Diaper Report 9/7/21

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Many – me among them – have had trouble understanding why Sickness Psychosis is heavily a Leftist affliction. What is it that makes Leftists so  . . . vulnerable to believing and virulently amen’ing what they’re told to be afraid (and to do) by the government and the corporations that have become its adjunct (or rather, the reverse)?

Aren’t Leftists the ones most predisposed to distrust authority? To question what they’re told they must do by those in authority? Whatever happened to be suspicious of The Man?

Well, the answer is simple. The Left became The Man. It is now in authority, rather than opposed to it. Therefore, it no longer opposes it.

In truth, it never really did.

What the Left objected to, even if most Leftists are unable to admit this to themselves, is being under the thumb of not-Leftists. They are perfectly fine with being the thumb, themselves. They merely pretended to champion such things are freedom of speech, when the felt their “speech” (it was often in fact not speech but simply – literally – pornography or similar forms of scat) was threatened. But once they were in a position to threaten the free speech of those who didn’t share their views, their views about the sanctity of free speech changed.

Just as their views about civil rights have . . . evolved.

You will perhaps recall My Body, My Choice! – because it is hard to forget when the chant is still ringing in your ears after 50 years of hearing it chanted from the willing TeleScreen, on the steps of the Supreme Court and everywhere else the Left took issue with the government interfering with what Leftists styled their right to choose to end the life of the other person within their bodies.

But the Left is even more strident as regards rescinding the rights of people who merely assert the sanctity of their own bodies – to be free to choose whether to risk their own lives by being free to choose whether to inject their own bodies with a substance that – ironically – contains (apparently) the genetic remains of the other people summarily executed in the name of My Body, My Choice!

Leftists were once as a rule people interested in health; today, they are much more interested in your health – even if you are demonstrably healthier than they are. Many of the most authoritarian Gesundheitsfuhrers and Krankleiters – such as the governor of  Illinois, for instance – are double-chinned fatsos who manifestly care so little about their health that they believe it is your obligation to care for it.

This also manifests in the Leftist obsession with communal and coercive “health care” – which is a euphemism for forcing the healthy to pay for the chronic sickness of others who cannot be expected to care for their own health. It was the attitude behind this that laid the groundwork for “we’re all in this together,” which of course “we” are not.

Most especially those of us who have had our businesses and livelihoods cratered via closures we would never have agreed to, since we believe people have the right to keep their doors open to those who aren’t under any compulsion to pass through them. To efface their faces – or not.

The Leftists does not believe in allowing such choice.

Especially given many Leftists never had to face such a choice, having declared themselves and their livelihoods “essential.”

Now they intend to deny us the right to choose to live – the price of which being the Jab. Serially, ongoing. That should be their choice, of course. It is a choice we happily extend to them. But it is telling that they would have us fined, jailed, excommunicated from life and perhaps even take our lives  – for daring to assert our right to make a similar (if different) choice.

What’s interesting about all of this is that the Leftists are blind to something they once saw clearly – perhaps because of that thing covering their faces. It is that having become the establishment, it is they who are now the objects of revolutionary criticism. It is they who cling tenaciously to an ossified hierarchy of dehumanizing corporate-government power. They are the rent-seekers, the glad-handers and grifters. The oppressors, themselves – though of course, most are incapable of seeing it since all they see (and hear) are people just like themselves, echoing the same self-serving pieties – which some of them may actually believe.

Just as the now-very-ex Dear Leader of Romania, Nikolai Ceausescu probably once also believed it. One can see this – in  the old videos – on his uncomprehending face, as the crowd below began to turn and the wave crested and washed over him, before the dawn of realization finally descended.

Such a moment may soon be at hand, again.

Well, with any luck.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in! Or email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com if the @!** “ask Eric” button doesn’t work!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

Share Button


  1. I think you are on point Eric. If you look back at the protests and platforms of the lefties of old you don’t find any opposition to the state… what you see is disagreement with those who are currently in charge. If there is one thing that can be said about the left, as well as the religious right, is that they are not principled actors; thus the whole “My Body, My Choice” for abortion but “Mandate the Jab” for covid on the left. On the right you get it with “The smaller the government the better” right up until it is about what you put in your body or do with a consenting adult.

    It is how I argue with both sides. I ask them questions until I get them arguing with themselves. Without a unified theory in politics you need only search out the “but” and their whole argument falls apart. On a fun note it also drives them insane.

  2. The Soviet Union was the first government to legalize abortion, happened in 1928. After the sixth or seventh abortion, women became sterile. By the 1950’s, the abortion numbers topped five million in one year. Had a direct effect on population growth in the Soviet era.

    After the sixth or seventh lethal jab, what do you think could possibly happen?

    In The US, in 1951, there were 1.5 million abortions performed in the US, all illegal. It is in the book Our Bodies, Ourselves. There is a photo of a woman who is dead on a hotel room floor from a botched abortion.

    Why there is a need for safe abortion methods, prevention is better. My wife has a copy, otherwise, I would have never opened the book to see what was in the pages. Don’t have to read it from cover to cover to understand what it is about. You get the gist of it, women want control of their bodies, not to be told how they can bear children.

    My mother once informed me that there was a woman in the neighborhood that routinely performed abortions on pregnant women. It was during the 1950’s. Women have rights and have a right to choose, you may not agree with the choice, however, it is their body.

    Unwanted pregnancies happen. A good friend of mine was separated from his wife, had an affair, the woman became pregnant, she didn’t want to burden the relationship with an unwanted pregnancy and had an abortion. Her body, her choice.

    A woman wants to copulate at the most opportune time for her to become pregnant. It’s human nature. Breasts produce mother’s milk.

    The needle is goddess, space is the place – graffiti on a building in downtown Seattle

    You are in the vaccine gulag.

    • Abortion should be legal up to 18 years, 9 months after conception – unless the fetus has been corrupted by a belief in socialism or authoritarian rule. Then the 18 years, 9 months should be extended to 30.

    • Shouldn’t all this revolve back to personal responsibility? Seriously, why is an abortion necessary if you were using protection all along? I began having sex in my late teens. I had a boyfriend (now husband) who I knew we were going to end up fooling around. Even at the tender age of 17 I made an appointment with an OBGYN to get on birth control. I didn’t tell my mother I just made the appointment. Fortunately, my mother sat my sisters and I down in our early teens and explained the repercussions of not using protection. We were told what was available and what to do when we needed it. We were also warned that it is not the responsibility of a man/boy to protect ourselves from pregnancy. It was our body and we had the obligation to look after it. My children have received the same talk, although my son is aware that it is his responsibility to protect himself.

      My husband and I were together 12 years before we had kids and I never had an “oops” moment during that time. If a horny, naïve 17 year old girl can figure this out why can’t a 25, 30, 35 year old woman? We have a multitude of devices that are offered to both men and women that no one needs to get pregnant unless they want to.

      • With due respect, RG, it was not always thus.

        The State of Connecticut once prohibited, by state law, the use of contraceptives by married couples (yes, you read that right), until the law was successfully challenged, leading to the famous Griswold v. Connecticut decision by U.S. Supreme Court, which happened in 1965. Even after that, reliable contraception was routinely denied to unmarried couples, either by law or by intrusive pressure by “busybody” physicians.

        For example, William Baird was arrested in 1967 for providing contraceptive devices to unmarried females, in defiance of Massachusetts law. The “free love” movement closely followed the “free speech” movement, as day follows night.

        It is ironic, to me at least, that the (unmarried) residents of Stanley McCormick Hall (womens’ dormitory at M.I.T.) in the late 1960s were denied the benefit of oral contraceptives, development of which were funded by their (housing) benefactor:
        In my opinion, Katharine Dexter McCormick did more for the liberation of women than any woman in history, bar none.

        Roe v. Wade, FWIW, did not happen until 1973.

        Up until that time, women who became pregnant had two main choices:
        a) carry the fetus to term
        b) have an illegal abortion, with attendant health risks.

        I broke up with my first sex partner because I was deathly afraid she would get pregnant, which would have seriously impacted our lives, both of us being undergraduates at the time ,and certainly not interested in marriage, or raising children.

        Oddly enough, in my high school (HHS Class of 1966) the girls who got knocked up were among the smarter ones. Evidently, there were gaps in their knowledge.

        • Hi turtle,

          I agree with you that it was not always that way and I am not sitting in judgement on women who early on found themselves in such a position. My grandmother told me horror stories on how pregnant wives would try to abort their babies using hangers because there was no money to feed additional mouths during the Great Depression.

          I believe in the last 40 years, especially the last 25, that is no longer a valid reason. The majority of women today are viewing it as an additional method of birth control. We have too many other contraceptives available that abortion should only be used in the rarest of circumstances.

      • I usually stay far away from abortion discussions as I don’t agree with either extreme that these inevitably descend to but I would advise people on the anti side to tread VERY carefully here. “Life begins at conception” is no more “The Science” than the Convid nonsense is, it is a religious/ethical belief. Which is fine, one is perfectly entitled to hold this belief and try and persuade (non coercively) persuade others to that position but using the government (and by extension AGWs) to enforce these edicts opens the door to some VERY dangerous ground. Look at how “the vulnerable” are used as an excuse for draconian Convid restrictions and you can see how the logic behind abortion restrictions can be turned around and used for entire other purposes, none of them good. Look at Texas wanting to restrict going out of state to avoid their most recent restrictions, this is VERY VERY BAD precedent, the kind of thing that can be used to restrict the same to the “unjabbed”.

        Libertarians need to think carefully and separate personal beliefs and make damn sure that this is the kind of power they want government to have. It never remains restricted to things YOU believe in.

        • Hi Metal,

          I agree, this issue is a contentious one. It’s one I’ve thought about intensively for many years. What follows is my view, which I hold. I do not insist others hold it. I do not demand that government impose it. It seems clear to me that, as a matter of biology, life does begin at conception. The two cells, which are certainly alive, join and become a new life – defined by the fact of both being biologically alive as well as merging to form a new/different life, with DNA from both parents. This life is certainly not fully developed, but the same is true through the entirety of gestation and childhood. A person is not fully developed until they reach maturity, which is another imprecise measure as no one can say exactly when a child transitions into an adult and stops maturing (physically, emotionally/psychologically). We set arbitrary boundaries, such as 18 – and then 21. It was once thought that a child reaches adulthood at 16 or even earlier, having attained the “age of reason.”

          To me, the fact of life is apparent; even more so once there is a heartbeat. This then begs the question.

          I see this as as a fundamentally different choice than whether the individual has the right to control their own body.

        • Hi Metal,

          I don’t advocate or support government having any say in abortion either for or against. I am not a fan of the new Texas law or of Roe vs Wade. My stance is not a religious one either, since I am not a religious person. It is one of conscious and responsibility. The government should not provide an individual’s moral ground, the individual should.

          I am not trying to go down the rabbit hole here, but when an individual becomes accepting of the wrongs of nature as being okay society will decay and authoritarian regimes expand whether it be via Big Brother, the Church, a club, or business.

          • Well-said, RG…

            The Left uses extremes (e.g., “rape and incest”) as it uses “racism” – to evade discussion and to silence those who question. In most cases, sex is consensual, an act both parties freely decided to engage in. That is a choice. It is also a risk, especially if sex is engaged in without birth control. Only imbeciles do not understand how babies are made – and imbeciles ought not to be having sex (at least, not fertile imbeciles). It is analogous to me choosing to ride my motorcycle without a helmet. I know the risk – and I assume it. If I get hurt, who is responsible for my choice?

            Well, if I choose to have sex and a woman chooses to have sex with me and she conceives – that was the result of our choice. No one forced us to make that choice. The coming child may not be planned or convenient but I do not see how that effaces the fact that it is a child, though not yet born. And I do not see that I (or the woman who conceived) have the right to end that life, which was created as the result of our choice to have sex.

            Like you, I do not want the government involved in this. I am speaking for myself only – expressing my own acknowledgement of what, to my mind, seem to be the inarguable facts of life.

            • Although I’d certainly contend that any man who drops his drawers and gets his freak on with a willing female must shoulder the consequences of dong so, that being the essence of “manhood” (i.e., looking after one’s one seed, and not simply putting food on the table, clothes on their backs, and a roof over their heads, but also guiding them as they mature, mostly by EXAMPLE), I find it interesting that the Loony Left’s position on abortion, in effect, is to absolve the female of same, at the expense of the unborn child’s life.

              Whether or not her soul is on the line is for a different thread.

          • >when an individual becomes accepting of the wrongs of nature as being okay society will decay
            Yes, exactly. Alternatively, you could say that is a symptom that society is *already* in decay. Look around you (I expect this is preaching to the choir, here).

            That is a fertile (no pun intended) topic for discussion, but to restrict it to only one aspect, consider that acceptance of (routine) abortion => acceptance of (routine) infanticide => acceptance of (routine) euthanasia.

            My understanding (“I read it somewhere”) is that infanticide of defective infants was normal practice in ancient Sparta. No use feeding children who have no hope of becoming warriors – better to leave them for the wolves.

            In modern times, we have euthanasia for defective adults being practiced by the Third German Reich, code name Aktion T4, to rid society of Lebens unwertes Leben (life unworthy of life), i.e. “useless eaters.”

            In both cases, I would argue these were societies on the ascendant, as regards political and military power, which regimented individual lives in service to the state. State power was on the rise, while individual liberties were in decline, being subordinated to the will of the State.

            The case of forced sterilization is an interesting one. As anyone who has seen the movie “Judgment at Nuremberg” knows, involuntary sterilization was advocated in the U.S. (the “Good Guys”) as well as Nazi Germany (the “Bad Guys”).

            But what of present day U.S.? I submit to you that we live in a society in profound, and perhaps irreversible, decline on all fronts. Amerika verfault an allen fronten, IOW.

            • Indeed, Turtle –

              When life is cheapened, life becomes cheap. Not some life. All life.

              As regards abortion, I would like first of all that it be discussed as such. Not euphemized as “choice” or “reproductive rights.” Let’s at least be honest with ourselves and face what it is we are talking about.

              Second, while I sympathize with the woman who got pregnant and does not want to be, that sympathy wanes as the pregnancy progresses. It is a sorrowful thing to take the “morning after” pill. It is a horrible thing to abort a nearly-born (and nearly fully-formed) baby at six months. I have never comprehended the reason for that. A woman knows she is pregnant pretty shortly after conception and – arguably – ought to know it is possible, immediately after she has had unprotected sex. So why not have protected sex, if you do not want to get pregnant? Isn’t that the obligation of the woman (and the man)? Why not take the “morning after” pill, if you didn’t use protection and had sex?

              Why wait until you are showing to abort your child?

              Yes, yes. Rape and incest. Little girls who got pregnant and are hiding it from their parents. While these things do occur, they are the extremes. As you say, abortion is no longer merely an in extremis practice; it is practiced routinely – as a form of birth control. This is horrible. It anesthetizes us to the horror of it. And that, inevitably, leads to the horrors you’ve written.

              Lebens unwertes Leben, indeed.

              • Hi, Eric,
                Yes, indeed. I am all for truth in advertising, which is a rare occurrence in this “age of propaganda.”

                One of the more egregious abuses of language I have heard on the topic at hand is the despicable lie of referring to infanticide as “post birth abortion.”

                We should all call *BULLSHIT* as loudly as possible on that one, as well as many other “language aggressions” which seem to be “systemic,” to use a currently fashionable word, in our decadent, and possibly dying, society.

                Ride hard, shoot straight, and always speak the truth as it appears to you, regardless of whose “tender sensibilities” get hurt in the process.

                For the other extreme on this question, please see my reply to MA, which appears below.

                My own POW, FWIW, is that what defines a human being is a functioning brain, not a beating heart. It follows that a fetus with a functioning brain, as evidenced by the detection of brain waves, should be regarded as a fully formed, though not fully developed, human being.

                Full development, as you and others have noted, takes decades (and some individuals never get there – a.k.a. clovers!).

              • Religion aside, I find abortion offensive on two levels: scientific and legal. The science of biology has developed complete understanding of mammalian sexual reproduction, There are no mysteries or secrets here: life begins at conception. We have total understanding of this right down to the sub-cellular level.

                If you want to prevent conception, that is one thing. Killing off a conceived embryo is another. Now, the argument of a LOT of pro-choicers is that because the life is not fully developed and is nascent, it does not deserve protection. This is a very, very slippery slope, of course; a five-year-old is “nascent” compared to a 55-year old corporate CEO or university provost in the prime of his career.

                Who is to decide? If we acknowledge that killing a certain life is acceptable because of the way it looks or because of it’s stage of development, we have to admit that these terms and definitions are completely elastic and subjective and can be manipulated to kill anybody for any reason. (One of the great ironies of the abortion debate is how pro-choicers take umbrage at the fact that Arabs, Chinese and Subcontinentals who would rather have a son than a daughter seek gender-selective abortions. Hah!)

                Now we have to confront the legal argument. Whether we are for or against abortion as a moral matter, in the U.S. legal system we have to admit that state have a great deal of power as to what does and what does not constitute justifiable homicide, namely in self-defense, euthanasia, and capital punishment. Some people find each of these morally repugnant (most often opponents of armed self-defense and capital punishment are pro-choice liberals) but nonetheless the state legislatures have jurisdiction over these matters.

                Abortion is no different — some may (rightfully) find it morally repugnant, but the jurisdiction over the matter lies with the state legislatures, not the U.S. Constitution or the Supreme Court. The idea that there is a CONSTITUTIONAL “right” to an abortion is the most ludicrous and idiotic thing that has ever been said by any court in this country. Since abortion is considered a medical procedure, state legislatures that govern medicine under the 10thAmendment have total jurisdiction over it, full stop.

                • >The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

                  I don’t see anything in there about “governing medicine.”

                  I am especially in favor of the last three words, “to the people.”

                  If you find abortion morally repugnant, then don’t do it.

              • Couldn’t agree more.

                Leftists very much argue that law and/or public policy must accommodate the exceptions rather than the rule. “The Law” is never perfect, as there simply isn’t enough paper and ink to figure out every potential outcome of human interaction. What there ARE are sound legal and moral principles, and JUDGES to help sort them out when mediation and common sense fail.

                • Amen, Doug –

                  I diagnose Leftism (in particular) as a form of mental illness that manifest as cognitive dissonance. The Leftist will rabidly defend a position – My Body, My Choice! (as regards abortion) and then attack the same position when it does not suit their feelings (e.g., leaving other people’s bodies free to choose whether to be diddled with by the pharmaceutical cartels, under orders from the same government they insist has no rightful authority to interfere with their “choice” to produce new life and then end it.

        • Hi, MA,
          As I understand it, “Life begins at conception” is official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, which teaches that humans have a “soul,’ and that “ensoulment” occurs at the moment of conception. As you have noted, this is religious dogma, not science.

          But what actually constitutes human life? Is it the union of gametes? Is a single cell organism, incapable of independent existence, but with the potential (the “programming” if you will) to become an adult human, to be treated the same as an adult human? Or the same as an infant? Or neither of the above?

          I would say this is a difficult, and as yet unresolved question, from a “natural philosophical” point of view, “natural philosophy” being the original designation for what we now call “science.”

          “Abortion stops a beating heart.” Well, yes, but so does vivisection of a frog, which we did in high school biology class back in the day. It is worth pointing out that “miscarriage” is another name for “spontaneous” abortion.

          If a woman engages in activities which are intended to induce a miscarriage, and succeeds in doing so, is she guilty of homicide? If so, at what level? Voluntary manslaughter? Or murder? If so, shouldn’t all women capable of bearing children be closely monitored to insure they are not “killing babies?” Mandatory monthly pregnancy tests, with results entered in a national database?

          Any woman who “tests positive” should obviously be required to quarantine, under close medical supervision, to protect the life of her unborn child, no?

      • Vaccines are nothing more than another form of abortion, tough to recognize what is really happening, it is crazed crazy out there.

        RG, I am all for life, have four children. After five dogs, some good some bad, you learn to enjoy the time with them and learn to grieve the loss, nothing lasts forever.

        My son called one day and asked if he could have a cat, I said go ahead, everybody has a cat from time to time. 40 cats later, I guess I have learned my lesson and now one crazy cat wants me to be his pet human, it is an outrage.

        It’s not fair that other animals want to be a part of it all, only humans count anymore, but not that much. Cats and dogs would live a lonely existence with no humans to help them stay alive. And that’s the truth.

        On the real life story side, here’s mine:

        One of my daughters was too weak to suckle after the third day of birth, was not able to suck the mother’s milk from my wife’s breasts. It was a critical situation that needed doctor’s advice and care.

        What was done was to express mother’s milk in known quantities, an eye dropper was used to feed one drop of mother’s milk at a time into one of my newborn daughter’s nostrils. It took approximately 36 hours of intensive feeding to pull her out of her critical status. Kangaroo care, body heat to her frail weakened body and condition worked wonders. It was touch and go, today she is healthy and spry. She is blessed with life, thanks to real medicine.

        Nature does work wonders, medical care with the right approach achieved positive results, she lived.

        All life is important. Even one taken prematurely.

    • You keep repeating the mantra, “HER body, her CHOICE”, disregarding the fact that about half the babies murdered are WOMEN (i.e., LITTLE GIRLS). What of THEIR choice(s)? That sort of cowardice and rationalization makes me wish YOUR mother had exercised her “right” to do the same to you, asshole.

        • Ok, Drumpish, maybe I’m being overly harsh, and if I was, I apologize. All of us can be glad that our respective mothers CHOSE life, i.e., each of US.

          What amazes me at times is how the pro-abortion Loony Left can rationalize their position. It seems that selfish choice is the overall principle, hence the mantra, “MY body, MY choice”, which likewise most of them think to no avail with respect to the “Jab”. Ergo, at least during the early stages of pregnancy, before the unborn child is “viable” (i.e, once it plops out, it should breath on its own, and if properly cared for, will live), or, in the more extreme cases, until all of the child has emerged from between her legs (i.e., “Partial-Birth” abortion). In the case of the latter, I find it baffling how they can parse the point where “choice” exists and where to terminate the child’s life would then become a homicide.

          I suspect that, in reality, the Loon Left actually believes in “abortion” at all stages of human existence, at THEIR discretion and CONVENIENCE. Hence why I’ve contended that the Loony Left is a DEATH CULT, mainly, YOURS and MINE, but not THEIRS. Like all would-be tyrants, they’ve no problem with MURDER if it serves their interests.

          • >Loon Left actually believes in “abortion” at all stages of human existence,
            Likely to include “pre-emptive” incarceration and/or termination for those accused (not convicted) of wrongthink, in order to “cleanse” the Body. Dep’t of PreCrime, IOW. The Body must remain pure. PreCrime is the “antibiotic,” political indoctrination is the “vaccine.”

            Body Politic, Body of Landru, same thing. Tyranny by the State has many names, but it all comes to the same thing. The citizen gets shafted by the State, regardless of whether the State is considered “far Right,” or “far Left.”

            “Communism” and “Fascism” are two heads of the same monster. According to its founder, National Socialism owed a great debt to International Communism. Political space, like the surface of the Earth, is curved. Politics is by nature a crooked game. Tyrants of the Right and tyrants of the Left meet each other on the Dark Side, and discover they are brothers under the skin.

  3. “The result will be war; there’s really no way around that.”

    Lifted from this bit by Brandon Smith at his Alt-Market site:

    “I think as usual there will be a couple of blue states or major cities that will introduce the measures first and they will try to exploit state police and roving or random checkpoints. Then, the federal government will show support and attempt to rally ALL blue states to enforce similar rules with their blessing, along with more permanent or “hard checkpoints”. They know they will not be able to con red states into accepting checkpoints so they will try to simply lock the red states in and not allow unvaxxed people from those states to travel anywhere else. I do suspect that the establishment will need a pretty aggressive crisis, either economic or an attack of some kind, in order to bring in any checkpoints. They will need the public to be highly distracted before implementing domestic travel restrictions, even in blue states. The result will be war; there’s really no way around that. To answer your question, I would not be surprised to see the first passport checkpoints go up in a year, unless there is some kind of catastrophic event such as a grid down or cyberattack that lasts more than a couple of weeks.”


  4. About a month or two ago, when our dictators here in OR told everyone they didn’t need to wear the slave muzzle, 98% of everyone in the store I frequent did NOT wear it. So maybe there’s some hope. But now, they’re all wearing it again EVEN THOUGH they’re not required to… but maybe they don’t know that because the store STILL has signs up saying it’s required, even though it’s not… only the employees are required to wear the slave muzzle. The shoppers all just do what they’re told because they’re too afraid to get in trouble. Spineless jellyfish. But does that mean they’ll get the lethal injection? IDK. No-one knows the true numbers of suckers out there. There may be hope though — it seems to me that a HUGE % of the population doesn’t want that lethal injection. What a cartoon these days.

      • I don’t even pay attention anymore, nor care. It’s all nonsense & treason. The fake govnor wasn’t even elected — was appointed by other official(s) that weren’t elected either because they frauded our elections. Everyone is taking orders from pirates that frauded their way into office! If this was a cartoon it would be funny. Everything is so ridiculously crazy that, as horrible as it all is, one can’t help but just start to laugh at it… it’s truly comical. I’m waiting for the mandate to have holes drilled in our heads. I’m actually hoping that they mandate everyone must wear a paper bag over their head, with holes cut out for the eyes. They’ll give out free bags, and printed on the side it’ll say “I’m a stupid ignoramous” — I swear the sheeple will wear that.

        I think the cell phones fried everyones’ brains. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were designed to damage the part of the brain that has common sense.

        • Hi Harry,

          I’ve read that cell phones are literally addictive (psychologically) and are conditioning people to disconnect from the real world and into the virtual. And of course, they serve the purpose of a voluntary ear tag that people willingly carry around with them, enabling the PTB to monitor and record their movements and habits.

          • Old guy here. I fail to recognize any pertinent value in a cell phone. I do have one and do find texting a distinct advantage. Being capable of communication without interrupting other activity. Otherwise, ho hum. Why anyone would choose to view the world through a 3″X 5″ screen baffles me. Obviously I use the internet, extensively. But I do so with a full size QWERTY board that I can actually type on. In English.

            • RE: “Why anyone would choose to view the world through a 3″X 5″ screen baffles me.”

              Me, as well.

              It really is bizarre how people spend sooo much time peering into that tiny

              It’s sooo the opposite of the big screen TeeVee craze. Yet, I suppose it’s the same?

            • Similar sentiment here.

              I was an “early adopter” of cell phone technology, back in he early 1990s when they were known as “car phones,” and the transceiver was the size of library book. They were extremely convenient for those who worked “in the field,” which I did back then. This was before the rise of the commercial Internet.

              These days, we all have fast Internet, and large flat screen displays. I am writing this on a 27″ monitor, the smaller of two monitors on my desktop, using a Microsoft Natural keyboard.

              I am in the office all day, except for infrequent trip to the field, or to a customer’s office. I see no purpose in carrying a cell phone, except for emergency communication, such as calling a tow truck, since “pay telephones” no longer exist.

              My $29 flip phone sits on my desk, in case the VOIP land line goes out. I do not text, I do not give out the cell number (I do not even know what it is, without referring to the Dymo tape I attached to it).

  5. Regarding Lefties and authoritarianism: It is very disappointing, indeed. All of what would be the “counterculture” has just become a flock of mainstream parrots. Punk is truly dead.

    The liberal meme-girl pictured, however, likely didn’t circumcise her son, if she had a son. Circumcision has become very uncool these days among the younger parents. They leave that anteater intact. No, what is removed these days are your testicles. 😉

  6. I heard a most extraordinary (possibly) COVID experience from a coworker this morning. We’ll call him “Mike”.

    He went for a survival camping trip in Idaho, in which he and a “friend” (I’ll explain shortly) rode horseback 18 miles into the wilds to live off of the land. They stayed in separate spaces. Mike was supposed to show his friend how to fish, gather berries and mushrooms and so forth in order to stay alive.

    Now Mike is an ultra-fit man, and does this sort of thing often, for fun. But he began to fall ill as they were driving to Idaho, and after the horseback ride in, he was utterly exhausted. Exhaustion and a sore throat were his primary symptoms for the duration.

    It only got worse, and instead of hunting and gathering, they ended up living off of their emergency rations, which were little packets of dehydrated potatoes and whatnot. Mike not only was starving, but couldn’t motivate himself to get down to the river to get water. He finally summoned his friend with his whistle, who seemed irked about having to deliver him some water. This “friend” was, apparently, angry about having the trip ruined by this sickness, albeit seemed completely unsympathetic, and if you’d ask me, he might be a psychopath.

    When they finally broke camp and headed back up the trail 6 days later, Mike slept on the back of the horse and most of the way back, though he certainly should’ve been in a bed. Upon returning to civilization, he tested negative for COVID, and went on a trip to Hawaii (!) to see some family. He described the symptoms as matching COVID, but we may never know.

    But I’ll tell you. This man is one tough SOB. He said he was still fairly exhausted during the trip to Hawaii, but recovered steadily, and today he was quite animated, and claimed he had a new lease on life. He thought he was a goner. With friends like his, who needs enemies, I told him.

    I imagine as healthy as this man is, if he had the proper nutrition, water, rest and perhaps medication, I reckon he would’ve been right as the mail in a few days. Moral of the story: Don’t put your life in the hands of psychopaths.

  7. Trudeau stoned:

    ‘Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been pelted by rocks while on a campaign stop Monday ahead of Canada’s general election. The incident took place in London, Ontario – with the Canadian leader later confirming he believes he was hit on the shoulder. The inbound objects were widely described as “small rocks”.

    ‘Video shows him being pushed onto a bus by his aides to escape a large and unruly group of protesters angry at his vaccine mandate policies, which include required Covid vaccines for all workers in federally regulated industries, as well as for any citizen to travel by rail, public bus, or commercial flight.’ — ZH

    We’re gonna need bigger rocks!

  8. I would love to blame the Lefties for the current turn of events, but the righties, the Republicans, the conservatives have stood by and silently agreed with everything the left has done. The party that were ‘supposedly’ advocates for limited government, personal responsibility, low taxes have not only kept quiet on the left’s rise to power, but actually abetted them! The only time they wake from slumber is when they hear a potential war is brewing then out comes the need for more money for the military! Where has that gotten us? Korea, Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan. We have lost them all. We have killed countless lives, destroyed our country’s financial security, and have become a joke to the world. What do we have to show for it at the end of the day? Nothing, not a damn thing. Build Back Better? That only rings true if you are the Taliban.

    • Most mainstream republican leaders agree fundamentally with the authoritarian aims of the left they (falsely) profess to oppose. Republican political leaders are either in on the game/take or are opportunists. The lines between the so-called right and the left are now hopelessly blurred, if they ever truly existed. At the upper echelons, the left and the right bear equal responsibility for our situation. The difference seems, to me anyway, to lie among the hoi polloi – where the leftists now seek to harm/destroy/ruin their fellow countrymen (us), falsely believing they stand to benefit from what arises from the ashes they leave behind.

      • Hi BAC,

        You are right. It is the same two headed snake. The Republicans are delusional. They believe that the left won’t eat them when everything else has been conquered, cancelled, and destroyed.

        I wish the country could amicably divorce. I know that isn’t possible, but it would be nice. This country is no longer functional. Very few can see eye to eye with their peers and no one trusts anybody. If it were a marriage we would have separated long ago.

        • Most on the right or left never see that while the right and left appear opposed, they are merely two legs of big brother moving towards the same destination.

          When the boot is at your neck, it matters not if it is a left or right one.

        • Maybe not “amicably”, but divorce we must. We can thank Saint Lincoln for the lack of amicability. Murder being his solution. There is a deep divide, and it’s near a perfect 50/50 split. “Democracy” won’t solve it. The Republicans in general differ from Democrats only in the speed of the handcart to hell we are riding on. The destination remains the same. There are a few bright lights on the Republican side, but life experience has taught me to be highly suspicious.

          • Hi John,

            “Democracy” won’t solve it.”

            “Democracy” exacerbates it, and guarantees the continual growth of the State.


              • That is why this country wasn’t supposed to be a democracy but a representative republic. With the people’s interest represented in the House, the State’s interest represented in the senate. The presidency was not supposed to be picked at the behest of 1 or 2 large cities but collectively by all the states which is why they have the electoral college. And the courts were supposed to be a check on any 1 or more groups exceeding their constitutional powers. Now the house is compromised by things like redistricting that can put 2 diametrically opposed groups in the same district(usually with the commiecrat group outnumbering the conservative group). The senate was compromised by the 17th ammendment which took the interests of the states away and turned it into a statewide popularity contest. The presidency is now compromised with election cheating and the courts are compromised because rather than be a check on constitutionality of laws now courts make up their own laws as they go along. The only way out of this is a divorce, i am still holding out hope of it being amicable but i fear more and more this will be a extremely violent divorce that will leave lasting scars on both sides.

        • Having been divorced TWICE, I can tell you that an “amicable” divorce is an OXYMORON. Simply b/c money, specifically, not only what’s been amassed during the marriage, but also YOUR future earnings (typically if you’re a man, and in practicality, that’s how it “rolls”, though the laws are written to be gender-neutral), both wages and pensions.

          Never mind, too, if minor children are involved, the CRUEL things that ex-wives do with the connivance of the divorce-industrial complex.

    • Today, there is a special legislative session going on here in Kentucky. Called by the dictator, er, governor as a result of laws passed during the last legislative session. Already, in committee, they voted to advance the dictator’s request to extend the “emergency”. Republican supermajority, but only one vote against it in committee. IOW, a bunch of RINO’s with few exceptions. Some of us are taking names, to see who we can primary out next year. We’ll see if it does any good.

      • Hi Jim,

        We have an election for governor in VA this upcoming November. We have a choice of two millionaires who have no concept of reality. I would be surprised if either of them could find Warsaw, Remington, Altavista, or Emporia on a map. I guarantee neither of them have ever stopped in these small towns. They know two locations….Fairfax County, for the money (and where they reside) and Richmond (where they rule). The rest of the state are feckless small towns and cities in between their two destinations of importance.

        One governor wants to mandate vaccinating all employees (to be enforced by said business). The other stands powerlessly by foolishly repeating the same mantra that the Party of RINOS have for years refusing to even say Boo at such issues as abortion, masking, mandated immunizations, property rights, labor unions, or the First and Second Amendments. Why not? Because the RINOS may offend someone.

        I have news for them, there is about 50% of us Virginians, that are good and truly offended. Why? Our choice of leadership consists of a communist, whose only claim to fame is a being a buddy of the Clinton Crime Clique, and a wimp who is backed by DC lobbyists. Wow, what a combo! Having to choose from these two winners you can see why I much rather stay home than vote. Better yet I may in Florida that month where I can actually see a man with balls actually govern.

        • Elect a libertarian and have these two sad excuses run out of VA on a rail, or tossed into the James river with cement overshoes.

  9. ‘ex Dear Leader of Romania, Nikolai Ceausescu probably once also believed it’ — eric

    Ceausescu’s wife Elena, with a 4th grade education, forced Romania’s few scientists to share authorship credit of their papers with her.

    When the couple faced a firing squad on Christmas Day, she protested, ‘But I’m a famous microbiologist’ — having come to believe her own b.s.

    Merry Ceaucescu Christmas, Dr Fauci!

    • What finally got the Ceausescus executed was, as the crowds gathered, they demanded that the Romanian Army mobilize against them. The generals refused, and allowed the soldiers, most of them on holiday leave, to stay home. Then Nikolai phoned “Gorby” (Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev) to send in the tanks to suppress the rebellion, he was curtly turned down. The Romanian generals had enough and as the Ceausescus attempted to flee in a helicopter, they had soldiers board it and literally threw the pilot and co-pilots out. Within a few hours, the former dictator and his wife were summarily tried and shot.

  10. The left has been a proponent of socialism for, well forever I guess. Socialism REQUIRES such tyranny to exist. All the left’s past complaints were only against those NOT socialist being in charge. They are adamantly opposed to voluntary association, free speech, free press, right to assemble, etc. unless one gets permission from the SOCIALIST Psychopaths In Charge. Socialism is the key to the door that all tyrants have desired to walk through. Which is why almost all governments are now socialist, to one degree or another.

    • John,

      You see this playing out on twatter in real time with the bogus rolling stones(shocker there a bogus story from them) story about an Oklahoma hospital being overrun with hilbilly rubes taking Ivermectin and overdosing on it. All the blue checkmarks including madcow itself passed on the article as fact. None of them having any sense of actual journalism for even a second and simply calling the hospital to verify the story before they blasted it out. None of these left wing blue check marks have found their pages suspended, none have found the fact checker warning of fake news. But pass along a factual peer reviewed study about the efficiency of face diapers or certain drugs, studies that are on the very own cdc web site and you are suspended, banned and fact checked. Hell, people who have provided their very own first hand experience with these jabs have found themselves fact checked, how the hell does a fact checker disprove the actual experiences of people first hand?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here