ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, September 04, 2015

One week at #1

Interest in SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police remains strong; it has 132 reviews and ranks in the Amazon top 500, which has been enough to keep it at #1 in Political Philosophy for a solid week now. Thanks to all of you for that; none of that happens without you buying the book, talking it up on Twitter and Facebook, and reviewing it. I hope you will continue to spread the word about it.

I'm gratified by both the positive responses from the Dread Ilk, #GamerGate, and the Alt-Right as well as the negative responses from the SJWs. Here are two recently published quasi-reviews, one from the gentleman plotting against me, another from a woman who is a strong supporter of Castalia House.
SJWs is primarily a series of Scripts. For PUA manuals, these Scripts are opening lines, moving from one phase to another, shifting venues, et al. In SJWs, the first Script is the anatomy of a SJW attack (Point and Shriek and so on) and the second Script is the proper response (Don’t Apologize and so on).

There is, of course, more to this book than the two Scripts, but as with PUA literature, it is mostly there either to explain and support the Scripts or to explain and support the Worldview. There are calls to arms and sections on how to SJW-proof an organization, but this is so much window dressing. What really matters are the Scripts and canned routines.

The breakdown of dialectic vs. rhetoric is a good one, although it does claim that Leftists are incapable of dialectic reason. Again, this may be somewhat justified. After a year of following Vox, I have not yet seen an opponent attack him with a dialectic argument, for whatever reason.

At the end of the day, SJWs Always Lie will likely do exactly what it set out to do. The culture wars within fandom will escalate, the disqualification arms race will heat up, and both sides will steadily lose the ability to see the other side as human beings. I will never say that both sides are the same, but they do have one thing in common: the constant dehumanization of the other side.

Vox Day suggests that the only way to combat the intellectual policing of the Left is for the Right to engage in intellectual policing. This is what we have come to, and why I find Vox’s posturing as a hero of free speech disingenuous. Apparently the Hugo SJWs are not the only ones willing to burn down the city to save it.
It's a fair and intelligent non-review, but I think Rev 3.0 makes the same mistake so many moderates do of confusing the TACTIC with the OBJECTIVE. There is nothing disingenuous about thought-policing SJWs in defense of free speech; how else does he think their attempts to exert control over everyone else's thoughts and speech are going to be combated?

Once your opponent introduces tanks to the battlefield, if you do not meet them with anti-tank measures, including more and better tanks, you will lose. Rev 3.0's implied notion of nobly relying upon even more free speech to combat the SJW speech police reminds me of the WWI French military doctrine that relying upon élan and esprit de corps was the right way to defeat barbed wire, trenches, and emplaced machine guns.

Isn't it possible that by utilizing their tactics we will turn into SJWs? It may be theoretically possible but it's not even remotely likely. We don't share their ideals, their goals, or their slavering hunger for control over others' thoughts and words. The Marines didn't magically transform into Nazis even though they adopted the maneuver warfare tactics that were developed by the Wehrmacht, and we won't turn into SJWs just because we have turned their own tactics against them.

As for why they won't attack me with calm, rational, and reasoned arguments, it is because most of them are incapable of dialectic. The few that can handle it also recognize that I am much, much better at it than they are. They don't flee from public debate with me because they are afraid they will defeat me too resoundingly and expose my intellectual limitations, but because they fear I will do that to them.

Ann Sterzinger's review is rather less coherent, and transforms into a Hugo 2015 summary before transmogrifying entirely into a review of John Wright's Somewhither in which she rather precisely nails some of the novel's weaker points. Unless she didn't.
Day’s brand-new nonfiction book on Castalia—SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police—is half Rabid Puppies memoir, half field manual for dealing with the sort of people who repeatedly call Day a white supremacist even though he repeatedly reminds them that he’s part Native American, and won’t shut up about his great-grandfather who was some kind of Mexican war hero.
The negative reaction by the SJWs is very nearly as satisfying, as the only time I have seen levels of butthurt this high was the day that that the 2015 Hugo nominations were made public.
  • this is an example of somebody piggybacking on a topic he knows will be popular for his own obvious self-aggrandizement
  • The book itself is named after one of his "Three Laws of Social Justice Warriors", a reference to Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics 
  • Adorable whining from a guy with a hardon about losing at the Hugo's
  • An unintentionally amusing account of how a pudgy, angry, little boy grows up into a pudgy, angry, little man.
  • This book is very poorly reasoned and complete garbage. The title is itself inaccurate and rhetorical fallacy.   
UPDATE: Greg Johnson has posted a long review at Counter-Currents:
At the risk of sounding like the Oprah of the New Right, I want every one of you to buy and read this book. Vox Day has written an indispensable manual for resisting the politically correct witch-hunts of so-called “Social Justice Warriors....

Chapter 8, “Striking Back at the Thought Police” and Chapter 9, “Winning the Social Justice War,” are the most exciting parts of the book, for Day makes it clear that he is not content with just fending off the Left, but on rolling it back completely. This is what sets him miles apart from mainstream conservatism, which has never conserved anything from the Left, much less taken back lost ground. I will just deal with the highlights of these chapters.

Day’s first strategic principle is to know oneself and one’s enemy, and act accordingly. Day points out that the Right has a systematic advantage over the Left, because the Left is based on lies; Leftists do not understand themselves or their enemies, but we do.

One of Day’s most important principles is to reject the ideals of SJWs: equality, diversity, tolerance, and progress. Day flatly rejects equality as a fact or a moral ideal. He flatly rejects the daft notion that diversity is a strength. He does not measure progress in terms of equality and diversity, but in terms of science and technology, and points out that these forms of progress are incompatible with the first two ideals. He dismisses tolerance as “little more than a cloak for SJW entryism,” noting that SJWs always demand it but never practice it.

Day simply denies the Left the moral standing to judge the Right. He dismisses them as followers of false ideals that lead to injustice and tyranny.  

Labels: , ,

162 Comments:

Blogger totenhenchen September 04, 2015 5:44 AM  

Whenever I see the word "Bacchanalian" used online I picture some fat, acne-riddled neckbeard lying around, wrapped in a bed sheet and expecting hot chicks in short little togas to show up any minute now and start pouring wine all over their tits.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 6:01 AM  

this is an example of somebody piggybacking on a topic he knows will be popular for his own obvious self-aggrandizement

Did John Scalzi say this, while writing video games?

Anonymous Strange Aeons September 04, 2015 6:01 AM  

By virtue of the Law of SJW Projection, I like to think that the comment regarding piggybacking for self-aggrandizement came from Chris "Still-Declaring-AntiGamergate-Victory" Kluwe, the "poorly reasoned" comment came from Phil Sandifer who couldn't even find Waldo, much less reason his way out of a wet paper bag, and that the "pudgy" comment came from Alexandra Erin, who resembles a deployed airbag in Elton Johns car.

VFM #0017

Blogger Shimshon September 04, 2015 6:23 AM  

I think the SJWs should burn copies of SJWs Always Lie. Yes, buy a copy, print it out, and burn it.

Anonymous MM September 04, 2015 6:33 AM  

send Kim Davis a book.. though she already knows the rule to Never Resign.

Blogger Shimshon September 04, 2015 6:33 AM  

Or if too lazy, just pull up a web page with a virtual fire that burns a virtual copy of the book that they didn't pay for. I sense a legal opportunity here.

Anonymous Giuseppe The Kurgan September 04, 2015 6:40 AM  

Keep it rolling guys, it's a nice flaming ball of spiked metal and when it impacts on the SJW fortress and cracks open, hundreds of fanged VFM will burst forth from it.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan September 04, 2015 6:41 AM  

I'll bet the moderate has never ever said boo to the SJW.

As for the counter currents crew if you would have only put in a positive reference to Hitler then you would received plaudits.

Blogger VD September 04, 2015 6:49 AM  

As for the counter currents crew if you would have only put in a positive reference to Hitler then you would received plaudits.

When people warn me about controversial or unpalatable allies, I simply remind them that for most on the pro-Western Civilization side, I am the controversial and unpalatable ally. The enemy of my enemy may or may not be my friend, but he is my ally and I do not target allies.

Look at where Bill Buckley's "police the right" strategy was a disastrous and self-destructive failure. I reject it entirely.

Anonymous Lulabelle (68) September 04, 2015 6:54 AM  

There may be - now - a constant dehumanization of the other side.......but that surely wasn't the case initially, or else the situation as we now know it probably wouldn't exist. The Christian ideals of forgiveness, grace, mercy.....are what allowed the SJWs to flourish. If only they had been mercilessly cut down at the first sight of their BS.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 6:58 AM  

Ruthlessly, not mercilessly. Mercy comes into the picture only when they ask for it.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit September 04, 2015 6:58 AM  

To highlight the danger of the moderates; they interpret the mad drooling of insane peadophiles and beastiologists into reasonable sounding demands and berate the intelligent people (who have clearly understood the raving of the mad trans-humans for what they truly are) for not accepting their interpretation of the drooling lunacy, all in the name of compromise.

Curse the moderate cowards who will happily ally with child molesters to avoid "conflict".

Blogger VD September 04, 2015 6:59 AM  

The Christian ideals of forgiveness, grace, mercy.....are what allowed the SJWs to flourish.

And those ideals are right and proper... when applied to a defeated or repentant enemy. God doesn't preemptively forgive and neither should we.

Anonymous Lulabelle (68) September 04, 2015 7:00 AM  

Yes, Markku, I agree. I should have used "ruthlessly".

Anonymous Lulabelle (68) September 04, 2015 7:09 AM  

The Leftys are totally against fat-shaming. Until they want to point out that Vox was a pudgy child. Then it's ok to fat-shame.
Were you a pudgy child? I only remember a pic of you from high school. With your blond, swoopy, "Flock-of-Seagulls" hair. You weren't pudgy. You looked like a Teen Beat pin-up.

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 04, 2015 7:13 AM  

A week at number one in it's category qualifies as a Philosophical Number One Bestseller.

Congratulations Vox.Day!

A lot of people helped make that possible because success always has hundred fathers and I'm never one of them. However I feel you owe a special thanks to the one man whose aggressive hyping, relentless attention and brilliant marketing on your behalf, indeed and truly put this book on the sky line.

John Scalzi.

Give that man a happy a face!

Blogger Owen September 04, 2015 7:17 AM  

I read through the sample pdf chapter. Great excerpt to release to give a flavor of the book. I bought the book today because of it...and the ridiculous response by Scalzi. $5 to twist a thorn in his side and gain a guide to battle SJW nonsense? Deal.

Blogger VD September 04, 2015 7:23 AM  

Were you a pudgy child?

Not even close. I was a scrawny little boy.

I bought the book today because of it...and the ridiculous response by Scalzi.

Streisand Effect FTW.

Blogger Daniel September 04, 2015 7:37 AM  

You are very welcome.

I was content to be left alone, to be left with a meager right to life and liberty.

They denied that. They consumed that.

Game on.

Childhood's End teaches that the evolved elites can't progress as long as there is one free man. What it denies is that one free man is only peaceful when left alone.

Anonymous JamesV September 04, 2015 7:42 AM  

I just finished the Kindle version and it recommended other books I might enjoy. The second recommendation was John Scalzi Is Not Very Popular And I MySelf Am Quite Popular.

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 7:42 AM  

The Rev.3.0 -

Might I offer a suggested counter-script? 3). Address specific statements with credible evidence.

"I have not yet seen an opponent attack him with a dialectic argument, for whatever reason."


Oh, the lulz.

Blogger Patrikbc September 04, 2015 7:42 AM  

Adorable whining from a guy with a hardon about losing at the Hugo's

That has to be Scalzi, it's his brand of gayspeak.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan September 04, 2015 7:51 AM  

I made the Hitler quip to lightly mock their eccentric love of NS. Their movie reviews especially Johnson's are the best part of their efforts.

Blogger VFM bot #188 September 04, 2015 8:14 AM  

I think the SJWs should burn copies of SJWs Always Lie. Yes, buy a copy, print it out, and burn it.

In public! They should do it in public, so everyone can know how evil it is.

Yeah!

Blogger Tank September 04, 2015 8:31 AM  

Should this be so much fun? Whatever.

Just started on my copy last night. I want to read it slowly. To savor it.

I wanted to mention VD's non-fiction writing style. Terse. Logical. Coherent. Devoid of any attempt to make it sound "intellectual." Down to earth. Like a real human being taking to you.

Blogger Gunnar von Cowtown September 04, 2015 8:40 AM  

@VD "And those ideals are right and proper... when applied to a defeated or repentant enemy. God doesn't preemptively forgive and neither should we."

That's a great quote. You should tweet it.

Anonymous Anti-Dentite September 04, 2015 8:48 AM  

Mr. Day,

All the cuckservatives and libertarians are asking Kim Davis to resign.

What is your counsel here?

Blogger VD September 04, 2015 8:53 AM  

What is your counsel here?

She should sit tight. She is a prisoner of conscience. I'll have more about this over the weekend.

Anonymous Alexander September 04, 2015 9:06 AM  

If you were an SJW, My Love now available at Amazon

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 9:07 AM  

Resigning, instead of forcing them to fire her, would be implicit acknowledgement that she is doing something wrong. And if she is doing something wrong even from her own perspective, then why sit in jail? Why not do the right thing and give the licenses?

There is just no scenario in which resigning would be anything other than utterly stupid.

Anonymous karsten September 04, 2015 9:09 AM  

I have nothing but the greatest respect for Greg Johnson, one of the boldest and finest writers on the entire alt Right (to use one catch-all phrase for want of a better). His endorsement -- especially such an enthusiastic one -- is significant, IMO.

I have hopes that Dr. Kevin MacDonald at The Occidental Observer might give the book a review. It might be worth contacting him. Just a thought. Though with the CC review, he might now be aware of the book.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 9:14 AM  

She is already invested in the side of Christ. After sitting in jail for that, there is no way to get back in Satan's good graces. She is already marked. But if she now - after all that - chooses the path of cowardice, she will make enemies of both sides.

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 9:21 AM  

She should sit tight. She is a prisoner of conscience.

Yes. Yes, and no. KY law still states that marriage is between one man, one woman. The State is not sticking up for its sovereign self, allowing her incarceration. KY needs to tell SCOTUS, "Fuck off!" She's arguing her moral conscience where the issue is one of law. Only if the State, via its plenary powers, were to legalize same sex marriage should she resign (conscience v Oath).

Anonymous 334 September 04, 2015 9:27 AM  

@ 13. VD

Which brings to mind the frequent attempts by SJWs (or more frequently their enablers) to make use of the teachings of Christ to disarm us.

In context, statements like "love your enemies" tell INDIVIDUALS how they may demonstrate to the world their own relationship with God and please him in the process. They do not instruct society as to how it should order itself, nor do they address how mixed groups within society deal with their differences. For an individual to cede his personal responsibility to protect his family, neighbours, co-workers and even society at large from attack by these vultures on the basis of such teaching is to make the same mistake made by the Jews when they took their parents' retirement savings and gave them to the synagogue at the instruction of the Pharisees (Mark 7:11-12).

It is not permitted to sacrifice to God something that belongs to another.

Applying such verses to Puppies, Ilk, Minions or even SJWs is a "category error", as Vox is wont to say.

Blogger Russell (106) September 04, 2015 9:29 AM  

"the constant dehumanization of the other side"

*Looks at Rape Rape*
*Looks at Scalzi*
*Looks at Sandifer and srhbutts*

No, they are doing that all by themselves.

Anonymous 334 September 04, 2015 9:31 AM  

@30. Markku

Right. There's a lot of nonsense about how she "took an oath", and if she won't fulfill it, she should resign. But the oath she took, assuming she took one, was to do a particular job under a particular set of circumstances, which the U.S. Supreme Court has now unilaterally modified.

Thus she is not bound by her oath, and not morally obligated to quit anything. As Vox says, she ought to stand her ground and make them fire her for insubordination if that's what they insist on doing. But to capitulate to this nonsense is to admit they have a point.

Blogger Jack Ward September 04, 2015 9:51 AM  

@16 John Scalzi.

Give that man a happy a face!

No....give that Happy Face a man.

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 04, 2015 9:53 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 04, 2015 10:00 AM  

I found this part of the review incredibly sad.

His recipe for defeating us.

1). Accept that your opponent is a human being.
2). Attack ideas, never attack individuals.
3). Address specific statements with credible evidence


I'd be more than happy to meet on these terms. But they can not do it. Not will not but can not.

It's completely beyond them. They haven't been trained intellectually to meet on these terms. In fact they have been trained to do quite the opposite. With a few exceptions a liberal arts degree these days means you've graduated from a reeducation camp.

And I'm sorry Rev but you don't appear to have ever been on the receiving end of the SJWs negative attentions. They only want to hurt and silence. There isn't the slightest regret on their part when they shatter lives. They revel in it and hold a party and slap each other on the backs for it afterward.

They've been trained and train each other, not to see us as humans and they will not treat us such. We are caricatures to them and who cares if you ruin a caricature's life?

I hate to break this to you Rev but you are a voice that is crying in the wilderness. One that no one on your side will listen to.

But we will be happy to give you a cup of bourbon to wash down your honey and locust. Then have a polite discussion about it.

We're here for you.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 10:13 AM  


1). Accept that your opponent is a human being.
2). Attack ideas, never attack individuals.
3). Address specific statements with credible evidence


Ha! THIS is the game that every reactionary has in his friggin' blood. If you could challenge Mike Tyson in any sport you liked, would you choose boxing?

No, stick to the rhetoric, rabbits. We're only just now learning that. We're still novices.

Blogger Danby September 04, 2015 10:23 AM  

She took an oath

So did every justice on the Supreme Corrt

Blogger CM September 04, 2015 10:26 AM  

And our presideny

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 10:27 AM  

If you understand the Tragedian and the Dwarf in C. S. Lewis's The Great Divorce, you understand an SJW.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 10:28 AM  

And if you haven't read the story and you read it now, then you just tell me if you didn't think of a specific person as the dwarf. I daresay you did.

Blogger VFM bot #188 September 04, 2015 10:29 AM  

About Kim Davis, prisoner of conscience in Kentucky: Sen. Ted Cruz was asked last night on TV what he thought about the situation. Cruz is a constitutional lawyer, former attorney general of Texas, and has argued multiple cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said he supports Kim Davis 100%. She should not be in jail. She is a victim of an unhinged anti-Christian federal government and a Supreme Court that no longer upholds the Constitution. He said read the 4 dissents in the homosexual marriage case to see what the problem is. Especially Scalia's dissent. Especially Scalia's.

Anonymous If You Were A Kindle, My Love September 04, 2015 10:33 AM  

If You Were An SJW, My Love now available on Amazon

Only 99 cents, and no reviews yet...

Blogger VFM bot #188 September 04, 2015 10:35 AM  

Greg Johnson's review of SJWs Always Lie at Counter-Currents is excellent. By all means go there and read the whole thing. It's at:

http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/09/defeating-the-left/

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 10:41 AM  

Kim Davis is the SJW here. She is the enemy:

1) Kim Davis is a Democrat.
2) She is making a mockery of rule of law
3) She is defying the Constitution
4) She is breaking the law
5) She is pretending to be a victim to make fools of gullible Christians
6) She is making Republicans and Christians seem like hateful hillbilly bigots
7) She is NOT a conservative but is as liberal as Donald Trump.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 10:47 AM  

Whew. I was worried for a while there that she might put me to shame, because I've never done anything one tenth as couragious for Christ. But if she has some liberal beliefs; well, that totally balances it out and now I can feel pretty good about myself, actually, and maybe play some Dwarf Fortress.

Glad you helped me out, lurker.

Blogger ScuzzaMan September 04, 2015 10:48 AM  

Regardinv mercy and forgiveness, some enemies are beyond these, even when defeated, cf. Samuel and his conversation with Agag, king of the Amalekites. Tge mkney quote;
"And Samuel said, As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal."
Those SJWs who have destroyed other peopl's lives in their evil pursuit of their own sick gratification, are fully deserving of the same treatment. It is not like we're going to hew them in pieces.

Anonymous The other robot September 04, 2015 10:48 AM  

When you add a parody book at Amazon, put SJWs Always Lie in the keywords.

That way, anyone searching can find it ...

Anonymous Alexander, #10 September 04, 2015 10:49 AM  

@48

Nonsense. This is battlespace and she is on our side.

Consider this. There are sheriffs across the country who have been elected on the premise that, in the even of a gun confiscation, they will defy state and federal edicts and stand with their neighbors.

This is the shot across the bow. Either the left will set a precedent that these sheriffs should resign as soon as their pledge to their people becomes applicable, or they will be attacked and imprisoned until they do so.

This has nothing to do with the rule of law, or the absurd set of changing definitions that passes for our constitution these days. If it did, then we'd be locking up every elected official in California for noncompliance with federal immigration law, and every elected official in Washington and Colorado for noncompliance with federal drug law. Lerner and Clinton could be imprisoned on contempt of court.

She is our ally until she proves herself otherwise.

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 10:51 AM  

Why haven't you left one, @46?

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 10:53 AM  

Notice not one of you refuted any of my points.

8) She's an elected official.
9) The 14th amendment via the Constitution is the law.
10) She is breaking her oath and her word.

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 10:58 AM  

@54 I see nothing in 14th that points to Scotus decisions. Also, the 14th must be viewed in harmony with 10th. In that respect, 14th fails in this issue.

Anonymous Alexander, #10 September 04, 2015 11:00 AM  

Fine:

1) Kim Davis is a Democrat. So? I am not a Republican. I don't care what she is, her actions speak for themselves. i wish there were more Democrats like her.

2) She is making a mockery of rule of law Nonsense. Gay Marriage being retroconned into the constitution made a mockery of rule of law.

3) She is defying the Constitution See above. The people who killed the constitution cannot demand authority from it.

4) She is breaking the law. Good. I hope one day if I am in such a position I am brave enough to do so as well. Of course, she didn't break state law. So she is in the same boat as all the bureaucrats in California, Colorado, Washington, and scores of municipalities, none of whom are in jail or are at any risk of losing their jobs.

5) She is pretending to be a victim to make fools of gullible Christians. She is not pretending that the left is rallying against her and a judge threw her in prison.

6) She is making Republicans and Christians seem like hateful hillbilly bigots. 1. Because the left didn't already take that for granted. 2. She's making Christians seem like having a backbone. About time somebody did.

7) She is NOT a conservative but is as liberal as Donald Trump. We need more NOT conservative, conservatives, apparently.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:01 AM  

8) She's an elected official.
9) The 14th amendment via the Constitution is the law.
10) She is breaking her oath and her word.

As for 8 and 9, we don't care. As for 10, it was already pointed out that the oath was in different circumstances. But the nature of your protests tell us that your concern for what this might do to the credibility of Christians was just crocodile tears. THIS is what followers of Christ do. God comes first. So far above man's laws that they aren't even on the radar when there is a conflict.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:02 AM  

4) She is breaking the law. Good. I hope one day if I am in such a position I am brave enough to do so as well.

This is on the absolute top of my prayer list as well.

Anonymous zen0 September 04, 2015 11:09 AM  

Under the rule of laws, everyone is a criminal.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 04, 2015 11:14 AM  

@28 VD
What is your counsel here?

She should sit tight. She is a prisoner of conscience. I'll have more about this over the weekend
---------------

I'm eagerly awaiting. A friend and I were looking at this story and it led me to explaining the SJWAL book. And how she is following the "do not apologize" step.

Blogger Steffen September 04, 2015 11:17 AM  

All of these points apply to Obama as well regarding the Defense of Marriage Act, and anything immigration related as well. Go ahead, stick this argument directly to the man if you feel so strongly about it.

Anonymous Northern Observer September 04, 2015 11:17 AM  

Pudgy? Short and bald maybe, but not pudgy.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:21 AM  

Here's where Greg Koukl believes the war will move next, if it is won by the enemy on sexual deviancy: The belief that Christ is the only way of salvation will be criminalized.

Anonymous Michael Maier September 04, 2015 11:21 AM  

9) The 14th amendment via the Constitution is the law.

10, you're an idiot.

Besides... all amendments after 1861 were enacted under duress.

Blogger VD September 04, 2015 11:29 AM  

Kim Davis is the SJW here. She is the enemy

No, she's not. She's not our enemy, although she may be yours.

Anonymous Nxx September 04, 2015 11:29 AM  

Isn't it possible that by utilizing their tactics we will turn into SJWs?

Not possible.

For us to become SJW we'd have to fixate on the Bolshevik Genocide and develop a belief system wherein we believe it necessary to persecute and sacrifice marxists in order to keep The Evil God Joseph Stalin from arising and blotting out the sun.

However we are already religious insofar as we are Christian. As such we cannot adopt a second religion; it's not possible for a person to dual boot two religions.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 04, 2015 11:31 AM  

@39 Cataline Sergius

I'd be more than happy to meet on these terms. But they can not do it. Not will not but can not.

I hate to break this to you Rev but you are a voice that is crying in the wilderness. One that no one on your side will listen to.
---

They can't because they are trapped in the world of rhetoric. It's like going through life with one hand tied behind your back.

And the poor guy has as much admitted that no one from his side has even posted. I believe that is because he is not using rhetoric, and they just can't understand what he is saying. Maybe they see him similar to how we see Cuckservatives.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:33 AM  

However we are already religious insofar as we are Christian. As such we cannot adopt a second religion; it's not possible for a person to dual boot two religions.

Many are trying to run the religion of hedonism in a virtual machine though.

Anonymous Jack Amok September 04, 2015 11:34 AM  

Rev 3.0's implied notion of nobly relying upon even more free speech to combat the SJW speech police reminds me of the WWI French military doctrine that relying upon élan and esprit de corps was the right way to defeat barbed wire, trenches, and emplaced machine guns.

Hey, don't forget bright red uniforms and easily identified officers. It always does wonders for elan to see the Captain cut down by enemy fire just as he stands up and yells "Forward!"

I am the leader of the French Army, and you can too!

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:37 AM  

Hey, don't forget bright red uniforms and easily identified officers. It always does wonders for elan to see the Captain cut down by enemy fire just as he stands up and yells "Forward!"

The officer should instead try informing the enemy that his mother was a hamster, and his father smelt of elderberries.

Blogger Steffen September 04, 2015 11:37 AM  

All of these points apply to Obama as well regarding the Defense of Marriage Act, and anything immigration related as well. Go ahead, stick this argument directly to the man if you feel so strongly about it.

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 11:40 AM  

This is ridiculous. She is not in jail for her beliefs, she is in jail for refusing the court.

The government is not a church. Court didn't order her to violate her beliefs - court ordered her to DO HER JOB. She's an elected official - they can't just fire her. She must resign or be impeached.

She is a total phony "Christian" with multiple baby daddies who is playing all of you sheep for fools.

I am a Republican. I don't want Hillary in office thanks to Democrats like Trump-Humpers and a bigoted redneck hypocrite with 4 divorces.

You are lemmings.

Anonymous Wyrd September 04, 2015 11:43 AM  

I am a Republican.

You're a cuckservative.

Blogger Russell (106) September 04, 2015 11:45 AM  

No, the agnostic lurker is completely right.

She should just follow orders, without question.

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 11:49 AM  

be impeached

Impeach the woman for doing her job as State law declares it to be? Yeah, right.

Anonymous Sheila September 04, 2015 11:53 AM  

Part of a comment I found at therightstuff that I think applies to this debate about appropriate tactics versus long-term objectives, or the newest thread about sexual deviancy with its sidetrack into death penalty debate [Note - I'm not personally endorsing everything in here, but the overall intent seems pretty straightforward to me]:

"We all know there are certain laws that one is allowed to - or even expected to - break, and others that no one is permitted to break. That's not how a "nation of laws" works, but it is how an ideological state works. . . . Only a fool doesn't know that anti-discrimination laws are to be taken seriously, and immigration laws are not. Only a fool doesn't know that "hate crimes" laws apply only when the victim belongs to an ideologically protected minority group and the perpetrator does not . . . Like freedom of speech, like freedom of association, like all Classical-Liberal concepts, the Rule of Law is dead in the water. This is because it turned out that Classical Liberalism has no defense against attacks from its left. Like the Maginot Line, all of its defenses point in one direction - against the enemies it faced in the 18th century from which it sprang, which were all traditional rightist ideas like monarchy, aristocracy, and theocracy. In the mid-18th century, Classical Liberalism couldn't imagine having to fend off attacks from anything more leftist than itself . . . At the heart of cuckservatism lies the inability to admit that the Classical Liberalism on which the United States was founded - its constitution and the entire philosophy behind it - is the equivalent of the Maginot Line: it cannot, has not, and will not hold back the enemy. If we want to not be overrun, we will have to come up with a different plan that includes more robust defenses."

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A September 04, 2015 11:54 AM  

@71. the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 11:40 AM

"This is ridiculous. She is not in jail for her beliefs, she is in jail for refusing the court."

And if those Christian beliefs run afoul of the law, she must make a choice. She chose Christian Beliefs over Rule of Man. What is your argument here? Seems that you don't like vanilla and prefer chocolate instead.

"The government is not a church. Court didn't order her to violate her beliefs - court ordered her to DO HER JOB. She's an elected official - they can't just fire her. She must resign or be impeached."

The court ordered her to do her job and by doing so violate her beliefs and her reading of KY law relative to her oath of office. You seem to have a hard time grasping the concept that the two things might be connected somehow, some way. She seems to be choosing the "Impeachment" route over the "Resign" route. She's selected one of your two approved options, and yet you are still aggrieved. Strange that.

"She is a total phony "Christian" with multiple baby daddies who is playing all of you sheep for fools."

At present, she appears to be taking a principled stand relative to current KY law and her oath of office. If more information comes forward to support your larger contention that she is a shill, I have no doubt the people here will reconsider. You have yet to offer an actual argument to bolster your side.

"I am a Republican. I don't want Hillary in office thanks to Democrats like Trump-Humpers and a bigoted redneck hypocrite with 4 divorces."

"Wahl, there's yer problem, mister. We couldn't tell until we had 'er on the lift, but yer underbody's got a bad infestation of cuckservative rust. Might have ta junk 'er out."

Blogger D. G. D. Davidson September 04, 2015 11:55 AM  

Sterzinger misunderstands Somewhither completely. It's dungeonpunk fantasy, not science fiction.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 11:57 AM  

I heard that she was born again after those four divorces. However, I have only heard this from one individual so I cannot guarantee that it's true. But it looks like the divorces are the SJWs' smear of choice right now, so we should be prepared, and look into it.

Blogger Russell (106) September 04, 2015 11:59 AM  

from a woman who is a strong supporter of Castalia House.

Bait set.

Ann Sterzinger's review is rather less coherent, and transforms into a Hugo 2015 summary before transmogrifying entirely into a review of John Wright's Somewhither in which she rather precisely nails some of the novel's weaker points. Unless she didn't.

Trap sprung.

Blogger Salt September 04, 2015 12:03 PM  

At present, she appears to be taking a principled stand relative to current KY law and her oath of office.

Woman's a trooper :) I believe it's impossible to impeach her. What law that could result in impeachment has she broken? Most certainly not her Oath.

Anonymous Jack Amok September 04, 2015 12:04 PM  

I am a Republican. I don't want Hillary in office thanks to Democrats like Trump-Humpers and a bigoted redneck hypocrite with 4 divorces.

Yes, instead let's elect the guy married to a Guatemalean and who wants to let millions of more invaders into the country.

Anonymous If You Were A Kindle, My Love September 04, 2015 12:07 PM  

So far, the best part of If You Were An SJW My Love is Chapter 5.

Blogger Harsh September 04, 2015 12:08 PM  

I am a Republican. I don't want Hillary in office thanks to Democrats like Trump-Humpers and a bigoted redneck hypocrite with 4 divorces.

You are lemmings.


No, your party is losing and you're a loser. Now get out of our way before you get stomped.

Anonymous Huckleberry September 04, 2015 12:10 PM  

I am a Republican.

You are lemmings.


Not much of a lurker if you really think this is some kind of stinging riposte.

Blogger Josh September 04, 2015 12:10 PM  

Shut up tad

Blogger B.J. September 04, 2015 12:12 PM  

Yes, appeals to civility are pointless when your enemy is lobbing mortar shells everywhere. It's the same reason why there was no 'Soviet Ghandi' passively resisting Stalin. Well-meaning people like Rev will be rounded up and put in the Gulags with everyone else, regardless of how polite they may be.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 04, 2015 12:13 PM  

@71 the agnostic lurker

While I enjoyed observing you shaking your fist at the sun here, I believe it would have had more impact if you had done so in Spanish.

Blogger Lana J September 04, 2015 12:14 PM  

Kim Davis' statement on her 2011 salvation and the mistakes she's made in the past. It speaks for itself.

Blogger Danby September 04, 2015 12:18 PM  

Okay, Agnostic
1) you don't get to tell us who is a christian and who isn't
2) you're a Republican and want Republican victories. Isn't that nice? We want to save our culture and our nation from destruction.
3) you're afraid, like all republicans are afraid, that somebody will use this to make republicans look like bigots. Take your fucking cuckservative ethos and shove it up your ass. We don't care what you're afraid of
4) Fakes don't go to jail for effect. She's taking the hit and standing up more bravely than most people would.
5) You can rant about her breaking the law all you want. That's a technical argument I'll leave to others. But do let me know when you've denounced Barack Obama, the governors of several stated, the mayors of most big cities, and the justices of the Supreme Court for failing to perform their duties under the law.

Blogger Danby September 04, 2015 12:20 PM  

@84 Josh
Oh carp. I should have seen it.

Blogger DBSFF September 04, 2015 12:24 PM  

@18

Rule 3: SJWs Always Project

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 04, 2015 12:26 PM  

@54

8) She's an elected official.

Concur, without question. Which means that she owes her electorate...What exactly? Her conscious? Her judgement?

9) The 14th amendment via the Constitution is the law.

No, I reject this argument. The shredding of the U.S. Constitution was completed by this opinion. It was legislation from bench with a mere one man majority turning the Supreme Court of the United States into a constitutional super legislature. Judicial review is a power which is ENTIRELY SELF-AGGREGATED and this isn't even judicial review.

Which does raise the question of why the fuck are we still going along with it?

It breaks my heart to say it but the Constitution is little short of a dead letter at this point.

10) She is breaking her oath and her word.

I don't know the wording of her oath, so I cant form a reasonable opinion about that. As for her word, that is matter of personal honor and believe it or not obligations to your honor will sometimes conflict. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's. Prioritize with long term view in mind is my opinion there.

Anonymous 334 September 04, 2015 12:26 PM  

She is a total phony "Christian" with multiple baby daddies who is playing all of you sheep for fools.

This is tiresome nonsense. She claims to have been saved in 2012. The neat thing with Christianity is that means a clean slate, at least with God and other believers that care what the Bible teaches. Have you ever read "Go and sin no more"?

Apparently only cucks and progressives never forget.

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 12:27 PM  

@71 the agnostic lurker

I believe the Latin equivalent of agnostic is "ignoramus."

Blogger Cataline Sergius September 04, 2015 12:31 PM  

I am a Republican

Forgive Cataline for quoting Cataline: The Tale of the Herald

Just skip to the end if you don't want to read the whole thing.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 12:31 PM  

The neat thing with Christianity is that means a clean slate, at least with God and other believers that care what the Bible teaches

It should perhaps be more clear if we said that the quality of her Christianity is not to be determined by her actions while she was still unsaved, and to think it does betrays stupendous Biblical ignorance.

As for clean slate, the meaning is ambiguous. Does God extract satisfaction from the Christian, for those past crimes? No. The satisfaction is paid by Jesus's death. But does He take away all the unpleasant consequences they have? Not always.

Blogger William Hughes September 04, 2015 12:34 PM  

May God bless Kim Davis and her family with the wisdom to discern God's will and the strength to see it done.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 12:34 PM  

But it looks like the divorces are the SJWs' smear of choice right now, so we should be prepared, and look into it.

This would be the dialectic route, would it not? Yes, I think we need to have the information, but SJW's smearing her because of her divorcing is rich. Wouldn't mocking them because they are choosing divorce as their battle ground be more effective?

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 12:38 PM  

Indeed my point was just to get the information. Its proper usage is another matter.

Anonymous 334 September 04, 2015 12:39 PM  

@97. Markku

Agreed. Kneejerk response on my part.

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 12:47 PM  

My concern is not so much the non-believers, as it is Christians understanding the difference. If someone is still suffering the consequences of their pre-salvation actions, perhaps quite painfully for several decades, it absolutely does not mean that God is still holding a grudge against them. It's fully paid, and they can go to Him with a clean conscience, even if the consequences are still there. That's just the way it works. He might only take them away at your death, and the sins themselves are still no less paid for.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 12:51 PM  

lurker,

What exactly are you trying to conserve?

Blogger Russell (106) September 04, 2015 1:01 PM  

Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

We have a promise there will be an end to all our suffering.

Blogger McChuck September 04, 2015 1:04 PM  

From Rev 3.0's page on "Killing Vox Day: Conclusions"
"The Rev September 4, 2015 at 10:34 AM

"Do you not understand that this is the goal of the Sad Puppies movement?"

Yes, and I think it's a goal that works for everyone but the true SJWs. It works for the Left, it works for the Right, it works for the people who just want all of the politically motivate people to shut up so they can read Sci-Fi.

Remember, not everyone on the Left is a SJW, just like how not every Communist is a Maoist.

As you say, the Sad Puppies are not the Rabid Puppies. The Sad Puppies are reasonable, and can be negotiated with - and their primary demand is quite frankly something that anyone who believes in free speech should support...oh God, I think I just realized I'm a Sad Puppy."

We may have one more budding convert to the cause. Step by step, inch by inch...

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 1:07 PM  

"We have a promise there will be an end to all our suffering."

Yes. A beating doesn't last forever.

Anonymous rubberducky September 04, 2015 1:12 PM  

I could be wrong about the situation, I've only got the news reporting on this and it hasn't been all that great in these details. But this is what seems to have happened.

1) Judge throws clerk in jail for contempt. Orders other clerks to issue licenses without her.
2) Clerks and lawyers confirm that's problematic. Kim's consent is necessary by Kentucky law.
3) Judge makes deal. If other clerks agree to go ahead with issuance, judge will lift contempt of court charges on Kim.
4) Judge decides it's a tactical bad move to let Kim out of jail, fearing she might try to interfere with other clerks issuances.

So, what's she in jail for? Judge seems to have lifted contempt as part of the deal. She seems to be in jail because it's a tactical preference.

Engineering courts for social justice much?

Court system's dead. Constitution = dead letter.

Been sayin' it for years, it's good to see a growing chorus, but seriously? How far is this theater of the absurd gonna go?

Blogger automatthew September 04, 2015 1:14 PM  

Stingray: What exactly are you trying to conserve?.

He's not. He's a liar, trying to cause strife.

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 1:23 PM  

I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary. To do this, I must expose and crush Democrats pretending to be "Republicans"... including those who are racist white supremacist homophobic bigots.

Anonymous 334 September 04, 2015 1:26 PM  

@102. Markku

Good thought. God does not hold grudges for repented sin, something that applies to post-salvation sin too, I am happy to report. The practical consequences and fallout of those sins are something else of course.

But yes, to be more clear, when I used the term "clean slate", I was thinking largely about the fact that Kim Davis deserves one in the eyes of any reasonable person for things she did prior to confession of faith in Christ. It is idiotic to hold anyone responsible for acting inconsistently at age 30 with a belief they did not actually hold until 40.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 1:27 PM  

@108,

I know. But I'm always curious as to what, exactly, conservatives think they are conserving. Inevitably, its something liberals put into place only a few years ago and in a few years, they will be toeing today's liberal line as well. Hell, they are doing it now, so forget that.

Hence, cuckservative.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 1:30 PM  

I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary. To do this, I must expose and crush Democrats pretending to be "Republicans"... including those who are racist white supremacist homophobic bigots.

DING! DING! DING!

Cuckservative.

Blogger John Morris September 04, 2015 1:32 PM  

No Vox, they aren't avoiding debating you from fear of your not inconsiderable intellect and skill. You aren't the smartest man ever birthed of woman and they have vast numbers; logic dictates they could find a debater who could defeat you in single combat in the field of ideas. Yet they do not debate you, they never even debate me, nay they are never seen engaged in debate on the field of ideas. You know why, you write it everywhere.

SJWs always lie.

You haven't delved deep enough into the question of why they always lie.

There are a multitude of reasons, basically boiling down to it being commanded of them as servants of the Father of Lies. But the one practical reason that best addresses the question today is fear.

They fear (rightly) the Truth, knowing that the vast majority of the world would instantly reject them and their ideas were they to ever get the slightest inkling of what they actually were. To openly debate their ideas would first require clearly stating their ideas and goals, something they all know must never be done.

Under those conditions any debate is going to be a lopsided advantage for us so of course they avoid it. The consequence of this insight is obvious.

Anonymous Forrest Bishop VFM #0167 September 04, 2015 1:32 PM  

@107. rubberducky September 04, 2015 1:12 PM

I could be wrong about the situation,

So, what's she in jail for? ... How far is this theater of the absurd gonna go?


It is strange case. For purposes of running the sim, consider the possibility that the federal Judge is black knighting the system by sending the clerk to the clink.

Timeline, partly copied from online media. Notice the speed at which a USSC decision becomes alleged law-
June 26, 2015: The U.S. Supreme Court rules 5-4 that states must recognize and allow gay marriage. Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear directs county clerks to comply.
KY Executive Branch.

June 29. Rowan County Kim Davis declines to issue licenses to gay or straight couples, saying her religious views prohibit her endorsing same-sex marriage.

July 2: ACLU sues Davis and Rowan County on behalf of four couples, two gay and two straight, who were denied marriage licenses. http://www.aclu-ky.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Rowan-complaint.pdf Sure enough, the ACLU SJWs exported to a federal Court, using a Section 1983 argument. They could have gone to a Kentucky court first, but shopped the venue.

July 8: KY Legislative Branch. Some clerks ask for a special session of the General Assembly to consider a bill to accommodate those who say they can’t issue licenses for religious reasons; Beshear declines, citing in part the expense.

August? Federal Judge Bunning, told her that she or her deputies must issue the licenses but stayed his order until this past Monday as she filed an appeal with the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. When that stay expired, appeals court judges declined to renew it. And when she asked the Supreme Court to weigh in Monday, justices in Washington refused.

So she's shut out by the KY Governor, by the KY Legislature, and by the feds. Seems to me, and I could be wrong, she should then have filed an emergency injunction or Writ of Mandate/Mandamus at the State level (KY Judicial Branch), staying the federal decision until the State could decide if the Governor's original action was legal. She could have done that last July.

Blogger John Wright September 04, 2015 1:38 PM  

Stingray, I am a conservative. I seek radical and immediate changes to our society, culture, and laws to bring them into alignment with the Enlightenment philosophy of the founding fathers, and with the Christian faith of the Church fathers.

What we are trying to conserve is the gains won by the sacrifices of the American Revolution, the Civil War, World War Two, and the Cold War, as well as the gains won by the sacrifice of the saints and martyrs of the Church.

Why we are called 'conservative' is an historical oddity. Like the word 'capitalist' it is a deliberately misleading term coined by our enemies to define themselves by a nonessential quality.

In this case, the nonessential quality is the question of whether the ideals of limited government were more popular in generations past than now. The radicals paint themselves as being a New thing when in fact the ideals of tribal totalitarianism are older then the Neolithic.

And so they call us the Old thing as a marketing tool, because Old=bad to someone who believes in the evolutionary theories of Marx, Hegel and Nietzsche.

We are the Sons of Liberty. We are indeed attempting to conserve are ancestral liberties, but we also seek to break the power of tyrants in all lands of all types, and impose this newest and latest of social dogmas in the darkened areas which have never known the light.

A more accurate term would be to call our side Civilization, and their side Barbarism, or, for science fiction fans, call them Boskone.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents September 04, 2015 1:41 PM  

cuckservative
I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary.

You are about 23 years too late, dude.


To do this, I must expose and crush Democrats pretending to be "Republicans"... including those who are racist white supremacist homophobic bigots.

Great! Have you seen any Demoplicans here pretending to be Republicrats? Or are you just a little 'bot running around on a tiny 8-bit program from 1992, pretending that demographics don't matter and somehow electing a Republicrat will make everything all better?

Who appointed Roberts to the Supreme Court? Musta been one of them Demoplicans pretending to be a Republicrat. Have you exposed GW Bush as the closet Demoplican he clearly is, yet?

One of the things cuckservatives do: refuse to learn from experience.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 1:54 PM  

A more accurate term would be to call our side Civilization

Yes, Mr. Wright. I couldn't agree with you more. I am beginning to lean more toward the conservatism you speak of regularly (I read your blog and have been closer to what you used to describe yourself as when you were libertarian. I am also Catholic and have been learning a great deal from you in this regard) You seek radical changes to our society, cultures, and laws. You wish to conserve what our Founding Fathers actually founded. You are a rare conservative in that this is what you are looking for and I agree with what you say.

What I cannot abide, are those conservatives who only wish to conserve what the liberals implemented only a few decades ago because they fear being called names like racist and homophobe. This is what a cuckservative is.

While I am still not entirely convinced of all your points of conservatism (the finer points you have discussed at you blog. What you wrote here, I full stand behind) I fully support your conservatism for what it is and the fact that it is not peppered with fear.

Anonymous patrick kelly September 04, 2015 1:54 PM  

re: Kim Davis

I haven't followed this closely and have been avoiding paying much attention to all the shrieking in social media about it, so forgive my ignorance.

FWIW, she doesn't seem to be a great poster child for the anti-ss-marriage position.

What jurisdiction does that court have to order her to do anything?
Can't whoever hired her just fire her for not doing her job? If they can, why don't they?

My understanding is she is refusing to issue any marriage licenses at all. A similar thing happened in Alabama, I think, and their judges and LE apparently don't care, and the Feds are not involved.

What's different here?

If someone has a link to a brief summary I will bother to read it, but I'd prefer factual clarity rather than pontificating support or opposition to her.


Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 2:05 PM  

"What's different here?"

If we end up before authorities for violating the law, may it be because we are adhering to a higher Law. May our suffering, persecution, and mistreatment always be undeserved because we are obeying G-d, which is commendable in His sight, and not because we ere making a fool out Him with behavior that warrants punishment.

The disciples were brought before the authorities for preaching in the name of the Messiah. They were ordered to stop by the Sanhedrin. This presents a quandary of sorts: To stop preaching in His name is disobedience to G-d and continuing to preach in His name is disobedience to an earthly authority established by G-d. What did the disciples do?

They continued to preach in His name and submitted to the punishment determined by the Sanhedrin for disobeying their order, and then they left rejoicing for having suffered commendably for His name's sake.

We need to prepare for much more of the same in the years ahead. And let us remember and take heart:

"Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.” (cf. Luke 12)

Anonymous rubberducky September 04, 2015 2:28 PM  

patrick kelly @118

She's an elected official, so she cannot be fired. She can resign, she can be impeached, she can be defeated for re-election.

She happens to be following the same strategy that Vox advocates by refusing to resign. They're going to now have to impeach or defeat her in the next election.

Impeachment's a briar patch none of the players want to be in. Brilliant move by Davis forcing them there, having a trial in the KY legislature, could be a perilous situation for pols. Bring it on.

Never resign is good advice.
Bounce the rubble, good advice.

Blogger automatthew September 04, 2015 2:29 PM  

No, Stingray. He's not a cuckservative. He's a liar, trying to sow strife. This is a shill, an enemy operative.

Anonymous patrick kelly September 04, 2015 2:30 PM  

The disciples were not agents of the state who refused to do their job.

I don't see much difference between this and someone taking a job at a liquor store, then the laws change to make selling pot legal there, and they don't want to sell it. Fine, get another job, don't be an agent of the state.

Anonymous Curious September 04, 2015 2:31 PM  

Heh. Now there are seven items under "SJWs Always Lie" on Amazon.

Keep them coming, folks.

Anonymous patrick kelly September 04, 2015 2:32 PM  

"She's an elected official"

Ok, this makes more sense. If the state doesn't like the way she's doing or not doing her job they need to follow due process to remove her. The state is being a lame coward and the court is being an ass.

Blogger SirHamster (#201) September 04, 2015 2:36 PM  

@89

Thanks for the link. It doesn't matter to me - her will to go to jail for the issue was sufficient - but it will be helpful for others.

Anonymous Stingray September 04, 2015 2:39 PM  

He's a liar, trying to sow strife. This is a shill, an enemy operative.

Ok. Thank you.

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 2:41 PM  

"The disciples were not agents of the state who refused to do their job. "

You missed the principle I was trying to illustrate. Her refusal is based in the truth which she is defending by her actions and she is willing (so far) to accept the consequences for her stand. This is commendable. More and more people are going to find themselves confronted with these decisions. We don't apologize, back down, or resign because someone does not like the truth for which we stand.

Anonymous patrick kelly September 04, 2015 2:51 PM  

@127 Rabbi B

I have a knee jerk balk about comparing Apostles to just about anyone today.

Now that I understand the situation better I do admire her stand. Every bit of dirt in her closet is being screamed across social media by the sjw hordes, which has be had to take. Lord have mercy.


Watching the state gov't squirm is going to get interesting. Who arrested her? If it was fed's and the state had any ballz they would march whatever their state police is called down to the jail and demand her release and start CW2.

Or they should have the ballz to impeach her, which might start another sort of war. Good times.

Anonymous patrick kelly September 04, 2015 2:57 PM  

I swear the first cuck-servative that quotes Rom 13 to me about this in person is going to get kicked in the nutz, if they have any.

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 2:58 PM  

"I have a knee jerk balk about comparing Apostles to just about anyone today."

Very few of us may be comparable to the Apostles, but their actions are written down for us and are worthy of imitation.

They were ordinary men in extraordinary times who initially protected themselves and shirked their responsibility, only to later turn the world upside down after the Master had restored, rebuked, and encouraged them.

I am no apostle and certainly no prophet or the son of a prophet, but I can relate to men like that. Imperfect vessels used by G-d to perfect this world.

But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us. 8 We are hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed—

Blogger Sage Klubb September 04, 2015 3:46 PM  

"I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary."

I remember 2008. I couldn't figure out for the life of me what difference there was between Pres Hillary and Pres McCain. They both hate conservatives, they're both hawks when it comes to puffing themselves up, and they both take marching orders from the New York Times.

Republicans are going to have to learn that concern trolling doesn't win elections.

Blogger Eric September 04, 2015 4:14 PM  

VD - just weighing in on SJWs always lie. This book is fantastic! I grabbed the Kindle edition yesterday and just cannot put it down. I think you do a great job laying out the actions and motivations of SJWs and provide an excellent game plan in dealing with attacks.

Thanks for doing what you do!

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 04, 2015 4:41 PM  

If I am a "shill" then so is Adam Baldwin:

https://twitter.com/AdamBaldwin/status/639899287472734208

Blogger SciVo September 04, 2015 4:47 PM  

I was hoping for a review from Robert Stacy McCain -- who is, after all, mentioned in it by name -- but at least you have him plugging it on Twitter and on his front page.

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A September 04, 2015 4:51 PM  

@133. the agnostic lurker

Splitter!

Blogger Danby September 04, 2015 4:56 PM  

Lurker, shut your cuckservative jock socket.
Baldwin's opinion means nothing at all to me. Who gives a fart in a pulp mill what he thinks?
She's not an employee, she's an elected official, responsible to the people who elected her, not to the state, nor to the federal court.

Anonymous Alexander September 04, 2015 5:07 PM  

Only by surrendering on every actual issue to the Democrats can Republicans maintain the office.

Cuckservatives, yo. Course, they choose dishonor for power and end up with neither.

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 5:10 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Rabbi B September 04, 2015 5:11 PM  



"If I am a "shill" then so is Adam Baldwin:"

"At this, the administrators and the satraps tried to find grounds for charges against Daniel in his conduct of government affairs, but they were unable to do so. They could find no corruption in him, because he was trustworthy and neither corrupt nor negligent. Finally these men said, “We will never find any basis for charges against this man Daniel unless it has something to do with the law of his God.”

Daniel was a government official appointed by Darius. A law was passed which he could not obey . . .

"Now when Daniel learned that the decree had been published, he went home to his upstairs room where the windows opened toward Jerusalem. Three times a day he got down on his knees and prayed, giving thanks to his God, just as he had done before.

Then these men went as a group and found Daniel praying and asking God for help. so they went to the king and spoke to him about his royal decree: “Did you not publish a decree that during the next thirty days anyone who prays to any god or human being except to you, Your Majesty, would be thrown into the lions’ den?”

The king answered, “The decree stands—in accordance with the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be repealed.”

We all know the story. Daniel remained faithful and was rewarded accordingly.

" . . . .So Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian."


Daniel's three friends were appointed officials:

But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon—Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego—who pay no attention to you, Your Majesty. They neither serve your gods nor worship the image of gold you have set up.”

Furious with rage, Nebuchadnezzar summoned Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. So these men were brought before the king, and Nebuchadnezzar said to them, “Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, that you do not serve my gods or worship the image of gold I have set up? Now when you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe and all kinds of music, if you are ready to fall down and worship the image I made, very good. But if you do not worship it, you will be thrown immediately into a blazing furnace. Then what god will be able to rescue you from my hand?”

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.”

(cf. Daniel 3 and 6)

These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come . . .

Adam Baldwin doesn't know what he's talking about and neither do you. It's wonderful to understand how real the Bible is. It truly is a great age in which to be alive.

Blogger automatthew September 04, 2015 5:41 PM  

If I am a "shill" then so is Adam Baldwin.

Dude. C'mon.

Laaaaaaaame.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents September 04, 2015 6:18 PM  

If I am a "shill" then so is Adam Baldwin:

Dude, who's Adam Baldwin and why should anyone care?
Have you read SJW's Always Lie yet? If not, why not? If so, why didn't you pay attention?

One thing cuckservatives do: fail to learn.

Blogger Pogo: I never said I was a diplomat September 04, 2015 7:34 PM  

The book was well-written, and the last few chapters were exciting to read.
They gave hope to one who more recently has tended toward despair.
Many thanks!

Blogger Unknown September 04, 2015 7:53 PM  

@133 A cuckservative is an unwitting shill for the communists he despises. You are surely shilling: the remaining question is whether it's done knowingly. The cuckservative label is giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Anonymous Fp September 04, 2015 8:46 PM  

"Apparently only cucks and progressives never forget..."

And the devil.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 04, 2015 9:24 PM  

@109 the agnostic lurker
I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary. To do this, I must expose and crush Democrats pretending to be "Republicans"... including those who are racist white supremacist homophobic bigots.
------------

Cuck-a-doodle-dooo!

Blogger Markku September 04, 2015 9:29 PM  

Hey!

Respect the cuck.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 04, 2015 9:48 PM  

I think all Cuckservatives should speak in English when in the United States.

Blogger SciVo September 04, 2015 9:49 PM  

Stingray @99: "Wouldn't mocking them because they are choosing divorce as their battle ground be more effective?"

I think we should attack them in that battlespace whenever possible, since friivorce has been a plague on our society. Let 2015 be known as the year that gay activists came out of the closet... against no-fault divorce, as a sign of low character!!!

Blogger Harsh September 04, 2015 10:00 PM  

I am trying to conserve this country from a President Hillary. To do this, I must expose and crush Democrats pretending to be "Republicans"... including those who are racist white supremacist homophobic bigots.

Good for you. Maybe a swift kick in the ovaries would cure you of your delusions.

Blogger SciVo September 04, 2015 10:02 PM  

Mr.A is Mr.A @77: "She seems to be choosing the "Impeachment" route over the "Resign" route. She's selected one of your two approved options, and yet you are still aggrieved. Strange that."

Bingo, on the nose, hammer meet nail, etc. #cuckservative

Blogger SciVo September 04, 2015 10:10 PM  

Cataline Sergius @93: "No, I reject this argument. The shredding of the U.S. Constitution was completed by this opinion. It was legislation from bench with a mere one man majority turning the Supreme Court of the United States into a constitutional super legislature. Judicial review is a power which is ENTIRELY SELF-AGGREGATED and this isn't even judicial review."

No, you're wrong! It was entirely self-arrogated.

Blogger SciVo September 04, 2015 10:18 PM  

William Hughes @98: "May God bless Kim Davis and her family with the wisdom to discern God's will and the strength to see it done."

In Jesus's name, amen.

Blogger David-093 September 04, 2015 11:15 PM  

Religious persecution has sent an American Christian to prison. She's the first, and she won't be the last.

Blogger CM September 04, 2015 11:37 PM  

Whoever wrote If you were an SJW, my Love...

I was crying after chapter one.

It moved me.

Blogger The_Mad_Pirate September 05, 2015 2:55 AM  

It's so ironic that the 3 "counter-script" tactics suggested by "The Rev" are EXACTLY the same 3 things SJWs NEVER do. In fact SJWs do exactly the opposite:
1). They treat their opponents as subhuman less than animals beings
( Take a look at the "writings" of Samantha Allen, Jessica Valenti or Valerie Solanas if you don't believe me)
2). Attack individuals, never ideas.
( As it was clearly proven by all the vicious misleading attacks on Nobel Prize Sir Dr. Tim Hunt and Dr. Matt Taylor )
3) Address very vague statements with non clear and/or nonexistent evidence
( basically every time their try to shut down an argument that's not going their way shutting "misogynist" , "patriarchy" or "sexist" )

Blogger Groot September 05, 2015 3:55 AM  

There is a thing which resonates deeply and naturally in most men, I think, and many good women. From stories of Arthurian legend, to the heroes of Westerns, to modern superhero comics, it captures our boyish imagination and really is the essence of the hero: It is Honor, unironically taken to heart. One of its core precepts is honesty.

But there live among us those who lie easily, without compunction, without regret, without scruple. We hesitate to believe it, to call them out, to suspect it as a default, because it is dishonorable, and thus despicable.

In normal times, these liars would suffer continuous damage to their reputation, and erosion of their prospects among honorable folk. But they have discovered a curious, almost magical, strength: If they all tell the same lies, they have the power of the block of They All Say. Those who believe in honor, who comport themselves to its dictates, who willingly suffer the duties it imposes, struggle uncomprehendingly to believe that large blocks of people have relinquished it entirely and mock your honor openly. So many people agree (though it seems such obvious weirdness), and speak of many honorable things, like concern for the weak, relief for the oppressed, protection of the bullied, that their lies often, so often, carry the day.

This is why SWJs Always Lie is so dangerous to them. The unanimity of their lies seems now no longer a strength, but the very symbol of their honorless corrosion. They have no honor, as all liars have no honor, and now they are left bewildered, since they cannot comprehend how twisted they seem to those who finally recognize how ennobling their own honor and honesty are. Confused, the SJWs return to call for consensus, to protect the pedophile, trying to achieve the strength of unanimity and consensus, but, at last, those who were with them back away, eyes opening, questions emerging.

Anonymous the agnostic lurker September 05, 2015 9:48 AM  

You can call me and Adam Baldwin "shills" --- but can you call of us?

https://twitter.com/jeffreyatucker/status/639521126406881280

Me, Adam Baldwin, Jeb Bush, Instapundit, Jeffrey Tucker, sure, all of us are "shills"! You lemmings!

Anonymous Jay and Silent Bob September 05, 2015 12:16 PM  

He loves the cuck. Snoogans.

Blogger JudgyBitch September 05, 2015 3:34 PM  

I recently bought the Quantum Mortis series on Amazon, and the next time I logged, SJWs Always Lie was in my recommendations, so I bought that one, too.

I'm on Chapter 3, and DAMN THIS BOOK IS AWESOME! I have two other book reviews I have promised to do, but I am pushing SJWs to the top of my review list.

I'm the blogger who got kicked of Twitter for the #WomenAgainstFeminism hashtag, and for tweeting the actual words of a radical feminist back at her. The first chapters resonate!

I hope to send a few more sales your way, Vox. I get between 23K - 40K views per week at my blog, and yes I can prove that. In 3 years, I have amassed 4.3M page views. Not bad, I guess. http://imgur.com/gallery/XAVvOpg/new

My review will be up sometime next week. I'll come back and post a link.

Blogger Carl Philipp September 05, 2015 4:34 PM  

Whoa! Hi JudgyBitch, I got people on Facebook mad at me for propagating your hashtag. Thanks for the Fun I had with that!

Blogger SciVo September 05, 2015 8:39 PM  

@ the agnostic lurker:

I wasted my time following your link. Self-contradictory nonsense.

Anonymous Real Republican September 06, 2015 8:39 AM  

To those who do not know Christ, #KimDavis is not representing our Lord and Savior with these actions.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts