WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Dear Donald, Sir: WOOF’s Open Letter to the President Elect

In "Only you Dick Daring" forum on December 29, 2016 at 2:26 pm



We wouldn’t normally presume to offer unsolicited advice to an incoming president, at least in such detail, Mr. Trump–except that we may well be responsible for your surprise victory over “Her Magnificence” (a cognomen for Mrs. Clinton impulsively bestowed upon her by an effusive Tina Brown and used routinely by us here at WOOF ever since).  But you probably know Tina, right? You seem to know all the glittery people. Anyway–we don’t suppose you had time to notice but we closed our October anniversary post with a suggestion that all patriotic Americans enter the voting booth and cast their ballots while chanting (quietly, of course so as not to distract others) Klaatu barada nikto.


Gort, Miss Neal, and an unidentified friend.

The logic here is relatively obvious: If Patricia Neal’s recitation of those words saved the earth from Gort the robot in the 1951 screen classic The Day the Earth Stood Still, we were pretty certain  they might work to save the earth from Hillary, too.  It is, of course, impossible to authoritatively tabulate how many American voters actually took our advice and thereby sought to enlist extraterrestrial assistance in saving the United States from destruction– but it only took Patricia Neal in the movie–so you can see our point when we say that your shocker electoral triumph may be largely or at least partly due to us–and, of course, benevolent space intelligences who can presumably hack election results without leaving a trace…or perhaps simply transmogrify the hearts of thousands of voters–who knows? So, on this basis, we at WOOF are tendering a kind of desideratum for you to ponder during the lull.


On forsaking Christine…


Left on the bench this election year, Christine O’Donnell looks fairly philosophical about it, we think.

And here’s another point. You may not read WOOF regularly, Donald, sir—and we understand if you don’t. After all, you actually work for a living, and you were busy on top of that getting elected—and before that, no offense, you seemed pretty liberal. So we can understand if you aren’t familiar with our editorial customs. But by way of demonstrating how united we became post-convention behind your candidacy, we want to point out that 2016 is the first presidential year we didn’t nominate a separate candidate for the White House. Usually, we nominate Christine O’Donnell—remember her? We just love her. After the 2012 fiasco, we mailed out a lot of our famous “Don’t Blame Me, I Voted for Christine O’Donnell” bumper stickers. We ran out of them…and since we didn’t charge money for them, we couldn’t afford to print more. But that’s not the point. The point is—and we hope you are properly impressed by it—that despite having a bunch of fresh bumper stickers ready to go this year, we hung fire! And this despite the fact that our planned “Christine in ‘16” slogan reflected the last presidential election year that rhymes with the comely Delawarean’s name until next century—so it took some restraint, believe us!



We’re here to help, Donald—and you’ll like our advice on these matters because it’s the best advice. It’s huge. And it’ll be great. Great. We promise! For example:

Bush signs border fence bill--his heart may have been in the right place, but the fence never was!

Bush signs border fence bill–his heart may have been in the right place, but the fence never was!

Immigration: You know you have to build a wall, right? It was hardly your idea, although because of your outspokenness on the subject, most people probably think so. Few, for that matter, realize that Peter T. King (R-NY) introduced the “Secure Fence” bill in 2006, and that it was passed by both houses of congress including a supportive vote from Hillary Clinton. When“W” signed it into law, he told onlookers that, “This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform.”

imjustabillUnfortunately, bills are just pieces of paper and they can’t do any of those things, and while fragments of a “secure fence” were built, mostly the fence remained unbuilt. In no time at all, wily illegals perceived that crossing the border in those far-more-numerous locations where there was no fence was as easy as ever. Eventually, this flaw caught the attention of the 110th Congress, which introduced the “Reinstatement of the Secure Fence Act of 2008”, even though the 2006 act was never really un-instated. The reinstatement bill called for building enough fence to seal the entire border, which is what the original fence was supposed to do—but this version of the bill died in committee.

Some of the construction standards need to be reviewed, too, we think.

Some of the construction standards need to be reviewed, too, we think.

In 2010, waves of illegal aliens poured across America’s southern border at such appalling rates that Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) decided to take action by authoring the “Finish the Fence” amendment to Peter King’s original bill of 2006, requiring Homeland Security to complete the project by constructing an additional 353 miles of fencing, which wasn’t technically “additional,” because it was already supposed to be there, only it wasn’t. But the amendment to finish the fence that was already lawfully mandated by the original bill died in committee. By 2012 public outrage had grown to a level that the Republican platform that year declared, “The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built.” Strangely, however, the Republican congress seemed to forget all about this plank of the GOP platform in the wake of Obama’s re-election.


There are plenty of engineers in the former Peoples Republic of East Germany who can build decent walls–why not consult them? If it keeps people in, it can keep people out, right? And the towers can double as burger & taco restaurants for sightseers–just sayin.’

In fact, even defeated candidate Mitt Romney, whose platform contained the urgent language, joined a chorus of GOP luminaries calling for immigration reforms, which in Washington DC means the abandonment of all efforts at reform and the approval, instead, of blanket amnesty. Romney recommended “swallowing hard,” and passing “a permanent amnesty bill.” Nobody to our knowledge has figured out precisely what distinguishes permanent amnesty bills from ordinary amnesty bills or why swallowing makes them less stupid, but despite valiant efforts by congressional RINOs, no amnesty at all has passed—leaving it to President Obama to impose de facto Amnesty, accompanied by his peculiar resurrection of busing as a means of relocating masses of illegal, non-English-speaking immigrants to distant states—mostly ones that he hates.

Liberals are fond of solving problems with busses--and "Obamabussing" illegal immigrants into states unfriendly to illegal immigration is bound to change hearts and minds...or at least voting demographics..

Liberals are fond of solving problems with buses–and “Obamabussing” illegal immigrants into states unfriendly to illegal immigration is bound to change hearts and minds…or at least voting demographics..

TRUE FACT: Until recently, liberals loved border walls. Here, well known leftist Big Bird sings and dances on the Great Wall of China, beloved by liberals everywhere.

TRUE FACT: Until recently, liberals loved border walls. Here, well known leftist Big Bird sings and dances on the Great Wall of China, beloved by liberals everywhere.

The situation persists. In fact, only recently, the New York Times even noticed it. The Times was quick to assert that building a wall is “impractical,” commenting that “more restrictive immigration policies” would be better. The Times may have forgotten that such immigration policies (indeed, immigration laws) already exist, but are no longer enforced. So, yes, we really need a wall. And don’t think a Republican House and Senate necessarily means this will be easily achieved. Look at their record. Guts are in short supply in Washington, Donald sir, and money talks. A lot of your superficial supporters on the Hill continue working for business interests seeking cheap labor, and the pro-immigration groups (almost all of which represent the Worldwide Totalitarian Socialist Conspiracy that Governs Us) seeking to deracinate our culture and subvert our constitution. These interests must be crushed. Not negotiated with–crushed. So build the wall, Donald, sir—and yes, make Mexico pay for it. There are, in fact, several ways to do this—and you probably know what they are. The two most obvious are impounding the 25 billion that flows back into Mexico from Mexicans working in our country—or you could simply redirect the 25 million that Mexico receives from us in the form of foreign aid annually, or both. The academics and media pundits who maunder on piteously that the ramifications of such moves would be horrendous for Mexico have at once grasped and missed the point. But you grasped that a long time ago—didn’t you! Build the wall.



Senate Majority Leader’s face registering unrestrained delight as CNN confirms a Trump victory.

Congress—your new “allies” Even long-time spokespeople for the political right—people who, in other words, should know better—are waxing ecstatic over the fact that the GOP outperformed all expectations in retaining control of the House and the Senate. Granted, this is much better news than losing these institutions to the leftist hordes, but that doesn’t amount to unicorns and sunbeams…far from it. Any supposition that the majority of GOP members in these crucial governing bodies “got the message” can be immediately dispelled by the consideration that both Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan were immediately reinstated to their leadership positions. We aren’t certain that you understand what appalling news this is, Mr. Donald—but believe us when we tell you, it is an absolutely dismal beginning, signaling a difficult and treacherous road ahead.

Smiling men with bad reputations…

You probably recall that Mr. Ryan has been an outspoken critic of practically everything you’ve proposed, said, or thought throughout the nominative process and general election. When you suggested banning Muslim immigration for a period, he professed to be horrified, moaning that such a moratorium was “not what this party stands for and, more importantly, it’s not what this country stands for.” Absurdly, Mitch McConnell found grounds to object to your proposal (no different from Jimmy Carter’s temporary ban of the same nature) because “It would prevent the president of Afghanistan from coming to the United States. The king of Jordan couldn’t come to the United States. Obviously we’re not going to do that.” Senator McConnell did not indicate why either the King of Jordan or the President of Afghanistan might wish to immigrate to America, which would be the only condition under which your ban would apply to them—but Mitch has never been a deep thinker.

Smiling men with bad reputations.

Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani registers shock and anguish upon learning that he may not be eligible for American citizenship under Trump.

Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani registers shock and anguish upon learning that he may not be eligible for American citizenship under Trump.

It wasn’t that long ago that McConnell was assuring the media elites that his senatorial leadership would spell doom for the cursed Tea Party. When McConnell crowed to his allies at the New York Times that “…we are going to crush them everywhere,” he wasn’t talking about the Democrats—he was talking about his own party’s conservatives. The primary victories of RINOs like John McCain, Thad Cochran, Kelly Ayotte and yes, Paul Ryan, all won against first rate tea-party-style challengers, are tributes to McConnell’s jihad against the GOP’s conservative element. And because American voters still prefer RINOs to radical leftists, all but Ayotte (who went out of her way to trash your candidacy on the advice of her expert consultants) won their elective contests.

Ayotta looked leftward for support in opposing Trump...so the Democrat won.

Ayotte looked leftward for support …so the Democrat won.

You must have noticed that guys like Ryan and McConnell were sniping at you the whole way for the amusement of the inside-the-beltway gerbil pack—and they haven’t changed any, and they can’t stand you, Donald. As soon as they can bad mouth your presidential performance to the piranhas at WaPo or the lynch mob on Meet the Press, they’ll jump at the opportunity. And the rest of “your” Republican House and Senate voted for them to retain their leadership roles—so don’t think that you have a GOP wind at your back—it’s really a RINO dirk. Wasn’t it the Incredible String Band’s Mike Heron who recorded an album back in the day entitled “Smiling Men with Bad Reputations”? The description was never more apt!


Speaker Ryan –more isn’t than ism.

Some giddy optimist at National Review (which we know you declared a failed publication, but just the same) wrote recently that “Conservatives should hope for a synthesis of Trumpism and Ryanism that improves on both.” There are several flaws in this argument. First, there is no such thing as “Ryanism” in a strict sense. Ryanism, unlike Reaganism, or McCarthyism, or for that matter Trotskyism, is an ism without viscera. A smarmy willingness to compromise with the very forces one swore implacable opposition to only months earlier, while doggedly serving, no matter how underhandedly, whichever interests may currently offer maximum media strokes and establishmentarian approval, is less an ism than a personality disorder.

Second, we are fairly certain that Paul Ryan is not a student of Hegel, and we are willing to bet that you aren’t either…sir. So the idea of synthesis, while philosophically charming, is almost certainly inapplicable in praxis. More probably, Ryan will spend his time and energies half-consciously assessing your perceived gains or losses in the matrix of power politics, all the while maneuvering in accordance with his perceptions. This is not a guy you can merge with synergistically. Nothing about the man will hold still long enough to merge with.


And finally, sir, “hope” is not a policy—and Conservatives are better advised to spend their time creating (and in many cases, remember, tenaciously obstructing) change, than hoping for it or against it. Let the liberals do the hoping.


Chuck Schumer--avuncular pick pocket.

Chuck Schumer–avuncular pick pocket.

Congress—your former friends Now about your “friends” from the old days—and in particular, since you recently made mention of him, your relationship with Chuck Schumer. We know you probably don’t like us iterating this unattractive concern, Donald, but to run the detail past you one final time, you seem to have been a rather liberal and Democrat-oriented guy for the majority of your time on this planet, and we can definitely understand that—up to a point. After all, when it comes to the particulars of doing business, whether in New York or internationally, one must deal with, befriend, play golf with, and express common ground with a lot of politicians and proverbial “fat cats” who are almost uniformly leftist, whether in the oleaginous domestic sense, or that more cosmopolitan sense that one associates with the likes of Alfonso Cortina, Thierry Breton , or Sir Anthony Salz.  But we got kind of worried when we heard you say that you look forward to working with Chuck Schumer because you “have always had a good relationship with [him]” and because “He is far smarter than Harry Reid and has the ability to get things done.”


Harry Reid: Wherever there’s an exercise machine beatin’ up a guy–he’ll be there!

So okay, yes, Schumer is far smarter than Harry Reid, but let’s be honest, so is the average begonia. Also, Reid’s extraordinary inability to voice any criticism or accusation that doesn’t ring simultaneously with mendacity and heinousness made him a kind of poster child for the depraved Left—a Golem-like figure so divested of redeemable characteristics that his opposition to any person or principle served as an almost automatic advertisement for the virtue of whatever he saw fit to assail. A man so detestable that his own exercise machine beat him up. You won’t be so lucky with Schumer, whose genius for duplicity is refined, and whose ability to dissemble any point whilst affecting a certain heuristic (not to say cloyingly condescending) sincerity is comparatively effective with large numbers of gormless voters and media poltroons.

It may be a particularly bitter lesson for you, sir, given your guileless enthusiasm for such characters, but the same politicians it was pleasant and profitable to schmooze while you chatted about real estate deals, or private jets, are now your blood enemies….and flattering someone like Chuck Schumer based on fond recollections of innocent times gone by will not drain him of a scintilla of malice. Consider that no sooner had you found gracious words for the newly anointed Senate minority leader than he made a beeline for the Politico to assure them he was not your friend, never ate a meal with you, never played golf with you, and only took around ten-thousand dollars in donations from you over past election cycles because—well—you only really became objectionably despicable about a year ago. He reminded us of Obama back in 2008 making a show of struggling to remember who on earth Bill Ayers was.

"...just some guy who lived down the street."

“…this is just a guy who lives in my neighborhood….”

How liberals compromise….

On FOX News Schumer vowed to compromise with your administration, yes; but he vowed to do so only on those occasions when your objectives “echoed the views of Democrats,” which is to say, when you already agree with him. For almost 50 years this has been the Democrat approach to “compromise,” and Schumer is a past master. Notice he has also laid groundwork for “compromise” on the 2nd Amendment, telling reporters that you can “prove” your administration is serious about keeping domestic terrorists at bay “only” by “persuading the National Rifle Association to support gun control measures sponsored by Democrats.” Only, in other words, by abridging the 2nd Amendment.

Chuck firmly believes that anyone who can get lciensed for concealed carry in NYC should own a gun. So far, however,, he's the only one.

Chuck Schumer firmly believes that anyone who can get a license for concealed carry in NYC should be allowed to carry a gun.  So far, however, he’s the only one who’s managed. 

The man has already made plain his devotion to compromise on the topic of healthcare, telling MSNBC that “Obamacare, he [Trump] won’t be able to do.” And build the wall? Impossible, says Chuck, “unless he includes a plan for immigration reform.” Yes, we know—this seems funny on the face of it. Saying you can’t wall off the border unless you also have a plan to reform immigration is exactly like saying you can’t go on a diet unless you also have a plan to lose weight. You probably think, well, we can file that one under “duh,” right? Wrong. In liberaleze this means a compromise is required in which you agree to blanket amnesty in exchange for the Democrats agreeing to fund your wall—and, in liberaleze, this means that amnesty will be driven through and the wall will never again be mentioned.


Obamacare must die. And the longer you wait to kill it, the harder it will be. This is due in part to the fact that as soon as the leftwing establishment media begin churning out shrill warnings indexabout what cataclysmic ramifications are certain to follow upon the repeal of this most invidious means of human bondage, a substantial number of Republicans will turn to jello and begin scoring brownie points with their media handlers by appearing on newscasts to support the liberal view. They will appear jointly, as is traditionally the case, with Democrats who will provide contrast by also supporting the liberal view. You must confront this tenaciously! It would be more than sufficient grounds to kill the Affordable Care Act owing to its horrendous impact on business, and small business in particular. It adds to unemployment because most employers daren’t surpass the limits at which they must become providers or custodians of all sorts of reticulate, poorly understood, and often Dadaistic healthcare requirements that cannot be afforded by struggling businessmen, or easily accessed by employees bucking such obstacles as impossibly high deductibles and a drastically diminished quality of service provision.


Too late the hero? Maybe it took 25 hours to rescue John Roberts’s loved ones.

It also remains a constitutional fact that Americans cannot be compelled by their government to purchase a product–any product–unless they have voluntarily entered into some sort of contractual relationship necessitating the purchase. In other words, if you decide to drive a car, the state will allow you to do so on the condition (to give a single example) that you are an insured driver. (Unless, of course, you are an illegal alien, but we digress…) You may choose not to drive a car, or you may prefer to move to a state where the requirements for driving a car are more to your liking, but if you seek a license, you are required to provide certain assurances of indemnification. Not everyone drives, and Heaven knows not everyone should drive–but everyone gets sick now and then, and the government cannot pretend that we do so voluntarily or as part of a contractual understanding.


Actually, we DON’T like that we agree.

The mandated coverage aspect of Obamacare is a tyranny, foisted upon Americans (through the reprehensible connivance of Chief Justice Roberts) as somehow constitutional. Which, clearly, it is not.  It was Justice Roberts’s genius to rewrite the Administration’s argument, you may recall, Donald, sir, so that the increasing levels of fines levied against citizens who failed to comply with the law mandating purchase of health insurance were reimagined as a tax.  Everyone knows taxes are legal, so hey, presto, so became the individual mandate.  Nobody knows what Justice Roberts may have been smoking, or if Jack Bauer simply failed to liberate whatever beloved relative of Roberts’s was being held hostage by Obama’s minions in time to spare the Chief Justice rendering a coerced  opinion– but that’s all behind us now.  Sadly, Obamacare is not, and it has to go– and go now, while its conspicuous failures–intended to make totalitarian control of America’s medical establishment irresistable–can be held aloft instead as proofs of the entire scheme’s impracticality.

Despite the First Lady's mastery of several styles of Kung-fu, the Obama's remain reluctant to return to Chicago.

Despite the First Lady’s mastery of several styles of Kung-fu, the Obamas remain reluctant to return to Chicago.

Take for example the fact that the impossible costs written into the law are now going higher, as dictated by the law’s fine print. Using Obama’s home state of Illinois as an example, premiums are blasting off to dizzying heights.  (Maybe that’s why Rappin’ Preezy says he won’t be returning to Chicago.) Bronze premiums are rising 48 percent, Silver are up 44 percent, and Gold is soaring to a 55 percent increase. (By the way, is this bronze and gold stuff all a Satanic rip-off of Plato’s Republic? Nevermind…) These hikes are similar to those occurring in all 50 states. And of course, all this was by design–because at this point the single payer option was to be trotted out, while all the insurance companies were to be accused of abject greed and driven out of the business by our benevolent leadership in Washington (read: the Leftists in charge of the caper) and specifically the IRS. After all, the IRS did such a good job fairly administering 501(c)(4) status to groups seeking to file as non-profits, it only follows that they should determine what degree and what types of health benefits our citizens may variously receive.  Seriously, Donald, this is like putting the Post Office in charge of the space program– except that it compounds blatant unsuitability with a history of overtly malicious bias.

Comrades, there are wreckers in the healthcare sector!

Photo of a communist show trial at which a woman confesses to be a wrecker in the medical field. WOOF apologizes for the blurry film quality--apparently there were wreckers in the photographic field, too.

Photo of a communist show trial at which a woman confesses to being a wrecker in the medical field. WOOF apologizes for the blurry film quality–apparently there were wreckers in the photographic field, too.

The collapse of Obamacare as we are now witnessing it was part of the original design. As intended, the private insurers (easily the dupes of the decade, so enthusiastically did they greet the idea of mandatory health insurance as a pending bonanza) are now facing bankruptcy unless they charge impossibly high premiums for governmentally dictated levels of coverage or simply drop out of the loop. This was the point at which a future president, say Hillary Clinton for instance, was supposed to carry the socialist ball forward by vilifying the evil corporate insurance providers and explaining to the same citizenry that thought it would be able to keep its insurance policies and its doctors if it wanted to, that thanks to the treason of the money-grubbing private providers, government had no choice but to step in and save the day. The scheme is almost pristinely Stalinist. A few show trials at which the CEOs of major insurance companies confessed to being “wreckers in the healthcare sector” would bring the whole thing to perfection. The ignorant masses would then demand pure government healthcare by tumult– But then you got elected, Donald, sir, and that was absolutely not in the plan.

Reportedly, the AMA's journal drew the line at agreeing to change it's traditional cover to accommodate the President's suggested replacement.

Reportedly, the AMA’s journal drew the line at agreeing to change it’s traditional cover to accommodate the President’s suggested replacement.

So now, behold Obama maneuvering to institutionalize the single-payer option by renaming it the “public option” and advocating its adoption in the Journal of the American Medical Association (wherein peer review would typically deflect such disingenuous and factually insupportable flimflammery, but not, evidently, when the flimflam has been ghost-written on behalf of the First Medic). Obama’s JAMA monograph expounds such significant medical insights as that “Congress should revisit a public plan to compete alongside private insurers in areas of the country where competition is limited,” by which, rest assured, he means the entire country. And the sparkly new idea he and his comrades have generated to address this “unexpected” difficulty? Why, a single-payer government system managed by the IRS and  designed to completely replace all other funding sources by undercutting the market with dollars bled from the very taxpayers to whom it will be offered! In other words, the same old endgame Obama has been advocating since 2003 when he blithely advised the AFL/CIO (who aren’t even doctors!) that he sought nothing short of “a single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan,” except that now he’s within a hair’s breadth of success.

You have a blessing in disguise, however, Donald sir, in Obamacare’s planned collapse–for instead of railing against the private sector and shouting that more of this poison will cure everyone, as Hillary was expected to do, you can point to the system’s myriad fatal flaws as evidence that the Affordable Care Act is a dramatic failure, and make the case for euthanizing the entire program.  Obamacare must be destroyed.

Remember when the Administration tried to sell Obamacare to Millennials? Somehow they remained totally uninterested despite a series of ads, many as brilliantly creative as this one.

Remember when the Administration tried to sell Obamacare to Millennials? Somehow they remained totally uninterested despite a series of ads, many as brilliantly creative as this one.


About Dodd-Frank As you will discover to be the case henceforth, helpful advisors will pop up unbidden to offer you unsolicited guidance with only your best interests at heart. It’s remarkable, actually, how often lifelong Democrat operatives pause to prescribe policies and attitudes for Republicans, and always in hopes of advancing and improving the Republican brand. If only our own side could display such magnanimity!

Mark Hamrick--we already discussed smiling men, right?

Mark Hamrick–we already discussed smiling men, right?

Mark Hamrick, senior economic analyst at Bankrate.com, for instance, recently opined that “It doesn’t look good for Donald Trump the populist to be essentially disemboweling what was the principal regulatory response to the financial crisis.” But you didn’t swear fealty to the Republican Party and its populist vision, did you, sir. No, in early September you announced from Trump Tower that you were “totally pledging [your] allegiance to the Republican Party and the conservative principles for which it stands.” Everybody heard you—including Reince Priebus whose brow jiggled in such a way that we assume he wasn’t anticipating the entirety of your vow. So in other words, Mark Hamrick might as sensibly have said, “It doesn’t look good for Donald Trump the turnip,” and completed his paralogism on that basis—it would have applied no less sensibly.

We labor the point only to remind you, Donald, that “smiling men with bad reputations” are everywhere, and they will devour you piecemeal if you don’t proof yourself against their advisements, which, no matter how prettily phrased, are never more than invitations to revisit the toxic-waste dump of leftwing agenda items. And what agenda item was Mark Hamrick subtly defending? Why, Dodd-Frank, of course—surely you realized.

Chris and Barney--they're from the government and they're here to help.

Chris and Barney–they’re from the government and they’re here to help.

Okay, as you no doubt recall, you promised to dump Dodd-Frank. This is a good idea, although it will not catch fire for you; first, because the average guy in the street has no idea what you’re talking about. Second, because the banks themselves are afraid to join you in protesting the law’s absurdities mainly because, third, the general perception of banking as an institution is almost entirely negative nowadays—from the Occupy movement to the Tea Party and at most points in between, the “banksters” are loathed and excoriated. And one thing you can say for Dodd-Frank, it definitely makes bankers miserable. Of course, favoring this imbecilic law because it beats up the banks is about as intelligent as favoring confiscatory taxation for the wealthy because one resents rich people.

I'll show you, you scurrilous bankers and rich people--after me, you're next!

“I’ll show you, you scurrilous bankers and rich people–and after me, you’re next!”

Dick Durbin--file photo

Dick Durbin–(file photo)

The Economist recently noted that “After the crisis of 2008, finance plainly needed better regulation. Lots of institutions had turned out to enjoy the backing of the taxpayer because they were too big to fail.” But wait a minute—aren’t government (which is to say taxpayer) bailouts the last resort of government regulators? And would bailouts be necessary if banking institutions were not press ganged into making untenable loans to minorities as a result of people like—well, Dodd and Frank—and threatened with federal retaliation if they refused to issue bad paper?

The Worldwide Socialist Totalitarian Conspiracy that Governs Us (file photo)

The Worldwide Socialist Totalitarian Conspiracy that Governs Us (file photo)

In fact, six years after the passage of this harebrained rewrite of our financial laws, Dodd-Frank has beaten small bankers senseless, left large bankers leveraged against the flurry of endlessly incomprehensible rules and regulations with which the legislation bristles, strangled access to credit, and set us up for a banking collapse that could dwarf 2007. As you seem to perceive, Donald, the whole mess was concocted by politicos who either believed or who found it expedient to pretend that deregulation caused the banking crisis. But when the federal government coerces banks into behaving incautiously, there is no deregulation. And Barney Frank and Little Chrissie Dodd running the nation’s finances makes no more sense than Joseph Stalin trying to run the Soviet Union’s agricultural programs or railroads. It was ridiculous back when Barney and Chrissie (and Dick Durbin –remember him?) were busy causing the credit collapse, and became even more ridiculous when the same culprits expressed outrage at the problems they’d caused and volunteered to fix them, whereupon Frank and Dodd churned out a 14,000 page bill…or rather, they agreed to carry the bill forward on behalf of the shadowy forces that concocted it. WOOF could explain these shadowy forces in detail, but it would require another 8,000 words—so for brevity’s sake we like to call them the Worldwide Totalitarian Socialist Conspiracy that Governs Us (somebody says we stole that particular description from the John Birch Society, but so far they haven’t complained). _________________________________



Defense Okay, so far so good! In fact, people often ask us things from time to time like “who would you choose for secretary of defense?” And we always got a kick out of replying “Mad Dog Mattis!” which remark would probably leave more liberals aghast if only more liberals knew who on earth he was– but it sufficed to scare the bejabbers out of the better informed amongst them. It also–have not the slightest doubt–drove Barack Hussein Obama up the Oval Office wall, he having purged the legendary Marine along with scores of other combat-hardened career officers in his putsch to oust  battle-worthy commanders from the military’s top ranks, making way for the kinds of sycophantic careerists with whom he prefers to populate the Pentagon (WOOF story here). And while this was going on, Obama’s short-lived but remarkably destructive secretary of defense, Chuck Hagel, was outspokenly determined to reduce the ranks of our military to the smallest number of active units since before World War II, at which he succeeded, sad to say–given how a vastly reduced military prior to World War II conduced rather obviously to America’s involvement in–well–World War II.  And this in the face of massive build-ups by Russia and Red China whose forces have been consistently upgraded and expanded since the beginning of the present century, and whose militaries are mainly deployed in anticipation of armed conflict with those forces that survived Chuck Hagel’s  meat grinder. “The U.S. Military…is aging. It’s shrinking in size,” warns Dakota Wood, a Heritage Foundation analyst. And this, sir Donald, is profoundly understated.


Why don’t things like Obama and Chuck Hagel ever happen to the Chinese?

Here’s a thought: You could make Our Beloved Helmsman even more frantic were you to appoint, say, Jim Webb as Secretary of the Navy. Yes, he was SecNav already under Reagan, but now that Mr. Webb is a Democrat (and a sufficiently outspoken and insubordinate one to keep the DNC in conniptions) it would be fun to ask him to return and once again set about the creation of a 600-hull fleet.  We at WOOF have been lambasted a time or two for recommending that the Iowa class battleships be once again recalled to service– and by a number of well-informed, patriotic readers who happen to think the idea is–well–stupid. But we’d still be okay seeing the three ships in this category returned to the high seas–call us hopeless romantics–but don’t you think it might be worth considering, Mr. Donald? Those Iowa BBs are big–they’re huge. Huge.


Nothing says “huge!” like nine 16″ rifles–just sayin’

But apart from this admittedly arguable recommendation, there is no escaping the fact that our naval presence around the world is now dangerously thin. As we mentioned, Webb built Reagan a 600-hull navy–and in fact, the average size of the U.S. fleet since World War II has been better than 700 ships. Know how many we have at the moment, Mr. Donald? If you guessed 273, you’re doing well—but our Navy isn’t. It cannot keep ships deployed in a number of theatres important to the global maritime environment. Our international adversaries are well aware of these gaps in the Navy’s coverage and you can be sure they are itching to exploit them. Without firing a shot they can focus influence in regions that may be co-opted into alliances or reliances on potential enemies to the detriment of American interests—and this must be addressed quickly. Sea power remains the most visible and influential form of military might. Building ships, improving weaponry, and keeping our technologies ahead of the curve will cost a lot, but we cannot afford to continue downsizing and revising our Naval presence.

The U.SS. Zumwalt is pretty cool--she is the name vessel of 28 more ships, all but two of which got cancelled by the Administration. And the Zumwalt broke down on her shake-down cruise--a little help?

The U.S.S. Zumwalt is pretty cool–she is the name vessel of 28 more ships in her class of Destroyers, all but two more of which got cancelled by the Administration. And the Zumwalt broke down on her shakedown cruise–a little help?

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel speaks to U.S. troops at the Al Udeid Airbase, west of Doha December 10, 2013. Hagel briefed Qatari leaders on Tuesday about the effort to destroy Syria's chemical weapons, and he underscored U.S. support for Syria's moderate opposition. Hagel met with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad and Defence Minister Hamad bin Ali al-Attiyah on the last day of a visit to the region to reassure Gulf Arab allies of continuing U.S. support, despite disagreements over Washington's policy toward Syria and its diplomatic overtures to Iran. Picture taken December 10. REUTERS/Mark Wilson/Pool (QATAR - Tags: MILITARY POLITICS) - RTX16DBM

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel uses hand gestures to show troops how to shrink to pre-WWII levels and yet remain a credible deterrent. Some skepticism is detectable in the ranks.

The Army is in even sadder shape.  Aside from the desperate need for improvements in the areas of enhanced lethality, enhanced survivability, improved communications systems, and imaginative advances in its avionic and electronic warfare programs, it needs two-hundred-and-fifty thousand more troops.

Another thing--have you noticed that "nose art" has deteriorated at the same rate as our military supremacy? Maybve you should revive that, too, Donald sir!

Another thing–have you noticed that “nose art” has deteriorated at the same rate as our air supremacy? Maybe you should revive that, too, Donald sir!

And then there is air power to consider. As you come to office,  Red China is phasing more than 1,000 advanced fighters into service.  They will be deployed in full before the end of your first term. Russia is racing to modernize its force of fighter and bomber aircraft. Meanwhile, we are still trying to get the F-35 to stay in the air and not catch fire on takeoff. You see, President Obama killed the F-22 Raptor, so we only have about 120 of those magnificent fighters operational. The idea was that the F-35 would be so much better. This is an old liberal ploy, Donald, sir—kill an efficient weapons project with promises of something much better to come, and then either deploy a flock of turkeys or kill the next project, too, on the same premise. But in battle, a sky full of something is better than a portfolio full of promises.


Consider also Northrop’s unbuilt F-23; another excellent fighter option that doesn’t catch fire or suffer “brain problems,” and that looks really awesome, don’t you think?

Build war planes—and build them using your particular genius for cutting through the bureaucratic bologna and wangling the best bang for the buck. To begin with, reboot F-22 production to the tune of an additional 250. That action alone will answer the Chinese expansion profoundly. The F-35 may ultimately prove serviceable in several capacities, but it is too complex, too expensive, and sacrifices too much maneuverability in the name of technological gimmickry to be relied upon as a our first line fighter. Oh, and our Navy needs fighter aircraft that suit its particularly strenuous requirements for carrier duty—don’t saddle them, or the Marines, with a compromise like the F-35 that satisfies nobody because it was meant to satisfy everybody.

F-35s catching fire on their runways--Obama's emphasis on the aircraft's greater destructive capacity neglected to mention that a good deal of it is self-directed.

F-35s catching fire on the ground–Obama’s emphasis on the aircraft’s greater destructive capacity neglected to mention that a good deal of it seems to be self-inflicted.


General Daniel “Chappie” James

Sadly, sir Donald, we must also refurbish and update our nuclear missiles. Your predecessor has been cutting back on  them as fast as he can, and the damage to our security is extreme.  The Russians will take note of improvements to our strategic bomber and missile forces and respect it—and so will the doddering commie oligarchs in Beijing, who are all Maoist atheists and in no hurry to be disintegrated, trust us. Wars aren’t won or prevented on a budget—but a close eye on how an expanded budget is managed at the Pentagon can put us out front again. As Air Force General Daniel “Chappie” James once told a contingent of his fellow Black Americans who complained that his campaign for the B-1 meant less money available for improved sewage systems in East Burbank, “Without the B-1, there won’t be any East Burbank.” You should really hire General James, Donald, except he’s been dead since 1978. Nobody’s perfect!


"Whose ox shall we gore today?"

Whose ox shall we gore today?” (Nyuck, nyuck!)

Budget cutting. Cutting taxes increases revenue. But this fact is so little understood by anybody other than Arthur Laffer and everyone in the WOOF cave, that cutting taxes can never be proposed as an economic stimulus without legions of critics chanting, “What budget cuts will you make to offset the loss in revenue?” And of course, budget cuts are a great idea in and of themselves, because we conservatives favor budgetary restraint, as Jeff Sessions has presumably taught you by now. But when you encounter demands for budget cuts from those afflicted with the sophism that reducing taxes amounts to reducing revenues, you will notice they seem overwhelmingly of the opinion that it can’t really be done (which is how you know they never wanted taxes reduced in the first place).  They all say the same thing, to wit, “Whose ox are you willing to gore?”  Ignore the planted axiom that all federal purse tightening must slash welfare and entitlement programs (although this is never an unattractive idea), and tell them you have quite a few substantial cuts in mind that lie outside the province of these gored oxen. As they blink uncomprehendingly, compound their bewilderment by suggesting that for starters you plan to sell Amtrak and the post office for a dollar apiece. Stress that the price is open to negotiation.

irsindexQuickly, while their minds reel with visions of motionless locomotives wrapped in vines and undeliverable parcels, add that you want to dissolve the IRS.  There is no constitutionally defensible basis upon which this tyrannical and politically malignant institution can justify its existence–and the multitudes that inhabit its dark kingdom can be replaced by any number of simple and equitable tax plans. Why not ask Ted Cruz for help devising a plan that will benefit the exchequer without immiserating the citizenry or shredding the bill of rights?  It’s time you two buried the hatchet, and if you can bury the IRS along with it, so much the better.

Next–get rid of the Department of Education. The media will scream that without it, our youth will fall prey to ignorance and illiteracy, but that’s what we believe you New Yorkers call crap. You know about the NEA, right? No other professional organization points annually to the increasingly poor product its members produce as evidence that its members deserve raises. Well, the whole Department of Education was created by Jimmy Carter as a pay-off to the National Education Association for its support in his 1976 election. Nobody needed it then or now. It spent 80 billion this year alone, and achieved nothing except a continued decline in the literacy and general educational levels of America’s school children. Under Obama it became a major promoter of “Common Core” which is a bane to the Republic and a propaganda utensil intended by its radical creators to turn our sons and daughters into America-loathing ignoramuses with no actual concept of their own history, cultural significance, or identities.


Eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency will have every liberal academic and media flak in America ranting that you are destroying the planet and polluting the very air we breath (can’t you just hear them?) but in fact, the EPA is a clown act even when it isn’t functioning as a hit squad for leftist political ends. In August, it caused the massive collapse of a mine in Colorado. It also spilled millions of gallons of heavy-metal-contaminated goo into the Animas River and thence into the waterways of three states.  In 2013, in the midst of a blinding snowstorm, a cohort of EPA bravos donned helmets, vests, and combat utility harnesses, hefted their M-4 assault rifles, adjusted their goggles, and marched menacingly into Chicken, Alaska (WOOF did not make that up) to raid the alleged operational epicenter of a gang of  Clean Water Act violators headquartered in a copper mine. The Chicken raiders encountered no armed resistance from the dumbfounded workers, but several House subcommittee Republicans branded the mission “an effort to intimidate miners.” The EPA insisted it was acting to protect Alaskan fisheries from pollutants issuing from mining operations, while the mining CEO accused them of exercising “an authority that nowhere has Congress given them, to go across America and determine where development should occur and where it shouldn’t.”

Undeterred by snowfall, the EPA's heavily armed paramilitary wing assaults Chicken, Alaska.

Undeterred by snowfall, the EPA’s heavily armed paramilitary wing prepares to assault Chicken, Alaska.

Rep. Darrell Issa, (R-Calif) attempted to look into the matter, but when his committee subpoenaed the EPA biologist whose advice triggered the raid, the guy disappeared. When Issa’s committee sought the biologist’s computer records, they disappeared too. The EPA “discovered” that all documents covering the mine episode in Chicken between April 2007 and May 2009 had vanished. Meanwhile, it transpired that the mine on which the biologist based his recommendation was not the mine the EPA raided, but rather “an imaginary mine the EPA invented,” as explained by Washington Examiner columnist Ron Arnold, who added, “You can’t respect anything the EPA says.”

Of course at one time everyone in Detroit just drank Stroh's, but we hear those days are gone too.

Of course at one time in Detroit people just drank Stroh’s, but we hear those days are gone too.

Meanwhile, perhaps most infamously, residents of Flint, Michigan called in the EPA to help with water contamination. But EPA decided to save money by introducing water from the Flint River as Flint’s tap water. The water was so polluted it ate away the pipes, further contaminating Flint’s water supply, which fact the EPA set about trying to cover up. The agency would have allowed Flint residents to continue drinking lead-contaminated water if it hadn’t gotten caught. Just get rid of them, Donald, sir. Don’t just drain the swamp– clear the air. We will all breathe easier.

hudimagesOther government agencies ripe for demobilization include the Department of Energy (another Carter brainstorm that led immediately to gas rationing and soaring prices at the pump), the Department of Commerce (whose very existence threatens commerce) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, named after a novel but hopelessly dated Paul Newman film. And when was the last time, sir, you looked over at Ivana during breakfast and said, “Say, honey, anything in the paper about whether Europe is complying with the Helsinki Accords?” Not for a while, right? And yet we find dollars in every year’s federal budget (except for those years when Obama didn’t bother submitting one, of course) to maintain a cold-war relic known as the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Europe can get along just fine without it, or perhaps more accurately, it won’t be any the worse for its absence.

Heck, even the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a paramilitary arm under Obama—remember when they raided the Gibson guitar factory and seized materials and computer records because Gibson’s president gives money to Republican causes? Fortunately, Gibson finally got its wood back and created the “government model” guitar series (buy some here) to mock the event—but our mental jury is still out on Fish and Wildlife—maybe we’ll wait to hear from Chuck Berry on the matter.

And do you know what the Federal Citizen Information Center (FCIC) does? It provides information–stuff like how to buy a new car, arrange a college loan, transplant your fluimagesDwarf fothergilla shrubs, install drainage around your home, or connect with additional government agencies if you need…well…additional government agencies. The FCIC mission statement touts the Center’s function as “answering questions relating to government services…” so here’s one: Why, in the age of the Internet, do we need the FCIC?

And then we have the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR). Originally established to “identify policies to improve the fiscal situation in the medium term” and “achieve fiscal sustainability over the long run,” the Commission has obviously failed and can  best serve both its stated goals by disbanding.  But since the Center stubbornly refuses to see reason, you may have to be firm…all in the name of fiscal responsibility, of course.



Other tax-funded organizations you might consider terminating include the obviously feckless United States Institute of Peace; the quaintly antiquated Board on Geographic Names (USBGN), founded to ensure consistent spelling of map locations as the railroad expanded Westward, and the Federal Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds (FICMNEW), which we mention not only because nobody needs it, but also for its metaphoric implications pertaining to  these and countless additional agencies crying out for eradication. We could fill an entire article citing additional examples of federal flab in desperate need of actuarial liposuction, but you get the idea, right?



ISIS At home, begin by supporting passage of the “Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2015,” or S.2230, and never mind that the chief sponsor is Ted Cruz, this is vital legislation bimagesaimed at stopping Islamic extremism’s piecemeal establishment of Sharia law here at home. Abroad, you must proceed with a level of violence inflicted on major targets with such repetitive, yet often unpredictable brutality that the foundations of Islam tremble. You have this power; we will leave it to your Joint Chiefs to advise you on the particulars.  Do not go gentle.


imagesIsrael  Oh, and God wants you to mend fences with Israel. No, not your personal fences, they’re fine–but under Obama the United States has spared no effort to belittle, insult, vilify, and/or delegitimize the Jewish State while embarrassing and insulting its leadership.  Obama’s anti-Israeli exertions include his efforts to humiliate Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, to return Israel to the indefensible borders predating the Six Days War, pour hundreds of millions of dollars into Iran’s war chest while encouraging its leadership–the proverbial Mad Mullahs–to perfect and complete construction of atomic weaponry to be used against the Jewish State, his (unsuccessful) attempt to rig the Israeli elections to result in Bibi Netanyahu’s defeat, and finally his sticking his thumb in Israel’s eye by abstaining from a UN vote crucial to Israel’s border security followed by John Kerry’s outgoing anti-semitic rant intended to disparage our most reliable ally in the Middle East and sell it down the river (which in this case would be the East River).  All of this must be turned around quickly, sir Donald–and supporting Israel wholeheartedly is the quickest way to dampen media gossip about your “Alt Right” proclivities into the bargain.



Maybe mention he’d look cooler if he wore the strap over his head instead of under his chin?

Putin  Apparently, President Obama decided not to leave office without uttering at least one sentiment that was indisputably valid. Toward this end, one assumes, he recently averred that  “Over a third of Republican voters approve of Vladimir Putin, the former head of the KGB.  Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave.” Notwithstanding the probability that Old Dutch has been spinning in his grave for the last eight years, Slow Rappin’ Preezy had a point.  Sure, his hypocrisy was at full blast, since he cheerfully played flunky to Mr. Putin throughout his first term, even begging Russia’s indulgence on the occasion of the famous live-microphone incident in which Obama could be heard begging Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to prevail upon “Vladimir” to grant him more time to further weaken American missile defense efforts, assuring the Russian that “This is my last election–after my election, I have more flexibility.”  So in other words, if the idea of pro-Russian conservatives seems a jarring departure from tradition, so do throngs of liberals abandoning a convention of irrational Russophilia dating all the way back to the New Deal in order to thunder patriotically against the bloody-fanged Slavic hordes of the East.  On the Left, of course, this is simply further evidence–if any were needed–that principles are largely adaptable to whatever pretense furthers the collectivist cause at the moment.

Teddy Kennedy loved the Russians--why, he even begged Breshnev to interfere in the 1984 election. (Actually, didn't Brezhnev get more votes than Mondale?)

Teddy Kennedy dearly loved the Russians–why, he even begged Brezhnev to interfere with the 1984 election. (Come to think of it, didn’t Brezhnev get more votes than Mondale?)

That said, Vladimir Putin, while certainly an interesting case study, is not an all around  good guy, Mr. Donald.  He is a fascinating guy, a smart guy, a guy it was fun to watch serially outwit Obama and his secretaries of state in Syria and around the world… even a  guy you might want to hang out with, ride a few bears with, shoot some Tokarev automatic pistols with– learn some Judo from–but  never mistake him for a geopolitical buddy– he’s not your pal, he’s not your ally, and no, George W. Bush never looked into his eyes and saw his soul. What he saw was sociopathy. So by all means, remain friendly toward Pooty Poot, enjoy his company, and maintain the warmest possible relationship with Russia–but never forget:  When this guy doesn’t like you, he puts polonium-210 in your borscht. Don’t drink the borscht, Mr. Donald–please!

Beats a walk in the birch woods any day, right?

Beats a walk in the birch woods any day, right?



And that’s it for this December, anyhow, Mr. PEOTUSA.  Congratulations, again! Looking forward to your inaugural–which reminds us–we haven’t gotten our invitations yet, are you sure you have the address right? Remember, it’s a cave–so it can be a bit dodgy finding us. Use Federal Express, they know where we live…they always get our copies of National Review here okay–oops–forget we said that. We’re all in your corner now, Donald Sir; and it’s going to be huge!WOOF PRINT


ZOMBIES, WITCHES, CLINTONS and KAINE! (WOOF Celebrates Birthday #4; Awash in the Demon Haunted Matrix of 2016!)

In "The horror...the horror!" forum on October 31, 2016 at 9:04 am


As we always explain at the outset of these birthday reviews, it’s once again the anniversary of WOOF’s entrance upon the cyberspacial stage, which is to say, in a less self-absorbed context, that it is once again Halloween. And as we also remark every year, it just so happens (and it truly does just so happen) that WOOF entered the blogosphere with its first hesitant and shabbily configured post on October 31, 2012. And here we are, four years later, the same dedicated band of jovial troglodytic counter-revolutionaries ensconced in our secret cave on the rocky coast of the tempestuous Atlantic, wishing ourselves another happy birthday.

Manifest horrors… 


A pretty scary decade!

As alwaysin keeping with the season, we now proceed to document the spookiest phenomena of the year to date, and this–we regret to say–means paying special attention this year to the scariest idea since demonic possession was re-popularized in the ‘70s  (which was a pretty scary decade, by the way), by which we mean Hillary Clinton becoming President. And that thought conjures a variety of terror that aficionados of the horror genre call “manifest.” In a way, it is the least sophisticated aspect of the art—the part of the movie where the monster appears and comes right at you. Sure, it’s scary, but overtly–almost cathartically so–and never quite so viscerally unnerving as the deeper psychological impact of its subtler counterpart, “implicit” terror.

TRUE FACT: Hillary's head does not actually spin around backwards--this is a misconception attributable the fact that certain lighting effects combine with the Secretary's Mao jacket collars to create the illusion of her head facing backwards.

TRUE FACT: Hillary’s head does not actually spin completely around–this is a misconception attributable to the fact that certain lighting effects combine with the Secretary’s Mao jacket collars to create the illusion of her head facing backwards.

For example, think about the parts in those teen slasher flicks where some supernaturally unvanquishable creature—say, Michael Meyers, or the other guy–the guy in the hockey mask–shows himself and begins lumbering after the screaming teenage coed, knife swishing around menacingly, massive figure looming, dead eyes beaming cold homicidality…all on the big screen….that’s manifest horror. Okay, Mrs. Clinton doesn’t have a knife, but otherwise it’s the same idea. The point is that regardless of whether we’re gaping at Jason or Hillary, the threat is right before our eyes, and while our adrenaline may be pumping uncontrollably, there is at least the oddly comforting realization that this is it–a stark confrontation with a malevolent creature from the Pit.  Hillary Clinton increasingly embodies that ghastly mythologem: the malignant crone of a thousand goose-bump-raising folktales–stumbling and wobbling toward the prize as if upheld by some occult force—and we watch helplessly, captives of a waking nightmare. But as in most nightmares, something nameless exerts an even darker influence on our souls, and strikes us with an even greater fear…

And deeper fears….

The most terrifying influences are psychological—and deeply so, in ways that incorporate those equally vital elements: suspense, and trepidation. Isn’t it scarier watching the coeds wander around outdoors with their dorky candles and flashlights, looking for whatever made the creepy noise outside their cabin, than it is to watch the monster chase them? Or at least unsettling in a creepier, more insidious way? These subtler manifestations of the macabre remind us of Lovecraft’s decree that “the oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is…of the unknown.”

“Hello, police? We’d like to report something creepy moving around outside–we think it might be the worldwide totalitarian socialist conspiracy that governs us!”


creep-sideAnd what dimly intuited dread gnaws at the peace of mind of everyday, red-blooded Americans, you ask? Well, okay, you didn’t really ask—but since we have a reply ready to hand, we’re going to pretend you did so we can tell you the answer. Perhaps it’s already occurred to you, or you may have jammed it so deeply into your unconscious that it only occasionally pecks at your awareness like an abreactive vulture—but the answer is: All those other Americans! Seriously, who are they?

led-three-livesTake that  TV show about sympathetic communist spies—what makes such a reprehensible formula salable outside the febrile sanctums of Hollywood? How did we get from Richard Carlson punching out commies for America in I Led Three Lives (1953-1956) to the current fare in which good-guy commies punch out properly degenerate capitalistic Americans? You may feel prompted to reply, “Aha, because so many of our fellow citizens are strangely dislocated from the American ethos; that’s what you’re getting at!” And yes, that’s part of the answer—but why do the rest of us watch? We believe a substantial subset of viewers are half-knowingly in search of answers—seeking to understand these others who come advertised as “The Americans.” And our curiosity seems justified given how many others traipsed distraitly to the polls only four years ago to re-elect the first blatantly anti-American president in our national history. Who are these people, and what on earth befell them between birth and their collective transfigurement?  What hidden force controls them; what infernal delusions motivate them?


Pod people…!

We haven’t kept count of how many seed-pods-in-the-basement jokes Glenn Beck has made recently, but they’re nothing to laugh at.  The seed-pod trope has endured in popular vernacular longer than its origins have lingered in popular memory. Just as thousands of water-cooler debaters exhort dissenting co-workers to “just keep drinking that kool-aid” without the foggiest notion of what happened in Jonestown, Guiana, so polemicists like Beck avert to “pod people” without giving any particular thought to which pop-cultural event begat the image. But here at WOOF we’ve been giving it plenty of thought. (You probably saw that coming, right?)

film1956-invasionofthebodysnatchers-originalposterThe 1956 film Invasion of the Body Snatchers originated the pod-people allusion. The average citizen may not recall this minor masterpiece from Don Siegel and Walter Wanger, but graduates of college film courses recall it. That’s because contemporary professors of the cinematic arts loftily reference the film as a blatant example of that era’s greatest evil: McCarthyism. The lectures never vary. Students learn that science fiction films of the 1950’s sought to recast the Red Menace as invaders from space, thus offering film-goers a cathartic release from their cold-war “paranoia.” Mostly, of course, this is unvarnished flapdoodle—but in the case of Body Snatchers, the pundits have a valid point. What they uniformly omit from their critiques, of course, is that McCarthy had a valid point too. He saw the Body Snatchers coming.

“Call the FBI!…Oh, wait…”

Are we seriously suggesting that a movie about seed pods from space materializing in peoples’ basements in small town America and gradually growing to resemble and ultimately replace the unsuspecting townsfolk, offers some sort of vital sociopolitical insight for our times?  Yes. In fact, what critic Leonard Maltin called the picture’s “McCarthy-era subtext” powerfully depicts the undiscerning insouciance of ordinary Americans who fail to notice friends, loved ones, and trusted authorities transforming into monotonic doppelgangers bent on subverting the very culture they inhabit. The town physician (played by the coincidentally appellated Kevin McCarthy) notices, but he can’t get anyone to believe him. Aware that the pod people replace humans while they sleep, the doctor fills his pockets with Benzedrine, grabs his extremely beautiful if incongruously British fiancée (Dana Wynter) and makes a break for it.


Sad to say Dana dozes off for a moment and she awakens a gosh darned communist pod person from space– but we still love her.

“Yes, it’s an emergency!”

Dana must have forgotten to take her Benzedrine because she falls asleep and gets co-opted by the space commies, but (Kevin) McCarthy escapes to a neighboring town where he  explains the situation to law enforcement. Understandably, the cops send in a psychiatrist who is about to ship our hero off to a padded cell when suddenly, compelling evidence turns up from another source that verifies his story. The last line in the movie is spoken by the suddenly-persuaded psychiatrist who snatches up the office phone and thunders, “Operator, get me the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Yes, it’s an emergency!

Future Democrat voters.

Future Democrat voters.

Today, the creepiest mystery haunting America is the rationally incomprehensible transformation of nearly half the population into what less gracious blogs might call brainwashed, zombified stooges. Who are these pod citizens who pursue their petty amusements while the Constitution is mocked, the President legislates, Supreme Court Justices toy with their fundamental liberties, and our exchequer is bled dry? Who are the Americans shrugging indifferently as their health care is sabotaged, their children rendered clueless by Common Core, their safety jeopardized by government-approved racial strife, their Joint Chiefs replaced with sycophantic careerists, their Internet handed off to a consortium of thugs, and their economy deliberately incapacitated? Do these people have seed pods in their basements? Are they the hapless victims of some sinister mind-control device? Oh, and about that….


In case this segment frightens you, the liberal media have even produced a book proving there is no such thing as the liberal media--you may find it soothing!

In case this segment frightens you, the liberal media have even produced a book proving there is no such thing as the liberal media–you may find it comforting.

Speaking of sinister mind control,the liberal media receive this year’s thing-that-would-not-die award. Of all the cultural monstrosities that beleaguer us, they remain the most conspicuously undead. The final phases of journalistic decomposition, like the final throes of rabies, seem to be the most frenzied and delirious. True, this may be the last major election the media can so shamelessly skew. Surveys suggest that only 6 percent of Americans trust the news nowadays, and (mirabile dictu!) Democrats trust it more than all other categories of respondents. The willingness of pod-voters to cast off the blessings of liberty in exchange for statism’s illusory gewgaws may be at least partly ascribable to massive doses of daily media misdirection.

Runner up: Carlos Danger rides again!

Runner up: Carlos Danger rides again!

Today, even if some freshly aroused citizen were to suddenly take note of the creeping terror at his doorstep, snatch up his phone and demand, ““Operator, get me the Federal Bureau of Investigation!” What good would it do? When James Comey proves unwilling to pursue justice if the result might embarrass the Clinton political machine; and subsequent revelations reveal that the Bureau’s chief function during the Hillary investigation consisted of handing out immunity to her accomplices like party favors–it becomes obvious that even America’s vaunted G-Men have slumbered, and fallen victim to the Body Snatchers. But this brings us to RUNNER UP for our thing-that-would-not-die categorythe perennial Anthony Weiner! If we can credit the latest news flashes, Director Comey now seems poised to redeem his organization by renewing the Clinton investigation; and this because “new evidence” has appeared—and the “new evidence” comes, apparently, by way of the Bureau’s investigation of the Weiner scandal–meaning that Hillary may be sucked into “Weinergate” through Huma Abedin’s cell phone. And that, Woofeteers, is a sentence that could only have been written this Halloween!


It takes a GLOBAL village?

Cardinal Sarah--another one of those uppity out-of-towners lecturing America's

Cardinal Sarah–another one of those uppity out-of-towners who doesn’t understand progress.

At May’s National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., Cardinal Robert Sarah opined that in the United States, “God is being eroded, eclipsed,liquidated, in the name of ‘tolerance’.” As evidence, Sarah cited “the legalization of same sex marriage, the obligation to accept contraception within health care programs, and ‘bathroom bills’ that allow men to use women’s restrooms and locker rooms.”  And as if that weren’t offensive enough to the sensibilities of his contemporaries, the Cardinal ended with an even more intolerable microaggression, asking “Should not a biological man use the men’s restroom?” But then, Cardinal Sarah is from Guinea, West Africa, and can be forgiven the archaic bias or two.  It is peculiar, isn’t it, how often a proper understanding of multiculturalism seems lost on foreigners!


Yes, globalism’s mission to spread the joys of corporatist collusion, U.N. corruption and “social justice” by fiat,  may be threatened by a handful of theological reactionaries. Fay Voshell, for instance, argued in the September 4th American Thinker that globalism constitutes a form of secular religion conducing toward a “world order in which all men pay allegiance to elite priests who rule over a World City without national borders.”  Demonstrating a theological mind set completely at odds with America’s mainstream churches, Voshell went on to argue that such concepts are, in fact, objectionable.  Wallace Henley, senior associate pastor of 2nd Baptist Church in Houston, Texas, called “the global governance scenario” “terrifying,” while Pastor Jim Garlow of Skyline Church in San Diego went so far as to call globalism “demonic at its core.” Globalism, it seems, has a bitter-clinger problem.

Professor Rabkin, contra mundi.so to speak.

Professor Rabkin, contra mundi.so to speak.

Not all opponents of globalism are Bible-belt rustics, however.  George Mason University Law School Professor Jeremy Rabkin–who is immune to accusations of fundamentalist dementia by virtue of being Jewish, which means that people like Hillary can only deprecate his heritage privately or in emails–published The Case for Sovereignty: Why The World Should Welcome American Independence, in which he argues for American exceptionalism, a concept uniformly appalling to Leftists.  More to the point, Rabkin told an interviewer that globalism is “a little creepy, a little uncanny. It’s basically saying ‘We are going to organize the world in a way that establishes an artificial consensus.’ It’s not enough to say it’s undemocratic. It’s threatening; it’s almost demonic.”

The devil, you say!

Well, what if it’s not almost demonic? In 2004, an official decree from Pope John Paul II instructed every Catholic diocese to appoint a qualified exorcist.  Pope Francis, despite his reputation for exhibiting dishearteningly progressive views on sundry matters, is known to support the rite of exorcism wholeheartedly. In fact, Francis himself performed an informal exorcism on a wheelchair-bound parishioner two years ago. What’s up?


SPOILER ALERT!  Linda Blair remembered a lot in Exorcist II, although Richard Burton was drunk throughout filming and claimed not to remember anything. Actually, Linda looks a lot better here than the film ever did.

hillary use itWe have a very secularized society in which, more than in the past, there’s the tendency to open the doors to occultism,” explains Father Pedro Barrajon, director of the Vatican’s Instituto Sacerdos. Fortunately there are experts on hand like Italian priest Gabriele Amorth, who has personally cast out 160,000 demons and heads the Catholic International Association of Exorcists—did you know that was even a thing? Amorth’s organization agrees that demonic activity is on the rise—and warns against such subtle seductions as ouija boards…and  yoga.  Suddenly Hillary’s rush to delete those 30,000 yoga-related emails makes sense!

Fr. Amorth believes priests should exorcise frequently.

Fr. Amorth believes priests should exorcise regularly.

Father Amorth went public earlier this month with concerns that his Church may not be able to hold the line against Lucifer.  In Italy, at least, young priests are quailing at the thought of performing exorcisms, declaring the process too terrifying. “There are only nine of us left and many more are needed,” Amorth lamented. “We need other priests like me to meet the needs of so many families.”

Fortunately, Americans are made of sterner stuff.  Sociologist Michael Cuneo insists that “Exorcism is more readily available today in the United States than perhaps ever before,” adding that “there are at least five or six hundred evangelical exorcism ministries in operation today, and quite possibly two or three times this many.” But to date, only Mexico has undergone a national exorcism. Last May, Spain’s noted exorcism expert, Fr José Antonio Fortea, joined forces with Cardinal Juan Sandoval Íñiguez, Archbishop Emeritus of Guadalajara in performing the rare “exorcismo magno,” an effort to deliver the entire country from demonic possession.  Should the United States contemplate such a self-administered cleansing? Or just build a wall in case the effort in Mexico fails?


Demons even go viral in sonograms—like the one featured in The Daily Mail last January.   The sonogram is real, although the mother prefers to remain anonymous. The Mail’s readers claimed to see a demonic entity watching the developing baby.  WOOF’s Readers may be relieved to learn that several authenticated sonograms have also appeared in which an image of Jesus was detected, (see example below for reassurance).


ISIS actually blew up the original temple of Baal last August because Baal was not a Muslim. The UN called the action a war crime, and then broke for tea..

ISIS actually blew up the original temple last August because Baal isn’t a Muslim. The UN called the action “a war crime,” and then broke for lunch.

And as if  all that weren’t weird enough, author Michael Snyder warns that near-exact replicas of the arch  over the entrance to the Temple of Baal in Palmyra, Syria, have been constructed in Times Square and  Trafalgar Square. Reuters confirmed the simultaneous unveilings, timed, many believe, to coincide with the occult festival of Baal. Sources including Breitbart and O’Reilly have featured reports about the twin arches, which Snyder fears will serve as “giant welcome signs for the Antichrist.” “From this point forward,”  he predicts, ” things are going to get much, much stranger.” We at WOOF are prepared to go out on a limb, and endorse Snyder’s prediction!

There have been signs!

Meanwhile, the baffling fascination insects display for socialist totalitarians-manque continues to dominate our “signs” category. Not only did bees pester Obama everywhere he went during his first term–he seemed incapable of keeping flies from landing on his face during speeches. Many dismissed this as happenstance, and sensibly reasoned that if insects were sending  other-worldly messages by swarming Obama, they would presumably target other progressive reprobates. This quieted our nerves at WOOF until the second Hillary/Trump debate. Hillary no sooner began screaking about her absurd plan to enforce a Syrian “no-fly zone,” than a fly planted itself determinedly above her left eye. Naturally this led us to consult Grayson Moseley Straith, WOOF’s own paranormal adviser, regarding the portent of these manifestations. Grayson replied that evidence of demonic involvement would be lacking, “unless the individuals made no effort to swat or wipe away the insects–as though powerless to do so.”  So now we’re really worried!

Guess who!

The New Yorker takes a surprisingly incisive editorial stance on the matter....

The New Yorker took a surprisingly enlightened editorial stance on the matter….

Even worse! The Antichrist is Barack Hussein Obama. We didn’t say that, Michelle Bachmann did–or at least she pretty much did. Check her out here. The beautiful conservative and former House member insists that Obama’s next ambition is to assume the top slot at the United Nations “and become King of the World.”  Despite the high regard in which we hold the congresswoman, WOOF continues to believe that Rappin’ Preezy is too sissified and dorky to qualify as the Antichrist.  For that matter, the United Nations is pretty sissified and dorky too…so we maintain that while Obama may be possessed,  he is almost certainly not the Antichrist. We qualify our opinion only because SNOPES bothered to rebut Bachmann’s claims at great length, thereby lending  them a modicum of credence.

Annual Halloween WITCH HUNT update!

High Commissioner Benjamin--further proof if any were needed that the Empire is finished.

High Commissioner Benjamin–further proof if any were needed that the British Empire is finished.

Our yearly witch-hunt update begins in sub-West Africa where the Republic of Ghana is rounding up thousands of alleged witches and stuffing them into internment camps. British High Commissioner Jon Benjamin felt prompted to demand the camps be closed. Obviously a man with little regard for multiculturalism, Benjamin bridled at suggestions he should respect local beliefs, rejoining, “Personally, I believe in the 21st Century it’s time to say there is no such thing as a witch and to decry the practice of using such a term to dehumanise vulnerable women.”  To what extent the Commissioner’s comments may have offended Wiccans is not immediately clear, but they made no discernible impression on the Ghanaians.

TRUE FACT: Despite their negative image, many witches are disturbingly attractive and should not be viewed naked without proper precautions!

TRUE FACT: Despite their popular image as hags and crones, many witches are disturbingly attractive and should not be viewed naked except by trained professionals!

Socialists everywhere may wish to pay special heed to the Republic of Benin this year, where the government announced that witchcraft explains why some people are more successful than others, and proposed state-sponsored counter-magical efforts to ensure an even playing field for its citizens.  Perhaps “income inequality” is banishable by magic? President Yahya Jammeh of Gambia, meanwhile, complains that he’s the target of evil spells. Despite Amnesty International’s objections, Gambia has already arrested over 1,000 witches suspected of anti-Jammehian spellweaving. Not to be outdone, Saudi Arabia has now created a total of nine anti-witchcraft bureaus which, according to the Arab News, have “achieved remarkable success.” In a recent case, witch-busters broke into the home of a suspected sorceress who, according to authorities, was caught in the act of casting a spell while naked, but eluded arrest by flying out her window, “like a bird!” Her flying abilities apparently gave way a few blocks from her apartment and she plunged through a rooftop, landing near a bed filled with sleeping children. There, the Witch Police found her unconscious and cuffed her before she could regain her senses and fly off.

Actual Saudi TV image of fallen witch. Fortunately, she's okay--disappointingly, she appears clothed. Her subsequent fate is unknown.

Actual Saudi TV image of fallen witch, stunned, but unrepentant.

According to the Times of India for March 17th, Agra played host toa horrifying incident, [in which] a man, who suspected his sister-in-law of practicing witchcraft and black magic on his family, chopped off her head with a sharp edged chopper in village Gadhia in the Mainpuri district of Uttar Pradesh on Thursday.”  The man, one Uttam (making him Uttam from Uttar, but we digress), blamed his sister-in-law, Dhandevi, the deceased alleged witch, for performing rites of sorcery leading to the death of his brother Thakur. We cannot help mentioning, in the interest of objectivity, that the Times’ most upvoted comment regarding the incident came from one Harrison H. McDonald, who remarked:


Cackling Witch” (stock photo)

“The fellow could have been correct. There are lots of witches flying around out there. One of them is running for President of the United States.”

And while we note that Mr. McDonald did not specify a candidate, evidence that Hillary is an occultic witch of the Illuminati is abundantly available at various Internet locations like this one. And lest you dismiss such conjecture out of hand, gentle readers, consider that the international belief in witchcraft remains surprisingly robust. Even in the civilized West a poll of Canadians and British subjects found that 13 percent believed in witches, while almost a quarter of Americans do. Naturally, WOOF made an exhaustive effort to locate survey data indicating what percentage of likely voters would knowingly support a witch’s presidential candidacy, but surprisingly, no such studies exist.


“You mean, like Democrats?”

ghost-breakersindexZombies are bigger than ever, of course– which continues to baffle those of us who thought they hit their stride when they recorded “She’s Not There”– but films, TV programs, and video games remain infested with the creatures. So what, exactly, is a zombie? Our favorite description derives from the 1940 comedy classic Ghost Breakers. In the film, Bob Hope and co-star Paulette Goddard find themselves in the tropics and beset by zombies. Baffled, they ask a local (played by Richard Carlson) for advice. Carlson explains that zombies have been raised from the dead. “That sounds horrible!” Goddard gasps. “It’s worse than horrible,” Carlson tells her,”because a zombie has no will of his own. You see them sometimes, walking around blindly, with dead eyes–following orders, not knowing what they do–not caring.” Hearing this, Hope asks “You mean like Democrats?”

The zombie Democrat theory got a boost of sorts when Hillary continued campaigning after her death was announced by ABC news.  On the evening of Hillary’s panicky exit from the 9/11 memorial followed by her sidewalk collapse, anchorman Joe Torres began his six o’clock news broadcast on New York’s WABC by saying, “Good evening. We begin with Hillary Clinton’s death.”  Adding to the episode’s surreal atmosphere, the program’s co-anchor continued smiling placidly through Torres’s dire pronouncement, as though she considered it settled history. Pressured for the facts, WABC dismissed Torres’s shocking lead as “a misstatement,” but rumor held that in reality, Torres had departed from contemporary journalistic standards and blurted out the truth.  The rumor gained stature when a tweet materialized purporting to show a screen shot of ABC’s webpage confirming that Clinton “died under hospital treatment at Montefiore Medical Hospital.”  In a rational era, the subsequent inability of anybody to locate such a posting on ABC’s site might have sufficed to discredit the tweet as a hoax; but in Obama’s America–where liberal news networks notoriously expunge or dramatically alter any website items displeasing to their DNC overlords–the post was rumored to have been stricken on orders from the campaign.

Cruel hoax, or yet another example of accidental journalism?

Cruel hoax, or accidental journalism?

Rumors quickly multiplied, including the notion that the woman who emerged feeling “great!” from Chelsea Clinton’s apartment was Hillary’s body double.  Twitter and the blogosphere blazed with support for this theory, mostly highlighting the putative differences in Mrs. Clinton’s figure and/or physiognomy before and after her widely viewed face-plant into her limousine. But even more ghoulish possibilities haunt our thoughts in the WOOF cave. After all, could a body double replace Hillary and also stumble like her? Screech like her? Pop her eyes out or cough like her, or phrase obviously focus-grouped rhetoric in those same painfully artificial tones?  It seems impossible. Which brings us to…..


colkidsindexWhat if Hillary recently underwent a head transplant? No, really. The internationally-renowned neurosurgeon Sergio Canavero (this year’s recipient of our Colander-of-Doom award) proposed the transplantation of human heads several years ago, explaining the process in a series of scientifically credible monographs detailing his plans  to re-animate lifeless bodies (after attaching his patients’ heads to them) with massive jolts of electrical current. In keeping with this markedly Gothic paradigm, Dr. Canavero turned to Germany for funding. “Today, I am officially asking Germany to help me realize the first cephalosomatic anastomosis in human history on German soil,” he announced, imploring Germans to “live up to what you are, a country that has set standards in medicine and technology for centuries.” Okay, that’s a little creepy.

Famed Italian neurosurgeon Sergio Canavera upon receiving word that Germany will sponsors his head transplants--what could possibly go wrong?

Famed Italian neurosurgeon Sergio Canavero receiving word that Germany will sponsor his head transplants–note his telltale Hillary-style  Mao jacket!

But even as Canavero petitioned the Fatherland, a seemingly unrelated  news item surfaced in an unlikely venue. The Washington Post reviewed Hillary’s misdeeds as Secretary of State in a manner shockingly close to the truth, concluding that “rarely, if ever, has a potential commander in chief been so closely associated with an organization [her own Foundation] that has solicited financial support from foreign governments.” And of the governments named, the United Arab Emirates and Germany figured most prominently. And since no thinking person would consider having her head transplanted in the United Arab Emirates, that leaves Germany, whose financiers’  interactions with the Clinton Cartel almost certainly include machinations that could prove ruinous if exposed. In such an atmosphere, a mutual willingness to grant occasional favors is understandable. One such favor might involve an affirmative response to Dr. Canavero’s seemingly ridiculous demand for funding. And indeed, just when things looked bleakest for cephalosomatic anastomosis, German funds were made available.  True, WOOF has not yet obtained specific evidence that Mrs.Clinton was secretly transported to Germany for a head transplant, but like James Comey–our investigation continues.


The unquiet dead…


Newman (premorbid), and large flower (background).

And lest you suppose, gentle readers, that zombies and politics never mix, consider how often dead people win elections! Take the case of Kansas City Councilwoman Hila “Dutch” Bucher Newman (D.) who ruled as Grande Dame of Missouri’s liberal establishment for decades.  Mrs Newman died of old age–thrilled that she had survived to see Hillary Clinton (whom she eulogized routinely) receive the presidential nomination.  And despite nationwide torrents of dutifully hagiographic testimonials lamenting her demise,  Councilwoman Dutch Newman was re-elected  on Aug. 3rd, one week after dying at age 95.  Nobody, apparently, dared suggest she relinquish her seat.


Boggs, flying high even in absentia

Also in Missouri, back in 2000, a lifeless Governor Mel Carnahan (D) defeated incumbent U.S. Senator John Ashcroft (R). The Governor was known to have died in a plane crash a month earlier, but he somehow managed to soldier on, winning the seat from Ashcroft who was certifiably alive, although never ostentatiously so. And in keeping with our Halloween missing-aircraft tradition, what about House Majority Leader Hale Boggs and Rep. Nick Begich? The plane carrying both politicians disappeared over Alaska on Oct. 16th, 1972–and not a trace of them or their plane was ever found despite exhaustive searching.  And if you think that’s spooky, consider this–not one, but both missing Democrats won re-election. Coincidence?

Florida Democrat Earl K. Wood died several weeks before the 2012 election yet managed to secure a twelfth term as Orange County’s Tax Collector in Orlando, Florida.  In 2010, Carl Geary won a landslide Mayoral victory in Tracy City, Tennessee, despite dying a month earlier. In 2009, Mayor Harry Stonebraker (D), was laid to rest weeks before he was swept to re-election by 90 percent of the vote in Winfield, Missouri. In 2008, Patsy Mink died of pneumonia one week after winning the Democratic primary for Hawaii’s second congressional district, but mysteriously remained on the ballot and won hands down, as it were.

Theodore S. Weiss--endorsed by the NYT despite being dead.

Theodore S. Weiss–endorsed by the NYT despite being dead.

Back in 1992 the New York Times endorsed Ted Weiss for re-election to congress from Manhattan’s West Side. The article acknowledged that Weiss was dead, having succumbed to heart failure days earlier, but encouraged voters to support his ticket anyway inasmuch as Weiss’s opponent was “a right-wing extremist.”  In those days, of course, the Times had subscribers–many of whom filed obediently to the poles handing Weiss a post-morbid walkaway (so to speak) of 54,168 votes to the hapless extremist’s 7,560.  The grisly question naturally presents itself–how many dead Democrat candidates are elected by majorities of equally dead Democrat voters?

zombie1Alarm was raised earlier this year concerning this very issue when J. Christian Adam, former Voting Section Attorney at the US Department of Justice, confirmed that “Dead people are voting!” As evidence, Adam cited a Pew Charitable Trust review of national voting roles that turned up nearly four million dead people who were deemed likely voters, many of whom appear to exercise their franchise regularly from beyond the grave. Astonishingly, irrespective of their politics when alive, dead people almost always vote a straight Democratic ticket—is that because their brains are decaying?


Madonna, vowing to make the dead grateful?

And as a postscript to these concerns, surely the emerging data cast an entirely different light on Madonna’s mid-October vow to perform oral sex on everyone who votes for Hillary Clinton this November–the sheer numbers alone seem daunting, and then there’s the whole abuse-of-a-corpse problem. But on the other hand, perhaps she intends to breathe new life (see what we did there?) into the long-foundering Horror Porn genre.


evil clown

Creepy clown sightings…third annual report! 

We at WOOF have been way out in front when it comes to creepy clowns. We began warning you about them in our 2nd birthday post back in 2014, and yet there are more of them now than ever–sort of like liberal celebrities. But the important distinction is that creepy clowns are elusive–and considerably less funny. And now, actual non-creepy clowns are in an uproar about the phenomenon.  In fact, we now have an official statement from the World Clown Association to the effect that “People dressed as horror clowns are not ‘real clowns.’ They are taking something innocent and wholesome and perverting it to create fear in their audience.” Accordingly, scores of professional clowns are preparing to participate in a Clown Lives Matter demonstration [which sounds clownishly microaggressive, but who are we to judge?] Nationally-respected talk show host Howie Carr, whose probity we deem unassailable), reports the WCA issued a statement denying that Democrat vice-presidential candidate Tim Kaine is one of them. Kaine meanwhile has yet to address charges that he may be a creepy clown, and WOOF’s inquiries to his office remain (we think tellingly) unanswered. Creepy clowns, meanwhile, are spreading through more states, apparently undeterred by the Worldwide Clown Association’s reprimands.


An authentic creepy clown photo verified by WOOF’s own Science and the Paranormal Directorate which affirms the photo shows real spooky clowns–not suspended models, inflated figures, or members of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Aw, see--now who did that? Some mean people on Twitter, probably--haters!

Tim Kaine–Aw, see–now who did that? Some mean people on Twitter, probably–haters!

Vigilant authorities in Alabama warn that anyone complicit in that state’s outbreak of clown appearances will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law—whichever law that might be.  In Dublin, Georgia, clowns were implicated in at least one auto accident. Police Chief Tim Chatman told local station 11 Alive that “it was a family member that reported it several hours later — that it was the reason why this accident occurred; because someone was in the road dressed like a clown.” Pressed for details, the Chief added,“We can’t say for certain that someone hasn’t seen anyone looking like a clown.”

v2-wascoclownWhen Lebanon, Tennessee experienced a series of clown encounters, the Tennessee Highway Patrol responded swiftly. One Coffee County student claimed she was attacked by one of the baffling bozos, although the story proved difficult to confirm in the absence of the clown. The Highway Patrol’s official bulletin on the subject encouraged citizens to be on the lookout for “suspicious clowns.” And clowns fitting that description turned up soon thereafter in neighboring South Carolina and Kentucky. In South Carolina, citizens of Greenville report a “clown flap” which began on August 21st  when coulrophobic callers lit up the switchboard at the Greenville police station.  The police were not amused—indeed, the Greenville police chief assured concerned residents that “clowning around will not be tolerated [because] It’s illegal. It’s dangerous. And it’s inappropriate…” and yet inappropriate clowns continue to manifest themselves in South Carolina and at least twelve other states. This has, you may be sure, drawn the attention of the Obama administration (also beset by clowns) which announced only this month that spooky clowns are “sinister,” and to be “taken seriously.” A spokesman for the President told reporters that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security “have been consulted on how to handle the scare.”  So, one assumes the President is focused on the problem like a laser, and a line in the sand may shortly be drawn. Despite these reassuring measures, a newly-released poll from Chapman University shows that 42 percent of Americans are afraid of clowns, whereas only 32 percent are afraid of climate change. We bet the overlap is considerable.

America strikes back!

“Not funny!”

Meanwhile, citizens have taken matters into their own hands, which is usually more efficient in the age of Obama.  During a creepy-clown outbreak in Athens, Georgia, an eleven-year-old girl was discovered with a knife in school. According to police the girl insisted she was carrying the knife “to protect her and her family because she had heard the stories about clowns jumping out of the woods and attacking children.”  The story fails to recount how police dealt with the young lady–presumably they commended her civic-mindedness.

When three creepy clowns showed up in Compton, California, they were confronted by angry locals, one of whom dispensed with formalities and landed a right cross on the nearest clown’s jaw. This sent the harlequins scampering–which is difficult in clown shoes. On October 5th, a creepy clown crept up on a car only to be assaulted by the occupants who beat him nearly unconscious with a baseball bat before discovering he was a friend attempting to frighten them. (Better safe, we think, than sorry!) On the same evening, a creepy clown confronted a woman in Auburn, Maine, formed a gloved hand to resemble a gun, and whispered “Bang!”  Maine, however, is a legal-carry state, and when the 49-year-old woman pulled her 9 mm automatic, the clown chose the better part of valor and beat feet.




Amazingly lifelike, seasonably terrifying, yet oddly unsalable!

Every fourth Halloween, newscasters rush around interviewing costume shop clerks, revisiting the decades-old hypothesis that mask sales predict election results. This year, we haven’t seen any such stories, possibly because “Trump is the most costume-marketable candidate in history,” according to Courtland Hickey, general manager of Chicago Costume. Thus, the Trumpster is this category’s clear winner. Oddly, despite Hillary leading the polls throughout September and most of October, trick-or-treaters are shunning her masks and stocking up on Trump costumes. Also, where is the fashion craze Mrs. Clinton’s day-glo Mao-Tse-Tung outfits should have ignited? The media unanimously hail her wardrobe as “trendy,” but–where’s the trend? Why aren’t progressive women bursting into toney fashion boutiques, demanding pantsuits à la  Hillary? Not since Braniff Airlines painted its passenger jets all sorts of voguish colors (before going bankrupt) has so much eyeball-busting variety been available to the fashion-conscious socialist, yet to date, only Angela Merkel seems to have caught the spirit.


Stronger together? So why aren’t feminists everywhere disporting themselves in outfits like these–from the ‘Hillary Line’ of Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s fall collection?


aliens among us!John Podesta is our 2016 winner in this category. Bill Clinton’s former Chief of Staff and Hillary’s current campaign chairman is a longtime UFO enthusiast, but that, as the Clintons like to say, is old news. Recent revelations from Wikileaks, however, expose the full intensity of Podesta’s obsession. By his own admission, Podesta tried, during Bill Clinton’s second term, to persuade the Air Force and CIA to allow the White House access to files on Roswell, Area 51, and other saucerological mysteries–but the military-intelligence establishment wouldn’t budge.  Recent Asange revelations make clear that Podesta’s interest in ufology only intensified as a result, and drew him into an utterly bizarre exchange of emails, beginning in 2015, with one Tom DeLonge, the lead singer for the rock band Blink-182, which nobody at WOOF ever heard of, although that’s not particularly damning.  At any rate, DeLonge persuaded Podesta that he, DeLonge, was receiving secret information from at least “ten  highly placed sources inside the U.S. government,” each of whom seemed a virtual wellspring of deeply classified UFO secrets.

Tom DeLonge--John Podesta's personal adviser on ufological affairs.

Tom DeLonge–John Podesta’s personal adviser on UFO affairs.

Bask for a moment in the wonderful ridiculousness of this, Woofketeers! The President’s chief of staff demands facts about flying saucers on behalf of the nation’s Commander in Chief,  and is told by the nation’s military and intelligence elites to pound sand.  Yet these same elites can barely restrain their enthusiasm for handing top-secret UFO files over to  a second-tier rock singer whose familiarity with government seems confined to having once recorded a song entitled “Enema of the State,” and a whirlwind bromance with John Kerry. Following a nervous breakdown, Delonge found himself suddenly in awe of Kerry’s “brilliance” and tagged along on the Massachusetts Senator’s stumble-bum 2004 presidential campaign after which he proclaimed Kerry had changed his life. His band seemed to agree: they expelled DeLonge, telling reporters he’d become “paranoid and mentally ill,”  a diagnosis that, although clinically tautological, seems otherwise shrewd.

Tom, John, and the Fragile Divisions


Delonge, after prolonged exposure to John Kerry.

DeLonge’s recent emails to Podesta reveal his acquisition of two “military advisers” whom he implores Podesta to meet, adding “I think you will find them very interesting, as they were principal leadership relating to our sensitive topic. Both were in charge of most fragile [sic] divisions, as it [sic] relates to Classified Science and DOD topics. Other words [sic], these are A-Level officials.”  As Podesta’s replies have yet to leak, we can only imagine his jubilation upon realizing his luck. Here he was, corresponding with the only rock burnout on earth who possessed his own military advisor (in fact two such advisors) and even better: advisors fresh from commanding the nation’s “most fragile divisions.” Better still, Podesta is collaborating with DeLonge on a UFO documentary scheduled for release in 2017–in time to be suitably mocked in WOOF’s next annual birthday post.


Mysterious Disappearances….

ameliaEveryone knows that the strangest disappearance since WOOF’s last anniversary was over 30,000 yoga items and wedding invitations vanishing from Hillary Clinton’s private email server(s). This mystery so preoccupied conservative media that its equally mysterious corollary, the disappearance of any trenchant reporting on the subject by anyone in the mainstream media, went largely unremarked. And besides all those yoga emails vanishing into cyberspace, recently leaked FBI notes reveal that two boxes containing Hillary’s printed emails also vanished!  When the State Department’s Office of Information Programs (IPS) first audited them, fourteen boxes of emails were stacked at Secretary Clinton’s Friendship Heights office awaiting FBI examination–but when agents arrived to retrieve the boxes, there were only twelve (insert Twilight Zone music here).  Ever alert, the agents promptly spotted this subtle discrepancy and moved swiftly to detain an IPS official for questioning. Under pressure, the IPS functionary revealed that it was “difficult to say what could have happened.” which apparently mollified the agents, who departed with the twelve boxes that remained.  Shortly afterwards, however, an additional mystery cropped up when all references to the two missing boxes included in the FBI’s official report also completely vanished!


Just as eerily, Julian Assange’s Internet access disappeared without a trace, leaving the Wikileaker temporarily incommunicado at London’s Ecuadorian Embassy where he remains a virtual prisoner. Wikileaks officials insisted Assange’s connection was “intentionally severed by a state party,” which reminds us that Hillary wanted to “drone” Wikileaks while she was Secretary of State. Luckily for Wikileaks, Mrs. Clinton fell during the subsequent Benghazi crisis, bumped her head, and forgot nearly everything she’d said or done while in office, thus her animosity toward Asange was almost certainly erased.  So, we don’t think Mrs. Clinton severed Assange’s link. First, by her own admission, she knows nothing about computers. Second, the leaks were clearly of no concern to her campaign, as demonstrated by the DNC’s assurances that the leaked  anti-semitic, anti-Catholic, anti-Latino, anti-American, and anti-Bernie messages were “no big deal.” Obviously, then, Hillary lacked both motive and means.


Escaping Certain Death….

indexEach October we review predictions of imminent doom, so our readers can plan accordingly– but first, let’s examine the ones that missed.  We begin with thanks offered a merciful God, for fending off, again this year, the horrors of Global Warming. This year marked a major milestone given Al Gore’s Oscar-winning prediction that major coastal cities would be submerged by 2016. Unremitting super hurricanes, due to render our seaports uninhabitable,were equally conspicuous in their absence, just as confirmed reports of drowned polar bears remained constant at last year’s level of zero, perhaps because the levels of arctic ice are actually increasing.

Professor Wieslaw Maslowski of the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterrey, California, solemnly foretold the complete absence of polar ice by 2016. Similarly, celebrated climatologist Peter  Wadhams of Cambridge University produced the widely-heralded book A Farewell to Ice, predicting the complete disappearance of arctic ice, even as figures released this September show 21 percent more polar ice than in 2012. We could easily proceed to name dozens of equally-respected experts who fingered this year as mankind’s last opportunity to glimpse icebergs or snow, but we are too overcome with relief at our deliverance.  Deus magnus est.

The Prophet Micah--so misunderstood--it's probably a good thing he's minor.

The Prophet Micah–so misunderstood–it’s probably a good thing he’s minor.

Not only did Hurricane Matthew fall miserably short of expectations–we also survived the entire month of May, which was fraught with peril! For instance,the planet Mercury entered alignment  with the Sun and Earth on May 9th. True this happens thirteen times each century, but the website Prophetico insisted that this time Mercury meant business. A new lunar cycle reduced the moon to a crescent at the apex of Mercury’s alignment–so as Prophetico put it: “The moon itself has been turned into a sickle, so literally turning Orion’s club into a mace as he strikes the lion’s whelp along the cheek, during the transit [of Mercury].” Supposedly this meant worldwide destruction, and/or the return of Christ, as allegedly predicted in the book of Micah—only evidently not. Suffice it that we survived to confront the deathly curse of the Blue Moon.

Black and blue….

blueimagesThe Blue Moon was scheduled to destroy us all on May 21st because it was the fourth full moon in one season—so psychics and tarot readers took to the Internet announcing the end of days. Mercifully, the Blue Moon came and went without incident. But this left us at the mercy of the Black Moon. As opposed to the Blue Moon, the Black Moon of September 27th was the result of the regular moon’s illuminated hemisphere passing under Earth’s shadow. Worse, this particular black moon followed fast upon the heels of a ‘ring of fire’ solar eclipse, which is why legions of astrologers, Internet prophets and religionists predicted worldwide destruction, and/or the return of Christ. As readers are presumably aware, neither event ensued.  This allowed humankind time to catch a breath or two before confronting a far more scientifically supportable problem: Aliens!


Hawking, the Inscrutable


TRUE FACT: Despite his countless commitments and intellectual undertakings, Dr. Hawking remains a lifelong fan of the original Mickey Mouse Club!

Indeed, no less an authority on absolutely everything than the ubiquitous Stephen Hawking once again cautioned earth’s inhabitants against “announcing our presence to any alien civilizations that might be out there, especially those that could be more technologically advanced.” If our radio telescopes finally document intelligent signals from some distant planet, Hawking advises “hang up!” because “Meeting an advanced civilization could be like Native Americans encountering Columbus. That didn’t turn out so well.”

earthvsdownloadWOOF understands that Stephen Hawking is far too intelligent for those of us hobbled by less stratified intellects to fully comprehend, but we are confessedly bollixed. First, we wish Dr. Hawking would explain whether we should continue crediting his concerns that AI (artificial intelligence) will shortly contrive to exterminate mankind, or whether these worries are now superannuated by threats of extraterrestrials following our radio transmissions here and invading, or whether these events are expected to occur simultaneously. Moreover, if contacting alien civilizations invites catastrophe, why is Dr. Hawking enthusiastically promoting his “Breakthrough: Starshot” initiative, which intends–suicidally, one might infer–to launch “nanocraft” packed with news about our planet in the direction of neighboring star systems?


“No, moron! This is some Godforsaken place called Guanahani–so like I kept telling you, Fort Lauderdale’s that way!”

Also, we humbly implore Dr. Hawking to share whatever groundbreaking research he possesses linking “Native Americans” with Columbus. Until now, we thought it embarrassingly fatuous of American Indian activists to assemble each Columbus Day to bemoan the exploitation, rape, and murder of their ancestors by Columbus, mainly because Columbus never set foot in North America–indeed, the only “Indians” Columbus “discovered,” were inhabitants of the Bahamas, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic, none of whom, ironically, bothers protesting the fact.  But if Hawking can place Columbus in, say, Beaufort, or Port St. Lucie, we stand ready to rethink the entire matter!


They’re here….

And who would know more about extraterrestrial life forms than a real live--well--recently alive--astronaut?

And who would know more about extraterrestrial life  than a real live–well–recently alive–astronaut?

Finally, it seems strange that so many scientists continue devoting their energies to intergalactic outreach when the aliens appear to be here already.  No less an authority than astronaut Edgar Mitchell, the sixth man to walk on the moon, unveiled the alien presence in 2009 when he told the National Press Club,”We are being visited. It is now time to put away this embargo of truth about the alien presence. I call upon our government to open up … and become a part of this planetary community.”  Obviously, the government wasn’t interested, but shortly before his death earlier this year, Dr. Mitchell revealed that,“ETs [have] been attempting to keep us from going to war and help create peace on Earth,” adding that ET is “the highest form of intelligence that works directly with God…and will not tolerate any form of military violence on the planet or in space.”  Admittedly, these assertions are difficult to square with the monumental levels of military violence engulfing our planet–but the aliens may not be infallible, after all.  Researcher Jenny Randles documents more than thirty cases of flying saucer crashes around the world in her book, UFO Retrievals: The Recovery of Alien Spacecraft,  so the aliens may be working out a few bugs in their own equipment.

Of course, after she spoke to Gort, it looked bad for Patricia Neal for a few minutes, but it all turned out okay and 20th Century Fox got its money shot.

Even after she spoke to Gort, it looked bad for Patricia Neal for a few minutes, but it all turned out okay and 20th Century Fox got its money shot.

The takeaway is that the aliens will protect us–at least as soon as they get their act together. They won’t allow nuclear war, and according to Mitchell they’ve already dropped in on the Pope and discussed world peace. So if all else fails, maybe they’ll save us from a second Clinton presidency— is that too much to expect from superior life forms?

How to vote on election day….

In closing, WOOF suggests that every patriot make a point of murmuring “Klaatu barada nikto” repeatedly as he or she enters the polling booth this November.  We aren’t really sure what it means, but when uttered by actress Patricia Neal in 1951’s The Day the Earth Stood Still, the phrase stopped Gort, a robot from space with powers of mass destruction, from laying waste to the entire country…so why shouldn’t it stop Hillary Clinton? Perhaps the aliens, hovering watchfully aboard their motherships, will respond to our appeal by humanely immobilizing the threat.  Gort was a lot tougher than Hillary, after all, plus he could walk around without falling over–so Hillary should be a cinch.  Otherwise, we may be filing WOOF’s next anniversary post from the Ecuadorian embassy in London.  Until then, fellow citizens…continue the mission! Stand your ground! Place your reliance in a just and righteous Providence…but brace for impact! WOOF PRINT 

Altogether now: KLatuu

Altogether now: “Klaatu barada nikto!” “Klaatu barada nikto!” “Klaatu barada nikto!”  (gasp!) “Klaatu barada nikto!””Klaatu barada nikto!”…louder…! “Klaatu barada nikto…”

THE RETURN OF THE WHITE MAN’S BURDEN (or) How Liberalism put White Privilege in charge of deciding when Black Lives Matter…try to keep up!

In "Tastefully avoiding puns with the word 'race' in them" forum on September 19, 2016 at 2:06 pm


Do you like Kipling?

As every educated westerner knows, the proper response to “Do you like Kipling?” is “I don’t know, I’ve never kippled!” But seriously, the man whom Orwell labeled “the prophet of British imperialism” is a profoundly misunderstood chap, especially in our age wherein berating old dead White guys is considered proof of intellectual sophistication. In fact, ranting against someone like Kipling will probably get you more respect on most college campuses than actually reading him! But because he gave us the “hook” for this month’s tumid screed, let’s begin with a brief overview of the writer’s extraordinary fall from grace—a reputational tumble so vertiginous that he is rarely recalled nowadays for his narrative genius and almost never for his intuitive appreciation of certain throne-and-alter conventions that bore the protoplasmic essence of philosophical conservatism. Nobody today echoes Henry James’s assessment of Kipling as “the most complete man of genius…I have ever known,” yet he was England’s most widely read and respected author at the close of the 19th century and the dawn of the 20th.

Kipling for beginners….

rudyard kiplingBorn in Bombay, India, Kipling’s world was the British Raj—the colonizing (and civilizing) vanguard of Victorian cultural refinement following fast upon the impact of British arms.  Later in his life, Kipling returned to India where he worked from 1883–89 writing for local newspapers. When personal differences with his editors resulted in demands for his resignation, he returned to England by way of Rangoon, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, and America. Traveling through the United States he befriended Mark Twain, golfed with Arthur Conan Doyle, and settled for quite some time in Vermont.

Shifting the burden in Kipling…

“Mmmm—We think We like the other poem better!”

Repatriated to England, Kipling set about writing a poem in honor of Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee, thus The White Man’s Burden was set to paper. But Her Majesty preferred a different Kipling composition, and Burden was shelved for the moment. It was later–following America’s seizure of the Philippines from Spanish Imperial rule in 1898– that Kipling saw a new role for his poem.

Kipling rewrote portions of the poem to reflect the American situation rather than Great Britain’s. Of course, the perception that the United States is an imperialist power (greedily squeezing the wealth out of the undeveloped world for the benefit of a small cartel of selfish industrialists) is so beloved on the dyspeptic Left from Alinsky to Zinn to Obama, we hardly have the heart to invalidate it here—let us rather agree that what halfhearted efforts America put into colonization came during this expansionary epoch.

When Kipling caught on in the States….

In the refurbished poem, Kipling exhorts America (the colonizing power formerly intended to be Great Britain) to seek empire, yet philosophizes concernedly about the inherent costs of doing so:

Take up the White Man’s burden—And reap his old reward: The blame of those ye better
The hate of those ye guard—The cry of hosts ye humour (Ah slowly) to the light:
“Why brought ye us from bondage, Our loved Egyptian night?”

Moro warriors--just not feeling the gratitude!

That’s gratitude for you! Liberated Moro tribesmen resist Uncle Sam’s benign governance.

As a revised cri de coeur meant to inspire Americans to share the responsibility for spreading Christianity, medicine, governance and lawfulness across the globe, Kipling’s verse retained some rough edges. Obviously, no American forces were deployed to Africa, thus references to Egyptian nights seemed bizarre. Besides, accepting the Philippines as a going away gift from their previous owner almost accidentally embroiled U.S. Forces in armed contestations with violently disapproving native populations. (Spain may have neglected to mention that problem in its haste to decamp.) As the United States tinkered awkwardly with the concept of empire building, ferocious fighting erupted in response to the American presence; in fact the Moro and other indigenous people of the islands– incensed at not being consulted–declared war on the United States.  American forces repeatedly defeated the indigenous fighters, but even after the Philippine Republic officially surrendered in 1902, guerilla warfare was waged by the Tagalog, Pulahanes and Moro peoples, all of whom maintained proud warrior traditions, many of whom attacked half-crazed on dope, and the majority of whom seemed utterly resistant to anything Kipling had to say about the matter. The resistance was not entirely subdued until 1913 and required the invention of the .45 Colt automatic pistol, which John Browning developed specifically to stop berserk Moros who proved insufficiently daunted by the army’s .38s.

Without the Moros, there might never have been a 1911 .45 ACP pistol--so at least some good came out of the whole business.

Without the Moros, there might never have been a 1911 .45 ACP handgun–so at least some good came out of the whole business.

Nothing in America’s foundational enzymes conduced toward these sorts of enterprises—besides which–or perhaps on account of which–we have always evinced a terribly un-imperialistic tendency to prevail militarily, spread all the gifts of civilization as lavishly as circumstances permit, and then leave.

TR peruses Kipling, despite stylistic reservations.

TR peruses Kipling, despite stylistic reservations.

This is hardly to suggest that large subsets of Americans did not perceive imperialism to represent the next evolutionary step for the Republic. Progressivism, as we shall see plainly in due course, has always maintained an ardor for subjugating and controlling the darker races, and Theodore Roosevelt, whose most regrettable attribute was surely his progressive streak, saw Kipling’s poem as a call for territorial conquest. Writing to his friend, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Teddy exhorted Lodge to read Kipling’s verse, declaring that it was “rather poor poetry, but good sense from the expansion point of view.” Kipling’s reaction to TR’s literary critique, if any, is lost to history.

Kipling breaks bad…..

Senator Tillman--not a fan!

Senator Tillman–not a fan!

Many Americans–perhaps the majority—were less fired by the poem than disquieted. It rang with pretensions to racial superiority that seemed–especially given the significance of the Civil War—disturbingly reminiscent of the antebellum south’s assumptions about American Negroes. Somewhat perversely, also, Senator “Pitchfork” Benjamin Tillman took exception, reading Kipling aloud to his peers in the Capital to reinforce his argument for scrapping the Treaty of Paris, asking “Are we to spread the Christian religion with the bayonet point as Mahomet spread Islam with a scimitar?” Pitchfork, himself a fire breathing racist, was opposed to bringing any more “racial inferiors” under the wing of the United States. Kipling struck him as a bleeding-heart trouble maker.  Others, who grasped the author’s mindset more discerningly, nevertheless scoffed at Kipling’s theme of implicit altruism.

Before Kipling was invented….

Others in the United States opposed the poem because it seemed remindful of “manifest destiny,” support for which was always scattered in American politics. Long before Kipling set verse to paper, the concept of Manifest Destiny was abroad in the land. The American Whig party argued, unimaginatively enough, that America’s destiny lay in staying put and offering the world an example of morality and democracy rather than territorial expansion. Of course, the Whigs soon became extinct.

The “Muddy Waters Doctrine”

The man, the myth, the doctrine that we just invented!

The man, the myth, the doctrine that we just invented!

Manifest destiny was also much ballyhooed when events, some glorious, others less so, and still others so labyrinthine as to elude classification, led to what Historians and  Mexicans like to call the “annexation of Texas.” In fact, following his humiliation at the Battle of Santa Jacinto, Santa Ana (not so fresh from overrunning the Alamo) signed treaties requiring his forces to retreat south of the Rio Grande and promised a thoroughly peeved Sam Houston he would instruct the Mexican Congress to recognize the Rio Grande as the border between the two countries. Thus, Texas, to the extent that it was annexed at all, was annexed fair and square, paid for in blood by Bowie, Travis, Crockett, and countless other Texians.  [And yes, we know, Mexico changed its mind about Santa Ana’s bargain when Texas became our 28th state, and the Mexican/American War ensued, during which Mexico was again defeated—but if Muddy Waters was correct in saying “you can’t lose what you ain’t never had,” surely some American academicians can be won over to the equally logical proposition that you can’t annex what you’ve already got.]

Feel the inevitability!

downloadBeginning with Jefferson’s purchase of the Louisiana Territory and his support for the Lewis and Clark expedition, it seemed evident that North America was set upon a process of civilized expansion into contiguous regions unbounded by borders. It seemed manifest. Our misguided efforts to expand northward (where there were, in fact, borders) were stymied during both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 by British and Canadian soldiers who seemed on both occasions adimant about declining statehood.

On the other hand, expanding toward the Pacific struck investors, entrepreneurs, explorers, and frontiersmen, as an ineluctable undertaking; and except in Texas, no foreign armies or contending powers were involved in the country’s Westward march—the obvious exception being the Indians regarding whom White settlers only rarely evinced behaviors approaching the standards of Kipling’s vision. This fact, unpleasant though it be, illustrates another distinction between Imperial colonization and Manifest Destiny. Kipling’s poem begins with the lines:

          Take up the White Man’s burden, Send forth the best ye breed
          Go bind your sons to exile, to serve your captives’ need…

As Custer discovered when he took command of the Seventh Cavalry, the American war department made no effort to send the best of our breed to its far western outposts— and nobody, no matter how supportive of our sweep toward the pacific, ever rationally argued that our soldiers or settlers were there to serve the needs of the Indians. One could argue, in fact, that western expansion might have been slightly less brutal if Grant and several hundreds of others in the East had been able to read Kipling.

The war to end econo-federalism?

civil-war-cartoon-1862-grangerQuite distinct from the extension of American dominance spreading across the plains, was the morally requisite growth of hostility toward the institution of slavery. It should suffice to comment that slavery became so heated an issue that ultimately, bereft of alternatives in law and threatened by the attempted secession of 11 states, the nation became involved in a vast civil war resulting in 1,100,000 casualties and the sacrifice of 625,000 American lives, not counting Lincoln’s. We realize that readers who are unwitting victims of the sophisticated opinionists currently ensconced in the history departments of higher academe will immediately object when we write the war was waged to settle the issue of slavery—but come off it. The alternative explanations enjoying academic currency wither as soon as they are subjected to the primary test. Go ahead, bounce your enlightened explications off us—each of them can be shown to be vapid unless supported by the dark tradition of human bondage. Economics? Economics based on what—or rather, on whom? States’ rights? States rights to do what? The Missouri Compromise? Gee, what was that about? The election of Lincoln? Don’t make it so easy.

It suits the purpose of liberalism to skirt the issue, in order that America seem less praiseworthy.  Leftist academics achieve this by disguising tautology as sophistication. Urban civil rights activist likewise prefer to ignore this central truth because they can claim grievances more persuasively once ridded of the burden of gratitude (Kipling, anyone?) We bear Southern apologists no ill will, but the civil war was about slavery, gentle readers, and slavery is evil, and the South lost.  Indeed, in the truest sense of Kipling’s verse, the North marched  “To seek another’s profit, And work another’s gain.” Obviously the average Union soldier didn’t think such things, nor did many of his officers and generals–just as many of the South’s finest from Lee to Stuart to Jackson fought for reasons of regional allegiance without any love for slavery; but without the enslavement of Africans in the South, the Confederacy would never have congealed, and Fort Sumter would be a name lost to history.economic-disagreements

Despite all the subversive anecdotage readers may have been compelled to absorb from Howard Zinn and his clones, the United States immersed itself in an internecine conflict so bloody that no war before or since resulted in so many American deaths, and slavery was, in fact, the fundamental issue compelling the states to divide and do battle. No other nation in the entirety of human history has engaged in so monumental a blood sacrifice to such purpose, let alone done so even as that abhorrent institution flourished in most of the rest of the world.  Without making this point emphatically, we cannot accurately relate the American narrative to Kipling’s vision.

Flunking Imperialism

samimagesNow we are at the part of this screed where, were it a motion picture, moviegoers would be shown the legend: “One hundred years later…” And we find that the Philippines are a proudly independent if dysfunctional nation, that Nicaraguans (whom we bedeviled during the same general period) were liberated from a right wing dictator by a half-witted communist and shortly afterward liberated from half-witted communist oppression by President Reagan, Ollie North, and the Contras—following which Nicaragua held free elections, ultimately electing the same half-witted communist as their president, but  hey, that’s Central America.  Elsewhere, many locations where America once fleetingly planted Old Glory and subsequently rethought the matter seem more inclined to pester us for statehood than rage against our tyrannies.

Creative equivocation….

Our national conversation has been hampered by various aspects of militancy, including duck tape.

Our national conversation has been hampered by various aspects of militancy, including duct tape.

Our ambivalence up to this point in advancing our thoughts about Kipling’s opus is not (at least entirely) ascribable to moral cowardice. President Obama wowed the swooning  network newsies 8 years ago and famously set Chris Matthews’s leg aquiver, by encouraging a national conversation about race. At the time, it seemed only vaguely necessary; but after two terms of Obama, Holder, Lynch, and their race-baiting minions conflagrating racial tensions, it seems obvious that such a conversation is overdue. And in any such conversation, Rudyard Kipling is owed a seat at the table.  We know, we know, our liberal and “independent” readers (all seven or eight of them) will feel obliged to send us emails objecting that no liberal in the history of American liberalism ever declared an affinity for Kipling’s obscenely supremacist ravings–and we hereby relieve them of that obligation by replying preemptively, “so what?”  The fact that leftists approach race relations in this day and age from a remarkably Kipling-esque standpoint, and that American Blacks do likewise, is no less a fact for the Left’s inability to perceive it.  Thus, we contend that viewed through a contemporary lens, the themes of The White Man’s Burden are entirely consonant with liberal civil rights initiatives, and have been for decades. How can such an irony endure unchallenged?


It’s the media, cupcake!

“Steffy”the Journalist

Everyone who owns a television set. reads newspapers, or frequents the leftwing blogosphere knows that Republicans and conservatives despise minorities and want to drag them around by chains, or turn fire hoses on them in the streets– right?  Of course the image is pure sophistry, but that is what many Americans persist in believing, especially seeming majorities of people of color. How can this ridiculous perception persist?  It’s the media, cupcake! Want an example?  To avoid aggravating anyone, we shall call only one witness, George Stefanopoulos.

“Uh…oh, right…my Christian faith…”

Readers will recall when Barack Obama, running for president back in 2008, appeared on ABC and complimented his opponent’s religious tolerance, telling Stephanopoulos,”John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.”  Anyone familiar with the incident will recall that Stephanopoulos interrupted Obama at that moment, interjecting “Your Christian faith!” to which Obama flatly replied, “My Christian Faith.”  Oops. Well, anyone can make a darn mistake. How many times have most of us made similar slips?—you know—starting to call ourselves Christian or Jewish but accidentally blurting out “Zoroastrian,” or “Hindu?”

Governor Wallace is famous for declaring,

TRUE FACT:.Governor Wallace is famous for declaring, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,” a phrase so admired by the New Black Panthers that they adopted it and use it today!

But more to our point, here was the familiar example of George Stephanopoulos (“Steffy” to the elites)  simply exerting himself to assist a fellow Democrat—and isn’t that what the media are all about?  So what went wrong on ABC Sunday last July 24th, when Representative Keith Ellison (D. Minn) began comparing donald Trump to the late George Wallace–you know–the Alabama governor who stood in the school house door to keep Black students from registering in 1962.

Rep. Ellison reconsiders: “…and I’d have gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for that meddling cowboy!”

Ellison, who is Black, and ought to know better, explained to Steffy that Donald Trump would be “the worst Republican nominee since George  Wallace.” And here’s the really strange part– Steffy Stephanopoulos just sat there nodding. His long streak of helpfully band-aiding gaffes issuing from his fellow leftists came to a sudden stop.   Ellison betrayed an embarrassing ignorance of civil-rights history, and  Steffy Stephanopoulos, who surely noted the Congressman’s mistake, said nothing. Why not? Is Stephanopoulos racist? Did he want the Black politician to look stupid? Fortunately, ABC Sunday’s other guest was Congressman Tom Cole (R-Okla) who took a moment to inform Ellison that George Wallace was a Democrat.  Ellison stared glumly at his desk, and Stephanopoulos moved things in another, though equally slanted, direction.  Steffy knew that Wallace was a Democrat, like Bull Conner, Robert Byrd (a high-level Klansman), and so many other segregationist Dixiecrats. So why didn’t he nudge Ellison as he had Obama?  The reason is obvious, of course–Ellison’s poor comprehension of history served the leftist narrative that Stefanopoulos strives to advance– and Steffy assumed his viewership wouldn’t know any better.  He reckoned without Representative Cole, however, who spoiled the moment.


Famous segregationists, George Wallace, Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, and Robert Byrd are typical of the Democrat Party’s racist heritage. Today, a more subtle racism has swept that Party– Lyndon Johnson’s tactical focus on keeping Americans of color beholden to White Liberal generosity became a less obvious but far more efficient guarantor of servitude than Jim Crow.

So powerful is the Liberal Establishment, gushing similar propaganizements from nearly all available conduits of contemporary culture, it is hardly surprising that Black voters file dutifully to the polls whenever required, to elect or re-elect liberal politicians despite the fact that it is impossible to point to any advantage they have ever gained thereby. Worse, in weirdly self-destructive conformity, Blacks vote overwhelmingly to keep liberal Democrats in charge of cities that are bankrupt or becoming so, violent to degrees that would approach genocide except for the fact that Blacks are also doing most of the killing, and where any possibility of rejuvenation is thwarted by excessive taxation and overt graft combined with street-level anarchy repelling any investors other than the Federal Government, which lavishly incentivizes the very behaviors that immiserate Black communities, including unemployment, single parenthood, and disastrous school systems. Murders in Chicago, meanwhile, are up 72 percent over this time last year, while shootings are 88 percent ahead of 2015. March alone accounted for 45 murders and 271 shooting incidents. Chicago has not elected a Republican mayor since 1927. The archetypically sleazy Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s former chief of staff, became the Windy City’s mayor in 2011 and easily won re-election in 2015. Chicagoans must be pleased with their city’s direction.

Rahm Emanuel's Chicago--where at least the WPA would prove superfluous since despair and terror produce more art than the New Deal ever could!

Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago–where the WPA would prove superfluous since despair and terror produce more art than the New Deal ever could!  Ah, culture!

Detroiters love Democrats too. The Motor City has been run almost exclusively by liberal Democrats since 1962. A recent Washington Post article sneered at what the author called “the Republican obsession with Detroit,” making the case that “Detroit does not vote for Republicans.” In a burst of editorial perversity, the Post writer argued that Republicans were daft to consider solutions for a city that clearly spurned their attentions. Gloatingly, the author added that “In 2012, 97.5 percent of the city went for Barack Obama. The county sheriff is a Democrat, as are the three U.S. representatives whose districts surround the city. The current mayor, the previous mayor, the six mayors before that guy: all Democrats, too.” And Detroit has a higher murder rate than Chicago–almost exclusively Black on Black crime. It is also a fiscal black hole (no pun intended, honestly) into which bail-out dollars vanish ineffectually. It may be recalled that Detroit went bankrupt shortly following Barack Obama’s vow that he would never permit Detroit to go bankrupt.

Barack Obama boasted during the 2012 election that his policies saved Detroit from going bankrupt. Following the election, Detroit filed the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history. Where's the white Man's Burden when you need it, right?

Obama boasted during the 2012 election that his policies saved Detroit from going bankrupt. Following the election, Detroit filed the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history. Where’s that White Man’s Burden when you need it, right?

The most violent cities in America, listed in descending order of homicidal intensity, are Detroit, MI;  Memphis, TN;  Oakland, CA: St. Louis, MO; Milwaukee, WI, and Baltimore, MD. Each city has been ruled by liberal Democrats for as long as citizens can recall–and each has a Democrat mayor.  Many have been sites of racial violence in which the Black Lives Matter movement played a role. This role will now expand considerably. The perfidious George Soros just poured $650,000 into BLM’s coffers, and the subversive Ford Foundation is preparing, even now, to up Soros’s ante by several million. Being on the trickle-down side of the White Man’s Burden may not provide much enlightenment nowadays, but enrichment there is aplenty!

Be afraid--be very afraid!

Be afraid–be very afraid!


Let Elvis explain.



The Memphis Coalition of Concerned Citizens is a collection of various activist groups — Black Lives Matter Memphis Chapter, Memphis Voices for Palestine [WOOF is not making this up], the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense & Inward Journey, and the Memphis Grass Roots Organization. This illustrious conglomeration recently announced its plans for a “show of solidarity” at Graceland, home to the late Elvis Presley. The singer’s mansion has been maintained in its original condition with furnishings and decor as Elvis left them, and also functions as a kind of museum, shrine, gift shop and popular Memphis landmark. Thus, upon reading that the CCC was planning a “demonstration of solidarity” we wondered what admirable traits of Mr. Presley’s, in particular,  had bestirred so massive a display of empathy…but, of course, we soon recognized our error.

The Concerned Coalition of Citizens intended to show solidarity mainly with Black Lives Matter, and with any other scowling malcontents willing to attachblmimages the issues of race, poverty, and White privilege to Presley’s estate. Their announced intention was to “shut down Graceland” during Elvis Week. Prior to these announcements, WOOF was unaware that Elvis Week was even a thing, much less a thing that any band of self-described civil rights activists could possibly find threatening. One might say our consciousness was raised, or at least augmented, by the Coalition’s statement on the matter, which, in part, read as follows:

 “The demonstration, set for Monday at 6:00pm, is planned as a peaceful show of solidarity, unifying the people of Memphis against systems that promote poverty, violence and economic disparity. Graceland… demonstrates one of Memphis’s most common forms of financial inequity. Graceland recently opened The Guest House, a new 450 room resort style hotel in the heart of the African American community of Whitehaven. The project cost more than $120 million dollars to build and received upwards of 78 million dollars in public funding and tax breaks. Project developers and city officials promised Whitehaven residents the project would be an economic boon to the community, but as has been case for decades, residents have seen little if any of that money ‘trickle down’ into the middle class neighborhood’s economy.”

True, it might have been simpler to admit that ruining the vacations of hundreds of Elvis fans, most of whom drove from out of state to peacefully peruse their idol’s manse and reminisce with fellow Elvis devotees, was a surefire way to get themselves onto the local and national news while creating a big enough impingement on the normal flow of events that some of the singer’s redneck cracker fan base was likely to lose its cool and yell some deliciously microaggressive slurs and maybe even become violent—but we would do the Coalition and its allies an injustice if we failed to parse their official statement for insight, because therein we will discover the continuing relevance of the hero of this month’s screed.

We checked--not an Elvis song!

We checked–not an Elvis song!

First, let’s consider the idea that marching into Graceland with the sole purpose of creating an annoyance is somehow “unifying the people of Memphis against the systems that create poverty” and “economic disparity.” What systems are we intended to infer here? The governance of White Democrat Jim Strickland, who besides joining the NAACP and showing up for photo ops at soup kitchens has done nothing whatsoever to meaningfully improve the lives of Black Memphians?  Or are we intended to think inculpatory thoughts about the all-Democrat, (mostly Black) city council? Because, clearly, all the relevant “systems” are entirely liberal Democrat, and largely African American—and while it is exactly true that they continue to promote poverty, it is difficult to imagine any connection to Elvis. Why not picket the people in power who bear the actual responsibility for mismanagement, incompetence, and to no small degree, graft?  Here’s a thought: Why not stop voting for them? But back to reality: Nobody in the Black community, or in the White liberal community, ever thinks of this–not only because liberalism is incapable of critical introspection, but also because Kipling has liberalism in a philosophical vice grip!


Finally! Someone gets our point! Lead them to personal responsibility and political independence, sister!!!

Apparently “Graceland…represents one of Memphis’s most common forms of economic inequity” Really? First, what on earth can be intended by calling the fortune compiled by Elvis Presley “common?” Does the upper crust in Memphis consist mainly of Rock and Roll singers swept to fame on the wings of social upheaval arguably engendered by their musical performances?  Can we just assume that question is patently rhetorical?


Early Elvis, seen here with Sammy Davis Jr., probably apologizing for all the financial inequity.

No, the only economic inequity generated by Presley was the natural result of his marketable abilities. The idea that talented performers earning large salaries in proportion to  how much approval they generate among the record-buying or movie-going public somehow constitutes unfairness makes sense only on the most sophomoric levels of pop collectivism…but of course, nowadays, that’s most of them.

No inequity, no White Privilege, no problem!

No inequity here, no White Privilege, no problem!

Graceland represents economic diversity, not inequity. It stands as evidence of a fundamental precept of the capitalist system—that some people will provide goods and services so eagerly received and widely demanded that they will amass wealth as a result—and with that wealth they may choose to erect homes, acquire land, obtain automobiles, fly in private jets to get pizza, shoot an occasional TV set, and generally pursue enthusiasms on a scale not available to those whose gifts are more pedestrian and whose surroundings are consequently less opulent. Rap artists are perfect examples of this sort of “economic inequity,” but no BLM protester would dream of considering the fact, nor any White Leftist—because the power structure targeted for destruction by these entities must be perceived and described as White. Otherwise, what’s the point? Otherwise, where’s Kipling?

The Coalition of Concerned Citizens complains that “78 million dollars in public funding and tax breaks” contributed to building a ‘guest house’” (in fact a luxury hotel where tourists may elect to reside while visiting Graceland). Apparently, the outlay of public funds was approved only because developers and politicians promised residents that erecting the hotel would spread economic growth throughout the surrounding community. The Coalition contends that no such benefits ‘trickled down.’ [Their phrase, naturally.]  If such were the case, surely the wrath of BLM and the CCC would be better focused on the city planners, office holders, and organizers who lied about the benefits and are therefore quite possibly liable for their deceptions. Certainly pursuing these culprits would make more sense than assailing the fans of Elvis Presley, who had nothing to do with duping the Black community, and nothing to do with maintaining in office the legions of mainly Black, entirely liberal municipal hacks whose promises routinely prove empty.

epmagesBut no. The overriding symbolism and subtext of the Coalition’s complaint in no respect inculpates the actual villains, because doing so would not serve the template. Instead, the leadership implies that minorities in the vicinity are somehow victims of the White power elite, personified, however awkwardly, by Elvis. The impression given is that every economic woe the underprivileged confront is directly linked to White exploitation. In this popular weltanschauung, the Whites crowding into Graceland are the beneficiaries of an unequal distribution of income that allows them to traipse through the Jungle Room and mill about the trophy building, so immersed in their bourgeois pursuits that they never pause to think of the hardships their very existence imposes upon minorities…or the moral obligations (the Burden) this places upon them!

Police brutality was not much in evidence during the protest.

Police brutality was not much in evidence during the protest.

Properly understood, the message BLM & CCC sent from Graceland is simple. Blacks in the African American community of Whitehaven (which seems  unfortunately appellated, we’d submit) are miserable, and their immiseration is ascribable to Elvis Presley, more or less, and his sneering minions. Ridiculous?  Not once you realize that in BLM’s cosmology it is not acceptable to blame city officials, coordinators, the mayor, or any municipal official, or anyone who repeatedly votes for these sinecurists, because only White racism is allowable as the casual factor,  never the miscreancies of liberal Democrats. It follows therefore that residents of Whitehaven have no means of bettering themselves apart from their reliance on hotels being built for Elvis Presley’s fans. Further, the protestors wish it understood, the hotel was built, and the oppressed minorities of Whitehaven got zip. In fact, we are told, they were materially damaged by the project.

Never mind?


A guest house room, featuring a gold lamé momento symbolic of economic disparity, one assumes.

Except that employment, by every measure possible, leapt upwards with the project’s arrival. Whitehaven Kiwanis Club official, Calvin Burton, who appears authentically Black, called the hotel “a goldmine,” adding that Graceland’s Guest House was “about to start a large snowball effect [in which] people get jobs at Graceland, crime goes down, more businesses move in, and that means more jobs move in, this is the snowball effect residents in Whitehaven are welcoming.” Marvin Newsum, also persuasively Black, added that  he has lived in Whitehaven more than 30 years “and could not be happier,” Both men hailed the 450 jobs already created by the project and a coming jobs fair aimed at making employment available to still more residents. Did someone forget to tell Black Lives Matter? Should the glad tidings be rushed to the leadership of the Coalition of Concerned Citizens post haste?  Don’t be silly!

Who was Darrius Stewart?

stewartCoalition leaders also chose Graceland because “the site has ties to…the death of unarmed teen Darrius Stewart,” although Stewart’s only known association with Graceland is that he was killed in its arguable proximity. Detained by Memphis police officer Connor Shilling, Stewart overheard radio transmissions cautioning Shilling to hold him on several out-of-state warrants stemming from—among other things–charges of sexual abuse of minors. At this point, Connor testified, Stewart, who had not been handcuffed, attacked him. A struggle ensued, much of which is captured on video, during which Stewart seized Connor’s handcuffs and lashed him about the head. Schilling emerged from the struggle with bite marks, bruises, and Stewart’s DNA all over his uniform. Stewart, on the other hand, did not survive the melee during which Connor reached his service pistol and fired two rounds, one of which proved fatal to his assailant. Forensics proved the shots were fired only feet from Stewart, verifying that Shilling fired them in the heat of a struggle and thus “acted in reasonable fear that his life or the lives of others were in jeopardy,” making the use of lethal force permissible. A grand jury refused to indict Shilling, who was nevertheless removed from active duty. As is so often the case, it again appears that a youthful Black male, mythologized by the community as yet another innocent victim of a willfully homicidal police force, might have been spared martyrdom had he simply elected to refrain from physically assaulting a policeman.

Check your “social formations!”

On August 16th, the 39th anniversary of the death of Elvis Presley, Black Lives Matter protesters staged a protest calling for increases in the minimum wage (of course), relief from unemployment (which goes hand in hand, they seem to believe, with increasing the minimum wage), and an end to police brutality in the city.  The police demonstrated their brutality by fencing protesters off to the degree that they could not obstruct visitors to Elvis’s home, and making only three arrests during the entire protest, and this despite the fact that BLM neglected to apply for a permit. Elvis devotees were not significantly obstructed, and the media didn’t get a bloodbath, but no news cycle is perfect.

And as it turned out, the three arrested protesters poorly represented the oppressed classes. What were the police thinking?

As it turned out, the three arrested protesters only partially represented the oppressed classes. What were the police thinking?

So what else did BLM want? Actually, the organization has listed nearly 400 demands phrased in what one might nowadays call paleo-revolutionary argot almost plangently familiar to anyone who dealt with campus radicalism during the militant ‘60s. Most demands are ludicrously divorced from reality, demanding on the one hand the abolition of police forces, and on the other, “increased protection…for black institutions like historically black colleges and ‘social formations.’” Many demands follow florid prologizing, the idea being—it seems—that the demand will seem all the more sensible given the premise provided.  To the contrary, the prefatory rhetoric simply numbs the eyeballs with such fatuities as, “Until we achieve a world where cages are no longer used against our people, we demand an immediate change in conditions and an end to public jails, detention centers, youth facilities and prisons as we know them.”

Kipling rides again

imagesWhat is germane to our theme in each of these demands is the implicit appeal to authority, invariably envisioned as White, (facts to the contrary notwithstanding) to make concessions, however implausible, to people who are Black. These concessions, were any made, would be heralded by the Coalition as capitulations to “the people”—to the community’s righteous demands for social justice; but that would be sheer dissimilation. Concessions, were any made, would exemplify noblesse oblige—the felt responsibility of the dominant culture. The burden, in other words, of the privileged class. Rudyard Kipling, please call your office—the tenor of the poet’s sentiments is altered only slightly by the militancy with which favors are sought, and the fact that those empowered to consider granting them are driven less by altruism than assimilated guilt (or political expedience). But amazingly, Kipling’s burden has not shifted an iota…it is still up to the White Man to give to the Black Man the means of socioeconomic sustenance.

The Milwaukee Riot

Smith, in happier days.

Smith and gun, in happier days.

On the 13th of August, a piteously distraught Mildred Haynes told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel  “My son is gone due to the police killing my son.”And that was a concise summation of events, if not as detailed or nuanced as subsequent accounts. The deceased in this instance was Sylville Smith, known already to police as a suspect in a shooting soon after which he was charged with witness intimidation when he endeavored to coerce the victim into withdrawing his testimony. In fact, Smith’s police record was extensive, including a concealed weapon charge from 2014 and a citation for operating a motor vehicle without a license while speeding and with open intoxicants in view.


On the night of the 13th, Smith was pulled over in a rental car that flagged as stolen. The entire event lasted 25 seconds. For reasons he is unavailable to explain, Smith exited his vehicle. fled on foot, and pulled a handgun as he ran. Officers pursued Smith who at some point during the chase made the additionally puzzling decision to pivot and level his handgun (which was afterwards determined to be stolen) at the foremost police officer, who was Black. The officer thereupon drew his weapon and ordered Smith twice to drop his gun. Smith, as clearly shown on the officer’s body cam, preferred not to. Consequently, the officer shot and killed him. Smith’s gun was loaded—in fact it contained 23 rounds—and the officer’s response was entirely lawful, and may well have averted his own demise. Moreover, the officer who shot Smith was a local rap performer and, it transpired, a classmate of Smith’s in high school.  But no matter any of that—another innocent Black youth (okay, Smith was 23) had been gunned down by the genocidal janissaries of White Racial Supremacy, and a riot almost necessarily ensued.

Say what you will, Detroit really knew how to have a riot!

Say what you will, Detroit really knew how to have a riot!

Okay, riots have happened for far less inflammatory reasons—the Detroit riot of 1967 started over a raided poker game. Milwaukee’s Black population was already chafing under the weight of several recent encounters involving questionable conduct by police, some of which appear substantive. And information is hard to come by at first, so passions are inflamed well before facts are circulated. To the BLM leadership, of course, facts are irrelevant to the narrative, and that narrative sufficed to spark the Milwaukee riot of 2016 which began with approximately one-hundred Black protesters gathering at North Sherman and Auer to confront a line of about twenty police officers as the “community organizers” at BLM set to work ginning up further outrage via social media. Predictably, things got violent.

As riots go, this one was par for the course. Cars, including some police cruisers, were smashed or set ablaze, a gas station was looted and torched, and firefighters proved unable to approach the blaze owing to scattered gunshots and a barrage of bricks. One officer was hit by a brick and rushed to treatment while other protesters, incognizant of the alliances implicit in such events, attacked reporters and photographers who were merely attempting to “get their story out.” But the evening’s festivities ended with only 4 officers injured, all the fires finally subdued, and only the usual number of liquor stores and supermarkets looted and/or demolished. For a time it appeared that peace might be restored and a dialogue opened.

Support trouble-free revolution!

Comrade Dix likes to wear Mao on his chest, so people don't forget he's a communist.

Comrade Dix likes to wear Mao on his chest, so people don’t forget he’s a communist.

But city authorities reckoned without the appearance of a far older, more practiced and calculated malignancy. The Chicago based (go figure!) Revolutionary Communist Party dispatched operatives to Milwaukee who proved so successful at stimulating a second day of wanton destruction that Police chief Ed Flynn singled them out for credit, telling the press on the second day “the communist group showed up, and actually they’re the ones who started to cause problems.”

Reached by phone, comrade Carl Dix, co-founder of the Revolutionary Communist Party, blamed the “righteous rebellion” on Smith’s death, helpfully adding that “This system sees police wantonly murdering people as part of the normal order of things.” Dix took the opportunity to advocate dismantling the police, but feigned astonishment at Chief Flynn’s accusations. “If anybody wants to allege that our people were actually committing those acts, they should bring that to us. That wasn’t what we went up there to do,” Dix said, insisting that his people “did go there to support a revolution but didn’t set out to cause trouble.”

What is to be done?

So now that the bricks have stopped flying and the streets have been swept free of debris, now that the communists have returned to Chicago, what acts of contrition and profferings of largesse can the sectors of White Privilege supply to ablute their guilt?  Yes, we know, the police should be dismantled, and the killer cops thrown to the mob, but seriously, beyond these puerilities, in a phrase Comrade Dix might resonate to, what is to be done?

Reporter Aaron Mak was nearly beaten to death, but the mob let him go when they realized he was Asian. which is kind of heart warming, really.

Reporter Aaron Mak was nearly beaten to death, but the mob let him go when they realized he was Asian. which is kind of heart warming, really.

During the riot’s second day, an intrepid crew of  TV reporters evaded pummeling long enough to perform a man-in-the-street interview with an  unidentified Black gentleman on the periphery of the violence, “It’s sad,” the man explained, “because, you know, this is what happen because they not helping the black community. The rich people they got all this money and they not, like you know, trying to give us none.”  The gentleman, whoever he was, exhibited an uncanny gift for synopsis. The same essential lamentation seemed on the lips of every resident the press managed to buttonhole.

The Raj is where the heart bleeds!

the Raj is where the heart bleeds...

The Hollywood Reporter ran a story recently about Opera Winfrey’s forthcoming TV series Queen Sugar, which in and of itself would matter not a wit to us at this remove, except that during the extensive interview, Ava DuVernay, the series’ authentically Black director, experienced one of those epiphanic moments that beset we mortals on quirkish occasion, and told the Reporter, “If you treat being Black as a plight, it affects your creativity.”  Think about that, gentle readers! Roll it around your frontal lobes for a bit.

Granted, were Ava DuVernay by the remotest chance to discover this screed, she might angrily insist that we have taken her out of context, but we contend that her statement is of that rare caliber that functions in virtually any context—making it worthy of inclusion among The Eternal Verities, postmodernism notwithstanding. And mindful though we be, here in the WOOF cave, of the invidious threat posed by dread cultural appropriation, we believe DuVernay’s insight works equally well for Whites—insofar as they too should desist from viewing “being Black as a plight,” and find more creative ways of addressing issues of inclusion. Sadly, however, nobody from the political left is prepared to do this, nobody to the center-right has the courage, and nobody to the right of the center-right could attempt it without being pulverized by media billingsgate.

TRUE FACT: Even though the terms

TRUE FACT: Even though the terms “Black” and “African American” were yet to be popularized, President Johnson never learned to correctly pronounce the word ‘Negro.’

Instead, American liberalism has created a new Raj in the United States, where White Privilege is seen as a kind of self-accusatory parallel to the old Kiplingism–and one that obliges the dispensation of favors to the perceived underclasses who prefer victimhood to self-efficacy–and who ceaselessly harangue the despised Imperialists (read: White Americans) for more and more contributions in the name of social justice.  It is not really WOOF’s purpose here to say categorically that this is wrong, or even improper. It is our purpose to say only that it is happening, in a weird homage to Kipling, and once again the entire burden of responsibility for the raising up of the underprivileged is placed squarely upon the shoulders of White, largely European elites.  It is placed there by America’s Black population–but they learned the gimmick from Lyndon Baines Johnson. And that says a lot about why liberalism now owns the White Man’s Burden.

And for peace in Southeast Asia, too; remember?

And peace in Southeast Asia, too; remember?

Johnson’s “Great Society” subsidized every social affliction detectable in the Black populations of America’s cities, and by subsidizing such difficulties, caused them to multiply. Liberal exertions destroyed the Black middle class, the Black nuclear family, and Black education  (which prior to Johnson’s meddling often scored higher on national tests than predominantly White school systems).  Once Johnson’s “Great Society” was fully implemented, Black unemployment soared, the Black nuclear family disintegrated, and the new Black dependency on government caused Johnson to infamously remark, “I’ll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years!” [NB: WOOF dutifully reports here that SNOPES, while going so far as to admit that “There’s no question that Lyndon Johnson…was…a sometime racist and notorious vulgarian who rarely shied away from using the N-word in private,” still doesn’t think Johnson said this, because nobody at SNOPES has seen enough evidence. WOOF has, but we like to give SNOPES equal time. Also, we will let readers know if SNOPES replies to our request for information regarding what a “sometime racist” might be.]

Kemp contra Kipling?

Remember Jack Kemp’s urban enterprise zones? Probably not. The whole concept was doomed to perish as soon as liberalism retrieved the Oval Office.

kempOne of the most hideously malformed proofs of the hopelessly advancing political sclerosis besetting the GOP was its 1996 presidential ticket, which may be recalled with effort by the mnemonically gifted as advancing the proposition that Bob Dole would make a terrific president, and that Jack Kemp might come in handy as his running mate. In terms of vitality, creativity, and salability to the public, this match-up might be likened to having the Beatles open for Herman’s Hermits. Kemp, the congressional leader of the brain trust behind Reaganomics, was ushered into the number two slot behind the prehistoric Dole, a man who used to tell dead supply-sider jokes on the floor of congress. The result, predictably was another four years of Bill Clinton…but at least good old Bob had his turn in the grand Republican tradition.

So they nominated Bush Senior--really?

So they nominated Bush Senior–really?

But the American Presidency wasn’t the only slot Kemp would have excelled in but never got offered. A few years earlier, he’d come up with a means of bailing out America’s failing cities and the minority populations that inhabited them. Of course, pundits will cluck their tongues and insist that Kemp’s plan for urban enterprise zones was tried and failed—and that is, indeed, the urban myth surrounding the initiative. But like a lot of things everybody knows, it isn’t so.

During his career, Kemp was bored stiff by the mediocre, and the near-mediocre.

During his career, Kemp was often bored stiff by the mediocre, and the near-mediocre.

True, in 1993 Congress passed Kemp’s plan, which the Clinton administration attempted to enact, and, true again, it didn’t work. But Kemp’s proposal bore scant resemblance to the hodge-podge deployed by the Clinton administration. Predictably, Clinton’s version proceeded from a vision of government’s role in the creation of economic growth that was diametrically distinct to Kemp’s. Kemp’s original intent was to promote the entrepreneurial development of abandoned urban areas by laying them open to the creative energies of local residents unbound by governmental red tape and boosted by Federal funds.. True to form, Clinton restructured the entire process as a hand-out to major corporate participants awash in a veritable sea of regulatory provisions certain to exclude local participation except at the most menial levels.  Worked Kemp’s way, the gift of personal responsibility and creativity would have been offered the inner city, and incentivized by Federal dollars ultimately recoverable as revenue.  Urban denizens might well have flourished. Run Clinton’s way, well….the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. And therein lies an important lesson:

Concerning rats…

wfbDecades ago, William F. Buckley, Jr. was debating Black civil rights leaders on his television program, Firing Line, when one of them glared in his direction and offered, as a kind of pre-emptive condemnation of White insouciance, the datum that “There are rats in Harlem!” Buckley agreed that Harlem was overrun with rats, but added, “You make it seem as though I personally sneak into Harlem every night and with a sort of gleeful chuckle, plop down a rat.” His point bollixed his guest. If Harlem has rats, he seemed to suggest, why haven’t the residents of Harlem taken the necessary eradicative measures? Or failing this, why haven’t they prevailed upon their own recurrently-elected yet notoriously phlegmatic officials to allocate funds and personnel toward this end?  This is exactly the line of reason–exactly the part of the “conversation on race”–that the Liberal Church of Sanctified Victimization cannot abide.  The moment personal responsibility enters the dialogue, Kipling’s worldview vanishes. So long as personal responsibility is banished from the dialogue, Kipling’s worldview is inescapable.  So, gentle readers–you probably figure we’re going to let our beloved William F. have the last word on this matter–but no!  When we at WOOF decide to discuss rats, we aren’t messing around.


It would be churlish to call this Leon’s finest moment…we suppose.

The Russian word расистов is a translation of racist, or rather, vice versa. The coinage is often attributed to Leon Trotsky, and while WOOF cannot state with certitude that the communist revolutionary with the ice axe sticking in his head is the progenitor of the term, he certainly made fond use of it.  And there is no doubt that word has obtained a utility beyond its justifiable applications in denouncing anyone who suggests anything related to race relations that might lie outside the purview of political correctitude as daily upgraded by the powers of the liberal academy. We know full well, therefore, that a conga line of shatterpated commenters will form almost immediately to denounce your humble editors and authors as “RACIST!” for daring to suggest that Black Americans take charge of their own future, and give up the idea that it is best dictated to them by the White Leftist Elite and their loyal crew of race-bating “civil rights leaders” who maintain status in accordance with how satisfactorily the Democrat party rates their performances.  Unless they do so, the American liberal and the DNC will eternally assume the White Man’s Burden as a feigned moral necessity, continually employ it as a political lever, and continually deliver nothing except poverty, division, acrimony, and distrust whenever that lever is pulled.  It’s been going on since LBJ invented high-rise housing for Black families– does anyone realistically suppose it will change?

The Great Society

The Great Society

So Trotsky gets the last word, and that word is “racist.” Trotsky used the term as a propagandistic utensil,, and it certainly caught on. We at WOOF dislike to be called racists because we aren’t–but we’re used to it.  We also know that a lot of people really are racist, and we hate that.  But beyond the looney blatherings of Klansmen, Skin Heads, certain of the “Alt Right,” “liberals” like LBJ and those thousands of DNC functionaries who even today deprecate Blacks privately while fawning over them publically, surely the most racist concept in today’s America is the notion that Blacks cannot succeed without Whites showing the way, paying the expenses, handing out largesse and directing the show. This message comes relentlessly from the Left. For decades it was disguised as compassion, but nowadays, as Americans of European ancestry are charged with confessing and lamenting their “White Privilege,” it proceeds equally from an assumption of ethnic guilt–a guilt that may be expiated only by dispensing massive sums of money and promises of preferential treatment to properly certified victims populating the Racial Left.

Hyphens away!

We believe that Americans of African descent will begin to awaken to this fact, not by tumult, but slowly and increasingly. The Left, of course,  is betting they never catch on. Until they do, Kipling’s poesy will remain a perversely applicable fact of life for all of us– in a way Kipling never perceived nor intended. And the White liberal establishment must conceal  Kipling’s ghostly presence in its approach to Civil Rights, in order to maintain its politicians’ electability. WOOF, however, calls on all Americans to free Kipling of his unforeseen roll in our national approach to race relations, to free American minorities of decades of tyranny imposed in the name of Federal assistance, and to cast off the chains of “multicultural” dogma imprisoning us in isolated social redoubts wherein we are so easily manipulated.  We especially say to the nation’s minorities, cast off victimhood and  unite with us in the American adventure! You have nothing to lose but your hyphens!WOOF PRINT