What are you going to do if Target doesn’t want to let her return anything? You going to pull an unloaded gun on them before grabbing the cash from the register and running away with your slides on your feet?
That’s called armed robbery, champ. You will get caught, because by the looks of your wife, she isn’t running anywhere, and your shoes are going to slow you down.
Of course we know that this is all bravado and bluster, since he is at the Pharmacy counter and not the customer service one. We don’t need gun owners like you. You are an asshole.
I don’t have much to add, but instead of a direct link, a quote:
It is genuinely upsetting how many people celebrated Charlie Kirk’s death with “Kirkiversary” posts. Some here, tons more on TikTok. The message is clear; if you disagree with progressive orthodoxy, they want you dead and will celebrate your murder too. That includes a young father like Charlie Kirk whose major “crime” was engaging in civil debate with them.
And these posts have thousands or hundreds of thousands of likes, these aren’t fringe edgelords, this is a major view at least among the progressive base. Violence and intimidation has become an accepted strategy for them.
I hate that I have to share a country with these broken people, they must be defeated and marginalized just as much as the brainrotted elements of the Candace Owens right.
I just can’t grasp their mindset. If some leftist commentator I despised was murdered for their views, I can confidently say I would not celebrate it, and you should really do some serious soul searching if that is who you have become. This shouldn’t even need to be debated.
Celebration of assassination and poltical violence is a very dark road to go down. But after Kirk, and their celebration of Mangione, and all the cheering for Trump assassins, it is safe to say it is what a significant portion of the progressive/DSA left now believes. This is who they are.
Oh, and they want to take your guns still. You know, for “safety.”
My only addition to this:
Of course they want you dead. I told you that YEARS before Kirk was murdered. They want us all dead or in camps, as they have boldly told us many times.
It’s too widespread to be a fringe element. This is across the left wing spectrum. This is the position of the Democrats/Socialists/Communists
That’s why they want your guns.
I am not one to scream that we need to kick off a Civil War, because I know how horrific that would be. Millions would die, and the enemies of this nation wouldn’t sit by and watch from the sidelines.
However, I don’t think it will be up to me. It’s coming, and I can feel it.
That’s what laws are for, Mr. Reardon. If the right people don’t break them, they are of no use whatsoever.
My recent quotes of Atlas Shrugged made me rewatch the trilogy. Part II was the best of the three.
It’s a fine balance we have. You depend on my coal for power, and to fill your hoppers. Hank uses my coal to make his steel. We use his steel to shore up my mines and to lay your rail. It’s perfect. Natural. Trading value for value.
The Hank Reardon in this episode was cast perfectly.
I honestly feel like going John Galt more and more often lately. My target for full retirement is 2030. Some days, I don’t know if I will make it.
Trump needs to nationalize our oil! We’ve got the oil, the refineries. But we are still in the world markets. The oil goes to whomever will pay the most. Meanwhile the farmers, truckers, 9-5’ers, get screwed! MAGA is just a joke. I feel so duped!
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. That’s what the communists claim, is it not? My question has always been- “How do you determine ability and need?” Well, Ayn Rand already answered that question:
Whose ability and which of whose needs comes first? When it’s all one pot, you can’t let any man decide what his own needs are, can you? If you did, he might claim that he needs a yacht — and if his feelings is all you have to go by, he might prove it, too. Why not?
If it’s not right for me to own a car until I’ve worked myself into a hospital ward, earning a car for every loafer and every naked savage on earth — why can’t he demand a yacht from me, too, if I still have the ability not to have collapsed? No? He can’t?
Then why can he demand that I go without cream for my coffee until he’s replastered his living room? Well, anyway, it was decided that nobody had the right to judge his own need or ability. We voted on it. Yes, ma’am, we voted on it in a public meeting twice a year. How else could it be done? Do you care to think what would happen at such a meeting? It took us just one meeting to discover that we had become beggars — rotten, whining, sniveling beggars, all of us, because no man could claim his pay as his rightful earning, he had no rights and no earnings, his work didn’t belong to him, it belonged to ‘the family’ — and they owed him nothing in return, and the only claim he had on them was his ‘need’ — so he had to beg in public for his relief from his needs, like any lousy moocher, listing all his troubles and miseries, down to his patched drawers and his wife’s head colds, hoping that ‘the family’ would throw him the alms. He had to claim miseries, because it’s miseries, not work, that had become the coin of the realm
The key to getting treasure in a communist system is to be needy. To prove need, one needs to have a tragic story, one must claim your victimhood. The contest, then is to be a victim. That’s why social media has become what it has. In this world, the crowd has decided that a black man who has been accused of being a domestic abuser is less of a victim than the mother who has to live with poor mental health and three dead children, even if she is the one who killed them.
The landlord isn’t a victim. The corporation isn’t a victim, and neither is it’s billionaire founder. The victim is the looter, the thief, the person who doesn’t produce anything. Why is this? Because it must be in order for the communist system to work.
Again to Ayn Rand in the morality of the kidnapper. The kidnapper holds a physical captive for ransom. Those who would take from society are holding those who producers captive using the producer’s own morality as a weapon. The “morality of altruism” holds a good person’s conscience, empathy, and sense of duty as a ransom.
theirs is the morality of kidnappers. They use your love of virtue as a hostage. They know that you’ll bear anything in order to work and produce, because you know that achievement is man’s highest moral purpose, that he can’t exist without it, and your love of virtue is your love of life. They count on you to assume any burden. They count on you to feel that no effort is too great in the service of your love.
your enemies are destroying you by means of your own power. Your generosity and your endurance are their only tools. Your unrequited rectitude is the only hold they have upon you. They know it. You don’t. The day when you’ll discover it is the only thing they dread.
learn to understand the nature of your own power and you’ll understand the paradox you now see around you. You do not have to depend on any material possessions, they depend on you, you create them, you own the one and only tool of production. Wherever you are, you will always be able to produce.
You have a desire to succeed, to build things, to accomplish things. My entire life, I have always worked, and built, and struggled to accomplish things. Those who would take advantage of me know this, and so they take advantage of my desire to do things, to work, to be useful. They take from me in the form of taxes, of asking that I do the right thing. They take small pieces of my time, my effort, my production for themselves, secure in the knowledge that I will continue to do so. They do the same to you.
As long as we continue to provide, they will continue to take. Like the old plow horse, the useless breeders in our society will continue to take our labor until we collapse under the whip. Not just us as individuals, us as a society. They will continue to take until the entire system comes crashing down.
It’s always been so, and will be until we have decided that we’ve had enough.
People come in to the emergency room every day who are 80, 100, or even 200 pounds overweight. They have been eating garbage, they have a blood alcohol that’s over 200, cholesterol over 300, and their urine is positive for barbiturates, or cannabinoids. Then they demand we fix them with a pill or something.
They come in with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome and you tell them the only way they will stop this, is to stop smoking weed. They call you a liar, complain loudly about the “healthcare system” and its failings, then leave. Two days later, they are back again. Same complaint.
Then there is the guy who comes in showing all the signs and symptoms of an acute appendicitis. We tell him he needs surgery. He signs out against medical advice because he has things to do that afternoon. Stupid, but whatever. What’s incredible about this, is he comes back at 8 am the next morning saying he is ready for surgery, but we need to do it and have him out by noon, because he is busy and doesn’t have time to waste.
People don’t have to take responsibility for anything.
We are in a society that has abandoned objective reality and reason. We each have our own truth- men can be women, Lindsay was a good mother who just snapped and killed her children but it wasn’t her fault because the health care system failed her. In that kind of a society, there can be no choice between what is good or what is evil, because in such a society, there can be no truth, only subjective reality.
As the nation slides farther and farther from the foundations mooring it to reality, it will become more and more insane. If you don’t like what is real, simply substitute your own reality for the inconvenient one. There is no such thing as the golden rule, no such thing as right or wrong. There is only you. Each person gets to decide what it is THEY want, without regard for what society wants or even needs.
In such a scenario, you get anarchy.
Yet anarchy can’t exist for long. Sooner or later, usually sooner, someone comes along and brings order to what is now chaos. The unfortunate fact is the person who brings order is usually a tyrant.
That’s where we are right now, so each of us needs to harden our hearts and be prepared for what is to come. Things will continue to get worse as the society that was once these United States begins to slide down the cliff into the abyss of history.
“A sane person to an insane society must appear insane” ~ Kurt Vonnegut
This post is late because it’s concerning the Lindsay Clancy trial. I wrote and scheduled it before the mistrial was declared. I decided to postpone it so I could do some edits. This is the result.
The Lindsay Clancy case has brought the TikTok Detective bureau out of the shadows. These women, experts in everything from police procedure to medicine, psychology, forensic evidence collection, law, military tactics, and nuclear physics are on the case and have declared Lindsay to be not guilty for reasons ranging from insanity to “her husband did it.”
Keep in mind, she was indicted for killing those children in October 2023, yet waited to file this lawsuit until January of 2026, shortly before her criminal trial. This is part of a claim Lindsay and her attorneys are making, that she was not in control or aware of her actions at the time she killed the children.
For that reason, there is no doubt, zero, that she in fact killed those children.
Killing someone isn’t always illegal, but in those cases, the defense requires admitting to the facts. For example, if I shoot and kill someone who tried to rob me at gunpoint, claiming self defense requires that I admit to shooting and killing the person, but I have an affirmative defense in that self defense is legal. I make the claim of being in reasonable fear for my life. The prosecution then has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting wasn’t in self defense.
The actual controlling Massachusetts rule is the doctrine of criminal responsibility, originating in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case law rather than a statute specifically saying “psychosis.” The foundational case is Commonwealth v. McHoul, 352 Mass. 544, 546–547 (1967). The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s current 2026 Model Jury Instruction on Criminal Responsibility states:
A person is not criminally responsible for his conduct if he has a mental disease or defect, and, as a result of that mental disease or defect, lacks the substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.
The evidence never required anyone to believe Lindsay Clancy was well. She clearly was not, as anyone who will kill their children is not mentally well. But being profoundly mentally ill and not being responsible for your actions are not the same thing. The law in this case requires the person making the insanity claim be unaware of the wrongfulness of their actions.
None of the providers who treated Lindsay Clancy diagnosed her with postpartum depression or psychosis. The evidence instead pointed toward a serious mood disorder, with multiple of them diagnosong her as bipolar.
As many who are bipolar do, she resisted that diagnosis, changed providers, often skipping or refusing to take medications. Lindsay was prescribed 13 different psychiatric medications over several months. That does NOT mean she was taking 13 medications simultaneously. The prosecution’s evidence indicated roughly 2–3 at a time. Then there’s the actual pill inventory presented at trial:
Zoloft: 30 prescribed — 23 remained
Ativan: 30 prescribed — 24 remained
Buspirone: 30 prescribed — 28 remained
Hydroxyzine: 30 prescribed — 27 remained
Buspirone refill: 30 prescribed — ALL 30 remained
Trazodone: 30 prescribed — 22½ remained
She hid some of her most disturbing thoughts from the people treating her because she knew it would result in her kids being taken. Above all, people with this condition are well known for resisting treatment, because they “aren’t crazy.”
Lindsay claims through her attorney that she became convinced that her brain was damaged and she would never return to her old self. She was suicidal, but her children were a tether to life, according to her claims.
Then there is the alleged voice. After months of treatment without documented psychosis, Lindsay said she heard a voice telling her to kill the children in the days and minutes before the killings. We are talking about roughly an 18-minute window where a voice commanded she kill her children. She never spoke of this voice before, or mentioned it until after the killings.
Yet during the killings and the hours preceding them, she was capable of purposeful, sequential behavior.
She created the opportunity to be alone with the children. She researched how long her husband’s trip would take and added another errand to extend that time. She killed the children one by one over a 15 minute period. When her husband called during this time, she missed his call and then made the decision to call him back. In the middle of a psychotic break so profound that it compelled her to kill her three children without realizing the gravity of her actions, she still recognized her husband had called, understood that not responding could warrant him returning early, and took affirmative action to call him back. That is difficult to reconcile with the narrative that Lindsay suddenly “snapped” and had no awareness of what she was doing.
Lindsay was profoundly mentally ill and genuinely wanted to die. But she still understood what she was doing when she killed her children. Those things are not mutually exclusive. She took steps to hide her psychosis, this alleged voice compelling her to kill, to get her husband out of the house, and to one by one kill her children.
Mental illness deserves compassion, and postpartum mental health deserves treatment, attention, and resources. However, compassion can’t replace the legal standard for criminal responsibility.
If the standard becomes, “She was a loving mother, therefore she must have snapped,” we’re no longer applying the law to the evidence. We’re creating our own definition of justice based on emotion and feelings.
In my opinion, this woman knew exactly what she was doing. She took steps to hide her behavior while she was carrying out her plan. All of this suggests cunning and a sense of guilt. You don’t hide your actions if you are unaware of the wrongness of what you are doing. In Massachusetts, the legal term for this is “consciousness of guilt.”
The legal issue to which those facts are relevant is whether the Commonwealth proved that the defendant retained substantial capacity to “appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness” of the conduct and to conform conduct to law. Massachusetts defines “appreciate” as understand, “criminality” as the legal significance of the conduct, and “wrongfulness” as its moral significance.
In this case, taking steps to prevent her plan from being foiled:
conceal what they intended to do
waited until her husband was gone
created a diversion to get her husband away from the scene
lied about what she intended to do
selected the time or place designed to avoid intervention
took steps calculated to ensure nobody discovered or stopped the act.
In my mind, that is what it boils down to: Did this woman know what she was doing was wrong, as evidenced by the fact that she took active, complex actions to ensure no one could discover or prevent her from carrying out her plan.
I think the answer is that she knew full well what she was doing. I tip my hat to the one juror who had the cajones to stand his ground in the face of the other 11 members of the jury, the judge, and the defense attorney. He stood up for those children, despite surely knowing what would happen to him in the aftermath, once his identity is discovered. The left is going to make his life miserable.
Now there are actually dumbasses out there who are calling for the elimination of the jury trial, saying we should use professional tribunals instead.
Retard says she would happily let Lindsay Clancy babysit her children and can't understand why people are treating Lindsay differently to her innocent husband. pic.twitter.com/QfAp28uVrP
If you think it’s out of bounds to step on her glasses, wait until you see what happens in a Civil War. Remember when they were talking about putting us in camps?
I have no empathy for the people who locked J6 protesters in cages for months, who have shot those on the right, and who initiate violence. There are no rules in a real war, and that is what they are asking for.
It’s important to understand the mindset we are dealing with. This guy travelled to Fond Du Lac, Wisconsin to set fire to a Republican Congressman’s office. he comes right out and admits to doing so, states he did it because he disagrees with the Congressman’s recent votes. He goes on to say he has tried peacefully protesting, but that didn’t work, so peace is no longer possible. I have started the video below at the beginning of his police interrogation, just after his Miranda rights have been read to him:
I can already hear a bunch of you- you are making fun of him because he looks like a marshmallow soy eating lard ass. (I will get in my one shot- his Antifa code name is Sponge Bro Lard Ass.) Here is why I think you are wrong: he did something other than sit on the Internet and complain. This alone makes him, and people like him, a threat. The stupid ones like him will either be stripped away while they are in prison, or they will be released until they learn how to carry out attacks without getting caught, and the attacks will get more and more deadly and effective.
For those reasons, I think we make fun of people like him to our own peril.
