The Clinton-UBS story

So perfect and breathtaking in the sheer balls of it. She comes in as SecState in 2009 and fixes a problem UBS (the Swiss bank) is having with Americans allegedly stashing cash with it to avoid U.S. taxes. (She intervenes with the IRS.) Then UBS contributions to the Clinton Foundation skyrocket and there are suddenly a raft of speaking engagements for Bill, to the tune of $1.5 million.

Nothing to see here citizen, keep moving, move along, get moving.

Richard Nixon must be scratching his head, somewhere.

Posted in General | Comments Off on The Clinton-UBS story

New Paltz: The surveillance tape of the last village board meeting

Not sure why I watched it.

Well, I didn’t really watch it. I took in some of the early moments and then kept jumping forward, compressing the ordeal down to about twenty minutes of hard viewing.

I will not pick on the new mayor, who seemed prickly and uncomfortable and was leaning on the lawyer at the far end of the table to fill in the blank spaces of, I presume, the “legalities” of “the process.” If you know what I mean.

Zimet was there, speaking from the gallery, working her latest hustle, something about having one building for town and village governments. She was being, as usual, very urgent, highlighting the urgency with dark implications. (There’s a committee studying all this! Again!  A duly constituted committee is the Velveeta cheese of local municipal process.) The mayor averred that the citizens are still, after more than a century, confused by the difference between village and town governments, and that maybe having them in one place would solve the problem.

Perhaps a twenty-minute refresher course in local civics at the high school (do they still teach anything like civics at the high school, or the middle school, or anywhere?) once a year would do the trick and avert the need for major construction. Meanwhile, that could be put on a YouTube and said confused citizens could be referred to it. Maybe even candidates for political office could watch it.

Don Kerr, local media star and now a trustee, seemed to be the only one on the board daring to raise questions about…things. Kerr is preternaturally restrained by the extreme roundness of his deferential attitude, which encloses his point (if he has one, and I’ll assume he does) within a nearly opaque bell jar. Just spit it out, Don. Try things like, “I don’t like this,” or “let’s try it this way,” and don’t worry about the fur going up on Tim Rogers’ neck. He’ll get over it. Or he won’t.

Despite the awkwardness of this meeting, it was a comparative relief from the prior board where one trustee seemed determined to drive Jason West to the welcoming arms of the Hemlock Society.*

* Silly me, the Hemlock Society, dedicated to putting you out of your misery, changed its name over a decade ago and then merged with another organization and is known today as the New Paltz Times.

Posted in General | Comments Off on New Paltz: The surveillance tape of the last village board meeting

Human sacrifice update

Don’t look at this if you’re over your horror quota for the quarter:

“On the tape, Planned Parenthood’s senior director of medical services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, casually sips her Merlot and discusses the sale of post-abortion infant body parts.  She even goes into detail about how – if they’re informed of which parts have been requested – they can alter the procedure to ensure they don’t “crush” the desired organs.”

Posted in General | Comments Off on Human sacrifice update

Naturalism, A Comedy

“On what ground is the house of nature built, Dr. Watson?”

“Why, Holmes, it is built on the ground of nature.”

“And where does the ground of nature sit?”

“It sits in nature, of course”

“And where did nature come from?”

“Again, from nature.”

“Oh, I see.” Holmes rolls his eyes. “And what is the purpose of nature?”

“It has no purpose, no purpose at all.”

“Why is it there? What is its meaning?”

“Why is it there? It has no reason for being there and has no meaning.”

“So, Watson, all of your reasoning takes you back to a foundation, in nature, of nature’s meaninglessness?”

“Of course it does, Holmes. You and I and all of it are completely absurd.”

“And where, again, but excluding the cause of nature itself, did nature come from?”

“Why, from nothing at all, my dear Holmes. From absolutely nothing.”

“And so you’ve concluded, my dear Watson, that something can indeed come from nothing?”

“Yes, of course I do. Everyone knows that, Holmes. The Americans call it the ‘free lunch’.”

“But there is no free lunch, Watson.”

“Exactly! That’s what I’m saying!”


Posted in General | Comments Off on Naturalism, A Comedy

“In Defense of Language”

Jeff Nyquist:

This poisoning of the mind, as the fruit of middle class prosperity and education, has led civilization into the fiasco of the intellectual. Human beings are not generally competent thinkers. We tend toward incompetence, and intellectual excellence largely consists in momentarily overcoming this incompetence. In this context, therefore, let us consider the following track record: namely, that the intellectuals fell for Darwinism, fell for Marxism, and embraced psychoanalysis. And as Karl Kraus noted, “Psychoanalysis is the mental illness of which it believes itself to be the cure.” Might we also say that Marxism is the political oppression of which it believes itself to be the salvation? And hasn’t man failed to evolve in dignity since Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species?

Posted in General | Comments Off on “In Defense of Language”

“Through Orwell’s Eyes”

Diana West writing for the occasion of Orwell’s 112th birthday, quotes this nugget:

“The autonomous individual is going to be stamped out of existence.”

Posted in General | Comments Off on “Through Orwell’s Eyes”

“The Microagression Farce”

Oh, it’s a farce all right.

Heather Mac Donald in last Autumn’s City Journal.

Posted in General | Comments Off on “The Microagression Farce”

Ann Coulter

Fresh off the publication of her new book on illegal immigration, she’s arguing that Donald Trump is being attacked because he told the truth about the criminality of Mexican illegals. And that the U.S. government and the media have been concealing it. She’s almost always right, despite what her detractors think. So pay attention to what she’s saying. Probably a good idea to get her book, Adios, America, though I haven’t done that yet.

Posted in General | Comments Off on Ann Coulter

The counter-revolution is truth

Angelo Codevilla:

“The ruling class’s component groups jointly dismiss America’s traditional liberties because they aim to replace them with their own primacy. Having seized the power to redefine liberty, our rulers tighten their definitions around their opponents’ necks like nooses. Since their desire for primacy has no limit, they can’t stop tightening. The norms that they demand that we honor help sustain each constituency by letting its members feel good about themselves while looking down on others. Their “dignitary interests” (to use Justice Kennedy’s term for who must be honored vs. those who must submit to being vilified) simply trump those of others. This is why the ruling class demonizes any questioning of its demands’ substance by imposing modern equivalents of the slave-era “gag rule.” They wage identity politics as war.”

Very clear, very explicit, and right. This is chapter one in the post-June 2015 re-initiation of America. I recommend it, at the link.

Posted in General | Comments Off on The counter-revolution is truth

2 + 2 = 5

“I love Big Brother.”


“He picked up the children’s history book and looked at the portrait of Big Brother which formed its frontispiece. The hypnotic eyes gazed into his own. It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you — something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost, to deny the evidence of your senses. In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four?”

Posted in General | Comments Off on 2 + 2 = 5

Science and not science, and how to tell the difference

Matt Ridley:

“[T]he huge green pressure groups have grown fat on a diet of constant but ever-changing alarm about the future. That these alarms—over population growth, pesticides, rain forests, acid rain, ozone holes, sperm counts, genetically modified crops—have often proved wildly exaggerated does not matter: the organisations that did the most exaggeration trousered the most money. In the case of climate, the alarm is always in the distant future, so can never be debunked.

“These huge green multinationals, with budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars, have now systematically infiltrated science, as well as industry and media, with the result that many high-profile climate scientists and the journalists who cover them have become one-sided cheerleaders for alarm, while a hit squad of increasingly vicious bloggers polices the debate to ensure that anybody who steps out of line is punished. They insist on stamping out all mention of the heresy that climate change might not be lethally dangerous.”

I love that phrase, “trousered the most money.” Matt Ridley is a “lukewarmer.” He accepts that there has been some warming — there has been, of course, since the end of the Little Ice Age in roughly 1850 — but doesn’t buy that it’s catastrophic or that the human contribution comes to that much. I’ve been following this for a long time, and I have always found that the sceptics make by far the better case. They are treated, always have been, exactly as Ridley describes.

Posted in General | Comments Off on Science and not science, and how to tell the difference

The opportunist

I have always taken Obama very seriously. I used to take issue with people who insist that he’s stupid but don’t bother arguing about it very often at this point. (He knows precisely what he is doing and prosecutes his agenda with great deliberation. He’s a little bit past his ‘provocation a day’ method, but not that far past it.)

Almost a year before he was elected I did what the media refused to do, go into the teachings of Wright’s church, which is based on “black liberation theology.” I warned about it, and that no one who had carefully chosen and voluntarily sat in that kind of church (it is not a typical black church, not even close; it is in fact roughly the black equivalent of a white racist “Christian Identity” congregation) had any business being in the Senate, let alone running for president.

I won’t go again here into my analysis of Obama as a Marxist, his long background of being mentored by and allied with hardcore Marxists (like Frank Davis, a CPUSA member when that meant you were a Stalinist) stretching back to his young teenage years.

What you saw yesterday, when he jumped right out on his gun control theme, is a key element of the Leftist doctrine for dealing with American society, which the Left detests for both its freedom and complexity (the Left hates complexity and wants uniform “diversity,” and of course despises freedom and champions the state as the state religion).

Again, Obama is not stupid. His failures are perfectly consistent with “the worse, the better” dictum of a Marxist-Leninist. He has no interest in the truth and would never consider what it might be before he opened his mouth on any topic. The “truth” is what the Party says it is, and right now he is in power and he speaks for the Party and he will tell you what the “truth” is, but as you have probably noted, that changes as required.

You’ll note that while the people of Charleston were struggling to transcend those murders, to achieve exactly the opposite of the effect the murderer claimed he wanted, Obama was right on his political message. It was an opportunity.

“He is a character out of a novel that Orwell did not live to write.”

Posted in General | Comments Off on The opportunist

Jane St. Onge

Jane will be dead a year this August. I was very lucky to get back in touch with her seven years ago. We talked a lot on the phone. We exchanged several letters. She was at once in bad shape, physically and mentally, but still her perfect self, contentious, skeptical, funny, smart. We were a couple of nuts together back when.

The first time I saw her, in New Paltz, she was leaning late at night against a pillar in a bar. Her hair chopped off, she was dragging on a cigarette, and looking too cool for words. God only knows what she saw in me.

We loved each other. She saw me through the worst of my bad times and I repaid her by being the absolutely worst boyfriend I could be.

She was among the great people I’ve ever known. Even in her terrible moments she found more joy in her life than most people will know. She could take perfect delight in the simplest things. She gardened as though she had discovered it. She made pictures. She made dresses. She was a math wizard.

Jane read books like some people have fevers. She had been a compulsive diarist. She could outthink me, most days, and got the jokes of life that I couldn’t get.

That sly look on her face, and the way she could turn toward a person and smile, were so real I can see and feel them right now.

She liked to smoke and drink, and that’s what killed her. The week she died I was thinking, “you know, she’s going to live forever, that woman,” and then the news came. She was gone. There were only a few people I knew around town who remembered her and I made sure to tell them.

In fact, in my life only Madam Vandam, who once had been Jane’s close friend, understood what a loss it was. Here we are almost a year later. I note her passing here, now, because this is the New Paltz Journal, and anyone who walks down Main Street in New Paltz is walking a path she once illuminated with her great spirit. We miss her, terribly.

Posted in General | Comments Off on Jane St. Onge

“Beyond the Brave New World”

George Neumayr:

“The speed with which the West has embraced all things perverse makes Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World look almost quaint. The moral anomalies of the West have far surpassed his imagination. The intensely reverential reaction to Bruce Jenner’s narcissistic self-mutilation would probably have struck Huxley as too improbable for fiction.”

Posted in General | Comments Off on “Beyond the Brave New World”

Ah, yeah, you should probably read my book

Yes, that’s what I would advise. Read it right now, today.

It’s right here.

Pay close attention.

Posted in General | Comments Off on Ah, yeah, you should probably read my book

Bruce Jenner

Haven’t seen a sex change this big since Norman Bates turned into his mother.

Posted in General | Comments Off on Bruce Jenner