglio in Alabama?  It seems to me nothing but a political hit job, rather like the claims of sexual harassment leveled at Trump in October 2016, and then completely forgotten after he won?

I get why McConnell and the rest of the establishment would go after Moore: they’d much rather have a democrat than an honest to goodness conservative to deal with.  But I am pretty disappointed that even Ted Cruz, who I thought was smarter than this, is now calling for Moore to drop out of the race.

If I were Moore, I wouldn’t do it.  I’d stay in and remain 100% defiant.  We cannot let the Left start obliterating candidates simply based on outrageous, totally unsupported allegations from 40 years ago.  Plus, we’ve seen far too many political hit jobs vanish into thin air as soon as some serious investigation begins (and I understand some of the allegations have already melted, and the credibility of some accusers is already under doubt).  ‘

But I don’t know what happens if the Alabama Republican party withdraws their support.  Supposedly, the democrat becomes the automatic winner then in a two man race.

So what happens viz a viz the base and the Republican party if they manage to get him to lose, when he seemed set to win?  Breitbart would say “WAR!” but what would that entail?  How else can we tell the party to radically change course, or else?  And if they continue not to comply?  Then what?

Flightline err Tuesday: Showing the Flag in the Sea of Japan November 14, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Flightline Friday, foolishness, fun, non squitur, silliness, Society, technology.
2 comments

Every year, the RIMPAC exercise will feature some impressive shows of force, with as many as three US carriers, many US and allied escorts, and an occasional allied carrier or similar “capital” ship.

But RIMPAC is generally staged around Guam.  Last week, however, the following was recorded in the western Sea of Japan or East China Sea off the coast of North Korea:

That is USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76), USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71), and USS Nimitz (CVN-68), along with what I believe is the Japanese JMSDF Izumo helicopter carrier.  There are a dozen odd escorts.

But the frankly cool part is looking down on the flyover by B-1Bs and Super Hornets.  That’s not a sight one sees everyday, a top-down aerial view of not only a large naval formation but also manned bombers and fighters.

Now the view from the carriers:

View from inside the Nimitz pilot house during the obvious PR event:

Amazingly, the USN managed not to have a collision in spite of all these ships being in such close proximity.  Top. Men.

Not sure how wise such a demonstration is in such close proximity to hostile shores.  That’s about $70 billion worth of hardware.

Since the USN only has 9 carriers, and typically two are in either refit (like USS George Washington right now, in refit for 2 years) or otherwise unavailable for every one deployed carrier, that’s basically the entire US carrier force right there.  I think there is one more in the Persian Gulf right now (Vinson?).  It is possible at times to take a force of 9 and have 5 deployed, but that’s about it, and only some of the time.  More than likely, only 3 are available on a day to day basis.

So the Brits with two Queen Elizabeth class ships basically have zero carriers, at least as a sort of worst case your enemy picks the day to start the war kind of scenario.

Anyhoo.   Love to see those Bones flying over the carriers, but the operational art the old SAC had……….I’m not sure it exists anymore:

I’m Not Wrong, I’m Just Ahead of My Time November 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, cultural marxism, General Catholic, history, reading, scandals, sickness, Society, true leadership, unadulterated evil, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

Four years ago, I posted my opinion, based on quite a bit of evidence, that the United States irrevocably lost the war in Vietnam after the Kennedy administration approved, and helped instigate, the assassination of the only patriot leader of sufficient standing and capability to lead the fledgling nation of South Vietnam through a domestic insurgency and foreign invasion, Ngo Dinh Diem.  I didn’t get much flak for that post – I think it was outside most reader’s area of interest – but I was gratified to see last week that an author has written a book advancing just my point – that Diem was falsely maligned by the US press and a Kennedy administration that badly wanted a pliant stooge leading Vietnam, rather than a dedicated patriot who was vehemently opposed to seeing mass US ground troops taking over the war in his country.  Diem knew that a US takeover of the war would de-legitimize his government and be the perfect propaganda piece for the communists to convince rightly nationalist Vietnamese to oppose the southern government.  This is, to a very large extent, what happened.  US involvement post-Diem expanded massively, successive unstable puppet governments ruled the country until the ineffectual and autocratic Thieu took over, and support for the government of South Vietnam remained divided and tepid, at best.

There is a long post on the book at The Federalist, which my friend, fellow Catholic, and Vietnamese Patriot Hiep Nguyen sent me.  Some excerpts below:

That man is Ngo Dinh Diem, president of the Republic of Vietnam (better known as South Vietnam) from 1955 to 1963, his rule and life cruelly ended in a military coup tacitly supported by the U.S. government. A recent book on Diem’s life, “The Lost Mandate of Heaven: The American Betrayal of Ngo Dinh Diem, President of Vietnam,” by military historian Geoffrey Shaw clarifies why Americans would do well to mourn the tragic loss of a man many deemed to be Vietnam’s best chance of defeating communism……..

[Follows an interlude in which the dominant leftist narrative of Diem as a grasping, incompetent autocrat is described at length.  We’ll skip that]

……..Shaw’s biography of Diem paints a far different picture of “America’s Mandarin.” For starters, Diem was a deeply religious man, whose Catholic faith was central to every decision in his life. Often attracted to the religious life, Diem had to be constantly pushed to embrace his natural skills as an administrator and politician.

Diem had a reputation both as an ascetic scholar and a capable bureaucratic, one who seemed to perfectly fit the role of the ideal Vietnamese Confucian leader. Indeed, as Shaw shows, Ho Chi Minh admired Diem’s austerity, and likely sought to emulate it. Even at the height of his power, Diem lived meagerly, and was known to constantly give money away to any in need. He was known to rise early every day to attend Mass, and worked brutal 16-hour days………

…….The Buddhist protesters who so famously undermined Diem’s regime in the months leading up to his ouster were in fact a minority within the south, incited by Buddhist extremist leaders very likely supported by the communists. Rather than a reflection of the teetering authority of the government, the Buddhist crisis was more likely a propaganda effort to obstruct what so many contemporary accounts and historical documents suggest: Diem and his brother were incrementally winning on both the political and military fronts. [Winning, but as the author notes, incrementally, and not nearly fast enough for the nascent 24 hours news cycle-dominated American politics of the time.  Of course, the problem of instantaneous victory increased exponentially after mass American ground forces were committed, which is the very thing Diem refused to countenance.  He wanted to win the war for the long haul and build up a survivable independent nation at the same time, and had done a good enough job that the North under Nguyen Tat Thanh (Ho Chi Minh) was compelled to basically invade the South with massive ground forces to keep the Viet Cong from being crushed]

So how have we come to have such a skewed perception of Diem and his reign as president of South Vietnam? According to Shaw, two sources share the majority of the blame: an American press heavily biased against Diem, and a circle of senior government officials — led by Averell Harriman and Roger Hilsman — hell-bent on replacing him.

Correspondents from such publications as The New York Times and Washington Post, contrary to their portrayal by Burns and Novick’s television series, were often junior reporters in search of the next sexy story to burnish their credentials. Many spent most of their time in Saigon and other major cities, inevitably drawn into the circles of rumor and intrigue that represented only a segment of Vietnamese society. This created a skewed perception of Vietnamese popular opinion, which was particularly troublesome given that Diem’s efforts were focused largely on protecting and improving the lot of poor South Vietnamese farmers, who made up a majority of the population.

Throughout the Kennedy administration, the press corps published article after article condemning just about everything Diem did, while urging his removal. The media’s presentation of events on the ground were far more negative than those military assessments offered, or those of U.S. Ambassador Frederick Nolting, who supported Diem’s regime. The media’s hatchet job was so over-the-top that U.S. officials on a number of occasions complained directly to the editors of the New York Times and Washington Post[So here we have it, fake news a la the 1960s.  The author is right, most of the reporters in South Vietnam in the early 60s were very junior, and very ambitious.  They were not as intellectually and physically lazy as today’s media, but they were not nearly so well informed as they thought.  They were also heavily biased against Diem for a wide variety of reasons, but more importantly, generally had no idea what they were writing or talking about.  The intricacies of South Vietnamese politics, still confusing even 50 years after the fact, were way, way beyond them. They sought simplistic “good guy bad guy” scenarios to create narratives for the public back home, just as the media does to this day.]

……….As for Kennedy’s administration, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Averell Harriman  [A nominal Republican, but a very liberal, Rockefeller type] led a cadre of officials within the government vehemently opposed to Diem’s regime. Much of this stemmed from Harriman’s distaste for Diem’s attempts to maintain autonomy over his government, the latter often spurning U.S. directives he viewed as misguided, if not a threat to the survival of his country.

Probably the most famous example is Harriman’s support for the neutrality of neighboring Laos, a policy that allowed the communists to take over large parts of the Laotian countryside and use it to transfer fighters and materiel to communist insurgents (the notorious Vietcong) in the south. The route through Laos became known, jokingly, as the “Averell Harriman Memorial Highway.” Diem was adamant in calling this out for what it was: a direct attack on his nation’s security and viability. Harriman, a classic example of a condescending WASP bureaucrat, was widely known to despise Diem for resisting U.S. policy.

Shaw’s research shows it was Harriman who instigated and led growing support within the Kennedy administration for Diem’s removal, consistently setting the tone of cabinet discussions as explicitly anti-Diem. As would be expected, he sought to sideline those individuals — like Nolting — who offered a different, more sympathetic take……….

…………Harriman’s argument — that Diem’s persecution of Buddhists had “made it impossible for the United States to back him” — eventually won in the White House, despite a congressional fact-finding mission in late October 1963 (the month before the assassination) that concluded Washington should stick with Diem. The White House ignored the report, and a wealth of other information, and communicated to Vietnamese military coup plotters they would not oppose Diem’s removal.

The men who supported the coup surely must have known what would happen to Diem and his brother. When the two were discovered inside the Church of Saint Francis Xavier in Cholon on 2 November, soldiers acting on coup leaders’ orders secured them inside a personnel carrier, where their executioner “cut out their gallbladders while they were still alive, and then shot them.”

This was the ignominious end to an American ally, a man whom observers — Americans, French, British, Australian, and even North Vietnamese — believed (or in the case of the communists, feared) was Saigon’s best chance to preserve an independent South Vietnam.

………Ngo Dinh Diem came to power in South Vietnam through the help of the United States. Burns-Novick’s film and Karnow suggest even this was a farce, given Diem’s ultimate rejection of the planned 1956 nationwide elections, though Shaw’s careful research proves this a problematic thesis, as well. Although the communists quite expectedly called “foul” when Diem demurred on elections, Ho Chi Minh’s government had already been in direct violation of the 1954 Geneva Accords by building up their military forces and supporting communist insurgent networks in the south.

Meanwhile, in the north, the communists were busy suppressing revolts, murdering thousands of people during their unpopular and poorly contrived land reform efforts. Moreover, as Shaw argues, their flagrant violation of the Laotian neutrality agreement years later proves the communists would never have allowed a free and fair nationwide election anyway. Diem simply saw the sham for what it was.

Indeed.  Those purported elections, upon which so much of the left-wing criticism of Diem rest, was always going to be a sham. First of all, the North outnumbered the South, even after 1 million mostly Catholic North Vietnamese fled south during the brief period of UN control after the French collapse.  Secondly, with a violently repressive communist government, anyone but a leftist bonehead could predict that the North Vietnamese would vote 100% for the communist government, just as the people of the Soviet Union used to vote 100% for the single-party commie candidate in their sham elections.  Thirdly, as noted, the North had already violated the 1954 accords on numerous fronts.  Only an idiot would submit to an election under such circumstances.

And I think this is the ultimate rub – not so much for the mainline democrats of the day (1956), which were a very different crowd than the democrats of today – for the hardcore leftists in the media and academia who have always held such opprobrium for Diem.  They wanted the North to win. The North were part of the great leftist utopian machine, and thus sacred parts of the worldwide leftist revolutionary element.  Many of these people are the same ones who marched in demonstrations against the war shouting “Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh, NLF (National Liberation Front – the Viet Cong) are going to win!”  Diem, an ardent Catholic and anti-communist, was the antithesis in what they wanted to see in government.  Bringing him down would go a very far way to seeing through the ultimate goal of a North Vietnamese communist victory.

I say that is the largely unstated motivation of the historians and media personalities who have blighted Diem’s name.  The government officials complicit in the plot to murder Diem were generally not of this cohort, they were simply liberally minded American incompetents horribly out of their depth and seeking to cover up their role in an unfolding catastrophe.

I think as time goes on there will be a general re-appraisal of Diem’s role and the inevitable events that followed after his death.  I think this historian Shaw (and I have not read the book) is very much on the right track.  Diem was a flawed man, as all men are, but he was by far the best leader the South Vietnamese had, and the one most likely to prevent the country from falling to communism.  It is quite possible to imagine a much different history to that still suffering nation had he not been betrayed by his erstwhile “allies.”

Testimony of Steve Willeford, Hero in Texas Church-Shooting November 8, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, cultural marxism, firearms, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, scandals, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.
comments closed

A very good interview from Steven Crowder below.  Sutherland Springs is only about 5 miles from where one of my wife’s sisters lives.  I do not know if they knew any of the victims.  My sister in law lives just outside La Vernia, which is about 7 miles from the shootings.

There is more and more evidence that the crazed shooter was motivated at least generally by hatred of Christians, with a heaping dose of base millennial instability, grave childhood woundedness, and severe emotional disorders to complete the tragic mix .  He used an AR-type weapon to perpetrate this atrocity, while he was also stopped by an AR-type firearm.  Hero Steve Willeford testifies that, due to the body armor the maniac atheist shooter Devin Kelley was wearing, it required at least an AR-type firearm to stop him.  It also seems increasingly likely that it was Willeford’s shot that put an end to Kelley’s life:

Obviously, prayers are urgent for all those suffering from this evil, a sign far less of a country in need of stricter restrictions on firearms for citizens to defend themselves (the killer, by the laws on the books, should never have passed the background check and should have been red flagged in the instant check database, but the Air Force failed to convey his domestic battery conviction to the FBI), than it is in need of a great cultural and spiritual renewal/restoration.  This is revealed even more in the response of the far left in this country, including such pathetically lost and self-loathing characters as Will Wheaton, which indulged in some vicious Christian-bashing in the wake of this crime.  Much of this commentary, though it comes from sources already known for their hatred of Christianity, is so over the top it is revelatory of the amoral hell that is at the root of Leftism.  Only a wholly amoral soul, one given over practically totally to that worst moral condition to which a soul can fall – a reprobate sense – could have uttered some of the hateful vituperation Wheaton and others hurled in response to the victims in this shooting.  Some were even mocking the deaths as being “deserved” because the victims were Christians, Texans, and thus probably conservatives, and so unworthy of life.

This is the cultural milieu in which we are forced to work out our salvation.  The self-anointed “elites” of the culture and country mock Christian prayer and the practice of virtue, while hiding crimes like child rape and the abuse of women committed by themselves and their allies (but what should we expect, from a group of people to treat the wholesale slaughter of perfect innocents, largely for the sake of convenience, as their holiest and greatest shibboleth?).  They laugh at a Christian response to an unspeakable tragedy but cover up for and extol islam when a similar attack is committed in New York a few days earlier, telling us how “allahu ackbar” is almost always a beautiful prayer.  Do you think these scum would declare the Pater Noster or Ave Maria a beautiful prayer under any context, but especially if a crazed false Christian uttered such words while in commission of a horrible crime? We’d never hear the end of it.  Just another reason why tens of millions of Americans no longer believe the slightest thing the media says.

As I’ve said for years, the self-described “rational,” “scientific,” atheistic Left is nothing of the sort.  They belong to a pseudo-religion that has hatred for Christianity, and especially Christian morals (the rejection of these morals being the driver behind all they do), at the very center of its creed.  Islam is simply another false totalitarian religion which the Left is making common cause with in its effort to finally rid itself of that Savior they are too proud, broken, or stupid to countenance.  But most of these leftists will happily don the hijab and prostrate themselves towards Mecca five times a day should the right circumstances arise.  They are not generally anti-religious – they are some of the most fervent (if depraved) religionists around.  They are simply anti-Christian.  They are revealing it more and more practically every day.

Thank you all for your thoughts and concerns about my health (TT, you are a wonderful person and a true friend.  Already had some Lourdes water, though!).  I go in tomorrow for some more follow-up.  It’s taken a lot longer than I would have liked to get this settled down (it is still not, yet, but hopefully tomorrow will be a big step forward).  We also had a major medical test on my son.  Good news there, what we were concerned were signs of seizures are not, in fact, seizures.  He may have had one or two breakthrough seizures in the past 6-7 months but that seems to be it, based on the test results.  So that is awesome. As for me, hopefully after tomorrow we’ll know a lot more and I can start to get back to my regular routine.

Fusion GPS Dossier Classic Example of Leftism in Action (Lie, Project, Double-Down) October 27, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Immigration, It's all about the $$$, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the enemy, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

A quick and dirty (I mean, his language is atrocious) but quite helpful synopsis from Paul Joseph Watson:

If you want to figure out what evils, what dirty tricks, what law-breaking the DNC and the Left generally are most involved in, most committed to, and which they feel is both one of their most powerful tools of malfeasance as well as one of the greatest dangers to their position of power, just look at what they accuse the other side of.

And it’s not just this fake (and frankly stupid, and disgusting) dossier contrived by a deep state apparatchik – it’s also things like the Harvey Weinstein scandal and the emerging masses of reports indicating that many leftist men, who constantly reproach normal men for their “toxic masculinity” and hateful, antiquated views towards women, are, in fact, serial rapists and abusers of women themselves.  Sargon apparently has a massive expose coming on this subject this weekend.

The three, invariable rules: leftists always lie, leftists always project, leftists always double down.

Now that the “Russian collusion” meme has been shown to be a massive conspiracy and illegality engaged in by the DNC, Hillary campaign, Deep State apparatchiks, and their media leftist running dog lackeys, it is suddenly to be flushed down the memory hole.

But in future, always remember, the very accusations themselves are a total giveaway of the evils the Left is wholly immersed in.

I felt this “Trump pee-party dossier” thing was a massive redirect and information op from the beginning.  And indeed, that’s finally, painfully slowly, what has been revealed.

How deep this goes is anyone’s guess.  It is already known the Obama administration, through its wholly corrupt and politicized Eric Holder/Loretta Lynch InJustice Department, is knee deep in this scandal.  How far up the chain of command involvement goes is easy to guess by how furiously the Dems are trying to prevent further investigation of not only Fusion GPS, but also the very strange scandal of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’ muslim former IT admin, who happened to abscond with several terabytes of classified data from now totally wiped computer hard drives.  The dems have been using all their power to keep that data from being subpoenaed………why?  What will it show?  Will it show, for instance, Obama’s direct involvement in the 2016 presidential election and deep corruption/collusion with the Russian government?

Why did the democrat establishment react like spurned lovers when Russia became involved in Ukraine in 2014?  We heard more bellicose war talk, even up to and including a full-on invasion/nuclear exchange, from leading democrats after Russia illegally invaded and continues to occupy large parts of the Ukraine.  Democrats normally wouldn’t give two blanks about something like that, but they totally lost their minds.  Is it because they felt like Putin had backstabbed them on a massive quid pro quo involving billions of dollars in kickbacks and massive undermining of US national security, a la the “Uranium One” deal?

These guys are in a full on blind panic.  They went all-in, well past the point of Watergate and into commission of probably hundreds of felonious offenses, to insure Hillary’s election.  Is that not just because they wanted their side to win, but because they knew if someone outside the Deep State apparatchiks was elected, it might blow the lid off their decade-plus run of unbelievable corruption, treason, and wholesale lack of care for the good of the United States and, much more importantly, the ordinary run of the mill citizen?

I don’t think we have any idea how deep this goes, or just what was sold or compromised, but the Left will inevitably tells us (some) as they try another redirect against Trump and conservatives generally.

And it’s not just Obama.  This Deep State/Leftist penetration of power and solidification began under Clinton, became entrenched under the (laughably inept and tone deaf) Bush 43 (thanks for giving your stalwart supporters a great big middle finger the other day, we sure appreciate it!  Guess we know where your loyalties lie.  Skull n Bones take care of their own, no?), and reached apotheosis under Obama.  I don’t know whether it is even possible at this point to deconstruct it.

Back to the rampant sexual abuse on the Left, up to and including massive pedophilia rings in their centers of power (just HOW many times did Clinton dump the Secret Service and fly to pedophile island?), Corey Feldman threatened to start naming names in Hollywood, and all of a sudden he gets slapped with a marijuana possession charge.  In CALIFORNIA?!?

The scandals are coming so thick and fast they are overwhelming, as, indeed, they are intended to be.  Scandals 10 times the importance and scope of Watergate pass by almost daily now, with the bought-n-paid for corporate/Deep State media telling us “nothing to see here.”  Or simply refusing to cover this at all.

But none of this should be surprising.  The fact that presidents of the United States colluded with global adversaries, repeatedly sold out the American people, and placed national security at grave risk in order to feather their nests to the tune of hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars, is exactly what one would expect from a cohort of people who have made their rejection of God and His Law, their very public despising of the Church and everything it stands for, the core part of their message and their very being.

This is what comes from an “elite” that rejects God and Our Savior Jesus Christ.  Pagan societies always devolve into endless self-aggrandizement, corruption, and wholesale ineffectiveness/incompetence.  People devoid of any sense of a law greater than themselves feel zero compunction over robbing citizens blind, colluding with deadly enemies, raping little children and forever destroying their sacred innocence, or the wholesale slaughter of very nearly 1 in 3 babies conceived in this nation over the past 44 years.  Indeed, the last point is the most telling – abortion has brought a curse down upon America, and, most particularly, on those “elites” who have done the most to keep it legal and the blood sacrifices to satan flowing.

Surely the apparatchiks, after reading the last two paragraphs, just an unhinged screed!, would conclude that I am an extremist, I am totally whacked and just totally unworthy of any credit.

But that, again, is the point.  The elites subscribe to an inveterately hostile, alien religion, which I call sexular paganism.  It is simply the latest manifestation of the false religion of leftist secular humanism which tries to put man in the place of God.  Christianity and sexular paganism are completely irreconcilable. Adherents to one cannot be adherents of the other.  One must choose between God and Mammon.

Incredibly, historically, philosophically, theologically, and historically speaking, the Church has played a huge role in the ascendance of sexular paganism among the cultural elites. By surrendering all the firm dictates and sublime, impervious moral and theological aspects of the “bad old faith” (e.g., “razing the bastions”), Church leadership not only left the Church open to further penetration by the forces of sexular paganism, but gave many wavering souls both perfect cover, and the perfect excuse, to make the final, irrevocable choice between God and Mammon.  By utterly neutering the Church’s unique power and voice, that leadership – some of which consisted of double agents of Mammon, but much of which were simply men to weak to resist – the choice of God or Mammon was made elementary, obvious for millions of lost souls, especially those with great ambitions and access to all the “delights” of power, money, and renown the world can offer.

It was a slam dunk.  So, the wind has been sown, and we are now reaping the whirlwind.  I wish I could posit a happy outcome for all this, but all I can foresee is ever increasing calamity, chaos, and confusion culminating in collapse (and that awesome alliteration alone is worth the price of the post).  Trump is great as a hopeful sign, but I fear the process has gone on much too long, and the rot is far too deep, for any man, or any series of men, to correct.  Lord, that I may be wrong, because I have a lot of love left for this country, or what it used to be, and my children and (pray God) grandchildren shall have to live here.

Now, if you want a more hopeful view, from a man deep in the fight, see the great talk given by Steve Bannon to the California GOP (yes, amazingly, it apparently still exists) below (h/t MFG):

He explains the problem, but gives many reasons to stay in the fight, and to hold out hope for a restoration of this country along constitutional lines.  I’m not overly sanguine on the likelihood of his effort being successful, but perhaps he gives some reasons to hope.

There, I’ve been out all week but now I give you a nice, long, overly wordy post.

The World is Upside Down: High Priests of Secular Paganism Promise to “Punish the Wicked” October 19, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

Guess who a sodomite activist thinks the wicked are?  You got it:  you and me.

With gay ersatzrimony having the imprimatur of the State, and homosexuality enjoying a positive swing in popular opinion, the only thing standing athwart homosexualism is the Church, which is finding itself increasingly the object of neosexualist agitations.

Two weeks after Obergefell v. Hodges, a liberal firestorm erupted when a Catholic priest in Louisiana withheld communion from Tim Ardillo during his mother’s funeral because of his “marriage” to another man. Apologies (!) from the Diocese of Baton Rouge and Archbishop of New Orleans quickly followed. [So which religion do these bishops truly worship?  Sexular paganism and the world, or Catholicism?]

Channeling Pope Francis, a diocesan spokesman, opined, “We don’t deny people communion… Who are we to judge whether they believe [the church’s teachings on the communion] or not?” (Emphasis added.)

………..What’s more, mea culpas and accommodationist overtones have little purchase in the fever swamps where religious objections are considered bigotry parading in clerical vestments. [Do you think they would say the same about, say, an extreme racist?]

Take Tim Gill a mega-rich LGBT activist who vowed “We’re going to punish the wicked,” which, according to his moral lights is anyone (person, business, or organization) wanting an exemption from participating in same-sex ceremonies. Or Equality Ohio, a LGBT activist group that announced it will go after churches—in particular, Catholic churches—that refuse to make their facilities available for events contrary to their religious beliefs. Or Columbia Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality that sponsored a colloquium of experts “to contest and reframe the utilization of religious exemptions to civil rights laws.”

……….The Equality Act, as it’s called, amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by including “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) as protected classes, equivalent to “race.” The proposed legislation includes protections not just for employment, but for housing, public education, credit, jury service, federal funding, and public accommodations. Despite its noble label, The Equality Act is anything but. By giving special protections to concocted classes of individuals, it abrogates the constitutional freedoms of others, creating inequality.

For starters, the bill prohibits appeal to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a basis for discriminating against LGBT folk. So if, for example, you are an employee or owner/manager of a private or public business, your constitutional rights to freedom of conscience, speech, and association take the back seat to someone else’s socially constructed “right” to your acceptance of their sexual expression…..

……Obergefell presaged the day when Caesar, having consecrated gay “marriage” as a civil right, will no more tolerate a church that refuses to marry same-sex couples or allow non-celibate homosexuals as members, communicants, leaders, or staffers than it would for a church that refuses the same for ethnic minorities. [It’s true.  And “Catholic in good standing,” receiving Communion at least annually from the hands of Cardinals, made it all possible. One man, deciding the persecution of churches.  And why not?  His own reasoning in approving pseudo-sodo-marriage declared that the ONLY possible reason to oppose it was blind, unyielding bigotry.  And bigotry, as the Left defines it, must always be stamped out, especially in the churches.]

The introduction of The Equality Act is a signal that that day is coming. How soon, depends on how the Supreme Court decides the religious liberty case before it, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

And when that day comes, churches acquiescing to the neosexualist agenda will be legitimized and officially recognized by the State and allowed to keep their tax exempt status. Churches refusing to comply will lose that exemption, causing many to become financially unsustainable, driving them, the confessing Church, underground.

What the “punished” get and their “punishers” don’t, will be something similar to the early Church despite its outlaw status: explosive growth. [You think so?  Maybe.  Do you think the institutional Church will stand firm in opposition to acceptance of sodomy, or will it cave?  Or hasn’t it caved already?  Perhaps it is time for the human element of the institution founded by Christ to die of its own gluttony-induced atherosclerosis, and the Faith to be born anew from the ground up.  But wither “canonically regular” traditional parishes? ]

I’m reading a book called When the Wicked Seize a City.  It’s about the sodomite political takeover of San Francisco. It was written 25 years ago by an evangelical pastor, one of the few Christians in Sodom by the Bay that actually worked to oppose the sodomite agenda.  All the evils, all the tactics, all the means of imposing their will on the majority, were developed, refined, practiced, and implemented decades ago in San Francisco.  But Christians were not paying attention, or couldn’t be bothered to care.

Too bad. They will make you care.  Whether it’s you, or your son or daughter, they are coming for you.  These are deeply wounded people who have an infinite need for not just acceptance, but unending affirmation, even glorification, and ending in total obeisance.  They will not stop until you are on your knees, practically worshiping them.

But in the book, which side was always kind, patient, prayerful, and giving?  And which side tried several times to murder the evangelical pastor, set fire to his house, attacked his children, constantly vandalized his home and church, and engaged in shout downs and even more physical forms of intimidation on a constant basis?  You got it.  The “good” guys.  Sodomites are one of the extremes of the Left, and the Left has convinced itself that everything it does, no matter how heinous, no matter how evil, is good by definition.

There are no limits to the extremes, to the utter depravity to which people so convinced will sink.  This movement must either be crushed, or they will crush us.

Is it time to split this country up?