This sounds about right

For some unknown reason, people seem to think that the Democrats don't have a message except that they don't like President Trump:


Where on Earth could people have gotten that idea?

Just for starters, you know they're lying

No doubt they vote Democrat, the "party of science:"

A “Breatharian” mom and dad of two have barely eaten for nine years as they live off “the universe’s energy.”
Husband and wife Akahi Ricardo and Camila Castello believe that food and water aren’t necessary and humans can be sustained solely by the energy of the universe.
Castello and Ricardo — who have a 5-year-old son and 2-year-old daughter together — have survived on little else besides a piece of fruit or vegetable broth just three times per week since 2008.

I'm not sure what else I can say.

CBS poll shows most Democrats think other religions just as dangerous as Islam

And you wonder how Donald Trump got elected? I guess this doesn't really surprise me:

According to a CBS poll, a majority of Democrats have said that they believe that the religion of Islam is dangerous, but that other religions are just as bad.
66 percent of Democrats believe when it comes to other religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Mormonism, et al, they are responsible for just as much violence as Islam. Only 14 percent believe Islam is more violent, which totals out to one out of seven Democrats.
Meanwhile, Republicans have few qualms with calling Islam a more violent religion than the others with a majority 63 percent.

Man, I just get the willies every morning when I go online and see all the reports of radical Lutherans beheading people and those crazy Mormons wiping out entire villages and taking the women as sex slaves. And don't get me started on those Episcopalians -- Lord, how they do love to set them some people on fire for worshiping the wrong God or stone them to death for being gay. Oh, wait. Never mind.

Democrats love them some moral equivalence if it prevents them from criticizing one of their core constituencies. Emperor Barry used to do this shit all the time, pretending that modern Islamist terrorism is just a contemporary response to the Crusades -- which happened almost a thousand years ago and were a counterattack against Muslim conquest of the Holy Land, Jerusalem and other sacred Christian sites. Barry acted like it happened yesterday and was an unprovoked attack on a bunch of peaceful Muslims who hadn't done a thing. Naturally, he had his defenders on the left and his detractors on the right. The problem for Barry, and the Democrats who seem to still think Christianity is a collection of gun-slinging killers is that the only examples of "equivalence" between Christian violence and modern Islamist violence is that the Islamists are still doing it, every fucking day and proudly proclaiming that they are doing so in the name of Allah. The only example Barry and his fellow travelers can come up with is the Crusades.

While you can claim, as Barry did and doubtless still would, that violent Islamists today are "perverting" a "religion of peace," the fact of the matter is they aren't. The Koran and the hadiths -- the holy writings of Islamic scholars containing material they attribute to Mohammed that was not included in the Koran -- provide more than ample basis for Islamist terrorists to claim they are acting in the name of their God as directed by their prophet. There are six such collections:

The two most highly respected collections of hadith are the authenticated collections the Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. (Sahih literally means "correct, true, valid, or sound.") In addition to these, four other collections came to be well-respected, although not to the degree of Bukhari and Muslim's sahih collections. These four other collections are the Sunan of Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, and Abu Da'ud. Together these four and the two sahih collections are called the "six books" (al-kutub al-sitta). Two other important collections, in particular, are the Muwatta of Ibn Malik, the founder of the Maliki school of law, and the Musnad of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the founder of the Hanbali school of law.

Feel free to look them up. Believe me, there is plenty there to support the view that Islamist terrorists aren't "perverting" their religion.

So Democrats want to pretend we're the problem. No surprise there, I guess. Maybe a little surprised they're becoming so open about their beliefs. My response to those folks is that nobody died because they published the (taxpayer-funded) image of a crucifix submerged in urine known as "Piss Christ;"

At least 12 people at the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo died in Islamist retaliation for cartoons like this one:

Guess which one of those images is more likely to get me killed. To quote someone whose name escapes me at the moment, I don't much care who the Islamists send, as long as they don't care if they come back.

I think you should back what your party backs. And choke on it.

A friend of mine went to Monticello today. I'm sure you've seen it on the back of a nickel -- it is the home in Charlottesville, Va., of Thomas Jefferson. She sent me some pictures, but I'm not publishing those because that isn't my point. Because she is a diehard Democrat, I wrote back to her, "Monticello is nice. Built by slaves, of course, so you have to feel guilty at the same time. According to your people. In fact, you should probably set it on fire."

The Social Justice Warriors who are running the Democrat party these days are completely out of control. Trump is evil, apparently -- I am willing to stipulate that he is a narcisisstic ninny and a nasty man with extraordinarily thin skin -- but they are passionately devoted to either a felon or a Socialist, with a capital S. The Constitution is racist, people should use whatever bathroom they want, depending upon how they "identify" that day, and yes, we should take money from people who earned it for no other reason than that they earned it. Their programs don't work, unless you consider creating a larger and larger bureaucracy that takes more and more of our rights without solving the problem the bureaucracy is supposed to address "working."

Actually, as we all realize, they do. The point is not to make people's lives better. The point is to ensure that government controls all aspects of those lives. They try to twist the Clean Water Act from covering "navigable waters" to covering "occasionally damp areas." They try to twist the Clean Air Act from covering actual pollutants to covering carbon dioxide, which is produced in far larger quantities by nature than by man and has almost nothing to do with climate, not that we could change the climate even if it did. Damn the cost, do something!

The party of science is totes OK with snuffing out unborn lives, but opposes the death penalty. The party of equality wants to subjugate the rights of more than 99 percent of the population to the "rights" of less than 1 percent of the population so that some confused, mentally unsteady people can pee where they want. The party of freedom of expression wants to shut down speech on college campuses that is just too "triggering" for the delicate snowflakes there who can't stand to hear opinions that differ from theirs. The party of justice wants to take money from people who have done nothing more wrong than earn too much money and give it to people who have done nothing. The party of freedom is gangbusters for, well, actually nothing that actually supports freedom.

So go ahead. Burn Monticello. Makes sense these days for a Democrat.

Update: I was under pressure from Jeb the Wonder Dog to take him for a walk, leading me to neglect to even mention the pressure the Democrat administration is putting on colleges to punish young men for "sexual assault" without any due process and to force high schools to let anyone who "identifies" as the opposite sex to use the opposite gender's lockerroom and bathroom facilities, regardless of their actual gender or even their actual gender identity. This is what passes for equality in the Democrat Party.

If this is the country you want, by all means, vote Democrat. And choke on it.

Seems like this is what we're seeing right now

Robert Heinlein, one of the greatest science-fiction writers ever, had no trouble seeing the world as it is despite his profession. As I watch the Democrat party slide ever-further to the left, I am reminded of this Heinlein quote, as this seems to be the goal of the left:

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as “bad luck.”

 That about sums up the philosophy of the Democrat party: hound the producers out of society, then blame the results on "bad luck."

Maybe somebody should tell the Democrats their Southern strategy isn't working

With Mary Landrieu's defeat Saturday in her bid for a fourth Senate term from Louisiana, there now are no Democrat senators from the Deep South.  Moe Lane has some pithy, brilliant commentary on a Politico story about how Democrats lost the South, electorally speaking. It wasn't easy to overcome the South's natural antipathy toward Republicans (hint: Lincoln was a Republican), but Democrats managed. I haven't actually read the Politico story -- I almost never do, because it's a left-wing rag founded by a bunch of "reporters" who left the Washington Post because it wasn't liberal enough and Tass wasn't hiring people who don't speak Russian -- and I won't link to it (for the same reason) but Moe thinks the story completely misses the real reason Southerners have rejected the Democrat Party:

It’s not demographics, and it’s certainly not gerrymandering, and shoot, it’s not even Barack Obama. It’s that the people who run the Democratic party [expletive deleted] hate the South.
And Southerners have noticed. It really does astound me that the national Democratic apparatus apparently thought that they could defecate on an entire section of the country for fifty years and still get that section to vote for them at the end of it.

Moe deleted the expletive himself. I'll put it back in and repeat Moe's thought for emphasis: the people who run the Democratic party fucking hate the South. Well, the feeling is mutual.

Sauce for the goose, bitches

It must really suck to have your own nasty-ass tactics turned back on you. I guess John Kerry wasn't home at the time, but apparently a neighbor was to take a photo:

Saul Alinsky specialized in politics of the nasty, and he is the author of the Democrat playbook. Kind of nice to see them eating their own. I guess John Kerry never thought he'd have people beating on the door of his posh Boston townhouse to protest his war policies. He's against war, right? Oh. Never mind.