Defunding the left

Reagan talked about defunding the left, but never actually did anything.

As a result of Trump’s threats against Berkeley, they are starting to think that hiring a bunch of thugs to beat people up and cause over a hundred thousand dollars worth of damage may have been a bit excessive.

Meanwhile Trump and congress are working on stripping two billion from NASA global warming propaganda.

NASA put up a bunch of satellites to measure global warming. To their considerable disappointment, these show no significant warming in the past twenty years. To a good approximation, no significant warming since the satellite data became sufficiently accurate as to deny people excuses for “correcting” it. So they returned to the old faithful, “surface temperature measurements” – otherwise known as weather reports. The trouble with weather reports is that from time to time the location of the thermometer, or the time of day when it is read, changes. Also the location is usually directly adjacent to human habitation, which over time tends to have more humans, more cars, and more parking spaces, all of which tends to warm things up. This requires numerous very large “corrections”, which corrections are pulled out of the rectums of NASA’s climate “scientists” – who sound more like cultists than scientists. One of the commenters asks of one such correction:

Did anyone ever figure out how the trends in the interior of Greenland could exceed the trends actually observed at stations*? Since there are no stations in the interior, the trends there must be computed by interpolating from nearby (coastal) stations

According to NASA’s climate data, GISS, calculated from surface stations, the world is getting hotter primarily in places where there are no surface stations.

Of course cutting a few billion from climate change activism is small change compared to the core of the problem, the universities, and I cannot see Trump taking on the universities unless he makes himself King.

But two billion less for climate change activism is the first cut for the left since the cuts that happened in restoration of Charles the second. It is a start.

Further, it is going to scare the vermin into voiding their bowels, since it was the most blatantly propagandistic warming “science” that got the first cut.

58 Responses to “Defunding the left”

  1. Dave says:

    I want to strangle any Republican who utters the words “Balanced Budget Amendment”. It’s a load of pious baloney; there has never been a time when a party that controlled either the Presidency or one house of Congress could not force a balanced budget by refusing to increase the debt limit.

    If Congress doesn’t give Trump the budget he wants, let there be another government shutdown, except that this time Trump actually shuts down the government!

    • Patrick Wilson says:

      Amen brother. Simple things will solve problems, it could be day without government no one would notice their absence except those on the take.

    • viking says:

      well that logic could be applied to the entire bill of rights say. It may be true no ones forcing them to spend more than they take in, but they might as well be pointing a gun.
      ALL LEFTISM DERIVES FROM THE BELIEF THAT RESOURCES ARE INFINITE.Imagine the farthest left BOBO forced to choose between actual needs like police and sanitation and their little social experiments. They would become instant right wingers because the reality is we haven’t the resources for both. Its only because they can spend other peoples money even people in forign countries and people not born that they invent ever more basic human rights that demand funding.Ideally only net taxpayers could vote, but even making it impossible to spend more money than you take in every year would radically eliminate leftism

      • Dave says:

        The problem is that when you win the lottery, become a celebrity, or inherit a vast fortune from thrifty, hardworking ancestors, the money really does flow in an endless gusher until suddenly it’s all gone. People loan money to wastrels hoping to cash out with interest before bankruptcy hits, so you can’t just divide the bank balance by the burn rate to know when they’re going to crater.

        We don’t know when the party’s going to end, nor do we know how. Americans are the most over-fed, over-housed, over-educated, over-entertained, over-medicated people on the planet, so whenever a hole appears in our economic dike, we have plenty of surplus resources to stuff in it.

        • peppermint says:

          》over fed

          Fed garbage like green tomatoes picked by illegal aliens who the left says would cost too much to replace with Americans so we can’t get rid of them. But lots of hungry White families can’t afford enough meat and vegetables and obese niggers on EBT.

          》over housed

          Tell that to young White men for whom the cost of a house is $outrageous and who can barely afford an apartment next to a niggers on Section 8, a kike on Section 8 claiming to have been the victim of a hate crime to get to the front of the lottery, and a bean nigger on Section 8 with a baby using single motherhood to get to the front of the lottery.

          》over educated
          Under educated. No one knows Greek or Latin anymore and probably fewer know geometry, trigonometry, and what a derivative is than in the past, fewer know about history except what they can get from the new culture of Internet gaming and stuff, writing coherently is deprecated in favor of filling pages with sanctimonious bullshit, and actually reading is deprecated in favor of book fetishism. Knowledge of chemistry is deprecated in favor of periodic table fetishism. Knowledge of physics is deprecated because not everyone can get it in favor of political points and anti-quantum screeds. Knowledge of biology is deprecated for political reasons much more than it was in the USA and bullshit about “ethics” supplants discussion of it.

          》over-entertained
          It’s not entertaining to watch liberal comedians or TV shows or movies. The best that can be said about them is it makes liberals feel good to cheer for their team.

          》over-medicated
          Whites can’t afford and do without healthcare and try to do it on their own. Other Whites are given drugs and drugs and drugs by muds who don’t actually know anything but how to prescribe drugs to people who have money to pay for them.

          That’s why it’s time for a revolution now instead of 20 years ago when your claim may have been accurate.

        • viking says:

          Dont really see how wasting ones own fortune has anything to do with government debt.We have only one resource that makes us able to pull this off our debt is backed by the largest nuclear arsenal and military, once we were also integral to the industrial progress of the planet now we are a shell extracting vig and increasingly resented bound to be tested and found wanting at which point our fiat collapses and we are enslaved. The road out of this is extremely narrow and steep and depends entirely on good luck

          • peppermint says:

            He’s talking about the Boomers wasting their inheritance on that their Worst Generation fathers told them to, and GenXers oblivious and charmed existence.

            The money’s gone now, which is why the revolution is now.

            • Dave says:

              Exactly. We inherited a great country and we’re wasting it because we think of our wealth as a fact of nature. Russia is cold, America is rich, QED.

              The money’s not gone yet, because we can still borrow the world’s surplus production on the promise that our descendants, whom we might never even bring into existence, will repay the debt with interest. We can keep doing that until God-knows-when, but when it stops, it’s going to stop *hard*.

  2. Dirtnapninja says:

    Next we have to smash these Fake Charity foundations like Soros’ Open Society Foundation and the others which pour finance the Enemy.

  3. Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

    “first cut for the left since the cuts that happened in restoration of Charles the second. It is a start.”

    LOL Jim you know this can’t be true. In American history alone Jefferson, Jackson, Coolidge and Cleveland all inflicted reverses on the left. There was a competitive libertarian party (the Democrats) until Bryan hijacked them in 1896. I’d believe they are the first cuts since the 1920s though.

    • jim says:

      None of these cut funding for the left. Coolidge slowed, but did not reverse, let alone halt, the expansion of government.

      Jefferson was a leftist. His introduction of religious freedom in Virginia was unilateral disarmament in the face of the theocratic predecessors of today’s Cathedral, resulting in the formal improvement in religious freedom, but the informal reduction of religious freedom. During the Reign of Terror in France he continued his pro french policy and declined to disavow the revolution

      • Hidden Author says:

        And yet today’s leftists disavow him as a racist, sexist, fascist, imperialist homophobe…and a slaveowner…

      • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

        I was off a bit about Coolidge but there were cuts in the 1920s under his predecessor. https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

        “Instead of “fiscal stimulus,” Harding cut the government’s budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding’s approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third.”

        Pretty sure Jackson dealt a pretty big blow to the left when he ended the American central bank and paid off the freckin national debt. Upon looking I guess Cleveland more held the line against leftists seeking to abolish the gold standard, but there was another pretty big reduction in government with the end of reconstruction in the 1870s. Are you familiar with the Southern redemption?

        As for Jefferson, obviously he had leftist tendencies but considering NRx did not exist until recently, doubt he could have predicted Harvard would end up like today not being a prophet. Overall, he definitely cut the size of government as far as I know. The starting phase of the French revolution when Girondins were in charge improved freedom through abolishing guilds, gabelle and so on, I’m guessing Jefferson just was an autiste and didn’t realize the regime changed after Robespierre’s coup. I will look more into this though.

        • jim says:

          That is the good leftist/bad leftist argument. If you look at the social graph, leftists do not know any non leftists, but good leftists know bad leftists. It is all one left. Scott Alexander does not know anyone who votes for Trump, but he knows lots of people who intend to murder very large numbers of people by broad and sweeping categories that might well turn out to include Scott Alexander. Obama was a red diaper baby and his mentor was a terrorist, and Obama gives every single leftist the tingles. Lord Howe set up his own men to die in very large numbers.

          Leftism is like Islam. Individual Muslims are often very nice people, and seventy percent of Muslims prefer peace, but Islam is at war with everyone that is not a Muslim, and has to be met by war, even though most individual Muslims are nice people who would much rather have peace. One concession leads to another, and pretty soon you have full on socialism, or full on Sharia, as the case may be.

          • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

            Correct me if I am wrong but I think your argument is that Jefferson had the same relationship to Jacobin France as New Dealers had to Soviet Russia. I simply don’t see this.

            I looked into it and now am more convinced that Jefferson’s praise for the French Revolution was limited to the pre-Jacobin phase in which they were trying to impose the British system of aristocratic republicanism in place of the Bourbon monarchy, which would be a move rightward not leftward unless you’ve changed your opinion on post Restoration England recently. He did not support France post Jacobin coup when the leftists were in control and imposing the red terror, nor did he advocate forming an alliance with Jacobin France. In fact he openly regretted the execution of Louis XVI and subsequent leftist takeover.

            “When Jefferson wrote these words, he did not know that Louis XVI had been executed on January 21, 1793. By the end of the year, Jefferson’s feelings about revolutionary France had cooled……..Louis XVI could have been retained as a limited monarch, thus staving off “those enormities which demoralized the nations of the world, and destroyed, and is yet to destroy, millions and millions of its inhabitants.””

            https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/french-revolution

            • jim says:

              The French terrorists got the upper hand on 14 July 1789. Lafayette, like Scott Aaronson, continued to play footsie with those who viewed him as an enemy of the people. Jefferson was still praising the revolution in 1792.

              • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                You are right Lafayette was pretty naïve. But saying he is Scott Aaronson is a little too much. Scott Aaronson will never criticize feminists, but Lafayette did try to helicopter the leftists, even if his efforts were too little too late.

                “In June 1792, Lafayette criticized the growing influence of the radicals through a letter to the Assembly from his field post,[130] and ended his letter by calling for their parties to be “closed down by force””

                • jim says:

                  Lafayette could have helicoptered them in 1789. Instead he played footsie with them while they helicoptered everyone who might have protected him. For over two years he supported the left while they murdered everyone who might have been his ally. No enemies to the left, no friends to the right.

                • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                  Were there political murders in France between 1789 and the September massacres? My impression has always been that the left took over starting with the September massacres and things prior to that happening was pretty good. That’s based on Acton’s account, btw.

                  Obviously Lafayette’s decisions were bad but I think it’s a stretch to say he had no enemies to the left when it’s clear that he regarded them as enemies and tried to do the right thing, although too late. The problem with people like Lafayette and Jefferson, and classical liberals in general, is that they allied with the left instead of helicoptering them, but I think that’s qualitatively different from someone like Scott Aaronson who would willingly swallow every leftist BS and present his neck when they want to kill him.

                • jim says:

                  Immediately following the storming of the Bastille, the murders began, for example Jacques de Flesselles, and they just did not stop. They continued, unpunished, unopposed, and lauded. There should have been collective action by King, Aristocracy, and Lafayette to restore order, and there was not.

                • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                  Interesting, thanks. Will investigate.

            • jim says:

              In January 1793, when it had long been obvious that terrorists were in charge of the French revolution, Jefferson writes a letter in which he says that to immanentize the eschaton, have to break a few eggs..

              the liberty of the whole earth was depending on the issue of the contest, and was ever such a prize won with as little innocent blood? my own affections have been deeply wounded by some of the martyrs to this cause, but rather than it should have failed I would have seen half the earth desolated. were there but an Adam & Eve left in every country, & left free, it would be better than as it now is.

              • Cavalier says:

                Holy fuck.

                Burn it with fire.

                Nuke it from orbit; it’s the only way to be sure.

                • Michael Rothblatt says:

                  Add to this his admiration for agrarian socialism, and you get the picture:

                  “It is difficult to resist the conclusion that the twentieth-century statesman whom the Thomas Jefferson of January 1793 would have admired most is Pol Pot.”

                • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                  LOL chill dudes.

                  The above quote is pretty much the 1700s equivalent of shooting the shit in a bar, I’m pretty sure you guys have said way worse things on this blog, let alone in that situation. The leftist narrative that Jefferson is a socialist is laughable given what he actually advocated.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Do you know what sort of person jokes about half the Earth being desolated for a good cause?

                  The sort of person who wouldn’t mind half the Earth being desolated for a good cause.

                  Allow me to trot out our gracious host’s old standby: https://youtube.com/watch?v=AsbqoytInTY

                  P.S. WMStEoOPaaFfWC

                • Michael Rothblatt says:

                  Clearly he was quite a little bit deranged. Many of his French friends got beheaded. Sane people don’t react to the news of their friends’ beheading with “It’s OK. What’s the little innocent blood?”

                • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                  This is 1792 we are talking about. It’s not like Jefferson could go on facebook and see the reign of terror starting, the only thing he knew was what his friends sent him a couple months ago. Given the Jacobins censored the shit out of letters, I doubt Jefferson was even aware that his faction was already ousted from power in France at the time he wrote this letter.

                • jim says:

                  Jefferson is still willing to burn the world down to immanentize the eschaton, regardless of what he knows about France.

                • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                  And as I have pointed out once he knew the Jacobins were in the saddle he stopped his support of the French experiment.

                • jim says:

                  The Jacobins were in the saddle for one hell of a long time before Jefferson stopped his support for the French Revolution.

                • peppermint says:

                  Yes, and since he’s far from the situation, all he can do is express general sentiments, such as “burn everything until freedom is established”.

                • Michael Rothblatt says:

                  Jefferson knew what was happening in France and still continued to support the French Revolution after even the most radical of his fellow American revolutionaries withdrew their support.

                  Jefferson’s sympathies for agrarian socialism:

                  “Those who labour in the earth are the chosen people of God, if ever he had a chosen people, whose breasts he has made his peculiar deposit for substantial and genuine virtue. It is the focus in which he keeps alive that sacred fire, which otherwise might escape from the face of the earth.”

                  “I think it the duty of farmers who are wealthier than others to give those less so the benefit of any improvements they can introduce, gratis.”

      • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

        “unilateral disarmament”

        How does having a state church in Virginia in anyway help the South fight against the theocratic North? The South was literally at the peak of military effectiveness, they lost due to not having enough resources not because they lacked the willingness to fight.

        • peppermint says:

          They were forced to fight physically because they surrendered morally, just like the liberals of today

        • jim says:

          You need to bring a gun to a gunfight, and a religion to a holy war.

          • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

            Yes, a religion can make you more militarily effective but the South was not militarily ineffective. Do you really think having a state religion would have let them win the civil war? The war between North and South was going to be a Northern victory as long as they kept putting in more resources.

            • jim says:

              Had people known how much the civil war was going to cost, would have avoided it. Having a state religion would make Southern commitment to the war more certain, and the costs to North more certain.

              Indeed, arguably the war was not so much about slavery, as that they did not want Massachusetts imposing her state religion on Virginia. Lacking a state religion, excited the blood lust of Massachusetts. Recall that the lead up to the war involved subscribers to the state religion of Massachusetts doing military stuff, martial torchlight parades expressing eagerness for war, and the South not doing military stuff, expressing eagerness for peace – expressing eagerness for peace at the worst possible time.

              • Reactionary Oriental Libertarian says:

                Fair point. But any rational analysis of the situation beforehand would have concluded that the North would win in a heartbeat, which is why Northerners started the war in the first place. It was a miracle the South held out for four years instead of instantly collapsing, I do not see how a state religion would have changed the massive imbalance in resources. It was a holiness spiral among northerners that resulted in war on the south, not an economic calculation.

                I argue the South’s secession was a huge mistake. If they stayed Congress was in hands of Democrats, they would have blocked Lincoln’s laws and prevented him from enacting the leftist agenda. Seceding lead to a nationalist holiness spiral among the northerners and give leftists a casus belli to attack the south, only a few fanatics like John Brown wanted to attack the South beforehand.

  4. Jack Highlands says:

    Now any recovering conservatives here can ponder why you were wrong for so long and we dissidents were right: if America had been anything other than a defacto One Party State for many decades, defunding ‘the Left’ would have begun long ago. But it could not begin because the Left is the ideological wing of The Party and ruled permanently: covertly under Nixon, semi-overtly under Reagan and overtly under the Bushes and all Dems.

    And precisely because America has been a One Party State for many decades, all branches of The Party hate Trump.

    Only we dissidents know what a squeaker this has been to recover Western civilization without civil war. And we are far from out of the woods yet.

    God Bless President Trump.

  5. Alrenous says:

    It is obviously colder in mid-Greenland because ice has a high albedo. Even if CO2 were magically reflecting much light many photons down onto it, the coasts would warm faster simply due to not being white.

    It amazes me what gets counts as plausible deniability.

  6. slumlord says:

    Disagree.

    Too many normies are on board with the climate science crap. The way to attack is to go for the easy targets. Creative writing courses, journalism courses, hr courses etc. The other thing to do is reverse “degree inflation”. Make nursing a trade, and “de professionalise” a whole lot of lower cognitive level degree’s. But the real killer is to make a STEM subject mandatory for anyone completing an arts degree. i.e No Arts degree without a proficiency in calculus or physics. It’s all about broadening education, isn’t it.

    • peppermint says:

      (1) mass executions of university faculty, from the truly evil to the scientists who were allowed to exist in order to lend credence to the university credentials
      (2) kill the civil rights act that chills speech while requiring university credentials
      (3) grant credentials to every possible cheapwr replacement for universities
      (4) end federal subsidies for education
      (5) require universities to cosign student loans
      (6) reduce federal grants to universities for anything possible, starting with the most outrageous nonsense and working from there

  7. Brian says:

    What can we do to support President Trump?

  8. peppermint says:

    Liberals have been pushing this retarded hoax for so long it’s going to take down Big Science. They’ve also been pushing the retarded Russian hoax for so long it’s going to destroy the legacy media.

    His Majesty just called the legacy media the enemies of the people, an old Soviet accusation I wasn’t expecting.

    I wonder what glorious new insults He has for Big Science.

    Shadilay!

  9. Mr Curious says:

    Why MScuM fake news not ReporT on Peter Springare?

Leave a Reply