Who would ask U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett if she is a rapist?
A deranged feminist, that’s who. Read the whole story.
Who would ask U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett if she is a rapist?
A deranged feminist, that’s who. Read the whole story.
Did you murder a cop with an AK-47? Are you an illegal alien charged with murdering an American and his two sons? No worries. No matter who you kill or why, Kamala’s got your back.
Now we have the evidence. Not that we didn’t know before. Of course Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, discussed the latter’s biz dealings in Ukraine.
Burisma employed Hunter Biden, an unqualified drug addict. Ukraine was investigating Burisma. Joe Biden forced Ukraine to fire the prosecutor to protect his son’s company. Then, when President Trump tried to get to the bottom of it, Democrats tried to impeach him for it.
Earlier this year, Joe Biden gave a lengthy interview to The New York Times, a venue as friendly toward Biden as Sean Hannity is to Donald Trump. In the course of this interview, Biden offered the following observation:
Well, look what’s happened. Look what started to seep in, beginning and probably even with candidates during our administration. We stopped showing up at the Polish American club. We stopped showing up, and we all went to you, the really smart people. We had a new kind of coalition we were putting together. College-educated women and college men and boom, boom, boom and so on.
Two conclusions seem inescapable: 1) Biden thinks that the Democratic Party walked away from Polish Americans, and 2) Biden does not number Polish Americans among “the really smart people.”
In talking this way about Polish Americans, it is unlikely that Biden meant to exclude descendants of the other Eastern European ethnic groups who came to America in large numbers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Indeed, the northeast corner of Pennsylvania, where Biden grew up, has a higher percentage of its population that traces its ancestry to Eastern Europe than just about anywhere else in America.
Biden is from Scranton, the county seat of Lackawanna County. Wilkes-Barre is the county seat of neighboring Luzerne County. The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre PBS affiliate (WVIA-TV) produced a documentary, “The Extraordinary Journey: The Eastern Europeans of Northeastern Pennsylvania,” which notes that 30 percent of the population in Lackawanna, Luzerne, Carbon, and Schuylkill counties traced their ancestry to Eastern Europe. Poles were the largest single ethnic group to immigrate to the region, but Slovaks, Czechs, Lithuanians, Hungarians, and Ukrainians also came in large numbers.
As the documentary details, the area developed a blended Eastern European culture. A lawyer friend of mine from Luzerne County is a good representation of those in northeastern Pennsylvania. He grew up taking pride in his Lithuanian name, loving the Polish Christmas carols sung at his parish church, and savoring the taste of the Slovak kolache baked by his grandmother. His family even makes kielbasa from venison.
Biden has portrayed this race as a contest between Scranton and Park Avenue, yet Biden left Scranton as soon as he could, nearly half a century ago. Park Avenue, on the other hand, has always looked down on Trump’s native Queens.
The Eastern Europeans of northeastern Pennsylvania figured out that Biden had little use for them long before he admitted it to The New York Times. Four years ago, the region’s swing to Trump was instrumental in giving the GOP its first presidential win in Pennsylvania since 1988. Polls suggest that northeastern Pennsylvania remains Trump’s strongest area in the state, while The New York Times recently ran an article on the area’s embrace of Trump, with much focus on Dave Mitchko, a local activist with an eminently Slavic last name.
But Biden wasn’t content with simply ditching Scranton. In order to amass the millions Biden has made in “public service,” Biden advocated for policies which devastated northeastern Pennsylvania and the many other places which “the really smart people” concluded had outlived their usefulness.
Biden supported NAFTA and Most Favored Nation trade status for Communist China, which resulted in thousands of American factories shutting down, causing millions of American manufacturing jobs to disappear. Biden also supported the Iraq War, a misadventure planned and executed by the type of Republicans who have endorsed his candidacy. That fiasco killed thousands of Americans and grievously wounded many more, devastated the ancient Christian communities of Iraq, and wasted hundreds of billions of dollars that places such as Scranton could have used.
Now Biden is embracing critical race theory and the concept of “white privilege.” This latest project of “the really smart people” promises to work out as well for the people of northeastern Pennsylvania as Biden’s earlier brainstorms did. It is absurd to describe Eastern European immigrants who came to northeastern Pennsylvania with nothing as “privileged.” Their families were serfs in Europe, and the work they did once they came here was always hard, often debilitating, and sometimes deadly. Mining anthracite coal put bread on the table, but also put coal dust in lungs.
Polish immigrants like my friend’s grandfather worked long days deep in anthracite coal mines without masks, respirators, or other basic safety equipment. They would not see the sun, or their children, for months—except on Sundays for Mass—yet they showed up every day, on time, without complaint. My friend’s grandfather died from black lung complications at the age of 57—true senior citizen status by NE PA standards in the 1970s. His remaining retiree buddies toasted his memory with nickel beers at the Polish Club in Dupont, PA, the same type of club Biden admits the Democrats abandoned for the “really smart people.” Now he wants to abandon their descendants by accepting the theory that what their families have earned in America is the result of an unfair and underserved “privilege.”
Right now, if the polls are to be believed, Joe Biden is enjoying his Polish joke. But maybe people like my friend will end up having the last laugh. If the many descendants of Eastern European immigrants who live in the critical electoral battleground stretching from the old anthracite coal mines of northeastern Pennsylvania to the Mesabi Range of Minnesota end up taking the same dim view of Joe Biden that so many Slavic-Americans who know him best have, the “really smart people” may end up as blindsided by 2020 as they were by 2016.
Tom Zoldak writes from Middle America. He can tell the difference between pierogi and golabki, knows what you use oplatki for, and can name “Wsrod nocnej ciszy’ in three notes or less.
By Wayne Allensworth
Storytelling is a lost art. Not just the storytelling we associate with literature, the stage, or cinema, though decent literature, stage plays, and films are in short supply in a culture that is heavily politicized, as well as manufactured, but the plain art of orally telling a good story.
Storytelling was once the basis of oral tradition, which, in turn, was an early form of transmitting history, and the storyteller was often a parent or grandparent, not only a tribal bard, elder, or teacher. Orally transmitted stories of a people’s origins, its heroic deeds, its fall from grace and redemption, were an integral part of a child’s education, before education became more formalized.
The origins of history as a discipline are rooted in oral tradition, in the making of loyal members of a clan, tribe, and nation through the transmission of a heritage, the basis of the formation of collective and individual identity. A sense of place and purpose, the foundation of meaning in our lives, developed from that sense of identity. Relationships were close and personal, unmitigated by the segmented, atomized electronic “marketplace” that has helped foster the alienation and loneliness of our post-modern world.
The “communications revolution” and the end of storytelling
As face-to-face interaction was replaced by the telegraph and telephone, then electronic communications, the ties between individual and family, family and community, community and nation were weakened, with each successive stage of the “communications revolution” actually diminishing the most salutary and enriching forms of human interaction. Letter writing, for example, was far more personal than e-mail, which looks relatively superior to texts and tweets. And the time frame of instant communications diminished the substantive quality of those communications.
Storytelling takes time. Even the circulation of jokes (telling jokes is another lost art related to loss of storytelling in general) has been replaced by the impersonal, electronic meme.
I could go on. The dissolution of the family plays a big part in this—how can an elder pass along stories when there is no extended family or even a nuclear one to transmit them to?
Remembrance of things past
The point is that the American Remnant, that portion of the population that is still attached to a more traditional sense of place and identity, is faced with the long term task of transmitting its heritage in an often hostile environment. Our contributors have stressed the need to counter the politicized, anti-American propaganda that passes for history with our real story, the epic story of America and the Americans.
For all of us live out our lives as stories, we consciously or unconsciously take on roles that have been transmitted to us in the stories we have learned. Unfortunately, the stories being transmitted to us today (and we are all the consumers of politicized stories told to us by the very people who hate us, those who frame the mass media “Narrative”) are too often unhealthy and debilitating ones.
One of our starting points should be the revival of oral storytelling. It will have to begin with those of us who still recall face-to-face storytelling as a foundational part of early lives.
The most prolific and influential storyteller in my life was my paternal grandfather. He was a working man of limited formal education who was a voracious reader and a gifted teller of tales.
The scene was often his modest home, perhaps on a Sunday afternoon, where the family gathered for Sunday dinner (I still say my grandmother’s fried chicken was the best ever). Afterwards, we might step out to the back porch for watermelon or hand-cranked ice cream. Sometimes, granddad and I would retire to his sitting room, where he kept his books on a stand by his easy chair. We both might read for a spell, and then he would pause, take his reading glasses off, and tell me a story.
It might be family history, one of frontier heroics and hardship, touched with a bit of genealogy. He might expand on that with a related story—he especially liked to recount tales of the Old West, of epic cattle drives and Indian wars—but we would usually circle back to family, and stories that his father had told him, which, in turn, had been told by his grandfather.
He had mastered the storytelling art, his voice raising to an appropriate tone at dramatic moments, and he well knew how to use the pregnant pause for effect. I relished those stories and have told many of them to my own children.
It will be up to us, the American Remnant, to be the carriers of our story. As censorship has tightened, and with the potential for more chaos, even “woke” totalitarianism, ahead, it will be up to us to be the keepers of that story.
We will be the preservers, who like the book people in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, will be charged with maintaining our story and transmitting it. Oral storytelling will be part of that. Keeping old books, too. And dig through those old boxes of pictures. Each one tells a story, and can be a fine jumping off point for oral history.
The motto of Quebec is “I remember.” It should be our ours as well.
We have to remember to know who we are. We have to know who we are in order to make a real effort to survive and carry on, to rebuild when, hopefully, this dark age has passed.
Wayne Allensworth is a Corresponding Editor of Chronicles magazine. He is the author of The Russian Question: Nationalism, Modernization, and Post-Communist Russia, and a novel, Field of Blood.
A bit of good news: David Suchet is going to be knighted. His portrayal of Hercule Poirot was, simply, extraordinary. Not only was it unforgettable, it was profoundly good, as Suchet highlighted the best aspects of the character. Suchet’s Poirot is not a fussy egomaniac or eccentric genius, but a man whose unfailing courtesy blends seamlessly with an overarching kindness, decency, and goodness, behind which lies a deep Christian faith briefly alluded to in the books but emphasized by Suchet.
The end result is this: whenever I need some relief from a world that can be disheartening, dismal, and dirty, I know I can always rely on Agatha Christie’s brilliant Belgian as brought to life by David Suchet.
Well done, Sir David!
By Joshua Emmett Doggrell
John Pelham was born in a house four miles from my driveway in my hometown of Anniston, Alabama, about sixty miles northeast of Birmingham. The site of the house (which burned down many years ago) is probably three miles as the crow flies, and only a rock throw from the church where my family and I worship on Sundays. The site features an historical marker, and a century-old obelisk stood for 115 years downtown until city workers dismantled it after midnight on September 28.
It never harmed anyone, but down it had to come, another casualty of the 2020 Social Justice Wars. That is the same reason we’ll probably have to rename Anniston’s surrounding Calhoun County. It is named for John C. Calhoun.
John Pelham came from a prominent family and, like many Southern boys, was a cadet at the U.S. military academy at West Point in April 1861 when the United States military invaded the South. He resigned just a few weeks before what would have been his graduation day to return to Alabama and defend his homeland.
Pelham enlisted in the Confederate Army, where he soon caught the eye of General J.E.B. Stuart. He fought with Stuart’s famed cavalry in more than 60 battles or skirmishes in less than two years and distinguished himself at the battles of Sharpsburg (better known as Antietam) and Fredericksburg.
None other than Gen. Robert E. Lee dubbed him “The Gallant Pelham.” Lee’s “right arm,” Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, said this:
It is really extraordinary to find such nerve and genius in a mere boy. With a Pelham on each flank I believe I could whip the world.
On St. Patrick’s Day, 1863, during a cavalry charge at Kelly’s Ford, Virginia, a fragment from an exploding Yankee artillery shell struck him in the head. Pelham died at the age of 24, giving his life in the struggle for his country’s independence.
One-hundred-thirty-eight years later, I read the marker detailing his death at Kelly’s Ford and walked the same ground Pelham died on just as I have walked the same ground upon which he was born and raised back home.
Why was the Pelham monument removed? Because the Anniston city council, each member up for re-election, voted to remove it a couple of months prior. They actually voted to remove it twice, presumably to show they were really serious. We live in the 21st Century, you see. We are awash in a sea of injustice and, as prevailing logic goes these days, the best way to combat it is to target dead white men. Particularly galling are any monuments to those horrible creatures (“racists!”, “traitors!”) who fought for the Confederacy. So the honorables on the council voted to bring it down, saddling the taxpayers with the $25,000 fine for violating a State law prohibiting these very actions.
Anniston is dying. Vacant houses, buildings, closed businesses dot its landscape along with the usual storefronts for check-cashing and payday loans. There is an extremely high crime rate, which has consistently ranked near the top nationwide in per capita rankings for decades.
But what is the council worried about? Well, its members are notorious for name-calling, petty email exchanges, shouting threats at the relatives of other members, brawls on the floor of city hall during meetings, getting arrested, and drawn-out courts of inquisition against other government agencies and enemies that never uncover any wrongdoing. In August, they were consumed with virtue-signaling on the eve of elections.
The valor and dedication that John Pelham possessed are alien qualities to the likes of BLM, Antifa, and the spineless cowards who compose the city council. The book of Hebrews tells us of saints “of whom the world was not worthy.” Perhaps it is fitting that the obelisk for Pelham was removed. We, as a community, have become a people not worthy of him anymore.
He was better than us all.
By R. Cort Kirkwood
Years ago, The New York Times’s public editor admitted his paper is incorrigibly leftist, but dusting off that confession only partly explains what happened when the media became an open advocate for the Democrat Party with the rise of Barack Hussein Obama, and subsequently, the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
What has occurred since Clinton lost, and this campaign season, particularly the first presidential debate between Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden and President Trump, fully explains it.
What Biden said elicited no questions or even a grimace from the leftist media in general or leftist moderator Chris Wallace in particular. And that exposed for anyone who cared too look what was at work, which is not just the double-standard of which conservatives have always complained. For at least with a double-standard, there is some standard, even if it simply doesn’t apply to one side.
But now, no standard applies. We have two sets of rules. One for us, meaning the American Remnant represented, albeit imperfectly, by Trump; and one for them, meaning the Deep-State globalists represented all-too-perfectly, by Joe Sneakyfingers.
What Biden Said
Biden uttered several claims and imprecations that were at once undignified and at turns preposterous.
He called the president “a liar,” “a racist,” and a “clown,” then told him to “shut up.” Then he had the gall to call the debate “unpresidential.”
But Biden knew the rules. He knew that no matter what he said, however ridiculous, the media — and Wallace, of course — would spin it or downplay it to protect him.
But let’s move from the undignified personal imprecations to the preposterous claims. Antifa, the communist revolutionary movement rioting in our streets, and attacking cops and murdering Trump supporters alike, Biden said, is an “idea.”
Then he flat-out lied when he said the New Green Deal was “not my plan.”
And again, crickets. Biden got away with it. Wallace said nothing.
Try now to imagine how media’s howls had Trump called Biden those names, or said “white supremacy” is an “idea,” which, in fact, it is.
It’s almost a cliché to answer that question out loud. We know exactly what would have happened because we all know the radical left controls the media, which have always been something of an information ministry for the Democrat Party. But at least, in the old days, they had the grace to try and hide it. No more.
The Washington Post boasted on its editorial page that it was an “independent newspaper.” “Independent” of what, it didn’t say, but since a month after Trump was inaugurated, it says something altogether different: “Democracy dies in darkness.”
So also does truth, and in the case of the media, impartiality. Not objectivity, mind you, but impartiality.
Joe Sobran described the problem years ago in writing about the preposterous claim that Pat Buchanan was an “anti-Semite.” A victim of the same false charge, Sobran cast his dexter beam on the calumny:
There is no penalty for making the charge loosely; the accused has no way of falsifying the charge, since it isn’t defined.
A famous example. When Abe Rosenthal accused Pat Buchanan of “anti-Semitism,” everyone on both sides understood the ground rules. There was a chance that Buchanan would be ruined, even if the charge was baseless. And there was no chance that Rosenthal would be ruined — even if the charge was baseless.
Defeat Trump, Elect Biden
And so it was with Trump. We all understood the rules.
If Trump said anything about Biden, and no matter how the president answered the nakedly-loaded “white-supremacy” question, we all knew the media would eviscerate him.
And no matter what Biden said about Trump — he could have called the president a child molester — no matter how idiotic his claims, we all knew the media would protect him.
But that’s not a doubled standard, again, because a double standard means some standard must exist. But it doesn’t. We can no longer appeal to an objective rule to show that a Democrat candidate has jumped his tracks. We can no longer appeal to an objective rule that must govern the news media to show where it’s treatment of a candidate is baldly biased, monstrously unfair, and in, some case, purposely false.
It’s two sets of rules. One for them. One for us.
The name of this game is Elect Biden.
And those are the rules. We are not supposed to notice, and if we do, we are liars, racists, and clowns. Or simply deplorables.
All of which mean the same thing. The American Remnant.
Insanity reigns. Portland is doomed.
Young, leftist women need a check up from the neck up.