The Force.
In the Dark.


  • April 7, 2015 at 10:57 pm
    B Woodman

    “There’d be a funeral for the bullet the next day.”
    If Scott Walker = Chuck Norris (Jr), does that make Ted Cruz = Superman (old school, almost invulnerable)??

  • April 7, 2015 at 11:15 pm

    Considering that pro-union idiots threatened his family during the union fracas in WI, I think Walker could channel Chuck pretty well if need be. That sort of thing doesn’t play well at all…

  • April 7, 2015 at 11:36 pm

    Hmm, I’m thinking of honorary guests for the opening of Double Down; that Walker Texas Ranger guy should be there (the little Real Deal yankee one, not the acting one, ‘though that’d be cool too).

    Might be an idea to start a membership invitation drive, even another contest in suggesting invitees; guys we’d want to hang out with or have working for us in DC, yanked straight from the headlines and DBD. I can think of a dozen I’d love to see there, …hope you’ll still let my ugly mug in to mingle with ’em.

  • April 7, 2015 at 11:50 pm

    Maybe going a little more old school in dealing with the unholy minions of darkness-the smiting Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind.

    It’s time for an honorable and righteous Man to be elected, not some tantrum throwing child, pimps or panderers.

    • April 8, 2015 at 12:06 am
      Chris Muir

      Or woman.Like Sarah!

    • April 8, 2015 at 12:31 am

      “It’s time for an honorable and righteous man…”

      It was time 35 years ago too; he answered the call, saved the world, and made it easy for those who came after to bask in his afterglow and steal his credit. It’s past time again, but he’s long dead now. 🙁

      Back in ’08 a popular pundit called Sarah “Reagan in a skirt”. It might have been true then, but she hitched her star to a RINO, and now her time is past too.

      So who now? Paul, Perry, Cruz, Carson? Good men, and there are others. Not a Reagan among ’em though. He was one in a lifetime; I’m glad I witnessed it. And I miss him so.

      • April 8, 2015 at 3:31 am

        I don’t think it’s time to count Sarah out just yet. She still has brains and honor about her. I’m thinking the RINO tried to use her. What he did was give her a boost in the national spotlight.

      • April 8, 2015 at 8:50 am

        Unfortunately that spotlight did her no favors, exposing some fatal flaws in terms of occupying the big chair. She’d still make a badass veep though!

      • April 8, 2015 at 9:36 pm

        that’s right, White “conservative” suckers. Just keep on voting. While the actual, One-Party ZOG System grinds you and yours to a powder

    • April 8, 2015 at 3:02 pm
      Tom Richardson

      Ed, agree totally on Sarah’s “time” being ahead of her. JTC, if you mean one of her flaws is “hitching her star to a RINO’, the pluses of giving her national exposure far outweighed the minuses of it being held against her now, like 4.5 million FB followers and tens of thousands in various Run! Sarah! Run! FB groups. Her ongoing support of McCain is one of my very few disagreements with her but I do understand loyalty. It will be interesting if any of the Tea Party types in Arizona who are thinking about running against McCain ask her for an endorsement. As to the “fatal flaws”, you will find that almost all of them are manufactured by the media, including the almost criminal editing of the “favorite newspapers” interview and “I can see Russia from my house”. Hers is the only Conservative endorsement that has mattered over the past 3 elections and she has had a major influence in some 100 new people populating Congress. Finally, she has a long, successful record of executive government experience during which she has been as hard on her own party’s establishment as she has the on the opposition. Would be most refreshing in the cesspool that is the Beltway.

      • April 8, 2015 at 5:17 pm

        Tom Richardson, don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t endorse her for veep if I didn’t think she had the conservative cred. And lest you think I don’t love her:

        Even had a McCain/MILF campaign sticker on my truck back then until my wife made me remove it, rightly calling it disrespectful.

        But let me put it this way in terms of both electability and potusability:

        “Governor, I helped elect Ronald Reagan. I believed in Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine. Governor, you’re no Ronald Reagan.”

        And nobody is. But Sarah’s strength and her calling is in the very blistering rhetoric that she is so good at, and in the encouragement and influence she undoubtedly has had on the new wave of conservatism. She would have been an awesome RNC chairman had the wingtips not effed that up, and we would never have had a Romney as nominee if she had been, and as I’ve already said, she’d be a great VP. But we, and this world, desperately need the vision, the leadership, the communicative ability, the rock-solid courage of conviction, and most important the ability to imbue those qualities in others both here and around the world, that was Ronald Reagan.

        And she ain’t got it.

  • April 8, 2015 at 12:34 am

    We need a Reagan once again. Ronaldus Maximus, you are sorely missed.

  • April 8, 2015 at 1:30 am

    I would be happy with an Eisenhower.

    The intentional acts of the progressives mean that I also support the deportation of all foreigners illegally entered or stayed since 2000 and all of their children wherever born. They have their own nations. Their staying here is helping put out the light that we have shown across the world.
    It does not matter that gratuitous citizenship has been granted to those b orn here,. the 14th Amendment needs to be interpreted as similar ideas and laws are interpreted around the world, and as the US Supreme Court has begun applying it over 100 years ago. A law defining citizenship would go a long way so long as it conforms with ine concepts differentiated in US and International Law of being “in” a jurisdiction and being “subject” to a jurisdiction.
    Walker having basic interpretations of citizenship and fairness to those who are citizens would have been a winner. People would have rallied to him for many reasons. His pathway to citizenship is suicide for the USA.
    We must not bring in people that desire us dead or who desire to kill us, individually or as a large percentage pf a group. All of those must be deported. We cannot afford to be forced to subsidize them here. Now we cannot afford top help them in their nations because the economy has been drained of much wealth. It is more cost effective to deport them rather than encourage their Reconquista or voting Democrat or their working and receiving welfare. The invasion may kill private unions, but the public ones should survive due to their hand on the money pocket across the country.
    The progressives and big business have supported the illegal migration. The migrants must know that we will kick them out along with all of the children born here to them. They are on notice. Those, like Obama and others, who have invited them and shelter and feed them are responsible and they intentionally did what they did. Expelling all who benefited from their encouragement are on notice that they will be tossed out. Paying them a little something to get out is less costly than keeping them here. But we owe them nothing.
    The UN would differ with me.
    Economies do not survive the bleeding that has been done to us.

    • April 8, 2015 at 1:11 pm

      “The progressives and big business have supported the illegal migration. The migrants must know that we will kick them out along with all of the children born here to them.”

      Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. If the “migration” was illegal, that’s one thing. But children born here are legal natural-born citizens. We are a nation of laws. You can not pick and choose which laws will be enforced.

      • April 8, 2015 at 9:03 pm
        David Gonzalez

        Mr. Henry—

        I believe that part of the “natural-born citizen” clause involves being subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or some-such. Were this not the case, every kid who was whelped in a U.S. airport as his non-citizen parents were in transit would become a “legal natural-born citizen”, as you phrased it. This way of thinking would make Ted Cruz a natural-born citizen of the Dominion of Canada, since his mom was visiting Calgary when he decided to make his trans-vaginal slide into this vale of tears. As things stand, he’s a full-fledged natural-born citizen of these-here Yoo-nyted States. Just in case, though, he (rather foolishly, IMNTBH opinion) renounced whatever Canadian “citizenship” might have attended his Calgary-based birth.

        BTW, since we were discussing the naming of the soon-to-be-christened gentlemen’s club and such and whatever fixtures might be therein installed, and Ms. Rand’s name kept coming up, may I suggest that y’all might ensconce a flagon somewhere, in her honor? If so, may I humbly suggest that we refer to it as “Ayn’s Stein”? (Go ahead John—vomit! )

  • April 8, 2015 at 2:02 am

    Why not just get rid of welfare, personal and corporate, then open the borders?

  • April 8, 2015 at 3:01 am

    Borders exist for good reasons. Aside from the obvious ones of crime control, stopping infectious human diseases and national security inspections are vital for safeguarding agriculture. The current open borders are putting a trillion dollars of agriculture that feeds almost the whole planet at risk. America has a generous border and immigration policy. The laws should be enforced.

    On Immigration this is a lengthy comment I placed on Instapundit. If it is inappropriate I apologize and ask our host to delete it.

    When I was at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center for US Customs they taught us immigration law. One curiosity stood out. There is a short list of people that the XIVth amendment provision for birthright citizenship, otherwise known as “jus solis”, does not apply to. These include the children born to a foreign Sovereign or diplomat on US soil, a child born on a warship transiting US territorial waters, and a child born to “a camp follower of an invading army.” Look at that last exception. There are two phrases that need definition, “camp follower” is one and “invading army” is another. Take them in reverse order.

    Who gets to declare if there is an invasion? Under the Constitution several people do. The President can inform Congress that we are being invaded and request the authority and resources needed. Congress can act on its own without waiting for the President to ask for help. For example a Declaration of War is purely a Congressional act and does not need a Presidential signature or veto overriding supermajority as does a law. A state legislature is also empowered to ask Congress for help in responding to an invasion. If there is a need to act quickly then a state governor can petition Congress directly and inform them that his state has been invaded. While states cannot maintain standing armies in peacetime the state governor can call the militia to active duty to repel an invasion while waiting for the federal government to respond to his call for assistance. All of these agents, the executives and the legislatures at both the federal and state levels have the right to declare that there is an invasion and respond. The federal government does not have the power to override or prevent a state claim that it is being invaded. The governors or legislatures of states, Texas or Arizona for example, have the power to declare that they are being invaded, and no one can stop them from doing so.

    What is a “camp follower?” The term is not defined in the text and that can allow lawyers to have a little fun with it. The simple definition is any civilian who accompanies an army and their children. There is an implication that this includes but is not limited to prostitutes and their children, who have been found accompanying armies for thousands of years.

    If the illegal aliens are declared members of an invading army then those who voluntarily associate with them and have children are by definition “camp followers of an invading army” and their children are not eligible for birthright citizenship. It would be under the power of Congress to invoke this standard, although a judge might choose to apply it a child was declared deportable and sued claiming citizenship. Nothing would prevent Congress from providing for the nationalization of such children even if they were found ineligible for birthright citizenship.

    Under this standard it would be possible for a person, we can be gender neutral here and seek to apply this standard equally to men or women who have a child with an illegal alien partner, to claim that the association was not voluntary and that the child was the product of a rape and consequently entitled to birthright citizenship. Substantiation of such a claim would I think include some cooperation in identifying and prosecuting the rapist.

    If the interpretation proposed here was adopted or even seriously debated then much of the incentive for illegal immigration based on the anchor baby model would be removed. If people were informed that they and their children were deportable and any detention by the police during the investigation of a crime, not including voluntary contact with the police during routine community policing when there is no reason to suspect the possible alien of other illegal activity, would result in deportation then people would often self deport or be less likely to enter illegally or overstay their visas.

    • April 8, 2015 at 6:27 am
      David M

      This is a VERY interesting idea! I like it!

      • April 8, 2015 at 2:50 pm

        As do I!

    • April 8, 2015 at 8:28 am
      Boobie the Rocket Dog

      Couldn’t sleep?

    • April 8, 2015 at 9:01 am

      Excellent. No question that someone entering the country illegally is “invading”. When you realize they are entering specifically to give birth there should be no grant of citizenship. If a diplomat’s child born in this country while they are here legally isn’t granted citizenship how can one argue that a person in the country illegally can give birth to a U.S. citizen. Makes no sense.

  • April 8, 2015 at 4:57 am
    Bill G

    ‘a funeral for the bullet’…Bwah-hah-haaahaaaa!!!!

  • April 8, 2015 at 5:37 am

    Allow illegal immigrants have path to citizenship, you will get 20 or 30 million Democrats added to the electorate (hard core socialists really) and that will tilt elections in most regions enough that Democrats will run the place for decades. Imagine 2008-2010 but for 20 or 30 years instead of 2. All those other things listed won’t matter.

  • April 8, 2015 at 9:20 am

    You shoot, UGABE, someone else will shoot back

  • April 8, 2015 at 9:33 am
    Snafu F. Ubar

    “Couldn’t sleep?”
    Right there I spilled my coffee right after I cleaned up the mess from the bullet funeral.
    I nominate for Honorary Guest:
    Judge Andrew Hanen,
    Philip Hamburger,
    Gary Lawson.

  • April 8, 2015 at 9:48 am
    Spin Drift

    If oBambi was to order the shot then it would be “Go ahead make my day” across the land. And speaking of shots, i think there should be a naming contest for cocktails at the new club and bar. I’ll start:

    The Sarah Palin: one shot Kentucky sourmash, two shots tabasco, splash of Coke, drop of rattle snake venon, nine grains of black powder, strain through crushed ice and serve in a jelly jar with an umbrella that is on fire.

    Hold Fast

    Spin Drift

  • April 8, 2015 at 10:10 am
    Ming the Merciless

    Count your blessings…think of the yurps with their muslim invasion…
    Why can you possibly think hard working people would vote demon-rat? Of course the degenerate socialist welfare bums of south messy-co will, but those who came to work(nortenos) always vote using their head…which is NOT democrat.

  • April 8, 2015 at 10:16 am
    John Egbert

    The only “Path to Citizenship” I can approve: Go home, get in line; do it legally.

    Lacking that (as if it would ever happen, more’s the pity), Federal authorities should set up holding areas, ala Joe Arpaio’s tent jails, near to military airfields. As law enforcement encounters illegals they would be detailed in these holding areas and sorted according to country of origin. When a C-130-lpad of any nationality is attained, load ’em up and fly them back to the main airport in their real capital city and let out on the ramp in front of the administration building. Let the country know they are coming and provide fighter escort if deemed necessary as a warning not to interfere. Seems to be an excellent opportunity for Reserve logistics and fighter squadrons to get in some cross-crountry training — a win-win all around. Too bad it’ll never happen, but one may dream.

  • April 8, 2015 at 11:52 am
    Gideon Reed

    I’ve been around a long time, and have been in a LOT of nasty places. I have also met a LOT or people you would never suspect of being the natural inheritors of the “Audie Murphy Thing”. Scott walker presents me with a quiet feeling that inside the short, nerdy looking doofus is an untrained genuine bad ass waiting to get out.
    Reminds me of someone who would be surrounded by DOA/BG’s and a pile of brass empties. Just a feeling.

  • April 8, 2015 at 1:25 pm
    Snafu F. Ubar

    Chris Muir, I don’t know what this is you’ve done, but I get a hell of a kick out of your commenters, and I’ve never seen anything quite like it. You’ve lit a fuse on crate of fireworks. Keep up the good work. Everybody.
    “… and serve in a jelly jar with an umbrella that is on fire.”

  • April 8, 2015 at 1:57 pm
    Snafu F. Ubar

    The bin Laden Cocktail
    2 shots and a splash of water.

    (thanks Joe)

  • April 8, 2015 at 2:58 pm

    The NetanYahoo Cocktail (served overhand at 15 yards, exclusively to Muzz)

    Pint of gasoline served flamb’e

    With a heartfelt toast, “Molotov!” Er, I mean “Maseltov!”

    Srsly, I’d like to nominate Ben for an honorary Double Down membership.

  • April 8, 2015 at 3:26 pm

    One more thing related to the invasion statements above: During time of war, any unknown foreign invader may be considered an enemy combatant, and killed on sight.

  • April 8, 2015 at 5:41 pm

    Whatever is done… lets hope it doesn’t turn into a circular firing squad with only one Rino left standing to face Shrillary.

  • April 8, 2015 at 6:09 pm
    Don in AK

    Sarah still gets my vote! “Common Sense” has become altogether too uncommon in Washington, to our detriment.

  • April 8, 2015 at 8:28 pm
    Oliver Heaviside

    Ted Cruz doesn’t have enough experience. I like him, but we have seen that a mere four years in the Senate does not prepare you for the hardball politics of Washington, whether you are right or left.

    Rand Paul is interesting. I confess I haven’t dug into all his positions, but does he really think shutting down the Fed and going back to gold is a good idea? Sheesh.

    Unions are a bigger threat to America, long term, than illegals. At least illegals work hard, unlike many union members. 😉 Public sector unions in particular; I don’t have as big a hard-on against private sector ones.

    As for illegals, no amnesty. Punishment. But whether that punishment is a very heavy fine of banishment is worth discussing. Trying to jail 11 million or however many it is has challenges, to put it mildly. For many other non-violent crimes, we assess a heavy fine and community service. Is that not an option for illegals who have not committed violent crimes? “Pay up or go home.” At, say, $10K a pop it’s a nice chunk of change. Help to pay for better border security, which we need.

  • April 8, 2015 at 10:08 pm
    spin drift

    Another cocktail:

    The George Washington: Two fingers of Rye, neat with a cherry

    The Neil Armstrong: Jigger of Everclear, pound of LOX, one pair asbestos underwear

    Hold Fast

    Spin Drift

    • April 8, 2015 at 10:10 pm
      Chris Muir

      These are all going on the menu,by the way.

15 49.0138 8.38624 1 0 4000 1 300 0