The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

#CPAC 2017: ‘The Deconstruction of the Administrative State’ — Steve Bannon

Posted on | February 23, 2017 | No Comments


President Trump is “maniacally focused” on keeping the promises he made to America during his campaign, White House strategist Steve Bannon said Thursday during a panel with chief of staff Reince Priebus. That includes enforcing immigration law — “protecting the sovereignty of the United States,” as Priebus said — and an agenda of deregulation that Bannon called the “deconstruction of the administrative state.”

Bannon warned the audience in the Potomac Ballroom at the Conservative Political Action Conference to expect intensifying attacks on Trump the “corporatist, globalist media” that is opposed to the president’s agenda of economic nationalism. “If you think you are getting your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken,” said Bannon, the former executive chairman of Breitbart News. “We want you to have our backs . . . to hold us accountable for what we promised.”

Priebus attributed Trump’s victory last November to the New York real estate mogul’s authenticity. “What the American people were starving for was somebody real, somebody genuine,” said Priebus, former chairman of the Republican National Committee. Priebus credited Trump for uniting the disparate factions of the GOP after a hard-fought primary campaign that began with 16 candidates seeking the nomination. Keeping the conservative movement connected to the Republican Party is the key to success in moving forward Trump’s agenda, Priebus said. “If the party and the movement are together, we can’t be stopped.”


In The Mailbox: 02.23.17

Posted on | February 23, 2017 | No Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

EBL: Sunlight The Best Disinfectant, Bill Maher?
Michelle Malkin: Fighting For The Falsely Accused
Twitchy: Space Cadet…Er, Feminist…Brianna Wu Trips All Over Her Own Smug Attack On Milo
Louder With Crowder: Women Freed From ISIS Celebrate, Remove & Burn Oppressive Veils

Adam Piggott: Gay Marriage And The Chesterton Fence
American Power: President Trump Rolls Back Obama’s Perverted “Transgender” School Bathroom Mandates
American Thinker: How To Tell If News Is Really News
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Second Amendment News
BLACKFIVE: Do You Know This Man Or Voice?
Da Tech Guy: Voices Of CPAC 2017 – Joe On Life Beyond The Berlin Wall
Don Surber: The Story Huffington Post Doesn’t Want You To Read
Dustbury: Bucolic Romance
Fred On Everything: A Budget Without Russians – The Empire’s Nightmare
The Geller Report: Swedish Politicians Say Trump Was Right
Hogewash: Go Ahead. Make My Day.
Jammie Wearing Fools: Alan Colmes Dead At 66
Joe For America: James O’Keefe To “Destroy CNN” With Hundreds Of Hours Of Undercover Tapes
JustOneMinute: Good Advice
Power Line: CNN Says Oh-Oh
Shark Tank: GOP Draws First Blood Against Nelson In 2018 Senate Race
Shot In The Dark: We Shall Call Him “Bluto”
STUMP: Kentucky County Pensions – 60% Funded (And Decreasing) Is Awful
The Jawa Report: Totally Mischaracterized Gitmo Detainee Goes All Splodeydope
The Political Hat: Gender Bending – In The Schools, In Utero, In Opposition
This Ain’t Hell: University of Michigan’s No Whites Allowed Space, also, 72nd Anniversary Of Mount Suribachi Flag Raising
War Is Boring: Russia Sells Lethal Jet Fighters To UAE
Weasel Zippers: Mexico “Will Not Accept” Trump’s Immigration Plans, Threatens To Go To U.N., also, Trump Strips Funding For Illegal Aliens, Reallocates Money To Victims Of Their Crimes

Instant Gratification – Today’s Digital Deals
Bear Naked Granola Snacks – Save Up To 20%

#CPAC2017: Joe the Plumber (@RealJTP) Talks Breitbart, Bannon, Trump

Posted on | February 23, 2017 | No Comments

Joe Wurzelbacher was just a guy in Ohio in 2008, when he encountered Barack Obama on the campaign trail and asked him a question about taxes that catapulted “Joe the Plumber” to nationwide fame. Now, Joe works with Liberty Alliance and this morning I bumped into him outside CPAC and recorded a brief interview:


By the way, the Satanic forces of evil, otherwise known as the Democrat Party, are casting a witchcraft spell on Donald Trump tomorrow.

Obviously, Christians need to pray for the President’s protection:

Pray therefore the God of Peace to crush Satan beneath our feet, that he may no longer retain men captive and do injury to the Church.

Never doubt the power of  prayer.




#CPAC2017: Kellyanne Conway, Ted Cruz, Mark Levin, Dana Loesch, Steve Bannon

Posted on | February 23, 2017 | No Comments


A big agenda of speakers today at the Conservative Political Action Conference, although the President doesn’t speak until Friday:

Just less than a year ago, Donald Trump decided to skip CPAC – a decision the organization said he would come to regret, since it “sends a clear message to conservatives.” The Trump campaign said he would be back in 2017, “hopefully as President of the United States.” (How many in the room in 2016 thought that would really happen?) Now comes this year’s CPAC, with Vice President Mike Pence and President Trump both in the speakers’ lineup. That’s just a hint of the extent to which the conservative movement has been adopted and co-opted by Team Trump. Conservatives – even those who insisted Trump was never one of them – have, for the most part, gone along with it. Reince Priebus, Steve Bannon, and Kellyanne Conway have all been CPAC fixtures in the past. Now they will be CPAC rock stars, appearing on behalf of the leader of the conservative movement, the man in whose administration they serve.

Speaking of fixtures, last night I saw Evan Sayet and reminded him that it was CPAC ten years ago we met. That was Andrew Breitbart’s first time attending CPAC and it seems like just yesterday to me.

UPDATE: Kellyanne clobbered it:

Senior Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway gave a simple reason why she doesn’t label herself a “feminist” in her speech this morning at CPAC.
“It’s difficult for me to call myself a feminist,” she said, because modern feminism is “anti-male and pro-abortion. I am neither.”
Conway is a staunch pro-life activist who was the first woman to successfully run a presidential campaign. She was responding to a question about the pro-abortion Women’s March and Democrats claiming to speak on behalf of women. . . .
On the main stage, Conway discussed the importance of her four children in her life. The 50-year-old empowered Catholic mother irked feminists and leftists while running the Trump campaign.

My CPAC roommate Pete Da Tech Guy talked to Mrs. Conway last night. He gave her a cannoli. She loves cannoli.

UPDATE: Interview with Joe the Plumber.


In The Mailbox: 02.22.17

Posted on | February 22, 2017 | No Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

First Street Journal: Why Can’t Every Illegal Immigrant Do Things The Way Adriano Espaillot Did?
EBL: Is It Time To Take The Keys From Grandpa?
Twitchy: Video Surfaces Of Bill Maher Condoning Sex Between Adult And 14-Year-Old
Louder With Crowder: Tucker Carlson Nukes #NotMyPresident Protester Who Claims Trump Is Anti-LGBT
According To Hoyt: If They Take Milo Down, You’re Next

Adam Piggott: On Milo
American Power: Marine Le Pen Wins Over Women Voters Who Feel Left Behind In France
American Thinker: The Left – False Premises And Suicidal Actions
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Hump Day News
BLACKFIVE: Stolen by Carey Baldwin
Da Tech Guy: CPAC 2017 – First Interviews
Don Surber: Trump 2020 Is Happening
Dustbury: Four-Piece Spicy, With A Side Of TimBits
The Geller Report: Muslim Texas Pre-School Teacher Removed From Classroom After Tweeting “Kill Some Jews”
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day
Jammie Wearing Fools: Illegal Alien Freed From Custody Kills Man Weeks Later
Joe For America: Trump Kills Another Welfare Freebie
Power Line: Remembering The Indispensable Man
Shark Tank: Florida Moves To Finally Ban Red-Light Cameras
Shot In The Dark: Today’s Chuckle
STUMP: Mortality Monday – Defamation Lawsuit About Mortality Rate Reporting
The Political Hat: Judge Not, O Person Of Pallor
This Ain’t Hell: It’s Not Like We Haven’t Been Warning About IAVA
War Is Boring: This Missile Scare Became Social Media Comedy
Weasel Zippers: California Bans Students From Traveling To “Anti-LGBT” States, also, These Senators Opposed Vouchers Backer DeVos But Send Their Kids To Fancypants Private Schools
Megan McArdle: How Not To Address Liberal Bias In Education

Instant Gratification – Today’s Digital Deals

Fear and Loathing: CPAC Calls Me, and How Can I Answer the Call?

Posted on | February 22, 2017 | No Comments


Cynthia Yockey called last night from the Minneapolis airport, where her flight to Baltimore-Washington International had been rerouted due to weather problems in the Midwest. Blame global warming, and also heteropatriarchy, but why take time to assign blame now, eh?

No, right now I’m rattling the tip jar like a fear-crazed madman because I’d been hoping to get a check that didn’t show up and I’m about $450 short of what I’ll need to make this trip to CPAC, an event I’ve covered for 12 consecutive years. It’s not like my cash shortage wasn’t apparent by Saturday, but I was deep into another exploration of a radical feminist insanity, and so I procrastinated on posting my emergency appeal for contributions to the Shoe Leather Fund. Now, here I am, just hours before my planned departure to National Harbor on the banks of the Potomac, pleading in helpless desperation.

How do I keep getting myself into these predicaments? Like the time my car broke down on the way back from the 2012 Republican convention in Tampa, and found myself using the wifi in a McDonald’s to write a post called “Fear and Loathing in a 2004 KIA Optima.” Less than 24 hours earlier, I’d been watching Mitt Romney’s acceptance speech from a skybox, enjoying free beverages provided by coal industry lobbyists, but there I was in Ocala, broke and desperate. And yet the regular readers came through to get me back home. Or like the time I flew to Alaska in 2010 on a one-way ticket, with no idea whether I’d be able to pay for my return flight. Four days later, I was hanging out with Todd Palin in Wasilla, and it was contributions from readers that made it happen.

When the going gets weird, et cetera.

Preparing to depart from BWI Airport, circa 2011.

Readers have been crowd-funding these gonzo road trips since 2009, but since the exhaustion of the long 2012 campaign, I’ve mainly been content to work from home and babysit my grandsons. Speaking of which, I just heard 18-month-old Alexander getting into mischief. Hang on . . .

Changed his diaper, fed him lunch, gave him a bottle and laid him down in his crib for a nap. But that has nothing to do with CPAC, except that my daughter-in-law will be coming to pick him up in about an hour, and then drive me to National Harbor, so I’d like to be able to give her $20 for gas, and then five days amid the right-wing carnival called CPAC. My share of the hotel room, split four ways, will come to about $400, which means that if 20 readers hit the tip jar for $20, or if 40 readers hit the tip jar for $10, I’m covered there. Hotel meals run about $15, so that’s probably going to cost me another $100-$150, depending on how many receptions with free buffets I can talk my way into. As for beverages, well, a cup of coffee goes for about $3 at the hotel. Last week, this blog got nearly 60,000 page-views, and so each reader doesn’t have to give much — $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford — to make this trip happen.

Oh, Alexander’s not napping, which means I’ll have to wrap this up quick, with the Five Most Important Words in the English Language:


Thanks in advance, and God bless you.


UPDATE: Here’s my latest on the latest:

What happened to Milo Yiannopoulos this week illustrates many problems in 21st-century culture, including the way the Internet has created a dangerous mob mentality. Justice Clarence Thomas famously called his Senate confirmation ordeal a “high-tech lynching,” but advances in technology have shortened the rope, so to speak. In a span of 72 hours, Yiannopoulos was disinvited from speaking at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, lost a book contract with Simon & Schuster, and was compelled to resign from his job as tech editor of Breitbart News.
Milo’s sudden downfall was precipitated by his remarks about pedophilia and child molestation in an interview he did in January 2016 with a YouTube program called “Drunken Peasants.” Yiannopoulos has complained that his remarks were taken out of context, and so the context is important to consider. Yiannopoulos gained prominence for his writing about the so-called “GamerGate” controversy in 2014 and 2015. This included two September 2015 articles about Sarah (neé Nicholas) Nyberg, an anti-GamerGate activist who in 2005 had described himself as a “transsexual pedophile” with an attraction toward a young female relative.
During the “Drunken Peasants” interview, the hosts asked Yiannopoulos to address an accusation that his criticism of Nyberg was hypocritical, because Yiannopoulos himself had previously confessed that he first had sex with an adult at age 13. This led to a five-minute discussion in which Yiannopoulos, who is homosexual, made comments that he himself later recanted as “outrageous.” . . .

Read the whole thing at The American Spectator. Thanks to Jerold, William and Daniel who’ve already hit the tip jar quite generously. My wife might even get a bouquet of roses if this trip goes well.

UPDATE II: Well, my daughter-in-law decided my son should drive me down instead, so my departure has been delayed, but that gives me time to thank more tip jar hitters: Roman, Cheryl, Randall, Daniel O., David, Dana, Robert, John K., Jeffrey and my good friend John Hoge.


To Milo or Not to Milo?

Posted on | February 21, 2017 | No Comments

That is the question. When the Milo Yiannopedophiliapoulos controversy erupted over the weekend, I was busy working on a 4,000-word post about a radical feminist that I didn’t finish until Monday. Then CPAC disinvited him Monday, and today Milo resigned from Breitbart, and all of this controversy went thermonuclear while I was too busy on other stuff (including babysitting my grandsons) to pay much attention.

Did I see the video? Well, I briefly glanced at it and saw a partial transcript. It seemed to me that Milo let himself be drawn into a discussion where the is/ought distinction became ambiguous. He spoke on the basis of his own experience, and voiced opinions about what actually does happen — e.g., teenage schoolboys and teachers — without necessarily saying what should happen, except to suggest that society has gone overboard in terms of public fear producing draconian punishments. For example, last week I noted the case of an 18-year-old boy who was required to register as a sex offender because of an online romance with a girl (a) he never met in person, but who (b) sent him pictures of herself in her underwear, and (c) did I mention she was 13?

OK, the circumstances require me to reiterate that I am against the whole “sexting” culture of online dating and so forth, and I am also against people taking selfies in their underwear (or less) and sending them to other people. Furthermore, I am against anything at all of that nature which might involve a 13-year-old. However, this particular case discussed by Lenore Skenazy at Reason seemed to be prosecutorial overkill, even though I concluded my own discussion of the case by emphasizing the law is the law, and ignorance of the law is no defense. The bottom line is, parents have to warn their kids about this stuff. End of story.

Having done a lot of work in my career to expose pro-pedophile activists — e.g., Judith Reisman and her 2002 book Harmful to Minors — I can scarcely be accused of being “soft” on this issue. The question comes down to what Jeff Goldstein calls intentionality. What was Milo’s purpose in saying what he said? Was he, as some have described it, “advocating” pedophilia? Was he making excuses for child molesters? That was not the impression I got, but as I say, I didn’t sit down and study the video.

What happened was that his hosts on the “Drunken Peasants” podcast asked Milo to react to someone accusing him of hypocrisy because (a) he had gone after Nicholas “Sarah” Nyberg over pedophilia allegations, and (b) he had said in an interview on the Joe Rogan show that he himself first had sex at age 12 or 13. That’s an apples-and-oranges situation, and Milo could have just brushed it off as a non sequitur. And in hindsight, I’m sure he wished he had brushed it off, but instead he let himself be drawn into a discussion that provided the dynamite with which his enemies subsequently exploded him. So, now what?

Milo issued a strong denial of the imputation that he was defending child molesters, and today held a press conference, and we shall see what the future holds. Ace of Spades wrote a lengthy piece about the “Social Media Scalp-Hunting Hurricane” that included this:

All that said, I do have an interest, and that interest is less about Milo than this same sick game of Pick the Day’s Hate Object and Destroy It.
Is it my scalp they’ll be coming for next week?
Who knows — maybe this very post you’re reading right now will be cited as the reason Ace Must Now Be Purged to Maintain the Purity of the Body of the Church of Twitter.

Exactly right. Who knows who will be the next victim of the Hate Machine? In the span of 72 hours, Milo lost a speaking gig at CPAC and his job at Breitbart and his book contract with Simon & Schuster, all because of an interview he did with some guys on a YouTube channel.

Geez Louise, the court of public opinion has become a lynch mob. As someone who once fought a two-week blog war to defend myself against bogus racism smears, my instinct is to defend anyone on Team Conservative against the Republican circular-firing squad mentality.

“Oh, no! Somebody said something controversial! Purge them!”

So, I’m glad I was busy when all this blew up into an online firestorm, because otherwise I might have been sucked into it. And I’ve got too many enemies already to risk pissing off more of my friends. But the people who were quick to purge Milo should keep in mind that you reap what you sow. If you ever find yourself facing a mob ready to destroy your life over some controversial quote — “I was taken out of context! I didn’t mean it that way!” — you’d better know who your friends are.

Jim Hoft observes that the #NeverTrump crowd’s fingerprints are all over the Milo takedown, and you can form your own opinion. Myself, I prefer to aim my guns downrange, and there’s plenty of targets there.

UPDATE: On Gab — you are following me on Gab, right? — I was accosted by someone who seems to be demanding 100% unanimity that Milo be treated as persona non grata, and who then scolded me for not acceding to this demand. So we’re in the “secondary boycott” phase of the controversy, where everyone is expected to choose sides. And I hate this kind of game, people telling me who I can and can’t be friends with. LGF’s Charles Johnson tried to do that to Pamela Geller back in 2007, and we see what happened to Charles. There is something to be said for minding your own business, and avoiding the temptation to play arbiter of ethics.


‘Feminist Witchcraft,’ Mental Illness and the Demonic Dangers of the Occult

Posted on | February 21, 2017 | No Comments

Feminist witch ‘Rain Lawless’ ranting on YouTube.

“There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch. Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.”
Deuteronomy 18:10-11 (KJV)

“Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies . . . they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”
Galatians 5:20-21 (KJV)

“Anti-feminists . . . are f–king evil. They’re such disgusting human beings. . . Men are so intimidated by women who know their worth.”
Rain Lawless, Jan. 15

In response to my 4,000-word discussion of “Rain Lawless” as a symptom of feminist insanity, a longtime reader emailed to suggest that the reason Ms. Lawless describes her father as emotionally abusive, is because her father is “reaching the end of his rope”:

Taking care of a mentally ill adult ranges from “difficult” to “impossible” depending on what state you live in, and by now he’s probably figured out that she will never be capable of living independently. . . .
You mentioned her Tarot business. It has long been known among occultists and Christians that the mentally ill should never, never engage in occult activity. A lot of what our spiritually illiterate society calls “mental illness” is in fact demonic attack or possession, and if you open the door to the spirits you may not be able to keep control of what comes through. Serious occultists spend years learning to discipline and shield their minds. The mentally ill can’t do that. A mentally ill person who engages in occult practices is like somebody who has mice buying several more at the pet store and bringing them home to add to the fun. Unfortunately the occult attracts mentally ill women like manure attracts flies. I think this is a much bigger problem than is generally recognized.

Thank you for this comment, longtime reader. It is true that emotionally vulnerable people are attracted to the occult, and that their involvement in the occult tends to exacerbate their problems. And it is also true that Christians believe that much so-called “mental illness” is the work of demonic forces. You may scoff at Christianity, but there are such things as good and evil in this world, and I am skeptical of any theory that attempts to explain life as a random coincidence. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalm 14:1 KJV) and if the fool imagines a godless universe, he therefore must imagine that Satan is non-existent, too. The fool succumbs to evil, because he believes evil is not real — or perhaps the atheist believes he is smarter than God. He supposes he can ignore God’s law, deciding right and wrong for himself. Once you start down that road, there’s no telling where it may lead you. Being old enough to remember the Manson cult, the Khmer Rouge and the Symbionese Liberation Army, I am certain that evil exists in the world (although comparing feminists to the Khmer Rouge is probably unfair to the Khmer Rouge).

Disobedience to God’s law always has evil consequences. “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20 KJV).

The Bible repeatedly warns against witchcraft, “familiar spirits,” idolatry, etc., but feminism has celebrated witchcraft as “empowering,” giving rise to the so-called “Goddess movement” (see “The Radical Theology of Feminism” and also “The Myth-Making of Academic Feminism”). You don’t have to take my word for this. Professor Wendy Griffin taught for 26 years in the Department of Women’s, Gender & Sexuality Studies at California State University-Long Beach. In a 1995 article, included in the 2001 anthology Gender and Witchcraft, Professor Griffin wrote:

In November of 1971, Mary Daly led “hundreds” on an “Exodus from patriarchal religion” . . . by walking out at the conclusion of a sermon she delivered in the Harvard Memorial Church. A few months later, in 1972 in Los Angeles, the first coven of feminist witches which practiced “the Craft” as a religion began to meet under the guidance of Zsuzsanna Budapest. Within a few years, these witches were gathering with several hundred women in the mountains to celebrate their visions of female divinity in religious rituals.

We might debate whether Mary Daly was mentally ill or possessed by demons, but we can all agree she was crazy, as were the neo-pagan feminist witches who gathered in covens during the 1970s and ’80s.

Mary Daly and her 1973 book ‘Beyond God the Father.’

Professor Daly’s hatred of men was quite literally genocidal. She advocated “a decontamination of the Earth” which would involve “a drastic reduction of the population of males.” In pursuit of this goal, Professor Daly attacked Christianity directly. In her 1973 book Beyond God the Father, Professor Daly called for “castrating God . . . cutting away the Supreme Phallus” (p. 19) so that “Christianity itself should be castrated” (p. 71). She called for “a spiritual uprising that can bring us beyond sexist myths, the Antichrist [which] has a natural corrrelative in the coming of the Antichurch, which is the communal uprising against the social extensions of the male Incarnation myth, as this has been objectified in the structures of political power” (p. 140).

Note that it was an eminent feminist who declared that the women’s movement is “Antichrist,” which is to say feminism is satanic, a synonym for evil. Having declared war on God, as it were, feminists were “liberated” to engage in of every form of wickedness imaginable, including “witchcraft, hatred . . . wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,” etc. They have insulted God, and thereby invited upon themselves a curse.


Yes, the angry fat woman Lindy West was proud of her role in the #ShoutYourAbortion campaign — feminists delight in shedding the blood of innocents, advocating this monstrous cruelty as a “right.”

If killing babies is not wrong, how can we say anything is wrong? And having deliberately transgressed the most basic standard of morality (“Thou shalt not kill”) are feminists then surprised that they are doomed to lives of misery and madness? Yet young women who don’t know the Left’s sordid history are sucked in by the feminist talk of “empowerment,” nor are they warned against the dangers of dabbling in the occult.

Rain Lawless’s “Feminist Witchcraft” shop on Etsy, offering the “Self Love Tarot Card Reading,” is symptomatic of her disordered mind in the same way her feminism is symptomatic, and her feminism in turn is symptomatic of her confused sexuality. She calls herself either bisexual or lesbian, either transgender or “non-binary,” but in reality, she’s just crazy. Neither feminism nor tarot cards can solve her problems.

However, as Vox Day says, “SJWs always double down” — like a gambler chasing his losses, when the feminist fails, she always blame the patriarchy, and how do you defeat patriarchy? More feminism!

This doubling-down habit is what keeps pushing the Democrat Party further and further to the Left. The defeat of George McGovern and the failed administration of Jimmy Carter did nothing to convince liberals that their core ideas were wrong. Even after three consecutive terms of Republicans in the White House — landslide GOP victories in 1980, 1984, and 1988 — liberals had learned nothing, and Democrats were beholden to the furthest fringe of their party, represented by the “Rainbow Coalition” of Jesse Jackson’s two failed primary campaigns. This was why Bill Clinton’s presidency was so divisive — Clinton used phony “moderate” rhetoric while implementing radical policy initiatives, which resulted in the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994. One sex scandal, one impeachment and one Florida recount later, America gets hit with the 9/11 terrorist attacks and, the wounds of domestic politics still unhealed, we embarked on a period dominated by foreign policy.


“SJWs always double down,” and the Democrats in 2004 nominated the left-wing Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and lost. Yet after eight years of war and in the midst of a sharp recession, the nation had tired of Bushism, electing Barack Obama, the apotheosis of progressivism. It was predictable, to anyone who studied history, what the sequel of the Obama presidency would be. Hillary Clinton had been a radical since her student days at Wellesley and Yale, but she was not far-left enough for her party’s grassroots activists, and she resorted to cheating just to fight off the socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders to gain the nomination. And then she lost, and the grassroots Left went completely berserk.


That brief history lesson was intended to illustrate the pattern of progressive politics, of which feminism is so typical. No compromise solution ever satisfies the Left, which has the totalitarian tendency to always demand more. The totalitarian can never be appeased.

If you give Hitler the Sudetenland today, next he will demand the rest of Czechoslovakia, and after that, he’ll begin threatening Poland. Likewise with feminists — grant them everything they demand today, and tomorrow they will return with a new list of demands. Feminists have an appetite for power that is ultimately insatiable.

Well, you may ask, what does this have to do with the lesbian/bisexual transgender/nonbinary vegan feminist witch “Rain Lawless”?


What does feminism share with the occult? Both are about seeking power. Study the life of Aleister Crowley (or Madame Blavatsky or Marion Zimmer Bradley or any other prominent figure in occult movements) and the pattern is clear. What the occultists craves is a lawless power in defiance of the natural order, for the satisfaction of selfish desire. Deception and cruelty are to be expected from such people. Aleister Crowley was not only a sadist, but a fraud and a plagiarist whose most famous maxim (“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law”) was borrowed without attribution from a line by Mephistopheles in Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus (1592):

The planets seven, the gloomy air,
Hell, and the Furies forkèd hair,
Pluto’s blue fire and Hecate’s tree,
With magic spells so compass thee
That no eye may thy body see.
So, Faustus, now, for all their holiness,
Do what thou wilt; thou shalt not be discerned.

Much of Crowley’s “magick” was similarly borrowed from an occult movement called the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, specifically from Arthur Edward Waite’s The Book of Black Magic (1898) and Macgregor Mathers’ The Kabbalah Unveiled (1887). The occult claim to have access to arcane and esoteric knowledge — secret “truths” revealed only to the enlightened — is, to put it as bluntly as possible, a scam.

The sort of eclectic plagiarism by which Crowley created his bogus “magick” is commonplace to occult movements, including the sort of feminist witchcraft in which “Rain Lawless” has been dabbling. The use of tarot cards, for example, was popularized by the aforesaid Arthur Waite who, in turn, was a disciple of the French fraud Alphonse Louis Constant, a/k/a “Eliphas Levi.” A shoemaker’s son who became involved in socialism before he turned to the the occult as a better scam, Constant/“Levi” wrote an 1854 book in which he claimed:

Behind the veil of all the hieratic and mystical allegories of ancient doctrines, behind the darkness and strange ordeals of all initiations, under the seal of all sacred writings, in the ruins of Nineveh or Thebes, on the crumbling stones of old temples and on the blackened visage of the Assyrian or Egyptian sphinx, in the monstrous or marvelous paintings which interpret to the faithful of India the inspired pages of the Vedas, in the cryptic emblems of our old books on alchemy, in the ceremonies practised at reception by all secret societies, there are found indications of a doctrine which is everywhere the same and everywhere carefully concealed.

Constant/“Levi” promoted Kabbalah and the tarot as means of accessing mystical truth, and it was his disciple Waite who created the so-called Rider-Waite tarot deck published in 1910 by William Rider & Son, which was accompanied by Waite’s book The Key to the Tarot. If you want to learn how these 19th-century European occult doctrines came to be adopted by American feminists in the 1970s, I recommend Phillip G. Davis’s book Goddess Unmasked: The Rise of Neopagan Feminist Spirituality (1998) and Ronald Hutton’s The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft (1999).

When the black vegan feminist witch “River Lawless” offers tarot card readings at her Etsy shop, you see, she is merely recycling the bogus esoterica manufactured by Constant/“Levi,” Waite, Mathers, Crowley and other 19th-century white male occult scam artists. As the reader who emailed me observed, “the mentally ill should never, never engage in occult activity,” yet crazy people cannot resist the occult. Kooks are always attracted to astrology, tarot and other bogus mystic nonsense for the same reason unhappy women become feminists. The occult and feminism offer magical explanations for life’s misfortunes and promise their followers the power to change the world, to undo the natural order of things, to defy God’s law, and to defeat the allegedly “oppressive” forces of society. The fool who believes she can find truth in tarot cards is quite often the same fool who believes herself to be a victim of “patriarchy.”





“Rain Lawless” is pursuing a path that leads to self-destruction, dabbling in the occult and radical politics, vainly seeking solutions to her problems in ways that will only make her problems worse. Feminism, witchcraft, abortion, sexual perversion, deceit, fraud, theft, drug addiction, mental illness, violent anarchy — we know the fruits of that poisoned tree.

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. . . . For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. . . . Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”
Romans 1-7 (KJV)

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
John Adams, 1798

Both our liberty and our security are dependent on the rule of law, and we cannot have peace and prosperity if cultural decadence and social disorder give rise to movements of political subversion that constantly threaten society with revolution. I keep telling you: Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It.

Who will make the laws to govern a godless society? How shall selfish hedonists settle disputes among themselves? “Rain Lawless” attempts this in her video “Lesbophobia, Transphobia, And Sexual Boundaries”:


For many decades, going back at least as far as Janice Raymond’s 1979 book The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male, radical feminists and the transgender movement have been fighting this war amongst themselves, and why? If there is no natural order, no Creator whose law is acknowledged, then who is to say that Bruce Jenner cannot become “Caitlyn,” or that boys cannot be girls in kindergarten?

What is the basis of authority in a godless society? Power.

By power, the rich shall rule the poor and the strong shall rule the weak. The majority can impose its will upon everyone or, by capturing the influential centers of power — in media, in academia, in politics and in the courts — a decadent elite can subvert constitutional law and thereby gain the power to rule by seemingly “democratic” processes. Next thing you know, Christian bakers and florists are sued into bankruptcy for refusing to provide services for same-sex weddings, students riot to prevent free speech at Berkeley, and lesbians who criticize transgender ideology are blacklisted by major feminist groups. This is the chaos unleashed when America opened the Pandora’s Box of godless radicalism in the 1960s.


If “the powers that be are ordained of God,” the Christian has no license to resort to criminal violence. Vandalism, riots and terroristic threats are not how anyone may “inherit the kingdom of God.” Yet the rage of the godless has no limit, for they acknowledge no moral law.

“The occult attracts mentally ill women like manure attracts flies,” as the reader’s email said, and what will the Devil do with them? Whatever he wants. Those who seek occult power seldom consider the costs of surrendering themselves to the control of that power.


« go backkeep looking »