Mon centre cède, ma droite recule, situation excellente, j'attaque. Un père de 12+, trois au Paradis.
Probably driving 1-12 kids
Joined December 2020
- Tweets98.1K
- Following900
- Followers3.8K
- Likes37
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
The Democratic respect and coordinate dropping of the "horrible racist radical" talking points for John McCain began in 2009.
For Romney, in 2013.
For Trump, it'll be 2028 when they can do "Vance is far worse, Trump at least was good on..."
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
I feel sad for Haley Stevens, who is finding out today something Aristotle wrote about several thousands of years ago regarding what he called mere "friendships of utility." She meant absolutely nothing to these people outside of her political usefulness to them. It's gross.
I know @HaleyforMI way better than most people on X. She and I came into Congress together in 2018. She was co-Prez of our freshman class. She was incredibly kind to me when my late partner died; she organized a big group of our class to come to the House floor to support me when I spoke about his suicide. We were roommates in 2023, after my wonderful first roomie lost her election; both my adult kids know Haley well and are on a texting basis with her. We’ve socialized and we have good friends in common. While she and I differ on one impt issue, specifically Israel and AIPAC support, I’ve never publicly challenged her on those things, because I felt that her good points outweighed the issues I disagreed with her on. Today, that changes. 👇
Haley’s endorsement of Rogers in the MI senate race is appalling. Not because he’s a Republican, but because what he stands for is what she, and I, and our caucus has fought so hard against. Rogers is a 100% anti-choice politician. He is a Trump loyalist. He’s shown his Islamophobia in his many remarks against @AbdulElSayed, and with this endorsement, Haley has shown that she agrees with his positions. I’m shocked by Haley’s endorsement. I’m terribly sad and disappointed. I’m furious and will be more so if we lose the MI senate race. So many people in the Democratic Party have shown so much support to Haley over the years, and she has betrayed them all. If this is because of her new relationship (about which many of us were so happy for her after she lost the primary), all I can say is that any woman who abandons her friends when a new guy comes along is no friend at all. The fallout for Haley won’t just be in Dem politics; she will be a pariah among her friends in the Democratic caucus in Congress. Only she will be able to decide whether it was worth it.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
Don’t give me “legitimizing.” Ron Klain was saying the 2000 election was stolen up until the standards changed in 2021, and it suddenly became a subject of politicized legal discipline to give a presidential candidate legal advice about the methodologies for disputing an election. Even in this thread, there are people who buy the myth that SCOTUS did something wrong in Bush v Gore.
If you want to go by “would not have changed anything,” it was impossible for Trump to change anything in 2020, because he didn’t have the votes in the House or Senate, even if Pence had gone along with the historically consistent plan to put the alternative slates up to a vote—the exact methodology by which Kennedy won Hawaii.
Gore was much closer to stealing the election than Trump was, and was happy to use a facially politicized bogus Florida Supreme Court decision to do so and ask SCOTUS to affirm or stay out of it. The main difference between 2000 and 2020 is that Gore had more organized lawyers and a complicit state court judiciary.
The Democrats are promising to destroy the constitutional order if they win in 2028.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
Tell me you have no idea how law works without saying you have no idea how law works.
unavailable
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
How could Boomers fall for AI slop so easily, dad?
They fell for Joyce Carol Oates, didn’t they?
yes, to be contrarian. but obviously no one, even a "devout Catholic," which is what O'Connor called herself, seriously believes that the communion wafer isn't a wafer.
if you even believed that the wafer was soaked in someone's actual DNA, you would not want to take it into your mouth & let it melt on your tongue.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Flannery O'Connor did not believe the Eucharist was merely "symbolic" or "metaphorical," contrary to Oates' claim. O'Connor repeatedly stated the Catholic belief that although the wafer has the physical qualities ("accidents") of bread, its true substance is Jesus Christ.
eucharisticcongress.org/post/american-…
usccb.org/resources/The_…
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
‘It seems that Muslimness has become almost like a racial identity, that it’s evidence of being a marginalized group.’
I think one thing that’s true, that many people have noticed, is that new immigrant groups are making a play at casting themselves racially and eliding their identities with black Americans to be able to make demands based on claims of prejudice and oppression even if there’s near zero supporting historicity and the people making the demands tend to be privileged elites.
Me on Democrats and the racialization of Islam:
"You have people like Zohran and Abdul who are very openly and outwardly Muslim, but it’s interesting the way their Muslimness is represented. When you think about Zohran, we don’t actually know a lot about the content of his faith or how practising he is or what he actually believes. It seems that Muslimness has become almost like a racial identity, that it’s evidence of being a marginalized group. It's no longer a theological category. And I know that frustrates some people, but Zohran is so popular and so successful that people are largely okay with that trade-off.
I think Abdul is interesting because he is definitely quite practising, and we know that Islam has been an important part of his life. But again, it doesn’t come out really fully. And I think there’s a lot of reticence for even these openly Muslim candidates to talk about the content of their faith, especially when it comes to social issues.
Abdul has had major opportunities to say things on trans athletes in women’s sports. He went on Fox News and was asked a question about that, but he punted. Democrats are so careful about not offending constituencies that even when they might have socially conservative values, they don’t actually express them. And I think there’s a real bind there. Like, can you be a fully fledged member in good standing of the Democratic Party and sound off conservative notes on LGBTQ issues? And it’s not clear that you really can."
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
#RIP Patrick Stewart of Star Trek and X Men ...
On 12-4-1997, after getting a @PressClubDC coffee mug, he was asked, "Just from a purely logical point of view, why is it that a Captain whose name is Jean-Luc Picard have a perfect English accent?"
Patrick Stewart answer here:
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
Fired General Admits to Leaks; DOJ Announces Investigation redstate.com/streiff/2026/10…
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
Only online is refusing to vote in a race between awful people on both sides a decision to vote. It’s a reminder of how many hyperonline people don’t really live in the real world.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
I'd add this is also the reason the GOP never has to be coherent -the nature of the Democrats makes them inherently unstable, which means the GOP can suck wildly and still get back into office whenever some corporate interest finds itself on the wrong side of a vote buying deal.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
The Democratic Party is the party of patronage and wholesale vote buying -and has been since Aaron Burr. I think PEG is right that their electoral organization is paradoxical -they win by buying votes, but that eats the resources they need to govern.
sabrdance.substack.com/p/thi…
Ezra keeps going on about this idea of finding a "vision of the Good" for liberalism. Very conservative concern!
He says that the main criticism of Abundance is that it was all about getting people more stuff and that it lacks a vision of the Good.
And, fair enough, I don't disagree with that. I think that's a perennial problem of liberalism, and I don't think Klein would disagree with that either. And maybe he's right that empirically it was the main critique from people who engaged with the book.
But, again, my critique is that Democrats now and in any plausible foreseeable future cannot embrace the many good ideas in his book because their explicit, fundamental strategy is to turn their party, and eventually America, into an ethnic patronage machine, and that's incompatible with the sort of supply-side policies he likes. I would like to see him engage *that* critique.
The philosophical critique is in some ways too easy.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
I have a bet with @canonlawyered that we can get five new paid pillar subscriptions today. Curmudgeon that he is, he thinks we can't.
Prove him wrong here:
pillarcatholic.com/subscribe
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
NEW UNDERCOVER INVESTIGATION: I spent several months investigating a nationwide network of advocacy organizations and medical providers helping families continue medically transitioning their children in defiance of state laws.
My investigation centers on Campaign for Southern Equality (CSE), an LGBT advocacy nonprofit that connects families with cooperating medical providers across the country. CSE has distributed over $1 million in travel grants to more than 1,200 families, plus another $1 million to partner organizations, including funding for medical appointments.
With CSE's knowledge, providers in its referral network told me the ways that they circumvent state restrictions on gender-transition treatments for minors.
Some discussed using alternative diagnosis codes, such as “endocrine disorder,” to facilitate prescriptions or insurance coverage. Others described mailing medications directly to families' homes or sending prescriptions to pharmacies in states where these interventions are banned.
Providers also discussed conducting virtual appointments with patients in those states. Others required patients to cross state lines for telehealth but did not appear to have a reliable method for verifying their physical location.
My primary undercover scenario involved an 11-year-old girl in Tennessee who had only recently begun identifying as nonbinary, with no long history of gender-related distress. The providers I shared this scenario with seemed eager to treat her. Many indicated that puberty blockers could be prescribed after an initial evaluation lasting just one to several hours.
My investigation uncovered practices that may violate state and federal laws and pose medical risks to children living hundreds or thousands of miles from their treating physicians.
Read my full @CityJournal investigation: city-journal.org/article/ped…
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
It’s Season 1 and Galadriel has to choose whether or not to bang Sauron
It’s Season 2 and Galadriel has to choose whether or not to bang Sauron
It’s Season 3 and Galadriel has to choose whether or not to bang Sauron
Things are about to get steamy in Middle-earth. With Jamie Campbell Bower making his debut as Celeborn in “The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power” season three, Galadriel (Morfydd Clark) will be forced to choose between her husband and Sauron (Charlie Vickers). bit.ly/4BrwlFP
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
You are choosing to endorse a candidate who has not only trafficked in anti-Semitism but made it fundamental to his political identity - and that is *before* we get to his MB ties. If you think Mike Rogers is worse than that, that’s a damning choice to own.
(((Not That Crown, Maybe))) retweeted
And here I thought the Bulwark was founded to support those who bravely put country over party, principle over partisanship in standing up for decency against nominees whose bigotry and conduct are beyond the pale.
