Opinion VIP

Democrats Need Practice Making Threats

|
Posted: Sep 23, 2020 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Democrats Need Practice Making Threats

Source: AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez

I have long contended that blue bubble Democrats simply don’t understand how human beings work. They are aliens in their own country, totally unacquainted with anything except their own low-T kind. This leads them to not getting the gist of basic concepts, like how to threaten your opponent. We’re seeing that hilarity in the wake of the death of RBG. Dudes, if you want to threaten us, you’ll need to work on your technique.

They almost got Justice Thomas and Justice Kavanaugh with their tacky sex lies, but you might think they won’t dare try that on fresh-faced Amy Coney Barrett or any of the other potential nominees (by the time you read this I expect we shall know who it is). You would think wrong – the coming attack is as obvious as it is loathsome. And it won’t work.

Of course, the real heat in this column comes from your overwhelming response to my reverse sear essay last week… 

Threats 101

It’s kind of bizarre that I need to explain this to the liberals since it seems obvious, but they don’t seem to understand how threats work. RBG dies and President Trump and the Senate dare to exercise the power invested in them by their election and the Dems went nuts. Immediately, they started with what they think are threats but are not.

We hear they will “take to the streets” and “burn it all down” if we exercise our prerogative. Lib senators announce that if we dare confirm a justice, they will break the filibuster, add states, pack the Court, and do all sorts of other stuff.

OK, how do I put this? It’s not a threat if you have already promised to do all the things you are threatening to do. What, are you still going to do them, only while angrier?

Unless you have only been watching the mainstream media’s limited coverage of the mostly peaceful riots and fiery protests, you are aware that Grandpa Badfinger’s supporters have been running rampant for months, particularly in lib cities where that nonsense is tolerated. It’s not super effective for a rioter to tell us he’ll riot if we do X when he is also going to riot if we don’t do X. That’s not how threats traditionally function.

And since they have been telling us for months that the filibuster is dust and it’s open season on our ability to participate in our own governance if they get a Senate majority, the idea that we better not protect ourselves by getting a majority on the SCOTUS (we all just assume Roberts is going to play ball because of course he will) or they will do what they are going to do anyway given the chance seems…flawed.

Libs, to threaten us effectively, you need to raise the possibility of you doing something you haven’t already been doing or have promised to do already. It seems pretty basic and I’m a bit baffled that you seem unclear on the concept. It’s not hard. Are you dumb? I mean, more than we thought?

And even when they make threats technically correctly, they are less threatening than their makers imagine. One hefty lefty on Twitter took a break from eating a turkey leg to assure us that this would lead to a civil war and she would be the first on the line – I can only assume she meant the chow line. I guess we are supposed to be chastened by her willingness to diabetes for her principles.

Oh well.

The Sex Claims We’ll See

We all recall the slander storm about Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh – though they are 0-2 on sex lies, that doesn’t seem likely to deter the Dems any more than their 0-1 record on civil wars seems to be slowing their roll post-RBG. Probably by the time you read this, President Trump will have nominated one of several very nice ladies, and it’s going to be a stretch to claim that any of them was the Ernst Stavros Blofeld of some teen rape gang.

So, they’ll just go with claims of normal sex.

They will find some scuzz to claim that he and the nominee did the nasty back in college, outside the bounds of holy matrimony, because as all liberals know, this will definitely freak out the squares. Because no conservative has ever scored pre-marital action before. And the thought of it makes us literally shake because we hate sex. Or something.

Now, I’m not even talking about weird stuff, like the antics of Jerry Falwell, Jr. (his pool boy/wife/watch-from-the-shame-closet flex seems a bit Never Trumpian – maybe channeling a scene from the Letters to Bulwark section was part of his kink). I’m talking a regular, straight vanilla, one-wine-cooler-too-many sophomore hook-up. And this is, in their minds, going to permanently ruin the nominee in the eyes of us prudes.

See, because us conservatives hate sex, especially women who have sex. Yeah, when I was in college, there was nothing I hated more than a chick who was ready to get busy, except maybe free beer.

Apparently, these libs have never been around CPAC on Friday around 10 pm. 

This only reinforces the long-understood fact that liberals don’t get conservatives, or Christians, or anyone who isn’t dwelling in their blue bubble. They really think we walk around dreaming of a Handmaid’s Tale scenario when in reality the scenarios conservatives dream of are more likely to involve cheerleader costumes and whipped cream.

Now, the seedy revelations of some dude who claims to have scored with the nominee back in school would certainly be embarrassing – largely because no woman wants to admit having cavorted with some liberal dork – only a delusional lib could believe that it will cost her support. I’d rather have the huge “I’ve got a few regrets” vote than the tiny “I’ve been perfect” vote. Instead, this plan will boomerang hard, because it’s tacky, classless, and gross.

They will still try it, because they are dumb and vindictive. Of course, the nominee could plausibly say she doesn’t remember it because, after all, it was a liberal who identified as male. 

Everyone will buy that.

You can fight back. If you are sick of this kind of nonsense, remember to support rising star GOP candidates like Sean Parnell and Mike Garcia!

You and Reverse Sear

Well, as usual my political insights got a few responses and my cooking ideas got an avalanche of responses. You people love my digressions into food. Every once in a while, there’s a hater who wants me to do more lib-bashing, as if that’s possible, but the rest of you love when I talk food. And I shall feed you more of what you want (Those are words every A1C-student writing for The Bulwark yearns to hear).

Now, I try to respond to every email, but I just got too many. Of course, I don’t have any excuse. There’s absolutely nothing going on in the news that is taking my attention. However, I did want to gather up and talk about some of the feedback...

Beth, Russell, and Richard are going to give it a try, and Tom is a believer already too. His technique is a little different: “I have been reverse searing steak for years as they turn out more tender, moist and consistent medium rare than on a grill....1 inch thick steak set oven at 240 cook for 30 minutes flip and cook for another 30 minutes....1 1/2 thick add 10 minutes per side... I use an espresso rub to get a smokier flavor.” I had a coffee encrusted NY strip steak at a restaurant recently and it was OK.

David recommends searing steaks in bacon grease, which I sometimes do. He and Lane recommend a pellet grill, but I’m pretty lazy. Steven recommends a smoker, but that seems like a lot of work.

Chuck wants to clarify the technique. You put it on a rack in the oven. You know, one of those racks that go in a shallow pan? You just want to keep it off the direct contact with the metal.

Steve reverse sears burgers. “When I cook for my buds, I serve thick 8 ounce burgers.  So, I form them up, put them on a platter, then in 200 degree oven for about 20 minutes.  Out of the oven, they immediately go on a hot grill for the sear.  Salt and pepper is usually all I put on the meat because I want to taste the burger not the spice.” Interesting – I never thought of this and I’m going to try it.

Luther, an Army guy, asked if I have ever tried it on venison and the answer is no. I haven’t gone hunting in a long, long time. I wonder how wild boar would do, because I’m kind of down to go hunt some wild boar sometime even though that violates my strict rule against being in the woods away from somebody who can bring me a drink.

Colonel Dave has done venison loins: “I cut them in about 10" lengths. Dry rub with seasoning of choice. I use a little higher oven temp and less time. Bake at 350 degrees for 23-25 minute.  Remove, sear in pan with olive oil and any additional seasoning (remember my heart).  The loin is super tender, almost melts in your mouth, those who have had me cook it for them rave.”

Alex says, “I reverse sear on the grill. I split charcoal basket one side with all the burning coals the other side empty.  I salt the steaks, put the steaks on the empty side, grill for about 8 minutes on one side 4 on the other (for 2-inch-thick steaks) then put over the flame to sear a couple of minutes each side. Reverse sear never disappoints.” Well, that sounds great, but that’s not exactly reverse sear, which is low and slow temperature. That said, I’d totally eat that.

And Vandervecken is completely out of left field with this: “Sear the steak FROZEN, in pan or on grill (grill is best of course) and then put in oven at 290 for 17 minutes for an inch and a half thick steak. More if you like it better done, which is madness but it takes all kinds.... You will not believe how much better this is, and how much more distinct the outer crust is from the inner pink juiciness. And the caramelization of the sear is so much better too.” I have my doubts but now I have to try this because it just sounds insane.

Check out my newly non-fiction best-selling series of conservative thrillers, People's Republic, Indian Country, Wildfire. and Collapse. Also, get my new intentionally non-fiction book The 21 Biggest Lies about Donald Trump (and You!)!

My super-secret email address is kurt.schlichter@townhall.com.