Smartest Clinton Cronies Employing Risk Management

Rank and file Democrats are most inclined to see the following as extremely random speculation. But the evidence that has arisen demonstrates how it is a well-considered surmise. Democrats, especially those currently planning to employ all means necessary to elect Hillary on November 8, would be well advised to consider it too.

My thinking that the smartest high placed Democrats have clearly seen the danger to themselves  began here before FBI director James Comey came out with his Friday morning announcement that the Clinton case was being reopened.

Then a few days after me, but before Friday, Fran Porretto published Political Hatred and Its Potential Consequences, which helps sustain the point I was making.

Yesterday, Saturday, Ed Bonderenka asked some questions about the Comey announcement and concluded "I believe Comey has seen something so damning that he IS actively trying to throw the election."

And shortly after that I saw the sensational headline ASSANGE EXPOSES HILLARY’S LIES: HACKERS AREN’T RUSSIAN, THEY ARE DEMOCRAT WHISTLEBLOWERS AND SHE’S KILLING THEM.

I actually watched the video interview of Julian Assange included in that click bait. Let me be clear. Mr. Assange was careful not to say he thought Hillary's camp had ordered the murder of Seth Rich. Nor did he agree when asked if Rich had been an informant of his. He responded that he protects the identity of his sources. However, in my opinion, he left it to be inferred quite a bit along the lines of that headline when he said with a very slow-paced delivery:

"Our sources face serious risks. That is why they come to us."
"A variety of WikiLeaks sources are concerned when that sort of thing [Seth Rich] happens." 

Indeed, Director Comey may very well know all that Assange does, and as Ed opines, maybe even more and worse and with certainty.

We live after the history of the soviet union has been disclosed. A large number of Stalin's closest associates met a gruesome and untimely end. Even minor apparatchiks wound up there, some believing to the very end that their circumstance was somehow all a mistake: 'If Stalin only knew.' Thank you Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

It is quite possible, given the varied reports that have turned up in the emails, that many of Hillary's closest associates have indeed seen behavior that troubles them. Could any of them have discreetly set things in motion that reduces their risks while not being seen as doing so? Wouldn't some of you?

Anyone who refuses to consider that these are dangerous times is engaging in -- how should I put this? -- "fear management." As one person told me "it's not that I have my head in the sand, it's just that I don't want to know" without displaying a glimmer of realization how contradictory that was.

Indeed, the simplest way to phrase this seems to be

Those close to Hillary who've carefully leaked what we've been provided could be said to be engaging in risk management.

Those who can't bear to consider the far-reaching implications of what Assange said in the link's interview are likely engaging in fear management. 

The fearful ones are laying low because the scheming brain required to protect themselves and not get caught is outside their capabilities. They are the among the latter while the brainier comprise the former. 

Should the clever ones succeed, their actions will wind up protecting the ones who have not realized the danger heading towards them. And they will wind up saving the nation even if that is not the first or even fifth order of interest to them.  

To my way of thinking, Trump is a risk. But Hillary is the greater risk, and that appears to be the opinion of some of those most close to her -- and they are banking their lives on it.  

Here's hoping that before election day enough of the lower echelon apparatchiks of the Democratic Part machine come to understand the risk to themselves too. That goes too for many lame-brains in the GOP who clearly don't know which way is safest and have been backing Hillary.

High Risk Exposure of Our Corrupt Political Class

I have been pained by Ted Cruz. That is because I get the sense that he's intended to be a lone and isolated voice.

It could very well be his job with the Establishment to demoralize all those who hold the principled stands that favor the American constitution that he has spoken of often.

And in this latest speech on the Senate floor, he lashes out at the business as usual McConnell and company.

One of the things he says today I have repeatedly said about seated establishment republicans (SKUNCs on this blog but called RINOs almost everywhere else).

SKUNCs will attack true conservative Republicans with a level of vitriol that they would never use on a Democrat.

A wonderful insight and a related observation

Wow.

‘..The big stuff, wars, moon landings, civilizations, doesn’t matter. Everything has been reduced to the lowest common denominator of personal insecurities masquerading as politics and entertainment reduced to fame for fame’s sake celebrities. All of it is calculated to match the workday routine of a twenty-something female college graduate working in media. Because that is mostly who writes it.
…Our enemies have set out big goals. We must set out bigger ones. We must become more than conservatives. If we remain conservatives, then all we will have is the America we live in now. And even if our children and grandchildren become conservatives, that is the culture and nation they will fight to conserve. We must become revolutionaries. We must think in terms of the world we want. Not the world we have lost.’

Daniel Greenfield

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com.au/2015/09/this-is-america-we-live-in-now.html

H/T Crusader Rabbit.

That’s an orthodox Jew perspective if I’ve ever seen one and it’s one of the best things to learn from the faith: it fully recognizes the hegemony of Natural Law so a reader doesn’t even have to be of their faith.

It reminds us that Abraham himself was a revolutionary.

Too bad his seed had so much in-fighting, usually involving jealousies and covetousness.

Ike hated by Ish, Jake hated by Esav, Joe hated by his bros, the Israelites hated by the Amalekites, set the pattern that is merely a repetition of what is endemic in the whole of the human race.

The last commandment, thou shalt not covet, were it strictly adhered to, would likey lead to the end of war.

People who admire others and don’t covet what the others have or can do are usually the most productive and loving people I know.

So what do we have now? Western Civilization hated by its current rulers for much the same reason as those revealed in scripture. Hence there is why our governments are also at war with Judeo-Christianity and its scriptures. It exposes how their actions are in parallel with all the evil-doers there.

Hence Greenfield is correct.

Lying to Fellow Jews

I wonder. Is Debbie Wasserman-Shultz perhaps related to the Sergeant Shultz [image] -- a character inspired by the behavior of the Juden Polizei?

She, along with an overpaid idiot at the ADL (Jonathan Greenblatt, a former advisor to Obama no less), came out swinging at Mike Huckabee -- whom I personally detest -- for saying what any sane Jew should be saying. In short, for saying that the Iran deal is allowing Iran to turn the entire nation of Israel into a Jewish oven. A sane Jew is one who has heard "Never Again" reverberating in their ears their entire lives. That clearly leaves out Mrs. Shultz. (Hmmm. Is she less Jewish and more a gut German?)

My Dad told me -- a man who was a contemporary of many of your great grandfathers -- that the lowest form of Jew during WW II was the one who, for few extra rations, worked for the Nazis. Their job was in keeping their fellow Jews from speaking out about what was happening to them. Preventing them from speaking of the truth parading daily in front of their eyes. Their job was to see that news of the Final Solution going on all around them was denied by all -- or else!

Back then Sergeant Shultz would be tasked with enforcing "You know nutting!" amongst her fellow Jews.

And back then she also would have had the decency to wear one of these on her sleaves so that we knew for whom she was really working.

Yep. The Juden Polizei's job was to make sure nobody spoke out or acted against government plans.

Silence Often Viewed As Consent

The SSM has not taken notice of Mr. Obama's rare silence on anything on matters such as this headline.

FBI: Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed in Line of Duty Up 89% in 2014

Because the highly paid apparatchiks occupying our news institutions haven't mentioned it, someone ought comment that silence is often viewed as consent.

Because it IS a Soviet-Style Media After All

The question -- answered by the headline above -- was asked by the man who has been tracking Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber all these years. 

Weinstein, back at home, was stunned at the reaction. Why did he keep finding Gruber gaffes? Why didn't the press glom onto this stuff first?

Yes Mr. Weinstein. A Soviet-Style media reports on only that news which allows the soviet-style government to operate with impunity; to hell with the voters it allegedly represents.

Furthermore, I recommend all read the article posted by Ace who highlighted this quote,

Meet the Guy Who's Single-Handedly Doing All of the Media's Jobs for Them

and then listen to the first 50 minutes of  Mark Levin from his show last night (11/10/14).

What is to be done about the revelations is problematic.

Any erstwhile leader who has even a plausible and not yet viable idea will indeed find many willing followers in America.

God help us. I suspect He is not getting any legitimate calls for help from the GOPe.

NRSC, Your Money, and Lenin

IIRC, Lenin famously predicted that capitalists would sell him the rope to hang them with.

It seems the Prog NRSC thinks it can beg conservatives for money with which to campaign against the grass roots but with which it claims it will use against Democrats. Bridge in Brooklyn unneeded.

Slipping away

NRSC Breaking News

To: Me
Today at 1:52 PM

After months of predicting GOP victory, the Washington Post's statistical model now shows a 51 percent chance that the Democrats hang on.

Why?

The answer is simple – the Democrats are spending over $40 million more than the Republicans in battleground races. For weeks, our candidates have been holding on, despite a relentless barrage of negative ads – but we need your help now or it's over.

I know that times are tough, that's why we're fighting so hard to bring new leadership that will turn things around. But, if we don't rally together now – as a team – then we will lose as individuals.

Can we count on you? [followed by links to donate]

They never stop.

Every penny sent to the NRSC is fungible. They may claim to use it for one thing, but it can be put to use where the leadership thinks the money will do them the most good.

The money will be spent not "to bring new leadership" as they promise, but to defend its incumbents and even to funnel some money to Dems in order to defeat real conservatives as happened in the Mississippi primary for U.S. Senate. 

And in Kansas.  And Nebraska. And in Indiana two years ago.

If you have some money burning a hole in your pocket, better to give it to the beggars outside 7-11. They certainly would do less harm to the republic than the Prog leadership that is the NRSC.

I pray SKUNCs in both parties are visited by an Eleventh Plague.

Let me be perfectly clear on this. That prayer is an update on the Tenth Plague. What they intend to happen to decent Americans winds up boomeranging back on themselves.

SKUNCs Stink- Proven Episode

Haley Barbour's PAC Funded the Racially-Tinged Attacks on McDaniels


Help me end the use of the acronym RINO. Rhinos are tough.
SKUNCs (Stooges keep undermining national constitutionalists) is the kind of label any designee or his potential voters will find hard to misunderstand as a compliment. 

Godwin's Curse

Godwin's Law in short asserts that mentioning of Hitler for any reason in support of an argument implicitly categorizes the speaker as desperate.

I don't care who Godwin was or that he is credited with this assertion. However I will credit him with the curse since his attitude will have helped trends to continue.

Godwin's Curse:

There will be a point in time where events have so deteriorated that the value of any comparative arguments, such as how similar behavior led to the same repercussions, will be moot.

[**Updated** to include the corollary:

When one is living the consequences of Godwin's Curse, adherents to Godwin's Law will then know what desperation really means.]

I will have you know that this video helped, especailly at 30 seconds in, helped me recognize this curse.




Hat tip to Kevin Baker.


Oh, and one more observation.

Someone please list and point to places where Bill Whittle has called out RINOs SKUNCs for their back-stabbing and anti-constitutional ways of their own? 

Undoubtedly Whittle keeps showing us superbly how badly we are being served. I think he does so better than anyone else except, on some occasions, his pal Andrew Klavan.

See, this is what worries me about Whittle. I cannot quite shake the feeling that he is frequently laughing at Americans who are less well-connected than is he.

The One-Way Ratchet Again

I wish I could recall where I saw it last week. Maybe one of you can refresh my memory.

But the answer to Ace's questioning headline

If Obama Can Ignore The Law Requiring the Deportation of Illegal Aliens, Why Can't He Ignore the Law Requiring Asylum Hearings?

is that the ratcheting away of protection for Americans continues unabated and rarely specifically laid out for scrutiny.

Who is protected by the law depends on the King's whimsy the unstated but easily recognized agenda of those who enforce the laws.

It is no accident that such blatant and brazen discrepancies continue to be abetted by our rulers' Soviet-Style Media.

 Bottom line for you Ace:

Equality under the law is now completely arbitrary wherever it suits those seeking ever more power and ever more longevity in the seat of power.

Period.

Adults Needed for the Anti-Statist Movement

JWF posted the following headline from the Washington Examiner. It ought to be pissing the adults in the country off.

"Democrats will pay political price for Obamacare in 2014"

Hardly.

The American public is far less Statist than our Soviet-style Media wants us to believe. Hence the relentless propaganda against the TEA Party movement as far Right.

But SSM never even hints, let alone admits, how far Left the Dem Party (and itself) is today.

Meanwhile the GOP is filled with liberal Statists who would rather see a GOP candidate lose to a Dem than let any additional TEA party types win and thus have a chance to form a true anti-Statist party.

Bottom line is that too much of the GOP hierarchy are Progs throwing plays to serve the other team. They do it because Dem views and moneyed interests are much closer to their own hoity-toity position than the position of us members of what they call the hoi polloi (when they aren't calling us racist, homophobes or xenophobles; and it is only a matter of time before they are dehumanizing us as Goebbals did Jews).

This headline may not be a complete lie, but it is misleading. If the GOP remains obstructed because too many Karl Rove type picks get elected, we will only see more govt growth from maneuvers where the Hastert rule is ignored or the filibuster gets gutted without consequence.

Thus Dem losses in 2014 are not enough to turn things around. God help us.

Envy As Admitted Federal Policy

Unbelieveably, the essence of Marxist class warfare, envy and its exploitation, was admitted today by "one of the prime architects of both the Massachusetts healthcare reform and the Affordable Care Act, Professor of economics at MIT, Jonathon Gruber." [source]

"That means that the genetic winners, the lottery winners who've been paying an artificially low price because of this discrimination now will have to pay more in return."

Sickening. Coveting the health of your neighbor is now fair game in contemporary America. Essentially this: 'If you are healthy, you deserve to be handicapped, and we have the power to do it to you.' You first Dr. Gruber.

Incidental report from the street:
I hear from soft-headed liberals who have been repeating the nonsense that gets aired repeatedly on SSM TV such as MSNBC declare that conservatives are anti-American because they disagree with President Obama. This revelation will not faze them in the least.

The real problem:
What is more of a problem are the conservative talkshow hosts who refuse to call this president a Marxist. And you know the old Leftist slogan -- "no enemies on the left." That would explain a great deal why talkers like Michael Medved and others at Salem broadcasting regularly call out others on the Right as traitors to the GOP before they'll call out Leftists as traitors to America. Or traitors to common decency. Or traitors to JudeoChristian ethics (thou shall not covet) such as this genius Gruber.

One Solution:
We of the TEA Party movement need to disassociate ourselves from the "Rightists" on the Marxist political spectrum of Left and Right. Let me repeat Ronald Reagan's vision for you. 

There is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: up to man's ages-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.

I am not on the Right any longer. There are too many Downs over there. I'm with the Ups.

To Hell with Downs like Medved, Hewitt, Prager, and anyone else who thinks like them. They are unfit company for people who need to recognize and fight all the enemies of freedom.

STOP Funding the Enemy

I received yet another email request for funds from the Tea Party "Patriots" Citizens Fund.

Here is the maddening segment of Jenny Beth Martin's reasons for her request for funds.

2) We need to bombard targeted Senators with ads. The constituents of every single wishy-washy “Republican” need to understand what is at stake. We just don’t yet have the funding we need to buy these ads. 

Someone this stupid has no business being in the business of fighting the Establishment. As far as I am concerned, she is essentially an antidisestablishmentarian. 

Hey, maybe I'm overly sensitive, but am I wrong is this? Speaking as a reluctant blogger, one who would rather be gardening and visiting his children among other things, my primary reason for blogging has been to provide counter-arguments, meager as they are, to the relentless propaganda issuing from the Soviet-style media (SSM).

I cannot see any gain in providing funds to run ads that will only provide those same rotten institutions material to editorialize against. But worse, if it is true that their ad revenue IS falling, why oh why would we help sustain them in any way? It's one thing not to storm their offices on a daily basis in protest, but it is another diametrically opposite thing to give them money. Sheesh -- this is NOT rocket science.

Ok. Tell me how to get through to this person allegedly on our side. If she is permitted to go on without the millions she is emailing hearing this perspective, that is potentially tens of millions of dollars she personally will funnel to our enemy for an ad campaign we already know our politicians will ignore because they listen to the people who actually give the pols money, not the SSM.

Rewritten:

If she is permitted to go on -- and the millions she reaches do not hear of this perspective I am warning about -- and then succeeds, that is potentially tens of millions of dollars she personally will funnel to our enemy. All for an ad campaign that we already know from bitter experience that politicians will ignore because they listen to the people who fund them far more than we do. And that is even assuming that those same politicians are not adhering to an anti-conservative, anti-constitutional agenda already.
It is worse than pissing our money away down a hole. It is giving our money to arguably our worst enemy, the SSM.

Minor Leftists: Beware

George Orwell took great care to make it clear that apparatchiks (party members not part of the inner circle) are invariably tortured for sport by those for whom they helped obtain and keep power.

Help restore the United State of America and save yourselves whist there are still others with whom you may ally (if they'll have you). In light of all that transpired during the 20th Century under totalitarian regimes, do not take Martin Niemöller's warning lightly (short version).

First they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Medved: For the Record

Readers here know that I castigated Michael Savage and David Horowitz for their part in fueling the racial issue divide in the George Zimmerman trial. What you may not know is that in comments at Liberty's Torch I stated the following: "I expect that Michael Medved (and the rest of that Judas goat's suspect Salem Broadcasting stable) cannot be far behind."

Well, he didn't go that far, but can it still be said he is, indeed, not far behind.  I ask your honest opinion and why.

The first hour of the Michael Medved show today (July 10) was devoted to taking calls on the GZ trial. I want to state for the record that Medved did not go so far as the other two.

I wish I had a transcript to review what I heard him say on his own and in reaction to callers. But since I do not, and won't pay for a podcast to get one, I ask you to rely on my own memory (that comes and goes since I tend to become distracted with my own thoughts in reaction to what I hear.) Still, my memory is often pretty accurate even when not precise.

Yes, Medved 'deplored those who raise racial tensions as have been on display here.'

Furthermore, I would bet big money that his call screener did not permit callers on to add to the hour the important news released only a few hours ago by Judicial Watch that reveals that the Obama DOJ has been actively fomenting racial tensions since Zimmerman shot Martin.  It would undermine what I believe to be his real intentions but for which he would never admit (unless this was his turn to be the radical.)

So in typical "Progressive" fashion, he let the DOJ and other two talkers carry the heavy load while he made appeals for the rest of us to play it cool and not rise to the bait.

Another way to look at this is found in the typical Leftists tactic of the Moral Marshmallow. One or two make the crazy, then fade into the background so they can't be questioned. Those who remain out front argue that you didn't hear what you just heard, and besides, it would be wrong to react violently to violence. And like this news that the call screener never allowed on air, it's as if it never happened so he doesn't have to deal with it in a timely fashion.

In other words, this was not Medved's turn to be in your face to us commoners, it was his turn to downplay the danger us commoners feel because his compatriot "former" Leftists had said what he vehemently denies matched his intentions.

The betrayal by "conservative" talk radio continues. It is my most fervent wish that others start critically observing such inconsistencies and help me shed light on these fifth columnists.

**Update**
Velociman came up with a fine way to weigh DOJ's involvement:

"This is the most stunning abuse of the police power of the state I have ever witnessed. And John Mitchell is the disgraced Attorney General? This is the United States of America. Your top cop does not agitate mobs and foment bloodlust against a private citizen." [Emphasis in original]

Despicable "Former" Leftists

To whom am I referring? Michael Savage and David Horowitz.

Savage sent out emails to listeners (in this case, former), that were almost as dishonest about the facts in the George Zimmerman trial as anything MSNBC published from the start. (Text is below the break.)

And the Headline from Breitbart David Horowitz: Conservatives Jumped the Gun on Zimmerman Innocence provides words of Horowitz' which will only foster race riots should Zimmerman be found guilty. Or even worse in the long run, terrify the jury into declaring Zimmerman guilty to save their own hides.

Listen up Horowitz. Most reputable conservatives did not claim Zimmerman was innocent. They were appalled

1. that all the Left had declared him guilty. 
2. that Prosecutor Cory had used extralegal means to indict him (and she has been indicted by a grand jury for it too)
3. and additionally, they were concerned, and rightly so, that all gun-rights eliminators from the President on down would use Zimmerman as another excuse to disarm Americans.

Has this "former" red-diaper baby has gone back to his bastardly ways? Looks like it.

Listen up Savage. I know your listener-ship is plummeting. Your lame attempt to promote your ratings with controversy has failed stupendously, and rightly so. You washed up talker and now senile old doper.

(**Update** After you read the evidence below the break, you may want to read my follow-up Death Cult Elitism On View.

and also read J.  Christian Adams' Newly Released Documents Detail the Department of Justice’s Role in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests  providing evidence that the Obama DOJ has been deeply involved in setting up the fuel for race riots.)

Countering the Undermining of Your Moral Foundations

The point of this screed is this. When you hear a popular talkshow host make a statement you know to be contrary to the views of the Right and its principles, or undermines our case that distinguishes us from the Left, speak out.  Don't let your inability to get past the call-screener stop you. Just tell as many people who are on the Right until there are many more of us who understand our need to watch our backs. We cannot be betrayed by an enemy.

One of the key foundations of Judeo-Christian morality is being able to recognize evil. And as I have constantly written here (so many times that I have a link to one near the top of my sidebar), the killing, murdering, sacrificing of children is one of the most distinct of evils recognized by this Western ethos.

I am currently battling a terrible cold while having a great many other things to do. This is but one of the reasons for my dearth of publishing.

However, while preparing coffee I turned on the radio briefly. It was Dennis Prager, a "conservative" radio talker whose niche is allegedly to keep moral issues alive and well in this overwhelming time of secular domination. Indeed, he often has many good and revealing things to contribute.

But as I warn my readers, it is very unwise to be an unwary fan of any man for his apparent wisdom. And there is abundant evidence that it is very unwise to do so with men who make their living in a medium that is constantly being monitored by licensing agents of an increasingly one-world-view government. There are some things they cannot say, and there are some untruths that they will propagate.

I heard Mr. Prager repeat one of those untruths, all the more angering to me given the latest news proving the contrary. It so angered me that I stopped what I was doing to write this down.

I hope what I tell you will be repeated widely. I know from experience that although Mr. Prager claims to allow dissident voices to his on first, that his screener will very likely find some reason not to -- such as "he's moved on from that" being one of the favorite lines.

At about 5 minutes to the end of his first hour, Mr. Prager was speaking about how easy life would be if both sides could agree what is good for society. Before he went on to mention distinct differences, he stated the following mind blowing statement. [paraphrasing as best I can since I don't have it recorded]

"Of course the Left and the Right agree that the killing of children is bad."-- Dennis Prager

I would ask Mr. Prager to square this with what his knows to be historically true, but even more so, by what is very current in the news -- or lack of it. Namely: The story of Kermit Gosnell and his "Women's Medical Society" is the precise opposite of The Preferred Narrative of the MSM. Mr. Prager is one of the first to assert that the MSM is dominated by Leftists. Yet he somehow overlooked without a moments hesitation that the MSM's determination to bury this story (as recounted at this link and many others) proves his statement to be completely untrue.

Get out there my friends. Make it clear that you and the Left are distinctly different, most especially in this issue as demonstrated in this matter.

And when you do so, you will now be prepared to be knifed in the back by the likes of Mr. Prager. When it comes you can now charge him and those like him with being an apologist for the Left. Here is your proof.

RINO Connotes Thick-Skinned You Fools

The filibuster in favor of protecting the 2nd Amendment, and indeed all of the letters of the Bill of Rights, lost today with 68 votes

When will the rest of the dextrosphere get it? Looks like never.

The damned so-called RINOs glory in being called that name. Why? Because it reminds them that they need to be thick-skinned enough to ignore their conservative and libertarian base.

They are the worst kind of Statists -- ones that will lie to you about their intentions. At least you can't say that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid or Bummer have been lying to YOU. You won't vote for them because their intentions are known. But the member of the GOP Senate that you voted for because he claimed to be a defender of the constitution, he outright lied to you.

Short of calling them traitors outright, Guy S's acronym SKUNC (Statist Knowingly Undermining our Nation's Constitution) is much more satisfying.

And were those RINOs to begin hearing the term SKUNC, at least they'd be reminded that we think they stink. They may not give a damn at this point, but it will be very hard for any of them to glory in being so labeled.

Think about it. At least cease using the label RINO.

Diagnosis By a Quack

Seeing as how he feels he can be unrestrained, and has broken his collegial phoniness airs of the US Senate, I declare John Quackain a quack rather than some more accurate designation reserved for a later date. As Guy S had reevaluated the partisans he previously so designated, SKUNC appears to be a far too understated label.

From the top of Drudge this morning.

MCCAIN CALLS YOUNG BUCKS 'WACKOS'...

Hatchet Man At PJ Media

Re: PJ Media has taken a novel approach to doing business.  Tells all its best customers that what they have to say carries no weight with, has no value whatsoever to, them.

"Send ideas, comments, suggestions, links or tips to tips@pjmedia.com"

To whom is endangering PJMedia.

We Are Fighting Elitism -- and then you take a cavalier attitude towards comments.
All comments of the past are now down the memory hole. You must be proud!

Gee, and we thought you were different. Silly we.

Buh bye.

Pascal

Some of Wretchard's best work was in the comments to his own Belmont Club posts. Unless those comments are recovered, I cannot imagine how this can end well for PJ Media. Maybe that's the point. Hatchet men are usually employed to rid a company of dead wood, not to eliminate the company itself.