Hurray, Hurray, it’s Constitution Day

In this morning’s e-mail there was a message reminding me that Constitution Week will soon be upon us, informing me that the University will honor this week with “a list of activities,” and encouraging me to include in my classes “a brief discussion of the United States Constitution, especially as it relates to [my] discipline.”  It was added that a survey conducted by the scrupulously impartial National Constitution Center has made the public’s “lack of knowledge about the Constitution . . . quite apparent.”

Now it should be noted that all of this fuss is in response to a federal mandate in 2005, which required all “educational institutions receiving federal funding to hold an educational program pertaining to the United States Constitution on September 17 each year.”   In other words, this has nothing to do with love of a venerable old document, and everything to do with love of money.

There is much to ponder in the schedule of events that will celebrate Constitution Week (not to mention keep the Federal dollars flowing).   Constitution week will kick off with an informative exhibit by the La Villita Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution at one of our public libraries.  The La Villita Chapter takes its name from “the Little Village” in San Antonio, a tiny eighteenth-century settlement with no known connection to the American Revolution.  Night owls are directed to a series of programs that will be broadcasted nationally by the PBS each evening at 11:00 p.m.  On Wednesday a panel (of two) will take up the theme “License to Vote: Voter I.D. Laws and the Constitution.”  You hardly need me to point out the exquisite neutrality of this title.

The Big Day is, of course, Saturday, September 17, since this is when the Federal Government will be watching what we are up to.  What they will see is the library staff giving “one free copy of the Constitution” to any student with whom they can establish eye contact.  At other locations on campus, pedestrians will be accosted and given one of the coveted “pocket-sized Constitutions” (which are handy to consult when the internet goes down).  The crown of the day is the “Aggie Agora Hackathon ‘Amending the Constitution’,” which will be held in a relatively modest room on the fourth floor of the Arts and Humanities Building.  Oh, yes, the campus carillon will also ring out “patriotic music” at 3:00 p.m., for some unspecified duration, and without anyone, I suspect, much noticing.

Constitution Week is an utterly phony event.  I am not denying that some eyes will scan the exhibit of the La Villita Chapter, or that some insomniacs will tune in to the PBS programs, or that auditors may outnumber panelists at the discussion of voter i.d. laws.  Pocket-sized constitutions will certainly be stuffed into pockets (and later discovered as a lump after the trousers are laundered); a few oddballs will show up to eat free pizza and amend the Constitution.  Some wild-eyed professors may even shoehorn some constitutional commentary into their lecture on the Krebs Cycle or fluid dynamics.  But the overall effect (apart from sustaining the flow of Federal dollars) will be as close to nil as to make no difference.

Observance of Constitution Day was mandated, I see, by the “Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement in the U.S. Department of Education.”  Only in America, under the blessings of our Constitution, can any boy or girl grow up to become an Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement in the U.S. Department of Education.  Don’t try to tell me that such a post is in any way foreign to the letter or spirit of the Constitution that was ratified in 1787.  I don’t presently possess a pocket-sized Constitution, but if I did I would pull it out and quote from its all-important penumbra; from this you would learn that “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, do submit to be bribed into pretending to observe phony Holidays by Persons including, but not limited to, the Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.”

In 2005 the person wielding this constitutional power of bribery was, I suppose, some deluded cuck in the Bush administration.  I apologize to sensitive readers for this descent into vulgar slang, but using the federal government to bribe people into phony compliance with something called Constitution Day more or less encapsulates what I understand by the word cuckservative.  The essence of these pathetic fools is precisely this sort of pantomime defense of things that were lost decades, perhaps centuries, ago.  Those who are woke know that this country no longer operates under the Constitution of 1787, whether in pocket-sized or folio edition.  It operates under Talmudic or Gnostic interpretations of that document, as made by functionaries of a Leviathan State in which we find not only a Department of Education, but also an Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.

I did take a look to see who presently holds this title.  It is one Nadya Chinoy Dabby, who had been Associate Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement, and was before that Director of the Broad Foundation, a philanthropic charity with an interest in urban schools.  In all of these positions Ms. Dabby seems to have focused on disbursement of money in order to shape educational institutions of one sort or another.  If this was on condition of these institutions firing up the campus carillon and clanging out old tunes, I find no record of it.

There are three things to see in all of this.  One, of course, is that we live under a stygian bureaucracy in which there are not only Assistant Deputy Secretaries for Innovation and Improvement, but also Associate Assistant Deputy Secretaries for Innovation and Improvement.  Another is that directives issued under the letterhead of these absurd and bumptious officers are no laughing matter, because virtually every educational institution in this country is hooked on Federal dollars, and lives in mortal fear of the withdrawal symptoms that would occur if suppliers like Ms. Dabby cut them off.  Finally, we should note that all concerned are satisfied if there is mere appearance of compliance, if recipients of the money undertake to stage what postmodernists are wont to call a simulacrum.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, come Constitution Day.

46 thoughts on “Hurray, Hurray, it’s Constitution Day

  1. Pingback: Hurray, Hurray, it’s Constitution Day | Aus-Alt-Right

  2. Wow! What a scathing (and I must say, spot on) indictment of such idiotic chicanery. I once pointed much of this out to a group of ‘Tea Party’ patriots, most of whom were sincere enough, if utterly mistaken about the U.S. Constitution (I had not as yet made the Talmudic connection, but was on a collision course with the revelation), when after the meeting I was approached by a man I knew from Adam, who said to me that I was treading in dangerous territory and would be wise to ‘watch your back.’

    Anyway, that was in or around 2010. At that time I had learned (I think from one of the attendants at the meeting in question), that the U.S. Printing Office prints, by act of Congress, 1000 copies per year of their “official” pocket sized Constitution. And that our illustrious Congressmen and Senators will, upon request and on a first come, first serve basis, send these out to the public.

    As I had several meetings scheduled at which I would give a short presentation upon the principles I had mentioned to the Tea Party group, I decided to try my hand at aquiring about 250 copies from my several Congressmen and Senators. The initial idea was to ask for 50 copies from each. This I did, contacting each office directly with my request, and receiving in reply a very simple “yes, we will send them right out.” In the next few days that followed, I began to receive, not packages of 50 (except in one case), but large boxes of 500. So, as I had recruited a couple of other fellows to follow my lead in requesting 50 copies from each office, and they in turn received the same (originally packed at the U.S. Printing Office) boxes of 500, it became kind of a joke between us that each office must have set aside a storage facility they rent on a monthly basis dedicated exclusively to the housing of these defunct documents, and that they can’t wait to get rid of them to make room for the next allotment. And of course they’re in such demand, don’t ya know. Ha, ha.

    Ultimately my friends dumped the bulk of their copies on me, since they had no particular need for a couple thousand copies of pocket constitutions. So, of course, I wound up with several thousands of copies myself. And there for awhile I couldn’t give them away fast enough. Everytime I attended a meeting I would give away hundreds of them. But at length I still have in my possession 2500-3000 copies, which I would be perfectly willing to send you for the upcoming *if* I hadn’t already decided back then that I might should like to hang on to a few thousand copies as I might very well need to use them for kindling someday in the relatively near future. And I’m only half-joking about that.

      • I meant to say they print 1000 copies per year *for every Congressman and Senator.* So 535,000 copies per year total, I guess. These things have been stacking up in these warehouses for decades. Lol.

      • Perhaps they store them in disused salt mines, along with surplus powdered milk and civil defense supplies. Hold on to your copies; we’ll put them on display when we get round to building the the American Cuck Museum.

      • “Perhaps they store them in disused salt mines, along with surplus powdered milk and civil defense supplies.”

        Given that these mines are, in all likelihood, owned by Jewish moneyed interests who charge exorbitant fees for their use by U.S.G. as storage facilities for stockpiles of useless materials they also loaned (at a hefty rate of interest, as always) U.S.G. the money to purchase them with, I don’t at all doubt it. And the higher this stuff stacks up, the higher the vaunted (or is it “vaulted”?) “debt ceiling”™ must be hacked out to accomodate them, right?

  3. In 2005 the person wielding this constitutional power of bribery was, I suppose, some deluded cuck in the Bush administration. I apologize to sensitive readers for this descent into vulgar slang, but using the federal government to bribe people into phony compliance with something called Constitution Day more or less encapsulates what I understand by the word cuckservative. The essence of these pathetic fools is precisely this sort of pantomime defense of things that were lost decades, perhaps centuries, ago. Those who are woke know that this country no longer operates under the Constitution of 1787, whether in pocket-sized or folio edition. It operates under Talmudic or Gnostic interpretations of that document, as made by functionaries of a Leviathan State in which we find not only a Department of Education, but also an Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement.

    This about sums it up.

  4. Pingback: Hurray, Hurray, it’s Constitution Day | Reaction Times

    • At this point, the sheer stupidity of this sort of stuff causes me to LOL, probably in an attempt to suppress the rage it ought to invoke. I especially liked this:

      “There are three things to see in all of this. One, of course, is that we live under a stygian bureaucracy in which there are not only Assistant Deputy Secretaries for Innovation and Improvement, but also Associate Assistant Deputy Secretaries for Innovation and Improvement.”

      I see that the position includes an annual salary of $166,000. and change. Just one additional rung in the ol’ ladder. Nothing at all to do, I am very sure, with creating jobs/positions for purposes of “taxing” these salaries, which is a backdoor means of further taxing honest-to-God taxpayers. No, couldn’t be that!

      In any case, check your State and local governments. This sort of nonsense is a cancer that the people can’t get enough of at any level.

      Meanwhile, if we have to have useless positions like this to satisfy the idiotic public’s thirst for more, more, MORE!, at least give them official titles that make them *seem* somewhat useful. For God sakes!

    • I’ll admit that I may be a prude in questioning whether creative movements should ever happen, but surely we can all agree that if they do, it should be in private?

      • No argument here. But the *actual* powers that be (as opposed to the *visible* pawns they control to effect these destructive schemes) know all too well that left to the private sector and honest-to-goodness private interests (as opposed to “private” entities wholly dependent on public funding), destructive “creative movements” would no sooner get off the ground before they were discovered to be such, and forthwith abandoned altogether.

      • I’m not sure that I agree with you, Terry. Fallen men harbor strong impulses towards self-destruction. These impulses are not irresistible, of course, which is why we do not see mass suicide amidst the rubble of civilization, but one doesn’t have to look far to find evidence of our demonic side. This cruelty is normally turned outward, and is obvious in acts of assault and vandalism. But I think this is just the destructiveness of stupid people. Clever humans are just as destructive, but are more secretive and dishonest about it. I don’t deny that the destructive impulses of the powerful are carried out by elaborate conspiracies, but destructiveness would not go away if these were somehow exposed and abolished. When we pray to be delivered from evil, a good deal of what we ask to be delivered from is the evil in ourselves.

      • Well, I’m not saying such destructive schemes would be abandoned on discovery for purely (or even mostly) altruistic reasons, minus our conspiratorial overlords. But I can’t really disagree with your assessment in any case.

      • Here I display once again my lack of wit. I was only getting at the fact that folks should never squat in public.

      • Nah, I just used your word “private” as a springboard to harp on one of my biggest pet peeves. It’s that fallen nature in all of us that Mr. Smith alludes to above. My apologies, sir.

      • Btw, all … I’m not saying *all* public utilities are bad, anymore than Mr. Smith is saying that; what I’m mostly getting at is that, given the fact that we are not angels, and thus *have to have* government and public utilities, it is in our better and overall interest to be sure, to the best of our meager abilities, that our public utilities have *at very least the potential for* serving the public good.

        As Mr. Smith I think has noted, positions of the sort filled by the above mentioned Ms. What’s her name are inherently divested (is “inherently divested” proper terminology?) of any potential for serving the public good. I conclude, therefore, it’s just a money racket.

        On the other hand, and as someone I know who occupies one such (state level) position said to me a couple of years ago, “you’re right; but I would be a fool not to take advantage of it.” Quite.

        To answer your question, Mr. Washington, there is NO security for life, for liberty, for property, when the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths.

      • Mr. Morris…

        Implicit to the reality of “fallen” men is the explicit will to not only stand again, but to proceed towards that which was intended from the very Beginning. The alt-rite critique of modern Christianity is DEAD ON, no pun intended. The mass of “white Christians” are “self-annihilators for salvation.” The mass of “white Christians” BELIEVE they are to stay fallen and just die as their “sacrifice.” Where the alt-rite PURPOSELY GOES WRONG is in both its diagnosis and solution to said diagnosis. Although “racist,” the alt-riter cannot “see” that “white Christian” self-annihilates BECAUSE he is pathologically deracinated. The modern “white Christian” TRULY believes he can separate his race from his religion. In a nutshell, modern “white Christian” is no such thing. Likewise, the alt-rite solution to just scrap Christianity altogether SIMPLY REFLECTS their anti-Nicene Creed. The alt-rite does not desire to get back to the “business” of doing what fallen white man are supposed to do once they’ve decided to stand again and embrace that which was intended for them from the very Beginning.

        Strive towards Supremacy.

      • Thordaddy, yes, I think I see what you’re getting at. From my vantage point (with the accumulation of knowledge, experience, and so on and so forth – like everyone else who pays attention and desires to understand things), white Christian man would almost certainly have to strive for non-supremacy in order to get himself there, as well as keep himself there. “Equality” is a nice word’n all, but beyond pretty limited application it’s total bullsh*t! Pardon my French.

  5. “directives issued under the letterhead of these absurd and bumptious officers are no laughing matter”

    Not least of all because those same officers can cause formidable armed force in the form of a SWAT team to come your way if they deem it necessary. I suppose they make those pocket Constitutions available just so you know what exactly authorizes the dragoons to kick down your door, shoot your dog in front of your kids, and so on. It’s in the Constitution, son!

    Once the flagship State of the West, America has become a silly place.

  6. It is such an interesting cycle…

    The most highest of (C)onstitution revealed as the empirically perfect (c)onstitution to which countless men throughout history formulated and forged into an empirically viable “us” (C)onstitution in the pursuit of constituting one’s brethren towards the most highest of (C)onstitution to only see over the passage of time such concrete instantiations of their collective (c)onstitutions disintegrate amongst a dull mass of moving creatures no longer constituted such that said human creatures are rendered intellectually incapable of recognizing the inherent GOODNESS to the most highest of (C)onstitution.

      • Mr. Morris…

        We all REQUIRE a solid (c)onstitution. And apparently, this derives from a solidly constituted meta-physical reality called the Nicene Creed, ie., the most highest of (C)onstitution. And it seems rather apparent that with the conceptual destruction of the latter comes the physical destruction of the former. And in between is the chaos that is perhaps white man’s best working imitation of the most highest (C)onstitution, the U.S. Constitution. And absent those still constituted of a faith in the meta-reality of the Nicene Creed, all subsequent (c)onstitutions are bound to a self-annihilation, ie., an anti-constituted “state.” Ergo, “we” witness the demise of perhaps white man’s best working imitation of the most highest (C)onstitution and are unable to gainsay the good or bad in this event otherwise.

        PS. I was attempting to use the base word “constitute” within one sentence as many times as possible as indication of how important it is to possess a real constitution and how a gutting of the U.S. Constitution is very closely equivalent to the white American gutting himself.

      • This is the point Eric Voegelin spent his life trying to make. The microcosm must harmonize with the macrocosm. The order of the soul must harmonize with the order of the polis, and the order of the polis must harmonize with the order of the cosmos. Traditional society says that the soul should map the political order, and the political order should map the cosmos. Modernity turns this around and says order begins in the soul, or the will to be exact. Thus man can will the nature of the political order and cosmos.

  7. With all due respect to JMSmith…

    A odious scent of deconstructing (c)onstitution runs through this article and subsequent comments. This is dangerous ground. “We” are already dealing with so many young white boys with either severely damaged or no constitution at all.

    • Edit:

      [An] odious…

      Although, I am curious, Mr. Bertonneau, as to whether “A odious such and such” can ever be grammatically tolerable?

  8. Let us not mince words.

    U.S. Constitution = Babel = Eye of the avowed Catholic.

    Yet…

    It is apparently the very fact that “we the people” have rendered meaningless the U.S. Constitution that “we the people” delve deeper into Babel.

    • Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Yes, a massive, unwieldy bureaucracy has grown under the structure that the U.S. Constitution has created but that does not mean that the entire function of the government is without merit. Under this same structure has grown the world’s largest economy, most powerful military and (relative to most of the rest of the world) on average a free and educated citizenry enjoying a high standard of living. It is still a remarkable document that has had a profound impact on much of the world. As with all maturing societies bureaucracies will fester. This is a natural progression.

      • Maybe, but we must still digest the rather large irony noted in the original post. Among the aims of the 1787 Constitution was prevention of a Federal government that could (or would) control the states outside the scope of some limited and enumerated powers. In this the Constitution has failed, spectacularly. It is just mordantly funny to see the Federal Government requiring celebration of the Constitution, when requiring such a celebration is beyond its constitutional powers. This is not to say that voluntary, spontaneous and authentic celebrations of the Constitution would be unwelcome or out of place. But as it stands, there is a Potemkin Village quality to the whole business.

      • Yes. I get that and I really admire your writing style. The issue of the power of the federal government was largely rewritten in the blood of the Civil War and World War II and the War on Terror. An ever increasing amount of power concentrated in the federal government (accelerated by war) just seems to be the natural progression. Perhaps the U.S. Constitution served to put the breaks on this progression to some extent but I see it as the evolution of a maturing society.

      • “In this the Constitution has failed, spectacularly.”

        No truer sentence hath ever been written. Many, many people on the right still believe our experiment in self-government is ongoing and still workable in spite of the fact that the constitution of 1787 is utterly ignored at every level and sphere of government. Eventually the hard truth of the matter will probably dawn on them, but I shudder to think about what dire straights will awaken them to the morbid reality.

      • I disagree that the constitution is “utterly ignored at every level.” The Supreme Court must ultimately base their decisions upon the Constitution. All jurisprudence and statutory law flows from the Constitution. Because the Constitution is not specific enough to cover every possible fact scenario it must be interpreted. It is in this interpretation and two hundred years of jurisprudence that gives rise to the appearance that our current state of law does not exactly accord with the original document.

      • The US Constitution has not “spectacularly failed.” Only those with God-ordained free will spectacularly fail where every other failure must be absolutely mundane. What failed was the (c)onstitution to stay faithful to the most highest of (C)onstitution such that the US Constitution functioned exactly as written. The state of affairs in MRKA circa 2016 is greater (c)onstitution crushing lesser (c)onstitution with really no higher (C)onstitution in mind.

        Real constituted anti-(C)onstitutionalists…

        I call it “radical autonomy.”

      • No; the Supremes *give the appearance* that they base their decisions on the constitution. And half the time they don’t do a very good job of that. The constitution is explained well enough in the Federalist Papers (which the Supremes know perfectly well, but they also know perfectly well that Joe Clueless has no idea what the Federalist Papers are, or that they actually exist).

      • Yes, there are many. The ruling on “Obamacare” is a very good example. Roberts claimed the individual mandate is a kind of tax, then used the general power of taxation as his excuse for declaring it Constitutional. The reason it’s such a fine example is because we have the benefit of Federalist #41 wherein the exact scenario is discussed and repudiated.

      • Mr. Morris…

        Ergo, Roberts is one who forsakes his (c)onstitution in obscurant rebellion to the most highest (C)onstitution in the service of sabotaging the fully functional intent of the US Constitution.

      • Winston, sorry I didn’t give you more examples earlier, but I was short on time. Anyway, think also in terms of 14th Amendment birthright citizenship.

        We are supposed to believe that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” means that literally ALL persons born here are automatic birthright citizens by virtue thereof, in spite of the fact that the 39th Congress addressed the issue and explicitly said that section 1 *excludes* persons born to residents who are foreigners, and/or aliens, subject to a foreign jurisdiction.

        Meanwhile, the phrase “immigration is a federal issue” (by which is meant that immigration is an *exclusively* federal issue) is a slogan, not a Constitutional principle. The Constitution grants no authority to the federal government to control or regulate immigration, nor does it deny this authority to the States or to the People. Hence, “immigration is a State and local issue” is a lot closer to the truth of the matter, *if* anyone cares what the Constitution actually says. Which the federal courts certainly do not.

        Another slogan we hear *touted as a Constitutional principle* is the idea that “federal law trumps state law,” which again is meant to convey the falsehood that federal law trumps state law *simply by virtue of the former’s being law in conflict with the latter.*

        Now recall all of those times in the recent past when the federal courts have struck down state and local immigration laws, or otherwise gutted them of their teeth. How do they justify it and say these decisions are based on the Constitution? Birthright citizenship granted to children born in the U.S. to foreigners and aliens subject to a foreign jurisdiction. That’s how. If they’re citizens, then they have Constitutional rights, namely that no state shall make or enforce any law that does x, y, or z respecting citizens.

        Every single time the courts rule this way, based on birthright citizenship granted to persons subject to a foreign jurisdiction, they are basing their decisions not on the Constitution, but on the activist interpretation which is a clear violation of both the spirit and letter of the Constitution.

        Rulings like the above are virtually limitless. I haven’t even touched on the Court’s out-of-thin-air invention of the so called “incorporation doctrine,” and all the ways in which it has given the courts license to violate the clear meaning of the Constitution. But it is on this basis that all of a sudden it’s supposed to be “unconstitutional” to have an invocation at a public h.s. sporting event, and state and local laws prohibiting the sale or distribution of violent and perverse video games *within their own jurisdictions* is declared unconstitutional. And on and on and on.

        To quote Tammany, “The appearance if the law must be upheld, especially when it’s being violated.” That pretty well sums up the judiciary’s adherance to the defunct Constitution.

      • Mr. Morris…

        If one uses a hammer to break rock and some time in the future the hammer handle snaps do you blame the hammer’s destruction on the hammer’s weakness because it DID break rock for so long even though said hammer was only ever intended to hammer nails?

        A written Constitution cannot be shredded by its handlers and then take blame for only being made of paper.

        Freedom of Speech = freedom of conscience = conscious of freedom = right to bear arms.

        This ^^^ is white America’s constitutional foundation.

      • Okay, Winston. Fair enough.

        When Mr. Smith states in the O.P. that we’re governed by a Talmudic or Gnostic interpretation of the Constitution, he is not just blowing smoke or exaggerating in the slightest. Specifically he is alluding to the supposed “hidden mysteries” of the Constitution that only the chosen initiates and “seers” are able to extract and apply correctly. I personally believe it’s even more sinister and more narrowly identifiable than that, which I discuss below.

        As I intimated in an earlier comment, the fourteenth amendment was never intended to supersede the original document except in very limited scope. It defies common sense to believe that its very broad application today (incorporation of the entire Bill of Rights) was ever a serious consideration by the framers of the amendment. For one thing, it never would have been ratified by the requisite number of States (no, not even the Union States during reconstruction) had this been the case. The framers knew this and spoke to it. This is all a matter of public record. In the second place, the entire legitimacy of the fourteenth amendment is undermined *if* the “real intention” behind it was hidden from the public during the ratification process.

        In any case, what we’re governed by is the fourteenth amendment and the later discovered “hidden intention” of the framers of Incorporation. In addition, the body of law and judicial precedent erected over time on *that* foundation. That is the “constitution” the Supremes and lower courts base their decisions on. Appearances to the contrary and when they occasionally occur notwithstanding.

      • Thordaddy, I’m not blaming the Constitution; I’m blaming the people who knowingly violate its principles. In any case, my agreement with Mr. Smith’s assertion that in certain respects the Constitution has “failed miserably” is just acknowlegment of facts of the current situation. It is a matter of irrefutable historical record that the Constitution’s fundamental principles, written in stone (so to speak) as they are, does not prevent persons so disposed from undermining them at every opportunity. Insofar as *any* written Constitution is intended to prevent this sort of abuse, the U.S. Constitution, as Mr. Smith has said, has failed miserably in this task.

  9. “In 2005 the person wielding this constitutional power of bribery was, I suppose, some deluded cuck in the Bush administration. I apologize to sensitive readers for this descent into vulgar slang, but using the federal government to bribe people into phony compliance with something called Constitution Day more or less encapsulates what I understand by the word cuckservative. ”

    Hahaha, nice. You’ve got to call these types out, they’re the ones who capitulate to the Lunatic Left over and over again. They’ve capitulated to first to the Jews, then to high finance and big business, and then militant black groups (including BLM) as well as all sorts of hostile aliens (including/especially Muslims).

    Btw, as for people who are so deeply offended by the word “cuck”:

    “The cuckservative is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a neocon, pseudocon, RINO, liberal, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a cuck and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.””

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s