Two Tiers, Once Again

 

 https://nypost.com/2025/01/17/us-news/bidens-official-x-account-draws-mockery-with-reference-to-constitutional-amendment-that-doesnt-exist/

 https://thefederalist.com/2025/01/17/biden-attempts-to-change-the-constitution-via-press-release-on-his-way-out/

The above links refer to the situation where Biden, on his way shuffling out the door, sought to impose a 28th Amendment to the US Constitution,,,the tragically moronic "Equal Rights Amendment".  Old Joe didn't write the statement released by the White House declaring this "amendment" to be "the law of the land".  I fully doubt he's even aware this statement went out with his name on it.  For the duration of his failed four years, I don't recall him ever bringing it up.  This was just another attempt by his handlers to push something out there to further confound those who would have to clean up the mess of it.  

Both articles describe well why old Joe is full of crap.  To pretend it was in any way ratified would have made the statement unnecessary, because we'd all be aware of it by now.  My pocket Constitution would have included it.  

This issue was suggested by Bubba, though I can't recall specifically why he did so.  He's free to go ahead and comment on it specifically, but since the time it came up, and after he supplied me with the NYP article and I had found the Federalist version of events, my interest in this has changed.  So I'm going to use it to address something else:  Qualifications and competence...and maybe a few others things related.  

As the Senate confirmation hearings for Trump's appointees had been moving on, and as for some continue to move along, we constantly heard about those two criteria, most particularly for specific people like Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Kash Patel.  But in most all cases where a selection is up for a position in which that selection had not already served in that capacity in a previous administration, "experience" is a none factor.  So what we see on the national stage to further rationalize disqualifying a Trump selection is a behavior all too common with our resident progressive fake Christian from Jeff St:  the tactic of finding fault, isolating it, inflating it without any regard to any relevance to the fitness of the selection, nor any recognition of positive attributes which would or might mitigate any faults.  Fitness isn't the issue.  Qualification isn't the issue.  Ability isn't the issue.  Partisan politics is the issue.

Pete Hegseth is said be unqualified because he wasn't a big general like Lloyd Austin?  Austin didn't at all distinguish himself and if we want to talk faults, among his many was going AWOL.  RFK Jr has involved himself deeply in health concerns for most of his political career and somehow he's less qualified than Richard Levine?  (Does Bobby have to don a dress to get any respect?) 

The Dems/marxists/perverts bring up every foible they can scrape up and even in cases where a behavior is wholly unseemly, it has no bearing on their selections.  Hegseth drank too much after serving in the military and Kennedy had issues with smack, but the lying left pretends Obama's crack indulgence either didn't happen or wasn't anything over which to fret.  It's the Dan-Double Standard writ large.

And this is unquestionably obvious with regard to the lying left's treatment of Biden and Trump.  While Trump has his many marks against him, Biden's are never put under the same microscope at the same magnification.   They want to pretend Trump has lied over thirty thousand times during his first term (or whatever number they claim after padding the list as much as they could), while Biden's been lying his ass off throughout almost fifty years in politics prior to his having illegitimately installed the puppet president in 2020.  While they questioned Trump's mental acuity, determining the line across which Biden went to senile from just plainly and obviously stupid is difficult and really more concerning.  

But the real proof is in the pudding for which the left has no taste.  Each had a single four year term to judge and the difference in competence and effectiveness...as well as honesty and a lack of corrupt behavior...couldn't be more stark.  Trump improved on what the left falsely claims was a booming economy.  Biden took a crippled but recovering economy and drove it into the ground.  Trump well proved his fitness, while Biden proved he wasn't fit to dress himself.  Pumping up Kamala Harris as a legitimate, suitable replacement was more of the same. 

I can understand partisanship.  But while my own (to the extent I'm actually a GOP partisan rather than just a conservative dude) is justifiable (easily so), I will not support ineffective politicians, or those who have proved themselves truly corrupt, as many are at the start while others become so later.  No.  I look at merit and find the left's entire lineup wanting, and they give me reason after reason for believing they are the true danger to our republic.  I don't disregard negatives.  I put them in context and in their proper priority.  I don't disregard positive actions by Dems.  I just weigh them in the same way against all the far more dumbshit things they do and try to do. 

The attacks on Trump and his appointees are crap and unworthy of government officials, but dumbasses elected them and we have to deal.  But we may have reached a point where Dem assholery has finally run its course, or is very near.  Their failures resulted in a good enough portion of their voters coming to the light, and now, with Trump on a roll they cannot stop, they're pulling out any stop they have left to overturn the positive response to his many positive moves.  I hope he keeps it coming at the rate it is now, and barring any unforeseen unforced errors on his part, it's hard to believe the midterms won't result in great GOP majorities in both Houses. 

So when the left accuses Trump of anything, it's likely one will not only find the story is wrong, but also that a Dem has already done it without rebuke by the same assholes accusing Trump.  Trump's often accused of "shredding" the Constitution.  Not only has Biden (and Obama, too, for that matter) actually acted in conflict with it, the story at the top of the post is one which goes farther...Biden rewriting the Constitution. 

It never ends.

Wow! Didn't See THAT Coming! Super Bowl LIX

Initially, I didn't care much about the Super Bowl since my Chicago Bears were cheated out of their rightful place in the contest.  

Just kidding.  My Chicago Bears totally SUCKED!

But I didn't care initially and then I began to care as the day drew near.  While I thought it was cool that the Kansas City Chiefs had a shot at the "first" NFL 3-Peat (had they officially began holding Super Bowl contests prior to the two-in-a-row the Green Bay Packers won in Super Bowls I & II, the Pack would already have had a 3-PEAT given they won it all the year prior to the start of this great tradition), at least their failure to achieve that goal relieves me from hearing about it ad nauseum for an unknown period of time, which would feel like forever regardless of how long it actually went on.  That crap's only enjoyable when it's a Chicago team getting the praise.  That's just the way it is and it can't be changed.

But this particular game became more fascinating to me because of both that 3-Peat potential and also for how much of a monster year (and playoffs) Philadelphia Eagles running back Saquon Barkley had.  KC must have had a bye in the playoff, for they had one less loss, according to what my phone showed, but they were both dominant in their respective conferences.  I seem to recall KC having had a shaky start, but in any case, their track record could not be set aside.  They had been a team which established their bona fides beyond question and to pick them as favorites was an easy bet for most.  I don't think anyone, even the most rabid Eagles fan, could have had real confidence that they would lose.  I know I didn't, regardless of how much I thought Barkley would continue his great year in this final contest.

The day before the game, I posted a comment on FB that I thought the real match-up to watch would be between Eagles Defensive Coordinator Vic Fangio, and Chiefs Defensive Coordinator Steve Spagnuolo.  The Chiefs succeeded in keeping Barkley under 100 yards total rushing/receiving.  But clearly Fang won that contest in convincing fashion.  The score of the game was approaching that of the shellacking given the New England Patriots by Da Bearsss in SB 20 (46-10), which was the result of Da Bearsss' other-worldly defense (the vaunted 4-6 Defense...named for Doug Plank).  The Eagles were swarming with mostly their front four.  It was a thing to behold!

Vic Fangio was the Bears DC not long ago, before moving on to failure as Head Coach of the Denver Broncos.  DC is his thing.  It's where he serves best.  As long as he remains DC in Philly, I think their defense will always be really, really good. 

There's a chance that Chicago could entice Chiefs Guard, Trey Smith, touted by many as the best at his position, and everyone knows the Bears O-Line needs him.  The thought of it excited.  After watching the Eagles D, it seems an absolute necessity to get this guy, but it doesn't excite as it did prior to this game.  Good gosh!  What a defensive display!

Eagles 40-Chiefs 22

We're DOOMED! (Not really.)

 Just a quick word on all the wailing and gnashing of teeth we're seeing from the Democrat Party and all who stupidly side with them.  Between the criminal assholes who warned criminal illegals of the oncoming justice (and may those "Americans" be found and arrested and prosecuted to the full extent of the law for obstructing it), to the clown show of House Reps haranguing a security guard for standing his ground (unarmed, it appeared) against allowing them entry, to the fools who think there is some "coup" afoot because Trump seeks to know where our money is going.  

As I've stated to other lefty buffoons on a different platform, candidates from both parties run on the promise of doing this very thing.  Now it's being done and because it's being done by Donald Trump, who outrageously dares to keep his campaign promises.  This piece by the great Andrea Widburg provides an argument as to why the Moron Party is likely to lose this battle to prevent those promises from being kept:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/02/trump_s_attack_on_the_deep_state_is_spectacular_and_almost_certainly_legal.html

And there are those who are shocked at the danger of letting agents of the president having access to our personal info, as if that info is necessarily any more or less at risk in the hands of the Department of the Treasury.  So here's something to be kept in mind:  the Department and its Treasurer are subordinate to the Secretary of the Treasury.  The Treasurer advises the Secretary and both of their signatures appear on all Federal Reserve Notes.

The Secretary of the Treasury appointed by the POTUS to the cabinet of the POTUS and advises the POTUS on financial and economic matters and is subordinate to POTUS.  Thus, the Department of the Treasury is subordinate to the POTUS as well and subject to his orders.  What are those orders?  They're to comply with his agents (under the leadership of Elon Musk, who was chosen to head up DOGE) in determining how our money is being spent, as well as to increase efficiency of the various agencies they're tasked to audit.  Ultimately, to find and eliminate as much waste as possible (the goal, I believe, is $2trillion) so as to lower our outrageous 36 trillion dollar debt.  I'd like to see 10% cut, but that still leaves 32.4 trillion.  Nonetheless, even just two trill...which at this point seems more doable than it did initially, will demonstrate what's possible if politicians had the actual will.  And of course, some of this will be the result of departments closing or reductions in their staff.  So much wasteful spending!  So much spending on so many things the federal government has no authority to justify it.

This is what the Dems are whining about and pretending is an unConstitutional "coup".

And they wanted us to rehire Biden or put Harris in his place while pretending Trump would be a danger?  Good gosh!  The reality is that this action by Trump and Musk is exposing all which has been going on for a long, long time and the lefties know their opposition will expose them as unworthy of their positions in government.  

So the pasted resistance...the old tomato...will be if Trump & Co can tie specific politicians to the most egregious examples of wasteful, corrupt spending so that replacing them will be a snap.  How are these people going to defend sending our money to another country so they can further sexual immorality and perversion, or propping up foreign bad actors or any number of other abominations?

Also, on the ICE front, it's the same thing.  Dumbasses trying to pretend there's a threat against legal immigrants or visa holders, when the point is to first round up the worst and most dangerous illegals and then move the next level of lawbreakers until eventually, most who are not entitled be here by virtue of their willingness to ignore our laws will be sent back to their home countries.  Some leaders of those countries thought they can stymie the push to return their scum to them, but they've caved to Trump's abilities to demonstrate he knows what he's doing.  

Yeah, Trump.  The guy Louisville losers like to pretend is an idiot.  If only we could keep the stupid from voting!

More Demands From Ducky Dan

 In Dan's Tuesday, February 4, 2025 post submission entitled "Let America Be America Again", he presents a Langston Hughes poem of the same name.  (https://www.blogger.com/comment/fullpage/post/7923725288901074422/1375085908999430787)  Dan's posted it before.  He's got it bad for homosexual communist black men.  They make his lady bits moist.  To each his own, I guess.   I'm more of a Bill Withers or Lionel Richie kinda guy. Throw in some Sylvester Stewart and Stevie Wonder, and I'm good.  Whatever.

I had been working on a post inspired by a suggestion of Bubba, but after one of my semi-random visits to Dan's Blog of Lies, I noticed the above post.  So after noting this reposting of Hughes' poem, I submitted a comment to see if I was correct about him having done so before (I'd say it was within the last year, and possibly no more than six months or so...whatever).  After inquiring, I added the following:

"America is now back on a path toward returning to a place more in line with what it was intended to be. The last for years was a major bump in the road thanks to the unwise like yourself."

 Needless to say, that made Danny clutch his pearls tightly, soil himself and launch into what I will copy and paste below.   It's the usual bile, but it's always comedic.  I present it here for your amusement, as well as to allow myself to respond in my own way without some little 5th grade girl impose her self-serving criteria which if not met fully and to Dan's satisfaction will result in deletion.  You know the drill.  I think I'll be responding in a manner where whatever isn't italicized is my response:

 

"Marshal: Do NOT comment unless you directly and clearly answer my question in bold below. Anything else will be deleted."

Yeah.  Whatever.

"Hey! Look! You did it! You made a factual claim (even though you didn't support it... it's like you lucked into it.)"

Dan thinks herself clever here, as she's referring to my comment posted above.  Despite the fact that Dan says whatever farts out of his ass without providing any evidence in support, this is just a ploy.  If he believes I've said something untrue, he's free to bring evidence in presenting what he thinks actually is.  But as you'll see, he'll say much which is presented as fact without any support whatsoever. 

"Yes, magop IS back on a path to returning to a place more in line with the original intentions of the majority of the founders. The founders wanted a "democracy" and a "republic" where the people getting to decide things were landed (wealthy) white males. Where specifically women, black people, and of course, LGBTQ people were EXCLUDED from having a voice. By design."

Hey Dan!  Remember when we went back and forth about this very false claim not long ago and you abjectly failed to prove the founders intended to deny people the ability to vote?  Yeah...those were good times!

Dan's argument in that case, to which he alludes here, is the same as arguments about race today as regards incarceration rates, qualifications for jobs or higher education and the like.  This argument is one where the "progressive" sees a problem with a racial component and then argues the suffering is the result of racism.  During the founding, property owners (who weren't required to be particularly wealthy) were seen as those who had the most skin in the game.  While there are other ways one can have skin in the game, such as military service, those with nothing at that time were seen the way many who don't produce now have proven themselves to be...forcing considerations for that which they did little to nothing to earn.  Initially, should any who didn't own property come to own property later, they were eligible, too.  It's not an illogical argument for that era and only slightly less so now.  Personally, I believe the most important qualification for voting is that one isn't a freaking leftist, because most of them are so incredibly stupid.  And that's evident by Dan insisting the point was to deny voting rights, rather than a reasoned determination about who should have voting rights.  Naturally, those who don't qualify are denied, but the denial was not the point or purpose.  Dan, who likes to pretend he's brilliant with regard to "nuance", fails to discern it here.
 

Anyway, Idiot Boy goes on:

"And yes, that is actively what magop is shooting for, by your own admissions."

This is three "fact" claims which aren't fact at all and requires evidence Dan doesn't bother to provide, while bitching about me not supporting claims (the first exposed above).  What Dan claims is true about the founding is not what what Trump & Co is working to achieve.  That's just another lie assholes like to tell, and this one says it without support of any kind, pretending, I suppose, that it's somehow "self evident".  And naturally, I didn't admit to Dan's fiction in any way.  It's just him trying to be clever, as in "thinking themselves wise..."

'The thing is: The US as it was founded has grown past its racist, sexist, vulgar oligarchy rule of rich white men.'

Certainly not while Trump and/or true conservatives are running the show. 

"We are NOT going back - no way in hell - to the times of rule by rich white men. Y'all have lost that argument and we're not going back."

No.  Biden's not in charge anymore and for the time being, Democrats and other socialists aren't in the majority.  It's YOU who lost that argument, Sister. 

"No matter how much you may praise those efforts."

 I don't praise those efforts.  I voted against them by voting for Trump.

 "That kind of racist, sexist, irrational anti-human rights thinking is a relic of an evil past.

Says the weak sister who constantly references stupidity like "white privilege/nationalism", promotes, defends, enables and celebrates sexual perversions of all kinds (farmers, keep a watchful eye on your barnyard animals!) and doesn't care about the lives of people in utero or those murdered, raped and robbed because of criminals you invited into our midst.  Asshole.

"But thanks for being honest about it all, as far as that goes. And even if you noted it unintentionally."

Thanks for lying about my positions and what's actually happening as a result of Trump's worthy victory in November.  You do what liars do, Dan.  Constantly.

 "But here's your chance to at least being to save your soul, Marshal."

I'm saved by my acceptance of Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior, not by appeasing moronic requests from fake Christians from a store front chapel on Jeff St. in Louisville, KY. 
 

"Trump nominated a man who..."

 Get your facts straight, Danielle.  Trump nominated him twice.  The man you're about to disparage worked in Trump's first administration.  Oh yeah, he worked for your racist pervert king, Joe Biden, too.

 "has met with white supremacists and who said

"competent white men must be in charge."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-taps-right-wing-ideologue-senior-state-dept-job-2025-02-04/

WILL YOU UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS RACIST PERVERT and call for his removal, acknowledging that this kind of open racism is NOT something that you will support in even the slightest?"

I'll get to the dumbass question soon enough.  But first, I would be remiss if I didn't offer some clarity:

I have been doing some research about this guy, Darren Beattie and have found little to hold against him beyond the snarky way he sometimes expresses himself, which I don't hold against a person who does it well.  I must have looked at two dozen sites trying to find details about his "racist" comments, and as is usually the case, they all referenced the same handful of quotes, none of which offered anything in the way of context.  Now, part of that is that some of the comments were tweets, and I haven't linked to his X presence to see how much of it I can find to see if they're stand alone comments (in which case they were likely stated to piss off the right people), or if they were part of a larger discussion about which there is no mention in any of the articles I read.  Some context can be inferred, as the "competent while men" comment was seen with another referencing wokeness and DEI quotas.  The message is that competent white men are denied in favor of women and minorities, with the implication that it opens us up to having less competent people in places where actual competent people would be of better and greater service.  It's the problem with DEI initiatives and it's the only explanation which makes sense barring a more detailed explanation for what he was trying to express.  He seems to reject requests for comments for further clarification, but given the sources stating he was unavailable suggests to me he isn't keen on giving leftist media the time of day.  Good on him, but I have been thus far unable to find anything from any of his own sites or blogs or such to see if he might have addressed these issues in a more detailed manner.  I subscribed to his Substack page in the most basic manner, which means I'll get emails for current stuff.  I don't know if I'll be able to access any archive without coughing up cash.

This "met with white supremists" bit is not exactly truthful.  It refers to the H.L. Menken Club for which I've found some info from the extremist conservative news source "The Village Voice" (now happily defunct).  Even this source dismissed the charge that the group is actually racist as a point of any mission statement, but is simply a group of most older conservatives who gather to discuss and debate ideas.  They're certainly opposed to stupidity such as DEI, particularly how it's practiced by the racist left, but the Voice considered them basically a group which says and/or favors much of what is said on outlets like FoxNews, which means they're mostly wonderful people.  The problem is, good conservatism often leads to attracting even assholes, like Richard Spencer, who most recently rejected Trump in favor of Biden and Harris, which clearly makes Biden and Harris racists scumbags according to Dan. 

I did find a copy of the speech he gave to this group...the reason Beattie was in attendance at all, and I doubt he cared that among this group might be a few assholes like Spencer.  His speech had absolutely nothing offensive, except perhaps to some conservatives, because the speech was about conservatism specifically, not anything related to racism in any way (a pretty heady speech since he's no idiot and was speaking to a group who aren't idiots, either.  I'm going to have to read a few more times to get a better grasp of what he was saying.  It's that kind of speech.)  Here are two links which provide info for both him and the Menken Club, both from outrageously conservative sources.  Before I do, I'll first give you an example of his snark:

https://x.com/DarrenJBeattie/status/1808531303610147225?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1808531303610147225%7Ctwgr%5Eae2dcc29af4881dcaa48bff59b7921289b6c40b2%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.snopes.com%2Ffact-check%2Ftrump-darren-beattie-state-department%2F

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-administration-taps-controversial-conservative-journalist-top-job/story?id=118369945

This story mentions his founding of Revolver, which not only gave a solid argument for the fake bomb threat story of January 6, 2021, but also had an awesome compilation of videos from private phones and other devices which by virtue of their time stamps alone, gives an equally solid description of exactly what had gone on, providing good reasons to concede Democratic hands in the instigation of most, if not all, of the rioting which took place on that day that will live in leftist imagery.  If nothing else, Darren Beattie is a worthy individual based on his low opinion of Dan's kind alone.  I like him already.

https://www.villagevoice.com/is-the-h-l-mencken-club-an-extremist-hate-group-or-just-a-bunch-of-weary-old-white-guys/

It's abundantly clear that Dan has once again chosen to hate on a guy simply for his daring to be a Trump supporter and not an asshole like Dan and those he prefers to Trump.  It's the usual case of, "we've no policies or track record of any merit or value, but we can demonize the better people in hopes there are enough morons like us who will believe our lies".  That's called "embracing grace" and it's what scumbag progressives do best.

So what of Dan's question, which is actually a demand that I be like him (I just puked a little in my throat)?   Well, Dan wants a direct answer, so I'll give it now.  Here's his question again:

"WILL YOU UNCONDITIONALLY CONDEMN THIS RACIST PERVERT and call for his removal, acknowledging that this kind of open racism is NOT something that you will support in even the slightest?"

Sure, Dan.  And I'll do it in exactly the way you condemned a couple of selections by Biden, such as a out and proud Satanist:

https://x.com/WolverinesFree1/status/1568023073768742913

This perv anti-Semite and racist:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/06/the_new_white_house_associate_communications_director_is_an_antisemitic_sexual_fetishist.html

And this overt Jew hating piece of shit:

https://canarymission.org/individual/Maher_Bitar

And of course, Tyler Cherry isn't the only sexual pervert of the Biden appointees, but Dan's totally into that shit so to list the others would only be regarded as good appointments in Dan's reprobate mind.  Thus I'm sticking with these other scumbags.  And of course, Biden's history of racism is well known and was acknowledged by the cerebral Kamala Harris in her first failed bid for the presidency before being tapped by Biden for VP on the basis of her being a "woman of color". 

So how did Dan respond to any of these appointments?  Shit.  I can't think of a single post wherein he even mentioned these several pieces of shit whose bigotry is far more obvious, ingrained and out there by virtue of actual evidence than the occasions of snark and politically incorrect expressions by a guy who appears to be far more intelligent than anyone in the Democrat party.  That means, Dan didn't condemn a damned one of them, and thus I will do as Dan did and not condemn this clearly morally superior individual. 
 

 "Save your soul, Marshal. Take a step into the light."

I'm already saved by accepting Christ as my Lord and Savior, which mean I'm already in the Light.  YOU?  You're gonna need at least a dry book of matches.  You're given over.

"Again, don't bother commenting unless you unequivocally condemn this and demand that Trump remove him."

Note that I never make such petulant, grade school girl demands at this blog.  Since I'm not going to pressured into lying as you demand I do,  I provided an answer to your dumbfuck question here and you're free to try to dig yourself out of this massive hole of your own making.  Good luck.