I have pinned this post to the top of my blog. It is to remind people of what many of our opponents want. Alison Aires wants a tyrannical government. They want summary execution for private possession of firearms.
The Democrat Party’s entire 2026 strategy is a single, malignant sentence:
“Promise revenge, and the base will crawl over broken glass to hand us the keys again.”
They’re not even hiding it anymore.
Impeachment?
Not for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” as the Constitution demands, but as a routine English-style vote of no confidence…exactly what Jonathan Turley just torched on Fox.
They’ve pathologized the impeachment clause into a weaponized tantrum, turning the solemn constitutional mechanism designed to protect the Republic from tyrants into a partisan guillotine for anyone who dares win an election they lost.
This isn’t politics.
It’s a clinical disorder:
revenge addiction dressed up as “accountability,” rage dopamine substituted for governance, and the slow, deliberate poisoning of the very guardrails the Founders welded into place to prevent exactly this kind of unhinged circus.
They believe the American people are stupid enough, or broken enough, to reward the party that openly campaigns on retribution.
That the spectacle of endless investigations, show trials, and ritual humiliations will somehow translate into ballots.
They’re betting the farm that their voters’ limbic systems…flooded with righteous fury and the sweet, sweet promise of payback…will override every warning light flashing in the constitutional machinery.
And if it works?
Watch the fuck out.
Because once you normalize impeachment as electoral therapy, once you teach an entire generation that losing an election is justification for destroying norms, you don’t get the Republic back.
You get the death spiral.
You get tit-for-tat purges, politicized prosecutions as standard operating procedure, and a body politic so septic with mutual hatred that the next “no confidence” vote ends with blood on the floor instead of talking points on cable.
This isn’t hyperbole.
It’s the terminal pathology of a party that has mistaken vengeance for vision and power for purpose.
They’re not trying to save democracy.
They’re trying to own it.
And if the country is dumb enough to let them, the Constitution won’t be the only thing that dies screaming.
I’ve become tired of the politically fighting. The Democrats are out of touch with reality and are stark raving, bat-shit, howling at the moon crazy. The Republicans have a better touch with reality but don’t seem to want to be the adults in the room and firmly tell the tantrum throwing toddlers to go to their rooms and stay there until they calm down. The recent news of DOJ charges Southern Poverty Law Center with fraud and the lawsuits against antigun states and cities are encouraging, but until I see large fines and people behind bars, I’m skeptical.
And if Democrats get political control of the country in the next election or two things are likely to get very spicy.
I’m glad my underground bunker in Idaho is ready for occupancy. *
* Physically, this is true. There are a few legal obstacles still in place by, shall we say, “an over enthusiastic government inspector.”
This video is worth the watch. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
This is what single issue voters finally find out. Your vote should be about policy, not the person. Identity politics only goes so far before it all unravels.
This video is worth the watch. Once you see it, you can't unsee it.
This is what single issue voters finally find out. Your vote should be about policy, not the person. Identity politics only goes so far before it all unravels.
Democrats do not have a monopoly on tribal loyalty over policy. Republicans talk a good talk about economic freedom and gun owner rights, but don’t really do much about it, they opposed gay marriage and grudgingly tolerate it now. And they are downright hostile to social freedoms such as freedom from religion, recreational drug use, social nudity, and sex work.
But freedom loving people cannot fight on all fronts at the same time. If we have the backing of Republicans and a chance to fix the wrongs of Democrat policies, then help them out. And when there is a chance to undo wrongheaded Republican policies, take advantage of that momentum too.
Wake up and align yourself against government overreach. The policy is important. The party and the people are not.
This probably first appeared on October 13th, 1965. But this mindset in U.S. politicians goes back to at least FDR. And internationally it goes much further. It is not quite so blatantly as Linus’s delivery here, but there is a probably at least a fragment of this mindset in nearly everyone. I strongly suspect the foundation of it had survival benefits from the time our ancestors first started roaming the savanna in tribes. Hence it is probably hardwired into our brains.
Just like believing the world is flat and the center of the universe, it takes a special type of brain to push aside the hardwiring and see reality. I really, really need to make that blog post about how to determine truth from falsity.
The 2nd Amendment was moral turpitude in and of itself. The possession of a gun is the mark of a person with a violent mind and bad character parading behind the nonsense, unprovable claim that our founding fathers meant/intended things they would have more than likely been against.
There are probably over 80 million gun owners in the U.S. who own hundreds of millions of guns and shoot billions of rounds of ammo each year. Yet only an extremely small fraction of them commits a violent crime in their lifetime. It is almost as if he is living in an alternate reality.
I has been a few years since I have read anything this messed up. I have to wonder if he just got Internet access after spending several years in a psych ward.
But that is being generous to him. It probably is almost as likely that he is just trying to move the Overton Window to enable elimination of private gun ownership and then a sizable number of the people who owned them.
Another, possible explanation is that he expected to get a lot of traffic from making outlandish statements. Here are few more.
Abolish the 6th Amendment, and start charging suspects with disorderly conduct, obstructing the police, and contempt of court when they invoke the 6th. We need to force accused criminals to own up to what they did without hiding behind an attorney.
We also need to abolish the court’s ability and authority to find someone not guilty. We need law that says all criminal court cases MUST end with a guilty finding. There is no such thing as an innocent criminal.
It’s time for our nation to ban all politics and political parties. Political speech, all political speech should be banned in all its forms as well. It’s the ONLY way to do away with political extremism.
But I somewhat discount he believes those are outlandish. Those are the only posts of that type I could find after scrolling through several dozen posts. He openly admits he lives in Chicago, claims to be a “Media Personality” and “Chicago Public Safety Journalist.” I find the attitude expressed in the posts above to be consistent with my model of his bio.
This was in response to the question (about Disney):
How bad is the DEI there and can anything be done to change it’s course?
Other than the peak seeming to appear a couple of years later, as I have said before, the impression at my company tracks with his. It seems to have been a fad. And as the fab showed how toxic it was the population as a whole turned against it.
And my impression again, the Democrats found themselves painted into a corner and have nearly suffocated on the paint fumes. They lost the presidency to multiple “felony convicted” Donald Trump, of all people. The got slammed in the popular as well as the electoral college by more than the margin of fraud. And despite all the fraud they lost the House and the Senate, too. The majority of voters came to the conclusion all the cancel culture, all the DEI stuff, all the child transition stuff, all the illegal alien stuff, all the looting, rioting, all the fake racism (think Jussie Smollett), and the insistence of a January 6th “insurrection” was too much and it finally popped the bubble the Democrats had been riding on. The Democrats lost so much credibility that a single podcaster (Joe Rogan) gets about double the views of any of Democrat aligned TV host.
Show me the lyric of a nation and it matters not who writes its laws.
Damon of Athens 5th-century BCE Greek music theorist, philosopher, and political advisor, known for his influence on Pericles and his theories on the ethical and political effects of music.
It views politics as ‘downstream’ from culture” was written by Don Eberly in May 2000; “Public policy is downstream from culture” was said by Bruce Chapman, president of Discovery Institute, also in May 2000. Eberly possibly coined the saying because it also occurs frequently in his book Building a Healthy Culture: Strategies for an American Renaissance (2001). Conservative American publisher Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012) often used the saying.
This is why coming out of the closet as a gun owner is important. This is why taking a new shooter to the range and making them comfortable with gun culture is important. This is why, even if we were to get all we want in the courts, we must continue working toward the extermination of the Marxist culture.
At first, I thought it was serious post. As I started writing up my comments, I looked a little deeper. Her bio says:
Dr. with a PhD in gender studies, global climate crisis advocate. Trans Rights are human rights. R word.
Why am I not surprised… Wait a minute. Here are some more posts:
School is coming back, this semester I am teaching the kids about their gender identity and how they don’t need to be bullied into accepting binary lies.
If you have any ideas for activities, please let me know. It’s for years 2-5.
…
White people make me sick. You’re all so damn racist.
…
Why is MAGA so mad at a gay couple having a baby?
The baby needs to be taught not to be so bigoted and just accept the world has changed.
Okay. That settles it. It is a parody account. You got me. Poe’s Law strikes again.
This is the most repeated claim in American tax politics and one of the least supported by actual data. The top 1% of earners take in 22% of total income and pay 40% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% earn about half the nation’s income and pay 72% of its taxes. The bottom half of earners, collectively, pay roughly 3% of the tax revenue. The United States, in fact, has the most progressive income-tax system in the developed world.
Idaho was a 2020 move-to darling, and it’s back in the spotlight. Since its high of 320 searches in for every 100 out 6 years ago — the state has taken a backseat to the headliners. It’s not that move-ins stopped, in fact the state has maintained positive inflow and sustained a steady rise of interest year after year.
And the proof is in the pudding. New U.S. Census data shows that 80% of Idaho counties grew their populations in 2025 and Idaho was among the top ranked inbound states of 2025 with a survey from United Van Lines showing family as the #1 driver.
One reason may be increasing Californian exits. A California Policy Lab analysis found that in the last five years net moves from California to Idaho increased over the last five years and that for each Idahoan that moves to the Golden State, it receives more than two in return. moveBuddha data backs that inflow story; of searches made early in 2026, 24% of moves to Idaho are from California. Additional analysis finds that housing costs are a driving factor.
I have mixed feelings about this. I know what happened to Colorado with out of state invaders. I’m tempted to suggest we build a wall to keep the rats from California out. This is even though my brothers and I were born in California. Of course, none of us stayed there for more about two weeks. And I have lots of relatives there.
On the hand, there is some confirmation that my choice of Idaho as the number one place in the world I want to live is the right one.
So, about all I can do is:
Encourage the right type of people to move and buy the property close to my little spot and give me a little bit of a buffer.
The Second Amendment is not about “gun culture.” It is not about hunting, sporting clays, or weekend range days.
It is the final, unbreakable firewall that keeps every other right from becoming a temporary privilege granted, or revoked, by those in power.
The Founders placed it second only to speech because they had just overthrown a government that tried to disarm them. They understood a brutal historical truth: an armed, trained citizenry is the one thing tyrants fear most. Without it, speech becomes punishable, assembly becomes rebellion, and due process becomes whatever the regime decides.
In 2026, some still call the 2A “outdated.” They ignore the clear, repeating pattern of history. When governments disarm their people, tragedy does not follow by accident, it follows by design. The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that ensures We the People remain the ultimate check on power, not the other way around.
Here is some examples of what happens when that line falls:
Ottoman Empire / Turkey – Gun registration and disarmament laws by 1911. Armenian Genocide (1915–1917): 1.5 million Armenians (plus hundreds of thousands of Assyrians and Greeks) systematically murdered in just 3 years.
Soviet Union – Gun control enacted 1929. Stalin’s regime (1929–1953): ~20 million dissidents, kulaks, and civilians killed through executions, engineered famines, Gulags, and deportations in 24 years.
Nazi Germany – Tightened gun laws and mass disarmament of Jews and political opponents (1938). Holocaust and related atrocities (1939–1945): ~13 million Jews and others exterminated in 6 years.
Communist China – Strict gun control inherited and enforced after 1949. Mao’s regime (1949–1976): 40–65 million dead from Great Leap Forward famine, Cultural Revolution purges, and mass executions in 27 years.
Cambodia (Khmer Rouge) – Full civilian disarmament upon seizing power 1975. Pol Pot’s regime (1975–1979): 1.5–2.8 million Cambodians (roughly 25% of the population) slaughtered or starved in just 4 years.
These are not isolated tragedies. They are the documented pattern: disarm the people first, then the atrocities become possible because resistance becomes impossible.
The Second Amendment was written precisely to prevent this from ever happening here. It is not a suggestion. It is not conditional. It is “shall not be infringed” for a reason that history proves in blood.
That is why we train without apology.
That is why we carry daily.
That is why we fight every single incremental step, because once the guns are gone, the graves fill quickly.
The 2A is not about guns. It is about ensuring that liberty never becomes optional again.
We can not let that line fall.
Stay dangerous, stay good.
RedBeard @HargusJeremy Posted on X, April 15, 2026
A recent news headline declared, “11,500 shootings occurred within 500 yards of US schools last year.” The obvious implication is that American school children are under daily fire on school campuses nationwide. But, as with most gun control narratives in national media written by reporters who mostly don’t understand the basics of firearms or criminal gun use, that narrative collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
The first glaring red flag in this story is that Hearst Television Data Visualization Journalist Susie Webb and the WCVB Get the Facts Data Team built their agenda-driven narrative by relying on gun control advocacy site The Trace’s “School-Adjacent Shootings” dataset, which tracks Gun Violence Archive (GVA) incidents that fell within 500 yards of a K-12 school. Even that dataset warns that each row is a shooting-to-school match and must be deduplicated before anyone totals up the incidents, deaths or injuries. However, that was not done before Webb and WVTM’s story went live on severalnewsoutlets, on social media, on Hearst Television’s YouTube channel and was even—unsurprisingly—picked up by MSN.
This blatant error is not a trivial methodological footnote. It is the difference between measuring school-related crime and measuring a broad circle on a map. It’s also a trick that’s been seen time and again from the likes of Everytown’s propagandist at The Trace and GVA.
The central problem is in the dataset’s own limitations. Each row is a “shooting-to-school match,” meaning one shooting can be linked to multiple schools if several campuses fall within the 500-yard range.
…
The public hears “31 shootings a day near schools” and is encouraged to picture students dodging bullets at recess. But the GVA data are more often than not actually criminal and gang activity near or after school hours, accidental discharges, suicides, police interventions near a campus and/or juveniles getting caught with a firearm at school. This means the methodology sweeps in a much wider universe of incidents with duplication risk baked in.
…
The result is predictable: bad facts drive bad policy. The issue here is not whether crime near schools is serious. The issue is whether the public is being told the truth. On that question, the answer is clear. The methodology does not support the headline, and the headline does not deserve the public’s trust. We all have a right to expect more from those who hold themselves out as objective journalists.
Black woman from South Africa: “Black people have been patient enough for more than 400 years of colonialism. We are coming for you, and we are going to get everything that you own.”
White people are facing racism, hatred, and brutal violence in South Africa. This is not… pic.twitter.com/3a5R93TzOs
I have to wonder what the political left thinks of the blatant racism. Will they demand divestment like they did because of apartheid in South Africa 40 to 60 years ago? Or will they cheer the hatred, confiscation of property, and the murders?
What kills me is as I get older and find myself yelling at clouds more, I’ve come to a greater empathy for conservatives. Now my wife texts me from the grocery store and says “The full-grown adult in front of me is wearing a tail” and I just think “these fucking idiots. No way we survive this. The answer to Fermi’s paradox is that the high order civilizations destroy themselves….”
John Schussler Via email April 13, 2026
I understand what he is talking about. But I’m an optimist and am not as fatalistic as John. But I have an underground bunker in Idaho. Also, last month ago I added another ~50,000 pounds of dirt on top of the bunker. Just in case.
You might think I’m joking (well, maybe I am a little bit).
This is the blend from the field to the north edge of the bunker:
This is the bucket loader I used to move the dirt. The ground was a little wetter than it should have been, but it got the job done:
If you attend Boomershoot this year, I’ll give you a tour of both the inside and outside. Friday evening at 6:00 PM.
All gun control is stupid as a means to reduce violent crime and unconstitutional. Banning 3D printed guns is extra stupid.
Never forget:
One thing that humbles me deeply is to see that human genius has its limits while human stupidity does not.
Alexandre Dumas Circa 1865, Grand Dictionnaire Universel du XIXe Siècle: Français, Historique, Géographique, Mythologique, Bibliographique, etcetera, Volume 2, Entry: Bêtise, Quote Page 650, Column 1, Published by Pierre Larousse, Paris. (Google Books Full View)
The Second Amendment protects the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use AR-15 style semiautomatic rifles for lawful purposes.’ Just last year, the U.S. Supreme Court made clear in a unanimous opinion that the AR-15 is “both widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers.” Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, 605 U.S. 280, 297 (2025). See also Garland v. Cargill, 602 U.S. 406, 429-30 (2024) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting) (AR-15s are “commonly available, semiautomatic rifles.”). Unfortunately, Virginia appears poised to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to enjoy and use AR-15 rifles for lawful purposes by making it a crime to purchase and sell them. This Civil Rights Division will seek to enjoin any attempt to infringe the right of law-abiding Virginians to acquire constitutionally protected arms that are possessed by literally tens of millions of Americans. See Snope v. Brown, 145 S. Ct. 1534 (2025) (Kavanaugh, J., statement respecting denial of certiorari).
In addition, laws that require constitutionally protected firearms owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes to be maintained in an inoperable state are unconstitutional. See D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 630 (2008) (“[T]he District’s requirement … that firearms in the home be rendered and kept inoperable at all times … [is] unconstitutional.”). We are aware that the Virginia General Assembly has forwarded to you several bills that, if enacted as currently written, would mirror the unconstitutional restrictions struck down in Heller 18 years ago. There are also other provisions contained in those bills that otherwise prevent lawful use of constitutionally protected arms for self-defense.
In all, the General Assembly has forwarded to you over 20 bills that restrict Second Amendment rights. I urge you to reconsider allowing any bill that would infringe on the lawful use of protected firearms by law-abiding citizens to become law. In an effort to avoid unnecessary litigation, the Second Amendment Section stands ready to meet and confer with attorneys in the Virginia Attorney General Office. Your counsel may contact Acting Chief Andrew Darlington at Andrew.Darlington@usdoj.gov. The Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens shall not be infringed.
Harmeet Dhillon Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division Posted April 10, 2026 on X
It is thrilling to have a Second Amendment Section of the Civil Rights Division, let alone them writing, “shall not be infringed.” It is not an 18 USC 242 event, but it is still Enjoy Your Trial time.
In experiments using a mouse model of colorectal cancer, researchers observed an extraordinary outcome after administering E. americana through a single intravenous injection. The treatment completely eliminated tumors in every case, resulting in a 100% complete response (CR) rate. This level of effectiveness was far greater than what is typically seen with established cancer therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (anti-PD-L1 antibody) and the chemotherapy drug liposomal doxorubicin (chemotherapy agent).
Looking at the “future directions” in the article, I found it odd there was no mention of moving toward use in treating human cancers. Perhaps other scientists will pick up on this and see if it works in humans.
Section 1715 of title 18, U.S. Code, is unconstitutional as applied to constitutionally protected firearms, including handguns, because it serves an illegitimate purpose and is inconsistent with the Nation’s tradition of firearm regulation. See N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111, 2129–30 (2022).
The Department of Justice may not, consistent with the Constitution, enforce section 1715 with respect to constitutionally protected firearms. The Postal Service should modify its regulations to conform with this opinion.
I wonder why the legacy media has not been talking about this. Are they drowning their sorrows in cheap boxed wine? Have they finally decided gun laws are now a lost cause?
But as Copilot told me:
The OLC opinion is a quiet admission that the 1927 handgun‑mailing ban was never compatible with the Second Amendment — it simply took a century for the government to say it out loud.
If a man wants to cum on his girlfriend’s face because he saw it in porn, and she doesn’t feel like getting her face cummed on, we cheer go-girl and frown at the man for even watching porn at all. But if a woman wants her boyfriend to buy her flowers because she grew up being fed this action in movies, and her boyfriend doesn’t feel like it, we have no sympathy for him. We are horrified even at comparing the two things. It’s obvious to us that porn should not influence what happens in sex, but we have been so immersed in romance-porn that the idea of buying flowers for a woman is seen as what romance ought to be. The romance narrative has become romance, and rejecting the narrative becomes rejecting romance itself. We have lost the ability to distinguish!
I love how Aella can see alternate realities and express them in ways that make me laugh and almost whoop for joy at the twisting of everyone’s view of the world.
The same sort of things applies to gun ownership. “Guns are icky and only criminals have them” versus “Everyone should have guns and know how to use them because they are tools for self-defense against criminals and tyrants.”
Framing matters. Media and your peer groups dominate the positioning of the framing. Try to see through framing and get a grasp on the true reality. Seeing things other people cannot see gives you a huge advantage. We cannot all be Aella or Elon Musk, but we can do better than what we currently do. Realty is tough, really, really, tough.
People on the right who have been mentally modelling the world since they were kids, constantly updating and revising their mental model so that it’s able to reliably anticipate basic functioning of the world around us, so we can navigate the world without being blindsided all the time; have trouble internalising this:
leftists don’t abide by the principle of non-contradiction
they do not understand the world through abstract or ideal first principles which they then apply universally, in a predictable and stable manner
like situations are therefore not alike
everything is its own thing & has no bearing on anything else
noticing patterns is racist hateful and evil so they stopped doing that a long time ago, pattern recognition is haram
Every position they hold is a unique stance that they imbibed from the media. They don’t start from an abstraction and think critically to rach their conclusion. They literally watched Colbert and had it drilled into their brain. They don’t have first principles or universal values. They do what they are told. Because it benefits their coalition to do so. That’s it.
That’s their whole worldview and it’s why they don’t flinch when they contradict themselves. They don’t have an “ideology” arrived at through abstract reasoning or critical thinking, they’re part of a cult that does everything humanly possible to prevent them from ever thinking about anything for any reason. They regurgitate the party line and experience affirmation and inclusion from their peers when they do. So they keep doing it. It’s that basic. They are Pavlov’s dog.
I can see this being true for a high percentage of the people on the left. Those who are also known as “useful idiots”.
But there are also those who are rational, deliberate, and carefully choose their words and actions. These are the Lenins, Castros, Pol Pots, Mao Zedongs, Sanderses, Schumers, and Clintons of history — the folks who promise progress but somehow always end up needing more of your land, your money, and your compliance, all enforced under pain of death.
