Category Archives: Culture War

Buchanan Hearts Putin Too

Steven Seagal isn’t the only one showing Putin some love these days. So is Pat Buchanan.

Putin is entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly City of today and command post of the counter-reformation against the new paganism. Putin is plugging into some of the modern world’s most powerful currents. Not only in his defiance of what much of the world sees as America’s arrogant drive for global hegemony. Not only in his tribal defense of lost Russians left behind when the USSR disintegrated. He is also tapping into the worldwide revulsion of and resistance to the sewage of a hedonistic secular and social revolution coming out of the West.

In the culture war for the future of mankind, Putin is planting Russia’s flag firmly on the side of traditional Christianity.

Steven Seagal Calls for Obama’s Impeachment

Since we’re on the subject of pop culture, this is worth noting. Steven Seagal has called for Obama’s impeachment.

The actor appeared at the Western Conservative Conference in Phoenix, AZ on February 22, 2014, and was not aware that he would be speaking but what he did say, he spoke plainly in the seriousness with his message.

During the conference, a lot of funny political jokes were said but Seagal said that what he is about to say will not fit into the funniness of the night’s event.

Seagal said, “What I have to say is quite serious. What I want to say is that never in my life did I ever believe that our country would be taken over by people, like the people who are running it… at this day.”

See more …

I know that Seagal is mostly a straight to video actor these days, but since so few people in Hollywood and pop culture are on our side, any defections are noteworthy. I don’t know where Seagal stands on all the issues, but what he says here is pretty hard core, and that he was willing to attend this venue is comendable. He has clearly identified himself with us Reds in the us against them war.

Why Don’t They Just Get it Over With and Start Calling the Oscars the PCscars?

Why Don’t They Just Get it Over With and Start Calling the Oscars the PCscars?

Let’s see, Ellen, practically dressed like a man, was the hostess.

Jared Leto won Best Supporting Actor.

Matthew McConaughey won Best Actor.

Twelve Years a Slave won Best Picture.

The bottom three were entirely predictable.

I’m not saying that McConaughey and Leto didn’t give deserving performances or that Twelve Years a Slave wasn’t well done. What I’m suggesting is that having a PC angle clearly gives you a leg up on the competition. For example, last year Django Unchained won recognition way out of proportion to its merit because it was a white guilt fest.

Is that constitutional?

Once upon a time, the meaning of the term “constitutional” was understood as “what powers the federal government is given.” But thanks largely to the legacy of the president whose birthday it is today, that term now means “what subjects of the United States are permitted to do.”

Think I’m wrong? Check out this story on yet another DC power grab:

A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that North Carolina’s attempt to offer a “Choose Life” license plate and not provide an abortion-rights alternative was unconstitutional.

The ruling is the third time one of the Republican-led General Assembly’s abortion laws has been struck down over the past three years.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in a 3-0 opinion written by Judge James Wynn of North Carolina.

“Chief amongst the evils the First Amendment prohibits are government ‘restrictions distinguishing among different speakers, allowing speech by some but not others,’” Wynn wrote.

Now there are certain extremists (me, for example) who think the First Amendment, like all the Bill of Rights, defined clear limitations to federal power. Those dangerous extremists would argue the sovereign State of North Carolina not only has the final say on what it puts on the license tags it issues, but would go on to say that North Carolina can adopt any slogan it wants, no matter who in DC disapproves. These days, however, all reasonable and moderate people know the Constitution makes DC sovereign. So it’s only natural that DC tells the people of the States what they can and cannot do.

Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, a private Catholic school is being sued by a cafeteria worker claiming he should be allowed to work at that school despite his homosexuality. He’s in a “same-sex marriage,” and the school, which upholds traditional Catholic values, does not want to be seen as endorsing that man’s lifestyle.

But as NPR reporter Tovia Smith observes in her story, “Ultimately the question of how much leeway religious organizations have in hiring will be answered by the Supreme Court.”

Get that? We must look to the federal government to learn “how much leeway” will be permitted.

Notice that the political doctrine being enforced here is that DC views “rights” as belonging to the individual, not to the States or religious institutions.

So when libertarians claim their ideology is the best weapon in resisting an authoritarian federal government, ask how that is possible when they hold the same central belief that justifies that government’s endless expansion into our lives.

Did Phil Robertson Dis the Confederate Flag?

Here is a NY Post article that alleges that Phil Robertson isn’t too fond of the Confederate Battle Flag. In the typical PC manner, it suggests that this is somehow evidence that Robertson is not a “racist.” You see, according to PC rightthink, respect for the Confederate Battle Flag is  prima facia evidence that someone is a racist. The story is from 30 Dec, but I didn’t hear about it until a comment about it appeared recently on my FaceBook feed. And interestingly, when I Googled to find some more commentary on the issue not much came up. This mention from a blog called The “Right” Scoop seems to accept the PC association in a “See, we told you Phil Robertson wasn’t a racist!” type of manner. (This is so typical of mainstream conservatives to accept the leftists’ PC framing of an issue.)

First of all, proud Southerners should be careful not to get too carried away just yet. This is an account of someone relating what he thinks he saw and heard. These are not Robertson’s own words, and as far as I know he has not commented on the issue. It is possible that he was bemoaning the fact that certain unsavory elements have used the flag for their own purposes, but this is not the conclusion the senario the witness recounts suggests. Mr. Robertson needs to publically clarify his true feelings.

That said, if this is a true recounting of the event, then it is very disappointing. Robertson is old enough to know better, so he doesn’t have the excuse of youth. The modern demonization of the Confederate Battle Flag (CBF) is a relatively recent phenomenon, and Mr. Robertson should know this. The Duke boys proudly sported a CBF on the roof of their car, named the General Lee, on prime time TV in the 80′s. Until fairly recently it was assumed that Southerners would be proud of their heritage. This relentless PC/Cultural Marxist attack on all things Southern is of relatively recent vintage. For some perspective on this, this artcle by Prof. Clyde Wilson should be read again and again. I wish Phil Robertson would read it.

There is a lesson here that conservative (and especially conservative Christian) Southerners who wish to distance themselves from the CBF lest they be tainted desperately need to learn. The PC beast is monolithic in it’s desire to eradicate every stray unegalitarian thought or at least the public expression thereof. (It is my belief that the mind of the typical PC stormtrooper is besieged by unegalitarian thoughts, and their PC shock troop role playing is a form of reaction formation, but that is for another post.). The PC beast is without nuance or subtlety. It doesn’t matter to it that Mr. Robertson’s thoughts on homosexuality are  based on his acceptance of the long held historic teachings of the Christian faith and his belief that God has explicitly condemned the act in His Holy Word. Nope. The senior Robertson has committed wrongthink and must be condemned and re-educated. The same article that says Robertson might not be a racist, begins by saying “Phil Robertson may be homophobic…,” whatever that means. (A more absurdly silly term than homo”phobia” is hard to imagine.)

Conservative (as in traditional/orthodox [small o] more so than political) Christians who wish to maintain the inherently unegalitarian teachings of their faith such as the condemnation of homosexuality and various other sexual practices, the endorsement of gender roles, Jesus as the only means of salvation, etc. need to resist the PC beast with every fiber of their being.  It can not be placated by throwing it sops such as distancing yourself from the CBF. Robertson, if this was his motive, whether thought out or visceral, for his comment on the CBF, is woefully niave to believe so.  If you are a wrongthinker on any issue, you are a wrongthinker in toto. There is no middle ground with this mindless beast. The fight for the CBF very much is the fight for a Christian understanding of homosexuality. The two can not be disentangled.

This is not to say that traditionalist Christians should not denounce malice and ill will based on race, which is not a Christian attitude, but racism has long since ceased meaning just malice or ill will based on race if it ever did. It means any unegalitarian thought. Conservative Christians need to understand this and understand it quickly, lest they empower the beast that ends up eating them and the civilization they created alive.

Tortious interference has consequences

Great news from Oklahoma! The self-appointed censors who shut down the American Renaissance 2010 conference just got their knuckles rapped:

On August 8, 2011, David Yeagley of Oklahoma filed suit against Jeffrey Imm and Daryle Lamont Jenkins in the District Court of Oklahoma County of Oklahoma for allegedly civilly conspiring and tortiously interfering with his contract to speak at the New Century Foundation’s American Renaissance February 2010 conference. …

Yeagley’s motion for summary judgment was filed on December 3, 2013, and Jenkins did not file a responsive brief to it. During the morning of January 3, 2014, a hearing on the motion occurred, and the judge granted it: Jenkins has been ordered by a court of law to pay Yeagley $50,000.00 for shutting down the 2010 American Renaissance conference.

Hurrah for David Yeagley! Check out his website here.

More Phil Robertson Reaction

Jim Goad at TakiMag is his usual irreverent self.

Clearly the Christian Bible preaches that “men who have sex with men” will not go to heaven. Despite what the Lavender Lobby and the Gay Mafia and the Homo Militia and their rainbow coalition of allies and enablers and apologists would have you believe, homosexuality is explicitly condemned in the Old Testament, New Testament, and the Quran. None of the three major Western monotheistic religions is down with the idea of men going down on other men. So you can either be a faithful adherent to one of these religions, or you can have sex with persons of your own gender—pick one and stick to it. But you can’t have both. Hey, I don’t make the rules—I only report them.

Kid Rock crudely but concisely says political correctness is out of control.

I support Phil Robertson and his choice to express his faith and beliefs. Shame on A&E. I hope all my friends, straight or gay, will stop this bulls**t a** PC game being played by ALL of these stupid a** coalitions, groups and idiots…

MERRY CHRISTMAS – F**K HAPPY HOLIDAYS…. and F**k PC!! Keep it real.

Read more…

Doug Wilson says conservative religious leaders need to get down off their high horse and join the battle that the rank and file are already fighting.

The contrast must not be between how unsophisticated Christians fight and how sophisticated Christians . . . what do they do? At most, they demur, with a throat-clearing caveat or two. Theologians and ecclesiastical eggheads can make merry over this kind of pop culture melee if they like. The material is there — “look at those rubes, standing against the principalities and powers with their duck calls, zz top beards, and chicken sammich haute cuisine, hold the mayo.”

But the lack of self-awareness in this criticism is staggering. These are shepherds who feed only themselves (Ezek. 34:2). When shepherds have neglected the flock for so long, and the wolves are ravaging them, and the sheep come up with some kind of strategy to defend themselves, and the shepherds sit up on the ridge, laughing at the tactical inadequacy of what the sheep are attempting, what shall we call that?

So what do we need? We don’t need generals. We have that. We need generals who fight. We don’t need leadership councils. We have those. We need national leaders who fight. We don’t need pretty boy preachers. We have those. We need preachers who fight. We don’t need evangelical regiments of pajamaboys. We have that. We need fight, and we need to fight with everything we have — heart, strength, and brains. All in.

Show me your forearms. Unless there are scars all over them, then I honestly don’t want to hear your views of the inadequacy of these cultural clashes (Gal. 6:17). When the barbarians are throwing their scaling ladders against the city walls, if the only defenders at the top of those walls are Chick Fil A employees in paper hats and hot grease from the deep fryer, and rednecks with their beards and shotguns, and nobody at all there from Red Brick Memorial Reformed, Rev. Forsythe P. Snodgrass, D.Min, minister, then let us be frank. We shouldn’t blame the folks who are there.

Read more…

What Was Cracker Barrel Thinking?

Cracker Barrel thought they would get out in front of the Phil Robertson controversy and be the first to officially ban Duck Dynasty items from their stores.

Hmmm …? Cracker Barrel? What could they have possibly been thinking? Who does Cracker Barrel thinks eats there, urban hipsters and metrosexuals? (Maybe urban hipsters eat there to be “ironic.”) I thought Cracker Barrel was known as a Republican leaning company. I could have told you this wouldn’t end well for them, and it hasn’t. Now after a major outcry, they have returned Duck Dynasty items to their stores.

Update: Rod Dreher comments on the Cracker Barrel incident here. His thoughts are the same as mine. Does corporate Cracker Barrel know who eats at Cracker Barrel?

Phil Robertson Stands Up to PC Gestapo and Refuses to Back Down

Phil Robertson is refusing to back down. Here are a couple of links.

The Daily Mail

Gary DeMar says good for Phil.

I missed this announcement, but apparently Sunday was Wear Camo to Church Sunday to show support of Robertson.

For the record, I don’t routinely watch Duck Dynasty. I watched it a couple of time just to see what all the fuss was about, but I don’t like reality TV in general, and to me much of DD seemed obviously staged. But I do think it is good that there is a show that portrays a Southern Christian family in a largely positive way. If Phil is rehired and DD returns to A&E then I watch it. If it moves to another channel, then I’ll watch it, just to show support.

Update: The Robertson family is sticking by Phil. If A&E doesn’t back down, DUck Dynasty may be done.

Update II: Aaron Wolfe at Chronicles chimes in.

League of the South Responds to Phil Robertson Suspension

LEAGUE OF THE SOUTH NEWS SERVICE

19 December 2013

Re: Phil Robertson and A&E

For Immediate Release

The League of the South, the premier Southern Nationalist organization, supports Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty in his Biblical condemnation of sodomy. Moreover, we encourage our members and supporters to boycott the A&E Channel and their advertisers until they issue a sincere apology to Mr. Robertson and end his suspension from the program.

League President Michael Hill said the following: “The executives at the A&E Channel have shown their contempt for Mr. Robertson’s right to speak the truth from God’s own word about the sordid nature of sodomy. This is merely one more incident that proves that the purveyors of American popular culture are committed to an anti-Christian and anti-Southern agenda of hatred and lies. We urge Southerners and others of good will to support Mr. Robertson and to let the A&E Channel know that they will not be watching Duck Dynasty or buying the products of their advertisers until this matter is rightly settled.”

The League of the South can be reached for further comment at (800) 888-3163 or at jmichhill@cs.com. More information can be found at www.dixienet.org.

Pentagon training manual: white males have unfair advantages

Imagine a deluded soul who claims to despise the Mafia, but gets teary-eyed about the bravery of its gunmen. That’s pretty much what housebroken conservatives do when they rage about DC’s assaults on our liberty but insist true patriots support the regime’s wars and armed forces.

This story should open some eyes about what those armed forces are armed to enforce:

A controversial 600-plus page manual used by the military to train its Equal Opportunity officers teaches that “healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian” men hold an unfair advantage over other races, and warns in great detail about a so-called “White Male Club.”

“Simply put, a healthy, white, heterosexual, Christian male receives many unearned advantages of social privilege, whereas a black, homosexual, atheist female in poor health receives many unearned disadvantages of social privilege,” reads a statement in the manual created by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).

The military document advises personnel to “assume racism is everywhere, every day” and “notice code words for race.” They are also instructed to “understand and learn from the history of whiteness and racism.”

“Assume racism is everywhere, everyday,” read a statement in a section titled, ‘How to be a strong ‘white ally.’”

“One of the privileges of being white is not having to see or deal with racism all the time,” the manual states. “We have to learn to see the effect that racism has.”

DC has pursued an egalitarian agenda since it squared off with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Our handlers decided that the best way to counter Soviet ideology was to emulate it. Thus was born the Civil Rights Revolution, which birthed open borders, the homosexual rights movement, and a domestic army of race hustlers.

Check out who authored the diktats from the Pentagon’s new manual:

I obtained a copy of the manual from an Equal Opportunity officer who was disturbed by the course content and furious over the DEOMI’s reliance on the Southern Poverty Law Center for information on “extremist” groups.

In other words, another leaker who couldn’t stomach what his government was doing made the courageous decision to expose what was going on—much like Edward Snowden. And just as in the Snowden affair, the heel-clickers will howl that only unpatriotic, hating extremists oppose what “our” armed forces are doing. That’s because the post 9/11 definition of a patriot is a person who supports all of the Pentagon’s urges, no matter how totalitarian and self-destructive they are.

Finally, click on the following story if you aren’t convinced the US military, like every other tentacle of the DC Empire, is a force of evil:

Two men married at West Point chapel for first time

Are you mad enough yet?

“American Exceptionalism” = Yankee Supremacy

In a recent open letter to the American people, Russian president Vladimir Putin assured us he likes and respects us, but asked us to realize we’re embarrassing ourselves and doing a lot of harm with our delusion of “American Exceptionalism.” Both the mainstream American left and right rushed to prop up our most beloved myth against this iconoclastic Cossack.

What’s interesting is that both wings of accepted American thought agree on what “exceptionalism” means–and more significantly, that both, though supposedly rivals, are actually in lockstep on all other major issues as a result.

For example, liberal columnist Dana Milbank shot back at President Putin with this bristling retort:

When we say we are exceptional, what we really are saying is we are different. With few exceptions, we are all strangers to our land; our families came from all corners of the world and brought all of its colors, religions and languages. We believe this mixing, together with our free society, has produced generations of creative energy and ingenuity, from the Declaration of Independence to Facebook, from Thomas Jefferson to Miley Cyrus. There is no other country quite like that.

Americans aren’t better than others, but our American experience is unique — exceptional — and it has created the world’s most powerful economy and military, which, more often than not, has been used for good in the world.

Miley Cyrus? Really? My pride floweth over.

And former South Carolina senator Jim DeMint, now president of The Heritage Foundation, also defended “exceptionalism” by invoking the image of America as the Multi-Culti Empire that roams the globe doing good:

We are, in other words, not a nation based on ethnicity, but on beliefs, and not coincidentally, that is why we attract people of all ethnicities and they become proud Americans…. When we have used our power, however, we have done it for good.”

Both echoed what Madeleine Albright said as secretary of state:

It is the threat of the use of force [against Iraq] and our line-up there that is going to put force behind the diplomacy. But if we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future, and we see the danger here to all of us.

That self-image still inspires the Obama regime’s global aggression:

In their more honest moments, White House officials concede they got here the messiest way possible — with a mix of luck in the case of Syria, years of sanctions on Iran and then some unpredicted chess moves executed by three players Mr. Obama deeply distrusts: President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, and Iran’s erratic mullahs. But, the officials say, these are the long-delayed fruits of the administration’s selective use of coercion in a part of the world where that is understood.

“The common thread is that you don’t achieve diplomatic progress in the Middle East without significant pressure,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, said Thursday. “In Syria, it was the serious threat of a military strike; in Iran it was a sanctions regime built up over five years.”

If your identity is that of a polyglot hegemon endowed with greater wisdom than the rest of the world, how can you NOT support open borders? Or the invasion of Iraq? Or Iran? Or Syria?

First of all, the US was NOT founded as a unique blend of whatever ethnic group decided to elbow its way in; it was founded as an outpost of Western civilization.

More important, the notion that the American people have always been committed to a never-ending global war to impose democracy and equality is a pure lie, and a fairly recent one at that. Previous “Wars of Liberation,” including Lincoln’s invasion of the South, the Spanish-American War, Vietnam, and Iraq, later turned out to be based on massive propaganda and misinformation.

The core idea expressed in “American Exceptionalism” is that the role of America’s elite is to serve as the global mind bringing reason and order to a chaotic, degenerate world. That is Gnosticism, an anti-Christian concept that explicitly glorifies abstract knowledge while scorning the physical. I argued here that Northern thought degenerated from its Puritan roots into militant Gnosticism, while Southerners upheld and lived by a balance between the spiritual and the physical.

Author John C. Wright said this of the Gnostic foundations of today’s statists and their leftist enablers:

In sum, they are idolaters who substitute the worship of Caesar for the worship of Christ; they are Gnostics in the posture of eternal rebellion both against God in Heaven and civil society on Earth. They are chameleons who adopt any ideals or values or party lines needed for so long as needed to destroy them, including Pragmatism, including Worldliness. They are Politically Correct and factually incorrect.

They seek to destroy civilized institutions here on Earth and drag Utopia down from heaven to replace them, indifferent, or even glorying, in the bloodshed required.

To avoid confusion, let us call them Ideologues. They are utterly unworldly, rejecting the pragmatism of the Worldly Man as cold and loveless and unspiritual.

The Ideologues are as nearly a pure evil as mankind has ever produced or can imagine, but please note that their motives are the highest and noblest imaginable: they seek things of the spirit, peace on earth, food for the poor, dignity given to all men, and all such things which are the only things, the holy things, that can electrify dull mankind and stir him to take up the banner and trumpet and shining lance of high and holy crusade.

Ever wonder why leftists see “education” as the cure to all ills? Or why they fancy themselves superior to those they see as living in the darkness of tradition and irrationality? Their contempt for the physical explains their hatred of heritage and tradition–and of life itself. But as John C. Wright pointed out, there’s a terrible price to pay for the spreading of their concept of the good. When Madeleine Albright proclaimed the death of a half-million Iraqi children as “worth it,” she was expressing what all Gnostics believe.

By their fruits ye shall know them.

How can we stop you from looking behind the curtain?

Unpatriotic Americans are steaming over continuing revelations about the National Security Agency’s domestic spying. Thanks to that trouble maker Edward Snowden, Americans are now aware of what their government is up to, and what good can come of that? Everyone knows we’re all happier when our handlers and protectors can do what has to be done without having to worry about the common folk finding out.

Here’s the latest: Seems many of those “accidental” peeks at Americans’ private communications weren’t all that accidental. As the Guardian reports:

US intelligence analysts have deliberately broken rules designed to prevent them from spying on Americans, according to an admission by the National Security Agency that undermines fresh insistences from Barack Obama on Friday that all breaches were inadvertent.

A report by the NSA’s inspector general is understood to have uncovered a number of examples of analysts choosing to ignore so-called “minimisation procedures” aimed at protecting privacy, according to officials speaking to Bloomberg.

Defenders of the welfare/warfare national security state realize their work is cut out for them. Fortunately, they work within a political system where the vast majority of citizens accept the regime’s notion of what constitutes acceptable political thought. Politically, you can be anything you want, as long as it’s Democrat or Republican.

Or, as I like to phrase it, housebroken liberal or housebroken conservative.

So, as these embarrassing revelations heat up the blogosphere, regime apologists are focusing on their base, and do so through the most transparent flattery. Housebroken liberals fancy themselves morally superior because they are so darn tolerant. Therefore, their designated handlers portray the whistle blowers as “racist.” And no one beats the “racism” drum like Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs. Check out the Lizard King’s latest counter-attack on critics of government spying: The Convergence of Glenn Greenwald and Rand Paul’s “Southern Avenger.”

Liberals have a gut-deep hatred of anything Southern, so left-leaning defenders of the DC Empire equate critics of government spying with “racist Southerners.”

On the other hand, housebroken conservatives imagine they’re morally superior because of their patriotism and traditional morality. So DC’s right-leaning apologists slam whistle blowers as traitors. And to keep the heartland distracted, The Other McCain has been uploading multiple posts on this story of under-age lesbians acting badly. Never mind the NSA — Look! Lesbians!

Con men know they must customize their acts by distracting their targets with different ruses. It all depends on the target audience.

The Constitution Party Disses The American Conservative

I don’t usually post blatant fund raising appeals, but this was too rich to pass up. Even the Constitution Party is dissing TAC now. Note the third bullet point.

Dear Friend of the Constitution Party:

The more things change the more they stay the same. That’s so very true in the political arena. Here are some recent news items that underscore my point:

• An Associated Press headline: “Britain’s governing Conservatives have hired Jim Messina, President Obama’s former campaign manager, to advise them ahead of the 2015 general election.” The Constitution Party has long said that the elites can cross party and ideological lines at will.

• The neo-con magazine, National Review, reports that, “Senate Republicans and Democrats Agree on Syria: Red Line Has Been Crossed.” The article backs the idea of US intervention in yet another Middle East hotspot—in this case it means siding with “rebels” who have the full, open support of Al-Qadea. The Constitution Party knows you can’t impose “democracy” at the point of a gun.

• Former GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman wrote an editorial in The American Conservative (of all places) stating that, “civil unions” and marriage “equality” were a “conservative cause” and should be supported in the name of “civil equality.” Even the GOP has joined the “gay rights” movement—the Constitution Party supports the traditional concept of marriage as understood by the Founding Founders.

George Wallace used to say, there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats. Today, the distinction between “Conservative” and “Liberal” will get you change for a nickel.

That’s why the Constitution Party is the only party to live up to its name. Our pledge is to support the right to life—from conception to natural death. We believe that US borders must be safe, that the security of American workers be the highest priority in foreign trade policies, and that Washington power brokers must not risk national sovereignty via entangling alliances.

I’m reminding you of what the Constitution Party stands for, what we fight for every day, because … it’s August.

You see, the hot summer months mean supporters are on family vacations. Perhaps home projects take their attention away from politics. In any case, funding for ongoing Constitution party activities is down. I have no other way to say that the Constitution party needs your help.

Please consider a generous donation of $50 or even $25—and please let me hear from you right away.

It’s urgent that we build a new website, print literature, and plan for ballot access drives. That work cannot wait until the slow summer months go by. Please invest what you can, $20 or $200, so we may stay in the fight.

If you believe that our fellow citizens need to hear the patriotic alternative to the establishment duopoly, then send a gift today. A $100 donation will go a long way this month. If we could count on active patriots to pitch in $25 it will help so much. Your support in August, in the next few days, will make a difference.

“Conservative” and “Liberal” labels are a fraud. Only “Constitutionalists” offer America real solutions … help us make that known.

Sincerely,

Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman

More Jack Hunter Thoughts and Reactions

Here is an article at VDARE on the Jack Hunter smear campaign. It’s good because it links to a lot of the sites that picked up the story, but the author, Alexander Hart, pretty much throws Hunter under the bus on account of Rand’s backtracking on the immigration issue.

Here is Hunter’s own statement. It’s pretty much a disaster. Hunter goes into full backpedal and placate mode. This is highly unfortunate. First, the PC Beast can not be placated. Just ask Jason Richwine. Just ask Paula Deen. The PC Beast must be resisted head on. Second, whenever you say some version of “I’m not a racist” you have already lost because you have conceded the other sides terms. Third, as I wrote yesterday, nothing in these revelations is really that damaging. Some of it is rather mundane. Just explain yourself forcefully without backpedalling or dodging.

That said, I do not think that now is the time to attack Jack for backpedalling. Here is what I posted on Facebook:

I am disappointed that Jack Hunter has chosen to backtrack and concede to the PC Rightthink Police rather than fight back, but that said, now is not the time for anti-PC forces to attack Jack. Now is the time for us to attack the PC Beast that is attacking him. We can attempt to drag Jack back to paleodom after we have countered the PC Cultural Marxists Gestapo.
I felt the need to say that because some folks have gone after Jack pretty hard for his backpedalling.
 
 
and Michael Hill (via Hunter Wallace)
 
I’ll explain why I think overly attacking Jack Hunter (as opposed to expressing disappointment), is unhelpful at this point in a separate post.

A “Conservative” Magazine for Gay “Civil Rights?”

Ugh! If you thought The American Conservative hit rock bottom when they published an article by Jon Huntsman arguing that gay “marriage” is a conservative cause, you would be wrong. Now they have published an article by David Lampo, a board member of the Log Cabin Republicans, arguing for gay “civil rights.”

Huntsman’s premise, gay “marriage” as a conservative cause, was absurd on its face, but at least Huntsman’s logic was tortured and circuitous essentially conceding the difficulty of his case. By comparison, Lampro’s screed is just straight forward gay rights advocacy. He even calls his opponents “homophobic.” What kind of a PC tool job do you have to be to use the word “homophobia” as if it is a serious term?

Whatever anyone thinks of gay civil rights, this article has no place at a supposedly conservative magazine, especially one that was founded by Pat Buchanan as a continuing voice of his campaign. It reads more like something some undergrad in a gay studies course would write to impress his professor. He even drops an “Institutional homophobia?” I kid you not. What’s next? A TAC article on white privileged?

White House Down is Left-Wing Hollywood Propaganda

Spoiler Alert: If you haven’t seen White House Down and intend to, then you may not want to read further. You have been warned.

I haven’t seen White House Down and don’t intend to. I never intended to because I just wasn’t that thrilled by the concept  and the trailers, but if I had intended to I wouldn’t now. It turns out that White House Down is blatant obnoxious left-wing propaganda (as opposed to the slightly less blatant left-wing propaganda Hollywood usually turn out.) The newly elected President is a Black man (Obama by another name) played by Jamie Foxx. Turns out the people trying to kill him are conservatives who are want to install the Republican Speaker of the House (John Boehner by another name) as President.

First of all, the idea that John “Crybaby” Boehner would have the balls to orchestrate a coup against the President is laughable. Second, how delusional and out of touch do Hollywood screen writers, producers, etc. have to be to think that this is a credible plot that movie audiences would flock to see? You wonder if they just said “Screw it, we’re going to make a propaganda piece that demonizes Republicans and damn the consequences,” or if they really were so insulated and deluded that they thought this was an idea that was credible and would sell.

Fortunately, the movie tanked. (Note: I think this link might change every week.) I don’t think it tanked just because of the political angle, which was largely unknown before the movie was released. It tanked partially because it’s concept was so similar to Olympus has Fallen which was released earlier this year and over performed at the box office. (BTW, Gerard Butler is also a more credible leading man than Channing Tatum who suffers the curse of the pretty boy.) But word of mouth has been horrible, and it has divided people politically if the IMDB message board is any indication.

Note to Hollywood writers, producers etc. The people who go see action movies are disproportionally Reds. You might want to consider not shoving your Blue sensibilities down their throats if you actually want them to see your movie.

The “Supreme” “Court” Strikes Down the Defense of Marriage Act

Wow! This is going to be a can of worms. Read part of Scalia’s dissent here. I don’t often read SCOTUS decisions. Is this how Scalia usually writes? I like it. It reads more like an essay than a boring legal opinion full of legalese.

I have pointed out before that opposition to gay “marriage” has always been for many what Lawrence Auster called an “unprincipled exception” to liberalism. For the devoutly religious who believe God condemns homosexuality, it is a principled exception to liberalism. But for the less devout who, for example, have no trouble tolerating shacking up or premarital sex, which God also condemns, they opposed gay marriage for visceral “unprincipled” reasons. It just didn’t seem right to them. The tide started to turn on gay marriage when those unprincipled visceral opponents started to flake off and endorse principled liberalism (equality as the highest good) over their unprincipled visceral opposition.

The problem for the gay mafia and their Fed Gov enforcers, however, is going to be the principled opposition of the religiously devout. Their opposition to gay marriage and homosexual activity in general is not going anywhere unless they flake off from the religion in general. There is no way to honestly make homosexuality not a sin, contrary to the best efforts of a lot of disingenuous liberals. If the Court is saying that opposition to gay marriage can only be motivated by hate, then we can see where this is going to lead. What will happen in States that legally prohibit gay marriage? What will happen when men and institutions of faith refuse to stop “discriminating” on the basis of their faith?

It’s easy to suggest that they’ll buckle to the Zeitgeist like they generally do. I hope that is not the case. But when you’re dealing with a man’s faith, that just might prove to be a different animal. Let’s hope so. Maybe this will be the matter that will lead to mass resistance.