Help fight the
liberal media

click title for home page
Be a subscriber

The complete history of Barack Obama's second term -- click Views/Repies for top stories

  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 10      1   2   3   4   Next   »

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #1 

Discussing gang violence is apparently worse than gang violence


Scott Greer (DailyCaller) is reporting that President Trump used the opportunity of two public speeches last week to highlight the brutality of the MS-13 gang.

What the president described was barbaric -- but, according to many liberal pundits and activists, what was more barbaric was Trump mentioning the crimes themselves.

"Ppl talk about the "southern strategy" but it"s Trump"s channeling of the racial politics of the post-Jim Crow *north* that makes him potent," MSNBC host Chris Hayes tweeted in response to Trump"s speech before police officers in New York.

Slate"s Jamelle Bouie wrote a whole column arguing Trump"s rhetoric about MS-13 and their crimes is done just to make white people afraid.

"Trump wasn"t just connecting immigrants with violent crime. He was using an outright racist trope: that of the violent, sadistic black or brown criminal, preying on innocent (usually white) women," Bouie wrote, before comparing it to the words of 20th century segregationists.

CNN"s Margaret Hoover, ostensibly a conservative, said that Trump"s tough rhetoric about a violent gang was an insidious appeal to "white nationalists."

Some activists on Twitter were a little more direct in criticizing Trump"s anti-gang attitude. Apparently, the real criminals are white supremacists.

"Me: White supremacy has killed more ppl than all street gangs combined," Bree Newsome, a race activist, tweeted out. "Racists: PROVE IT! Me: *opens history book* Let"s start in 1519…"

That tweet earned 4000 retweets and 9000 likes.

With all the pushback against Trump for focusing on what should be a bipartisan concern, it was bound one major outlet would give a sympathetic portrayal of MS-13 gang members. CNN did not disappoint in fulfilling this expectation.

On Friday, CNN interviewed MS-13 gangsters to get their take on Trump"s immigration policies. Shockingly, they were not fans, but the gang members claimed the immigration crackdown was somehow helping their criminal activities. Apparently, CNN thinks there"s no more reliable source to speak against a crime policy than criminals themselves.

It stands to reason that if a Democrat, particularly one from the Hispanic communities on which MS-13 preys, had said what Trump told about the gang, no one would have had a problem with it. But since it was Trump and it was connected with his immigration policies, it was considered a racist dogwhistle to recall the grisly crimes of murderous thugs.

The primary reason for this sentiment is because Trump ties MS-13 with the problem of illegal immigration. To liberals, illegal immigrants are good people just coming here to do jobs Americans won"t do and make our country a better place. In their telling, they commit far less crime than our lazy citizens and are an absolute positive for the nation.

The large number of illegal immigrants who compose MS-13 undermines that vision. Thus, liberals get upset and shriek racism when Trump or other Republicans talk about the gang. The implication in the pushback is that this violent gang is something we need to accept and not worry about in our multicultural society.

This is a similar situation to what occurs when Islamic terrorism strikes Europe. Anyone who worries too much about growing radicalism in the Muslim community is called an Islamophobe. Journalists rush to offer portrayals of Muslim residents as patriotic and moderate folk. Politicians claim that terror attacks are just a part of living in a big city.

Just like a street gang that fancies torture and mutilation.

Additionally, leftists enthusiastically point to white people as the real menace after a terror attack is committed by Muslims.

The narratives in both cases are driven by liberal faith in mass immigration and multiculturalism. When events occur that make those two ideas look unappealing to law-abiding citizens, pundits get to work to obfuscate the crimes and belittle those who worry too much about them.

With all the many accusations that Trump receives for lying, the same certainly cannot be said of what he detailed about MS-13. He recalled their gruesome tortures of using knives to carve up their victims, many of whom are female.

That actually occurs with MS-13 -- Trump just left out the Satanic aspect. In Houston, for instance, there are multiple examples of the gang committing horrifying ritual murders against young women, as the Houston Chronicle reported.

Isn"t that a more pressing issue than the terror of mentioning these awful crimes during a speech? Is it better if we just ignore illegal immigrants butchering Hispanic girls on the behalf of dark deities?

Nearly all Americans, regardless of skin color, don"t like gang violence. Trump cracking down on MS-13 ensures that millions of law-abiding residents in minority communities can live in peace. The president highlighting the gang"s worst atrocities is a rhetorical tool to alert Americans to the danger of these criminals

Nonetheless, it"s pretty bizarre for the media to take the side of Satan-worshipping, torture-loving gangbangers. Do journalists really want to make these guys out to be wrongly-maligned undocumented entrepreneurs?

In case you haven't noticed, the Left has adopted a racist campaign against "whites."

Everything that's wrong with the world and their personal lives can be placed at the feet of "whites."

It doesn't even occur to them that race hatred is evil and it's not going to get better anytime soon.

The Frankfurt School's cultural Marxism has blossomed in America.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #2 

Michael Moore calls for a citizen army to "swarm" D.C. and remove Trump


Andrew West ( is reporting that the radical left can't get enough of their violent rhetoric and anti-Trump coup fantasies, and the big-mouthed Michael Moore is happy to oblige them.

Moore, who has been struggling to maintain a place in the political punditry after a series of bizarre and inflammatory statements outed him as nothing more than a showman, has been interjecting himself into the popular culture in spades after the inauguration of Donald Trump as President.  A controversial republican presidency is something that Moore likely believes that he was built for, given his liberal firebombing of gun rights, religious freedom, and 9/11's global impact.

Now, the bombastic and bipartisan bigotry of Moore has come fully to light during an appearance on fellow liberal Stephen Colbert's late night program as the filmmaker overtly called for American citizens to literally form an army and attack the President in Washington D.C.

"Moore was on the CBS show to promote his new original one-man Trump-skewering Broadway playThe Terms of My Surrenderwhich the 63-year-old director says is a humorous take on a 'country that's just elected a madman.'

"Going forward, however, Moore says an 'army of citizens' must rise up to take down President Trump.

"'I will say this: I refuse to live in a country where Donald Trump is president and I'm not leaving. So something's got to change,' Moore told Colbert. 'We have to form an army of citizens and come at him like a swarm of bees.'"

Moore's comments come at a time in which the American political left needs little coaxing to resort to violence.

Not only have New Fascists in Berkeley, California ushered in a new era of anti-free speech violence, but horrid physical attacks on conservatives have become nearly commonplace.  The left's "resistance" to Donald Trump has manifested as such, thanks to the normalization of grotesque, anti-conservative violence portrayed by Hollywood celebrities and leftist media figures.

Numerous music videos have referenced the assassination of Donald Trump, including bits by both Snoop Dogg and Moby.

I wonder if Moore is aware that his comments are seditious?

Sedition: "incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority"

The Sedition Act of 1918 (Pub.L. 65–150, 40 Stat. 553, enacted May 16, 1918) was an Act of the United States Congress that extended the Espionage Act of 1917to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light or interfered with the sale of government bonds.

It forbade the use of "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for five to 20 years. The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times "when the United States is in war." The U.S. was in a declared state of war at the time of passage, involved in the conflict at the time referred to as the Great War but generally later referred to as the First World War. It was repealed on December 13, 1920.

Though the legislation enacted in 1918 is commonly called the Sedition Act, it was actually a set of amendments to the Espionage Act. Therefore, many studies of the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act find it difficult to report on the two "acts" separately. For example, one historian reports that "some fifteen hundred prosecutions were carried out under the Espionage and Sedition Acts, resulting in more than a thousand convictions." Court decisions do not use the shorthand term Sedition Act, but the correct legal term for the law, the Espionage Act, whether as originally enacted or as amended in 1918.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #3 

Late-Night Comedy Writers Frustrated They Aren't Persuading Voters to Hate Trump


Tony Lee (Breitbart) is reporting that late-night comedy writers are reportedly frustrated that their unoriginal, stale, tired, and unfunny criticisms of President Donald Trump are not persuading Americans to hate him.

At a Beverly Hills "Has Politics Made Late-Night Great Again?" panel, a writer for Full Frontal with Samantha Bee whined that there just may not be a way for late-night comics to reach "the other side," acknowledging the industry's left-wing bias.

According to Variety, panelists "included Ashley Nicole Black, a writer for Full Frontal with Samantha Bee, Christine Nangle, head writer for The President Show, Hallie Haglund, writer for The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, and Jason Reich, head writer for The Jim Jefferies Show."

"I truly do not know if there's a way to reach the other side," Black reportedly said. "Not in terms of content but in terms of straight eyeballs. People only watch certain channels and read certain outlets. We're not going to put a 'Full Frontal' commercial on Fox. The real problem in our country is people in our country, their media diets are so separated."

Reich reportedly wondered how much they were "preaching to the choir."

"We're not really going to convert anyone but we're trying to point things out that people may have missed," he said, adding that he found Trump's presidency "exhausting." He said it was not fun keeping up with the never-ending news cycle.

Nangle, apparently without any sense of irony and self-awareness of her industry, said Trump is "unearthing part of our country that people didn't know existed" because "there's so much more hate and resentment than we possibly could have imagined … This man didn't come out of nowhere."

As Breitbart News' Jerome Hudson has documented, Hollywood celebrities have been some of the most vile and unhinged during Trump's presidency, with many envisioning violence (including murder) against Trump.

According to Variety, "'I don't want this job' was the general feeling among the writers" on the panel who were apparently exhausted that their oh-so-clever writing is failing to win over Trump's supporters.

These people are clueless!

The Left is wallowing in Trump hatred. It oozes from their pores. Yet the Left continue to see normal Americans as having "so much more hate and resentment than we possibly could have imagined."

How can these people be so self-unaware?

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #4 

The Left says Trump's Boy Scout speech is a Hitler Youth rally

The Left isn't smearing Trump. They're smearing the Boy Scouts of America

Cristina Silva (Newsweak) is reporting that President Donald Trump brought his bombastic politics to a Boy Scouts event Monday in West Virginia, drawing cheers from the children gathered at the event and prompting comparisons between his rousing rhetoric and NAZI youth rallies from some liberal activists and journalists. 

The president, the first sitting U.S. commander-in-chief to address the group since George W. Bush, used his speech to slam the "fake news," demand loyalty from administration officials and advocate for the overhaul of federal health care. He spoke to about 40,000 people at the Boy Scouts of America 2017 National Scout Jamboree.

"As the scout law says, a scout is trustworthy, loyal," Trump said, before adding, "We could use some more loyalty, I will tell you that." As he spoke, the crowd chanted "U.S.A" and applauded, prompting some critics of the president, who has the lowest approval ratings in modern history, to compare his rhetoric to the Hitler Youth, a wing of Germany's NAZI party.

"The Boy Scouts must distance themselves from that offensive attempt to politicize scouting and turn them into a Trump youth organization," wrote Richard W. Painter, vice-chairman of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the chief ethics lawyer in the White House under Bush, on Twitter Monday night. 

Trump reminded the crowd of his victory against Hillary Clinton in the November presidential election and thanked Americans for supporting him after he lost the popular vote to her. "Do you remember that famous night on television, November 8?" Trump asked. He said his ascendance to the White House was "an unbelievable tribute to you and all of the other millions and millions of people that came out and voted for Make America Great Again."

At one point, Trump pointed out Obama's decision not to attend a jamboree during his two terms in office. He told the crowd, "Did President Obama ever come to a Jamboree?" Boy Scouts yelled out in response: "Noooooooo!"

Trump referred to one of his campaign slogans at another point: "The Scouts believe in putting America First."

The Boy Scouts of America said in a statement after the speech that the organization did not endorse Trump or any "position, product, service, political candidate or philosophy." The group has a tradition of inviting sitting presidents to address its annual gathering. It concluded, "the sitting U.S. president serves as the BSA's honorary president. It is our longstanding custom to invite the U.S. president to the National Jamboree."

Trump noted that at least 10 of his Cabinet members were Boy Scouts, including Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who served as the group's president from 2010-2012. Obama was also a Boy Scout. Trump was not.

Trump, who has attracted support from white nationalists leaders in the past, has repeatedly been compared to the NAZI leader by his critics. The NAZI Party targeted German children to help spread its propaganda messages, at one point counting more than 5.4 million members before joining became mandatory in 1939. A Trump supporter launched a group named "Trump Youth" last year that also drew comparisons to the Hitler Youth. A video promoting the group made references to a worldwide "parasite" enemy, a code in NAZI propaganda for Jews. "Our nations have been commandeered by an international criminal cartel and this parasite is feeding on our energy. It's in Japan, it's in China, it's in Germany, it's in America -- now, if we don't throw this parasite off our backs, the world will fall into chaos," group leader Jayme Liardi said in the video message, the Forward reported. 

Other critics of the Trump administration have said it is offensive to compare the president's politics to NAZI imagery and tactics. "Although the candidate has said a number of disgusting things, the comparison to Hitler is far too facile -- so facile that it is dangerous," Jonathan A. Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, wrote in March 2016 during the 2016 campaign.

Cristina pretends to write a third-person news report, but it's clear that the above is an essay supporting her own view of President Trump.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #5 

Unpleasant truths

Bill Whittle talks about the cruelties and consequences of a world where nothing matters except how you feel.

One of progressivism's beliefs is the belief that anything a progressive wants is a fundamental right.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #6 

Luis Gutierrez -- unhinged!


Tony Lee (Breitbart) is reporting that Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) -- a member of the Puerto Rican Socialist Party, a Marxist-Leninist entity -- denounced President Donald Trump on Saturday as a "major criminal" who must be peacefully "eliminated" and brought to his knees after Democrats take back the House of Representatives and begin the impeachment process.

Fuming and furious at the thought that Trump could end former President Barack Obama's executive amnesties and impact 1.2 million who did not have "papers," Gutierrez tore into Trump at Chicago's Lincoln United Methodist Church, vowing to "resist" Trump non-violently with "everything possible."

Gutierrez emphasized that Trump -- and not illegal immigrants -- is the real criminal.

"For me, the major criminal that exists in the United States of America is called Donald Trump -- he lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue at the White House," Gutierrez thunderously said. "And we're going to take actions today, and we're going to take actions tomorrow. And there will soon be a majority in the House of Representatives, and I am going to make sure that I am there, to make sure of one thing, that we write those articles of impeachment and take him to trial before the Senate and eliminate him as president of the United States of America."

After citing Gandhi, Gutierrez vowed that he "will not allow Donald Trump and all of his cronies that he surrounds himself with from Wall Street at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to determine the future of 1.2 million people."

"Gandhi took on … the greatest British empire non-violently with love in his heart … and he brought them down to their knees," Gutierrez said. "We can do the same thing to Donald Trump in the United States of America if we're ready to do it."

Gutierrez asked the audience, "you wanna know who a criminal is?"

He then answered, "someone who takes health care away from 33 million people is a criminal. Somebody who puts in charge of the Environmental Protection Agency someone who takes their orders from polluters and contaminates our air, and our water, and our land is a criminal."

"Someone who uses his executive authority to turn away people fleeing devastation … have you seen the children? … have you seen the faces of those fleeing Syria? And he says, 'no, you can't come to this country and seek refuge in the United States of America.' To me, that's a criminal," he said. "Someone who surrounds himself from people from Wall Street that ripped us off in 2007 and 2008 … someone who surrounds himself with bankers from Wall Street instead of people. Those are criminals."

Gutierrez said Latino voters stood up for left-wing causes like LGBTQ rights, climate change, and Black Lives Matter in 2016 and declared that Democrats should no longer take Latino immigrants and Hispanic voters for granted.

"It is time for you to fight for us just as we fight for you," he said.

Gutierrez said he was inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement because he would not be in Congress had it not been for black Americans who fought for civil rights, human rights, and political dignity.

"They paved the way," he said, adding that "we can do that and we can do so much more."

He said he gets "angry," "very frustrated," and "very sad" when he thinks "of the implication of the 800,000 young people" whose hopes and dreams can be "destroyed at the stroke of a pen."

But he vowed that his "love" for illegal immigrants who received Obama's executive amnesties is moving him to action and declared, "we will be triumphant" and "use every means at our disposal that is peaceful … in order to make the case … in the most important court in the United States, in the court of public opinion, where we will win."

"I'm ready to occupy whatever it is you have to occupy -- whether it's an office, whether it's a building, whether it's a street -- but we will do what we need to do in order to make our case resoundingly clear to the American public," Gutierrez said.

Gutierrez said that Trump can't say "I am the king and I am the dictator," and Gutierrez vowed to make democracy work for everyone, whether they are "gay, straight, brown, white, papers or no papers." He said he is willing to put his freedom on the line so "other people can be free."

"Get ready, our movement is coming to somewhere in your neighborhood," Gutierrez declared.

Another Marxist takes a leadership role in the Democratic Party.

John Kennedy wouldn't recognize his party.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #7 

Bill Gertz says leftist policies have damaged national security

It's time to introduce the American People to America's political Left -- America's greatest enemy.

America's political Left is a greater threat to our way of life than Russia, China, North Korea and ISIS combined.

Coming soon:


A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #8 

The Left's maniacal war on common sense


David Kupelian (WND) says a major crime wave is ravaging your neighborhood -- not only frequent break-ins and burglaries, but armed robberies, assaults and even murders. What do you do? Do you arm yourself and make sure your doors are locked at night and add a security system?

Or … do you intentionally leave your doors unlocked and post a large, brightly lit sign saying, "Welcome criminals and psychopaths. There's a lot of money in here, women too. The doors are unlocked and we are unarmed"?

In today's America, one of the two major political parties favors the latter option.

Case in point: High-profile Democrat Rahm Emanuel is currently mayor of Chicago, where more than 4,000 people were shot last year, 762 of them murdered. The former Obama White House chief of staff is proud Chicago has some of the nation's most stringent gun-control laws, even though decades of research proves more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens reliably results in less crime. Worse, the mayor defiantly boasts of his determination to keep Chicago a "sanctuary city" -- meaning the city's police are prohibited from cooperating with federal law enforcement in getting criminal illegal aliens off the city's streets by deporting them. Indeed, the "sanctuary city" designation serves as a "Welcome" sign to violent criminal illegals, assuring them that Chicago, like hundreds of other sanctuary cities, is their "safe space."

Likewise, in San Francisco, the famed BART rapid transit system is currently plagued by "swarming attacks," in which a dozen or more teens board a train car and assault and rob passengers. On April 22, for example, 40 to 60 teens boarded a train at the Coliseum station, robbed seven passengers and beat up two. Normally, of course, surveillance footage of such crimes would be immediately released to the media so the public could help identify the perpetrators. But not in San Francisco, where BART officials steadfastly refuse to release video footage of such crimes to the media. Why would they do that? Because, you see, letting the public see the video would encourage racism, they claim.

This is the same thinking that recently led a Seattle city councilman to object to hosing human feces and urine off public sidewalks in an area with homeless shelters because it would be racially insensitive. Power-washing the sidewalks, he claims, might evoke "images of the use of hoses against civil-rights activists," and thus traumatize observers.

Unfortunately, it's not just with regard to crime and public safety that the Left piously champions policies that utterly defy common sense. It's the same in almost every area of life:

  • Responding to relentless LGBT pressure, virtually the entire sports world, including the Olympics, is now allowing powerful male athletes who "self-identify" as female to compete against actual women, often winning the women's competitions and -- in some cases -- seriously injuring their less-powerful female competitors.
  • With Obama-era taxes and regulations squeezing millions of people out of the labor market, keeping money and jobs offshore and smothering the U.S. economy, President Trump promises to implement the obvious common-sense fix: seriously reduce taxes and eliminate ill-conceived business-crushing regulations. But the left's antagonism to the sensible is evident even here. Their envy toward "the rich" blinds them to the necessity of allowing businesses to be profitable and thereby expand and employ more Americans. And after Trump's June rally in Iowa, when the president explained how he had wanted to put a rich successful person, not a poor unsuccessful one, in charge of the U.S. economy, Democrats and the "mainstream media" attacked him as a hater of the poor.
  • Countries the world over are suffering from terrorism. Since the vast majority of these terror attacks today are committed by Muslims in the name of Islam, one obvious common-sense response for concerned nations would be to limit Muslim immigration, especially from known terror hotbeds. Yet the Left -- including the Democratic Party, "mainstream" media, most university populations, progressive judges and Hollywood -- seems intent on doing the opposite, bringing as many Muslims as possible into Europe, the U.K. and America. For the United Kingdom and Europe -- already reeling from major Islamic terror attacks, an epidemic of sexual assaults and other immigrant crimes, widespread non-assimilation and "no-go zones," and the steady encroachment of Shariah law, female genital mutilation, "honor killings" and other anti-Western aspects of Islamic culture -- it may be too late to reverse course. Not so in America -- yet.President Donald Trump in February said his administration was committed to a "common sense" approach to immigration and national security, promising to do everything in his power to stop terror attacks within the U.S."We are getting such praise for our stance, and it's a stance of common sense -- maybe a certain toughness, but it's really more than toughness," Trump said during his Feb. 13 press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. "It's a stance of common sense, and we are going to pursue it vigorously. And we don't want to have our country have the kinds of problems that you're witnessing taking place not only here, but all over the world."
  • Nowhere is common sense under greater attack by the Left than in higher education. Americans were repeatedly told by pollsters last year that college-educated folk tended to favor Hillary Clinton, while those with only a high-school diploma favored Donald Trump. Did that mean Hillary Clinton voters were somehow smarter, wiser, more perceptive, more mature and better informed than Trump voters? Obviously not.In reality, not only are those attending college today subjected to the distorted, left-wing, politically correct, anti-American indoctrination ubiquitous in the modern academy, but there is also mounting evidence that campus life is actually causing mental illness! An influential 2015 report in the Atlantic, titled "The Coddling of the American Mind," cited evidence that colleges today literally promotepathological thinking:

But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong. The harm may be more immediate, too. A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.

Ideology and emotion trump reality

All this raises a disturbing question: Does the Left even care -- at all -- about evidence, facts, history, proven principles? Or is everything, including reality itself, subservient to their coveted agenda, however delusional and destructive? In my book "The Snapping of the American Mind," I cite a mountain of peer-reviewed research documenting, beyond any reasonable doubt, the sad fact that early abuse, especially sexual abuse, often causes the abused person to later self-identify as homosexual. Yet after citing study after study after study after study after study after study providing overwhelming proof, I make the following observation:

However clear, compelling, and heartbreaking the evidence, none of this apparently matters. Fewer and fewer people seem to care anymore about actual causes and effects, about the true nature of things. Instead, too many of us care only about what we want to believe, what we wish to be true. We want homosexuality to be a healthy lifestyle, even though, as the Wall Street Journal has documented, "Projections have shown that if current trends continue, half of all gay and bisexual men will be HIV-positive by age 50." We want transgenderism to be normal, even though reason, experience, and biology all shout otherwise.

In other words, the Left is so mesmerized by its utopian ideology and its pet "narratives" (euphemism for delusions) that it simply believes and acts -- and aggressively strives to indoctrinate others -- in accord with its alternate reality. To hardcore leftists, reason, common sense, the laws of economics and the lessons of history are all inexplicably irrelevant.

Before concluding, let's pause, take a deep breath and ask: What exactly is this thing we call "common sense"?

Although philosophers and intellectuals since Aristotle have theorized about it, in reality common sense is simply the internal guidance system God gives man, transcending ideology, education and economic status. It is the mysterious essence of logic, clear thinking and right acting, the twin brother of conscience and the heartbeat of a competent, successful life. As such, it is a priceless gift from the Creator.

However, it is precisely because common sense represents an inner perception of what is right and sensible -- which implies an obedience to a higher good -- that it interferes with the designs of the perpetually angry and discontented left, which aspires to impose an entirely unworkable utopian fantasy-world on the rest of us.

Consider that although the Ten Commandments constitute the moral foundation of Western civilization, its precepts are uniquely congruent with conscience and common sense. That shouldn't seem odd, in light of God's biblical promises to put His laws "into [our] hearts."

"I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people." -- Jeremiah 31:33

"This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them." -- Hebrews 10:16

Common sense tells us stealing is wrong; if you're a little child and another kid steals your stuff, you know it's wrong without anyone telling you and without ever having heard of the Ten Commandments. It's God's law written in your heart -- "self-evident" truth, as Jefferson put it in the Declaration of Independence. In the same way, we know murder is wrong without anyone telling us; same with adultery and lying ("bearing false witness against our neighbor"). It's a reality-based sense of truth common to us all. Or at least to all who have not yet been seduced or traumatized away from their original God-given moral sense.

What we cryptically call "the Left" is at war with all that America once most cherished -- liberty, genuine Christian faith and morality, equality under the law, personal responsibility, limited government and unlimited opportunity. And the primary battle in that war is the left's ongoing frontal assault on common sense. For common sense is truly the gateway to the rest of our blessings, including our safety, prosperity, happiness and sanity itself -- and to our future as a free people.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #9 

The Left's next step -- redefining "hate speech" as violence


Mark Tapson (FrontPage) is reporting that an article in the Sunday Review section of the July 16 New York Times posed a question that, once upon a more innocent time, would have been considered nonsensical: "When Is Speech Violence?" The response of any person who cares about the clarity of language would properly be "Never," but Lisa Feldman Barrett, a professor of psychology at Northeastern University, asserts in the Timespiece that the science is settled: "speech that bullies and torments" is "literally a form of violence."

It might seem obvious, Barrett begins, that "violence is physically damaging; verbal statements aren't." Yes, that should be obvious to anyone except illiberals, who know that whoever controls the language controls minds. So they are hell-bent on weaponizing words to advance their totalitarian agenda.

The Left has spent decades successfully normalizing the intentionally vague term "hate speech" in the culture, even going so far as to insist that it should not be protected by the First Amendment. But what is "hate speech"? It's anything the Left wants it to be, of course. When the media elites of CNN or HBO or The View or late night talk shows openly bash Christians or the traditional values of flyover Americans, it is never, ever condemned as hate speech; but those same elites leap to denounce virtually everything the Right says as such. It is a brilliantly effective way to delegitimize conservatives and their ideas, and to exclude them from the public sphere.

Now illiberals want to take the concept of hate speech to the next level, redefining the word "violence" to include emotionally hurtful language, and Barrett and the New York Times are attempting to legitimize this scientifically.

Barrett's premise is that words can have "a powerful effect on your nervous system." The stress they cause can "make you sick, alter your brain -- even kill neurons -- and shorten your life." Thus "certain types of speech… can be a form of violence." She notes that this concept is the sort of thing that has led to campus controversies about "microaggressions," which have "stuck [sic] many as a coddling or infantilizing of students, as well as a corrosive influence on the freedom of expression necessary for intellectual progress."

Yes, that is precisely what all this politically correct umbrage about "safe spaces" and "trigger warnings" is: coddling and corrosive. But it is also more than that; it is an insidious strategy to shut down ideas and people that the Left wants to demonize as not simply unworthy of debate but as dangerous and evil.

Barrett believes she offers a scientific rationale for "which kinds of controversial speech should and shouldn't be acceptable on campus and in civil society. In short, the answer depends on whether the speech is abusive or merely offensive." The latter has no adverse physical effects, but what she calls abusive speech triggers "the kind of stress that brings on illness and remodels your brain. That's also true of a political climate in which groups of people endlessly hurl hateful words at one another, and of rampant bullying in school or on social media. A culture of constant, casual brutality is toxic to the body, and we suffer for it."

Few would disagree that our political discourse today is toxic, but labeling it violence is a bridge too far (except, of course, for actual incitement to violence, which is already excluded from First Amendment protection). Barrett actually calls it "reasonable, scientifically speaking, not to allow a provocateur and hatemonger like Milo Yiannopoulos to speak at your school. He is part of something noxious, a campaign of abuse. There is nothing to be gained from debating him, for debate is not what he is offering."

That is utterly false. It is not Milo who isn't interested in debate; it is the politically correct bullies of the left, who have jettisoned intellectual debate because they know they cannot compete with conservatives on the level playing field of reasoned argument. The reason the Left has nothing to gain from debating him, as Barrett claims, is not that he is unwilling to debate but that he crushes opponents in debates. That is why the Left prefers to employ Saul Alinsky's strategy of the politics of personal destruction.

Having dismissed Milo as a hatemonger unworthy of consideration by decent people, Barrett moves on to casually dismiss the political scientist Charles Murray as a racist – although his speech isn't violent, she concedes, merely offensive. It's revealing that Barrett didn't offer up examples of hate speech or racism from the left; why not use the anti-Christian gay activist Dan Savage as an example of hatemongering? Why not name Al Sharpton as an example of a racist? The tiresome accusations that Murray is racist are based literally on one tentative sentence from his whole impressive oeuvre of social commentary, whereas Sharpton has a lengthy career of openly racist statements and unapologetic race-mongering.

And yet Sharpton can speak anywhere, anytime without fear of violence from the right, while Murray recently had to flee a speaking engagement when Antifa thugs shut it down and chased him to his car, assaulting his escort, a female professor, in the process. Dan Savage can spew his profane hate anytime, anywhere with confidence that he will remain safe, but rioters injured at least half a dozen Trump supporters and caused over $100,000 worth of damage to the UC Berkeley campus where Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak earlier this year. Barrett is arguing that shutting down Milo's appearance is acceptable because he is "noxious" and "there is nothing to be gained from debating him."

Barrett concludes her article by paying lip service to the necessity for "open conversations and vigorous debate about controversial or offensive topics," then declaring that "we must also halt speech that bullies and torments. From the perspective of our brain cells, the latter is literally a form of violence." Literally. Sorry, illiberals, but to quote from The Princess Bride, you keep using that word – I do not think you know what it means. Speech is not literally violence. Of course verbal bullying can be stressful, but to claim that speech qualifies as violence redefines both concepts and enables the Left to demonize and shut down any argument they deem sufficiently stressful. That, of course, is their aim.

Defenders of the First Amendment must never budge an inch on this issue. Free speech protections must never be restricted to exclude what some consider offensive speech. As free speech proponents these days are constantly compelled to explain, the whole point of the First Amendment is to protect speech we find offensive or with which we disagree. That's why the Left craves so badly to limit it, all the while waging literal violence against the right.

It's really simple. "Hate speech" is any speech that the Left doesn't like.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #10 

Rush says the Left has developed "a genuine hatred for this country"


Rush Limbaugh (WND) says the Left has developed a genuine "hatred" for America, and nothing triggers it so quickly as reminders about how great the nation is, talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh says.

Such as President Trump's speech last week in Poland in which he praised Western civilization and said the key to its future is its regard for family and values.

Chris Buskirk, co-author with Seth Leibsohn of the new book  "American Greatness," praised the speech.

"This is somebody who gets it," he said. "This is somebody who understands that Western civilization is uniquely valuable and the United States has a leading role to play in Western civilization and in the defense of Western civilization. When I heard the president's speech in Poland, I thought to myself, 'This is better than I ever thought!' And I thought he was going to be really good! So it's really exceeded all expectations."

Buskirk made the comments in a recent interview on the "Freedom Friday" radio show with Carl Gallups, the author of "When the Lion Roars." Both Gallups and Buskirk noted with amusement how fiercely the left-wing media opposed Trump's speech, even though it was in defense of ideals many Americans would define as self-evidently good.

Limbaugh took up the issue on Monday, too.

He noted the Left's "singular focus on nothing" and Trump's question whether America "has the will … the desire to defend Western values, which is who we are and what we are."

"I knew there was objection to it at the time, but it's singularly instructive to note the literal cow that the Left is having over the assertion of greatness of Western values. Places in mainstream media, mainstream media, which is indicative of just how far out to the Left the mainstream of the American left or Democrat Party has become. The nonsense, the paranoia, the fear, the hate, the unbridled hate over the expression of Western civilization, Western values," he said.

"For those of you that are not quite sure how to define Western civilization, you have to think of people like Winston Churchill, you have to think of the Founders of this country. Western civilization is simply that which led to the United States of America. It's instrumental in the founding, the values, the overall view of humanity and the world. And it has been one of the greatest acknowledgments of the human condition in the history of the human condition, and that being the United States' Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the entire setup of the United States of America," he said.

Liberals, Limbaugh said, have gone too far.

"And I've always known they're extreme, and I've always known they're hateful. But I continually – and I shouldn't be, I guess – but I continue to be surprised over just how far gone they are. There is now a genuine – we have to just call it what it is. There is a genuine hatred for this country and its great traditions and institutions. And it appears at first glance to me like it happened overnight. It hasn't happened overnight; that's the point."

He said it was there when George W. Bush was president, it just wasn't expressed. But when Barack Obama moved into the White House, "it seems like that wing of the party, the people that voted for Obama because of his policy orientation, not because of his race, had become something distinctly not American. And it was like a jack-in-the-box popping up to me. And it was a shock."

He noted that the leftists now are calling Trump's speech on Western civilization "a shining example of racism and bigotry, white nationalism, white supremacy. And in this we are discovering what these people have always thought of this country. It's just recently, relatively recently that for whatever reasons they feel entirely comfortable and confident in going public with it, with no caveats and no qualifiers. It's just stunning."

He cited a long list of negative comments about Trump's address from far-left activists.

"And to me it's mind-boggling to listen and see some of the reaction to that speech. You realize, as I said, those same values, the same belief, country founded by God, we are all created by God, endowed with certain inalienable rights – life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. This is the stuff that's under assault as white nationalism, as white racism, as the problem with America is, it's been all white too much of the time, and white values. That means Christianity."

He explained drove the Left "over the edge" was Trump's reference to family, freedom, country and God.

"That literally sent them over the edge. … These are the people who think our education system needs to be fixed. These are the people who think that Barack Obama was the answer to all of our problems," he said.

Trump's speech earned a rave review from Buskirk.

"I thought the speech was fantastic," said Buskirk. "[But] I'm looking at something on Vox right now and they are saying 'Trump's speech in Poland sounded like an alt-right manifesto' and underneath that they have a quote from the speech where he says 'for family, for freedom, for country and for God.' Now I heard that and of course I was thrilled to hear him say those words yesterday. Now you look at, a very left-wing outlet, and this is what they think 'alt-right' is. 'For family?' 'For freedom?' 'For country?' 'For God?' I guess they're opposed to all those things. They say they're opposed to the alt-right, they say that's the definition of alt-right, well, OK, if that's it!

"Most people in this country, when they hear for family, for freedom, for country and for God, they think that's America, and they're thrilled to hear the president talk about it in unapologetic terms with a confidence and really a swagger that we need to get back. And you know, you can tell something about a man from who his enemies are. Washington Post, Vox, The Atlantic, CNN, MSNBC – they hated it. That should tell you everything you need to know. It was a great speech."

Buskirk accused Trump's liberal critics of being fundamentally ignorant about the nature of our civilization.

"Not only is it ridiculous, they don't understand what they're talking about," he said. "The concept of Western civilization was built upon natural, God-given rights. And our view in Western civilization is that those rights exist outside of anything the government does but we form government to protect those rights. That should be unobjectionable to all people of good faith. And we find out that it's not and all the Left has to offer is identity politics and name calling. And so they hear Donald Trump say words like, 'The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive,' that's a quote from the speech and they go absolutely bonkers. But remember, these are the same people who drove Western civilization courses out of the university, off college campuses a generation ago. They are opposed to Western civilization."

Gallups, who was an influential evangelical backer of Trump during the primaries, praised Buskirk's book as a must-read and a challenge to conservative movement orthodoxy.

Buskirk suggested Trump's election could serve as a wake-up call for the conservative movement.

"We got a call from a publisher literally the day after the election who said, 'You guys have to write this book about the election, what went wrong, how did conservatives miss this,'" he said. "And it wasn't WND, by the way. Once we wrote the book, our original publisher I think maybe didn't like everything we had to say. We looked back, and it was self-reflection really in a lot of ways, and said what has gone wrong in the conservative movement in this country when we've got the flagship publications of conservatism, places like the National Review and Weekly Standard, and they have more in common with The New Republic, The American Prospect, The Nation and, you know, all these left-wing journals when it comes to who they want to see elected president.

"Something has gone dramatically wrong here, and it's not the country, it's not the voters. I mean, I live in Phoenix, I'm not a D.C. person. We've got to take a look at where this went wrong and what we can do to recapture the momentum, the intellectual, practical and political vigor, the fire in our bellies, to take the country back."

While many conservatives were shocked at the rise of Trump, Buskirk and Leibsohn defend the president in "American Greatness" as exactly the kind of fighter American conservatism needed. The problem, they suggest, was not with Trump, but with the conservative movement.

"There are really two parts to the book," Buskirk said, describing the book's thesis. "One is to say where did the conservative movement go so wrong that when somebody like a Donald Trump comes along, somebody who espouses all of the things we've been saying we want, all the things that the pundits say they want for years and years and years, and not only did they not support him, they actively work against him. We've got people like Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard and Jonah Goldberg at the National Review saying we'd rather have Hillary! That makes no sense to me. And so we dug into that stuff when we wrote the book and said, how did we get there? And you know, part of the answer to that is that the D.C. establishment is one thing.

"It's not so much that we have a left/right division in Washington. In this country, we have a distinction between a ruling class and a country class, between a D.C. part of the country and everybody else. And whether you want to be a Republican or a Democrat in Washington, D.C., it's all sort of go along to get along. And now you had people say enough of that, at least for the voters who elected Donald Trump."

But now that Trump is in the White House after the biggest political upset in American history, many are fearful the momentum of his populist campaign will be squandered because there is no intellectual groundwork behind the Trump movement. Providing that intellectual guidance is the second purpose of "American Greatness."

"The other half of the book is, now where do we go?" said Buskirk. "How do we build on this? How do we build on this momentum and have an intellectual reformation that leads to a political restoration of the things that you and I hold dear?"

Ultimately, Buskirk said, the book's simple yet profound title encapsulates the worldview not just of the authors, but of the spirit behind Trump's campaign, a spirit once again expressed in the president's speech in Poland. That's why, after some dispute, "American Greatness" is the title of the book which more than any other explains the intellectual roots of the Donald Trump movement.

"We finally settled on 'American Greatness' because that's really what the book is about," Buskirk said. "That's what we believe in. We believe in this country."

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #11 

Far Left activists applaud speech comprised entirely of Hitler quotes

Matt Miller (GatewayPundit) is reporting that at the "Impeach Trump March" in Chicago earlier this week, a Trump supporter disguised as an "anti-fascist" protester read a speech comprised entirely of Adolf Hitler Quotes.

The entire "anti-fascist" crowd applauded the Fuhrer and his words of National Socialism.

This is the transcript:

Ladies, Gentleman, and non-binary members of this congregation.

I would like to thank everyone for coming out today to support the constitutional rule of law, I stand here today, a veteran of these United States armed forces, and a proud 21st century patriot. I would like to take this opportunity to talk about this oppressive regime, and the repressive regime that constitutes capitalism as a whole.

We are Socialists, we are enemies of the capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with it's unfair salaries, rights it's unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.

Benefit to the community precedes benefit to the individual… The state should retain supervision and each property owner should consider himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others among his own people. This is the crucial matter. This American Nation will always retain its right to control the owners of property… A policy of laissez faire in this sphere is not only cruelty to the individual guiltless victims but also to the nation as a whole.

For there is one thing we must never forget… the majority can never replace the man.

Life is like a mirror, if you frown at it, it frowns back, if you smile it returns the greeting.

Donald Trump seems to think that if you tell a big enough lie, and tell it frequently enough, that it will be believed. It's not the truth that matters, but victory.

The doom of a nation can be averted only by a storm of flowing passion, but only those who are passionate themselves can arouse passion in others.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #12 

G20 summit protesters loot shops and torch cars on the second day of violent demonstrations


Jon Lockett (TheSun) is reporting that activists clashed violently with riot cops in Germany setting cars ablaze, looting shops, throwing petrol bombs and trying to gatecrash the convention center hosting the G20 talks.

Hundreds of extra police were drafted in to the streets of Hamburg in a bid to keep the increasingly violent protests by anti-globalization rioters under control.

But as these shocking images show the port's streets were once again turned into a burning battleground.

Around 200 police officers were injured, dozens of activists had to be taken to the hospital and more than 70 protesters were detained.

Many had to be taken to the hospital, including an officer whose eye was injured when a firework went off in front of him.

Thousands of officers in full riot gear patrolled as many as 30 different protest marches.

Most of the demonstrations were peaceful and creative, but some rioters threw petrol bombs, iron rods and cobble stones at cops.

As night fell, some lit fires in the streets of the city's Schanzenviertel neighborhood.

Nearby thousands danced in the streets to techno music as the international leaders listened to a classical concert.

More than 20,000 officers were on hand to guard the Hamburg's streets, skies and waterways.

Police trucks blasted protesters with water cannons, and officers physically dragged away a group holding a sit-in at the entrance to the summit grounds.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned the violent protests as "unacceptable." Merkel said"

"I have every understanding for peaceful demonstrations, but violent demonstrations endanger human lives, they endanger people themselves, they put police officers and security forces in danger, put residents in danger, and so that is unacceptable."

Merkel thanked security forces for their work as the G20 met behind a heavy police presence in a no-go zone that was off-limits to most.

Protesters repeatedly tried pushing into the no-go zone among them a group of 22 swimmers from Greenpeace who tried accessing the area from the Elbe River but didn't succeed.

Activists also attempted to get near Hamburg's highly protected philharmonic hall, where international leaders were set to listen to a concert and have dinner together.

Police condemned the "shocking criminal energy and high potential of violence" on display.

The city's fire department said 11 activists were severely injured and taken to the hospital after falling off a four-meter-tall wall (13 feet) after fleeing from a confrontation with riot police.

I've been yelling at the TV every time I hear some talking head refer to these rioters as "protestors."

Even this reporter refers to these savages as "protestors" and "activists."

Click this link and check out the photos of these riots -- unbelievable!

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #13 

The Democrats' Soviet insane asylum for Trump


Jamie Glazov (FrontPage) says The former Soviet Union possessed many imaginative mechanisms to deal with the problem of enemies of the people who obstructed the path to socialist utopia -- now known as "social justice." One of those mechanisms was the practice of confining individuals who were thinking the wrong thoughts to insane asylums. Indeed, if you caused any trouble for the commissars, a good inoculation of neuroleptics(powerful drugs used to "quiet" the symptoms of schizophrenia), forcibly administered through a tube in the nose, could do wonders in bringing your politically incorrect behavior to a halt.

Dissidents such as Natalya Gorbanevskaya, Pyotr Grigorenko, Vladimir Bukovsky, Alexander Esenin-Volpin and Joseph Brodsky were all among the brave freedom-fighters who bore the brunt of the Soviet practice of institutionalizing dissidents in mental hospitals and force-feeding them mind-shattering drugs. Gorbanevskaya was committed to a psychiatric hospital for attending the 1968 Red Square demonstration against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Grigorenko suffered the same fate for criticizing the Khrushchev regime. Bukovsky was confined to a psychiatric hospital for "anti-Soviet agitation." Brodksy was sent to mental hospitals for not writing the right kind of poetry; his treatments involved "tranquilizing" injections, sleep deprivation and forced freezing baths. Esenin-Volpin was institutionalized in the Leningrad Special Psychiatric Hospital for his anti-Soviet thoughts.

Today's progressive Democrats are also faithfully journeying on an uplifting odyssey. Horrified by Trump's opposition to Obama's "fundamental transformations," they have found their own neuroleptics in the form of the 25th Amendment and a bill seeking to impeach the president for being mentally unsound. Indeed, Trump has to be mentally deranged and unfit for office, because what other reason could possibly explain his frightening disagreement with the Left's un-American creed of identity politics -- race and gender uber alles? What other factor could possibly be at play in his embrace of individual freedom and responsibility -- and in his rejection of group privileges and racial/gender hierarchies that, as David Horowitz has noted, can only be manifested after America's Constitution is null and void?

Confronted by Trump's shocking blasphemy against their anointed plan, several Democrats, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), have now signed onto a bill that seeks to remove Trump by invoking 25th Amendment powers. The bill cites section 4 of the amendment, created in 1967 after JFK's assassination, that allows for an independent body to remove the president based on the determination that he has been mentally or physically incapacitated to carry out his duties. Raskin's initiative would activate a probe into whether Trump has been too far "incapacitated" to continue as president.

This effort is, actually, even sicker than the Soviet practice, since the amendment does not refer to psychiatric problems, but to actual incapacitation through assassination or stroke.

Raskin claims he is concerned that "something is seriously wrong" with Trump, citing a "sustained pattern of behavior" and several "errant and seemingly deranged tweets," which he believes are damaging to U.S. interests. But to anyone who hasn't drunk the progressive Kool-Aid, it is obvious that Trump's sustained pattern of behavior is not damaging U.S. interests. Instead, it is unhinging his political enemies and damaging the progressive assault on America's social contract. Trump's tweets do not warn, for example, that the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam (an Obama meme) or that you can keep your doctor if you like him. They are singing the praises of America and calling out a corrupt media for its brazen lies and political partisanship.

The only reasonable observation in Raskin's statements is that (to people like him): "it certainly doesn't feel like the ship is on an even course right now."

Consequently, the Democrats are now trying to steer the ship back into progressive waters. They are doing so by applying the lessons of the Soviet secret police -- in quashing those who disagree with them like Andrei Sakharov. Sakharov refused to toe the Soviet party line and be politically correct; therefore, like Trump, he was also obviously mentally ill. That's why the Soviet authorities had to confine him in a closed ward of the Semashko Hospital in Gorky, where he was force-fed and given drugs to alter and enlighten his state of mind.

And now enter the new self-appointed social redeemers of our time: the progressive Democrats who are consumed with ferocious rage as they watch the horror show of an American president strengthening America and abandoning the enlightened course on which Obama's ship sailed. There is no secret about what the true yearnings of the Raskin Gang are, but absent a totalitarian state to back them up, they are bound to fail.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #14 

The New Left's fake patriotism


Daniel Greenfield (FrontPage) says if anyone doubts that patriotism really is the last refuge of a scoundrel, a recent CNN article boasts that liberals are reclaiming patriotism. After going through their musty attics, tossing aside copies of Howard Zinn's revisionist Marxist history of America and all the "U.S. Out of Everywhere" buttons, they found their patriotism, moth-eaten, covered in dust and a little worse for the wear. But otherwise intact.

That's right, progressives are patriotic again. Again refers to the brief period between the end of the Hitler-Stalin pact when the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union necessitated a sudden outburst of pro-war sentiment and the beginning of the Cold War when the Communists became the enemy again.

When the Left acts as if WW2 was the only good war, it's because it was the only war that didn't force them to choose between their sympathies for Communism and their United States citizenship.

Every time they did have to make that choice, history records their duplicity and sordid treason.

The new left-wing patriotism doesn't consist of actually loving this country. Or discarding their conviction that America is the worst thing that ever happened to this continent and this planet.

Instead, conveniently, the new patriotism consists of hating President Trump.

When Hillary's people decided to shift the blame for losing the election from their unlikable candidate, their incompetent campaign operation and the good sense of the voters to a vast Russian conspiracy, the Left became patriotic. And by "patriotic", they mean blaming the results of an election on Russia.

It's not that the Left actually hates Russia. Before Hillary decided to blame the Russians for her own unlikability, she was mugging for the camera with one of Putin's henchmen and wielding a misspelled Reset Button. 

Why a reset button?

Back then the born-again patriots of the Left had accused President Bush of alienating Russia (and the rest of the world) with his cowboy diplomacy. Obama and his team of sensitive diplomats would replace cowboy diplomacy with cowardly diplomacy. That was why Hillary's people pried a swimming pool button out of a pool so she could show off the new "Reset" with Russia. It was why Obama sold out traditional allies to appease Putin. It was why he was caught on a hot mic telling another of Putin's people that he would have more flexibility to appease him after the election.

All this has been forgotten in a rush of revisionist patriotism. Traitors now masquerade as patriots. Last year's appeasers now stick out their chests and act as if they're Ronald Reagan, not Jimmy Carter.

Don't expect it to last. If you doubt that, Al Gore once attacked Bush for being soft on Saddam.

As tensions with Russia grow over Syria, the born-again patriots will be reborn as appeasers. The next Democrat will run for the White House promising to restore our relationship with Russia. And he'll blame President Trump for ruining our previously congenial relations with cowboy diplomacy.

History will once again be rewritten. Russia was always our friend. Lefties were always advocates of diplomatic relations and opponents of wars. But we will have always been at war with Eastasia.

That's the disgusting farce of the new lefty Russia hawks. They don't hate Russia. They hate America. Give it two years and they'll be on television explaining how Putin will love President Elizabeth Warren because she won't offend or provoke the rest of the world by insisting on American greatness.

After eight years of betraying America to Chinese hackers, Iranian nuclear negotiators, Islamic terrorists from Iraq to Libya, Cuban Communists, Columbian narcoterrorists and yes, the dreaded Russians, the Left wants us to believe that they have left behind the error of their ways and love this country again. 

The lefty patriot has a lot in common with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny: he doesn't exist.

There's more to patriotism than hating your political opponents. It's not a negative emotion. It's a positive one. It demands the degree of feeling that I heard from a man on a twilight porch in Montana as Fourth of July fireworks filled the sky, "God, I love this country!" 

The difference is easy to spot.

Republicans stand by their country against foreign enemies no matter who is in the White House. Lefty patriotism however is a rare phenomenon that had previously only occurred when Democrats were in office. And even then, lefty patriotism is as unreliable as solar panels and wind turbines in January. 

Every time we have fought a war, cameras could reliably spot leftists protesting against it. And yes, that even includes WW2.

Patriots don't announce that they will move to Canada if the wrong guy wins the election.

The new progressive patriot doesn't love this country. Even his newfound resentment of Russia is incidental. He hates Russia because of Trump. Once CNN and the New York Times detach Trump from Russia, he'll see the wisdom of liking it again. Russia, like every other country except Israel, must be better than America. It's better than the horrifying orgy of capitalists plundering the planet, racist police randomly shooting young black men, fundamentalists hating women, militarists plotting to bomb brown people and all the other hysterical leftist fantasies which are traced back to this country's original sins.

America was founded by racist, capitalist slave-owners who stole the land from the Indians so they could open fast food franchises. That's what the average college student is taught. It's what the average leftist believes. How much love can he be expected to feel for America? About as much as you feel for Iran.

The new lefty patriotism is really anti-patriotism. It doesn't really resent Russia. Instead it resents President Trump's call for national greatness. Tying him to Russia is a cynical bid by traitors seeking their last refuge outside of their safe spaces and pronoun-free toilets in the sacred space of patriotism.

History tells us that lefty patriotism has a shorter life than some of the world's rarest substances which can only be created in labs and whose very existence continues to be debated by feuding scientists. 

This current phenomenon in which lefties briefly confuse their hatred of America, with their subsidiary hatred of President Trump and a sudden subsidiary resentment of Russia for foisting him on us by cleverly causing the Democrats to nominate a candidate with all the popular appeal of spoiled supermarket tuna, will pass. And it will pass quickly.

When the Washington Post fails to deliver their Watergate on time, when even the dimmest follower of Occupy Democrats realizes that pigs will fly into his front yard and uproot his Bernie 2020 sign before impeachment happens, they will turn to something else.

And the new tattered lefty patriotism will go back up to the attic to lie under their moldering American flags and their defaced copy of the Declaration of Independence.

Sic transit gloria moonbat.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #15 

#BlackLivesMatter leader and make-believe black man says: f*ck the 4th, f*ck the flag

Jim Hoft (GatewayPundit) says Shaun King really hates America:


King is a white man pretending to be black. He is a leader of the #BlackLivesMatter movement and he really, really hates America and whitey.

Kinda weird, huh?

I agonize about putting these crude items in the Forum, but I believe it's important to know what vile cretins populate the political Left.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #16 

Acts of terror -- a history of left-wing political violence in America

Warner Todd Huston (Breitbart) is reporting that after a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer attempted to assassinate Republican members of Congress in Virginia, many on the left began insisting that "both sides" need to moderate their violent political rhetoric. But history proves that most major incidents of political violence and assassination attempts were committed by leftists in the United States.

Democrat volunteer James T. Hodgkinson opened fire as Republicans practiced for a charity baseball game, seriously wounding Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), on June 14, 2017. Immediately thereafter, the New York Times blamed Republican "violent rhetoric" for the Democrat shooter's actions. And as the nation took stock of Hodgkinson's actions, many voices also called for "both sides" to stop with the harsh political rhetoric. The conceit is that "both sides" are responsible for Hodgkinson's crime.

But finding "both sides" at fault neither fits with the event in question nor with the historical record.

At the turn of the 1900s, when American leftism adopted a more Marxist, class-conscious bent found in the socialist, communist, and anarchist movements that often overlapped, political violence kicked into high gear in the United States as it had in Europe. While the old continent succumbed to those leftist trends and incorporated them into its politics, the U.S. never quite did. But that didn't stop extremist groups from perpetrating a long list of acts of political violence, which continues from the 1900s-era anarchists all the way to the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter movements today.

It began over 100 years ago as the United States became afflicted with extremist actions perpetrated by ideological bomb throwers and assassins. By no means exhaustive, this partial list of violence perpetrated by the American Left over the last century or so nevertheless runs shockingly long.

1906 -- 1911 Union Movement Dynamite Terror Campaign

Starting in 1906, the violent, left-wing labor movement in the U.S. began a campaign of terror bombings targeting American politicians and businessmen intended to force capitulation to union demands.

1910 Bombing of the Los Angeles Times HQ


As part of that union terror campaign, the headquarters of the Los Angeles Times was practically destroyed when John and James McNamara, both active in the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, set off a bundle of dynamite at the building. The explosion and fire ultimately killed 21 and injured another 100. The brothers became a cause célèbre, with their innocence an article of faith on the left until the pair admitted their guilt in detail.

1919 Anarchist Bombing Campaign

As the various anarchist and socialist groups grew in numbers in both Europe and the U.S., violence became a central part of their effort to win power and the year 1919 brought America a string of bombings meant to coincide with the Communist celebration of May Day.

In total, 36 dynamite bombs were sent to American politicians across the country. No one died from the bombs as most were stopped by authorities, but a maid working for Georgia Senator Thomas W. Hardwick had her hands blown off when she opened the package that the senator received. The senator's wife was also seriously injured by the explosion.

That wasn't the end of the 1919 campaign. In June of that year, the anarchist groups detonated bombs in eight American cities. Several lost their lives during this campaign.

1920 Wall Street Bombing


Another anarchist bombing occurred on September 19, 1920, in New York's financial district killing 30 and injuring another 143.

Communists Killing Each Other

There was also much intrigue and murder inside the American communist scene itself as American members of the U.S. Communist Party became disillusioned with communism in Europe, especially that in the Soviet Union. Two lamented communists are notable here.

Born in 1886, Juliet Poyntz was an early activist in the American socialist movement. After first becoming active in the labor movement, Poyntz became fascinated by the Russian Revolution siding with the communists. By the 1920s, she had joined the Communist Party of the United States and became instrumental in the Friends of the Soviet Union. Then, in June of 1937, Poyntz left her hotel room in New York City to meet a Communist friend in Central Park but after entering the park she was abducted and then disappeared without a trace. No hard facts are known of her demise, but it has been theorized that she was eliminated by the Soviet State Political Directorate (G.P.U.) and either shipped off to a gulag in Russia or murdered here in the U.S.

Lovett Fort-Whiteman became famous in the U.S. and abroad as being one of the first black Americans to become an ardent communist. He became so well known that he was dubbed "the reddest of blacks" by no less than Time magazine.

Fort-Whiteman became such a booster of communism that he eventually moved to the Soviet Union to take his place as a Soviet operative. When first arriving in 1924, Fort-Whiteman was celebrated as an important American activist. However, by 1937 the Communists had succumbed to a wave of paranoia. Fort-Whiteman was charged with being a spy and eventually sentenced to five-years hard labor in a Gulag in the Soviet Far East where he died of malnutrition and neglect, his teeth kicked out of his mouth, in 1939.

Political Assassinations

A series of political assassinations occurred nearly all at the hands of leftists. As it happens a large number of politicians murdered in the U.S. after 1900 were killed at the hands of leftists.

To list just a few of the many political assassinations in the U.S. after the rise of the political left:

  • President William McKinley was assassinated by self-professed anarchist Leon Czolgosz in 1901.
  • Idaho Governor Frank Steunenberg was killed in 1905 by members of a mining union.
  • Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak was shot in 1933 by an anarchist during a speech being given by President Franklin Roosevelt. Many believe Roosevelt himself was the intended target, but he was unharmed.
  • Long Beach, New York, Mayor Louis F. Edwards was assassinated by members of the police union in 1939.
  • President John F. Kennedy killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, a communist in 1963.
  • Senator Robert F. Kennedy killed in 1968 by Sirhan Sirhan, a mentally unstable Palestinian.
  • Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme attempted to assassinate President Gerald Ford in 1975. A member of the infamous Manson Family, Fromme used her trial as a platform to discuss environmental issues.

The Black Panther Party


Above: Bobby Seale, co-founder of the Black Panther Party

In October of 1966, black activists Huey Newton and Bobby Seale founded the Black Panther Party. The pair claimed the group was started for the self-defense of the black race. Its ideology was based on black nationalism, Marxist rhetoric, and revolutionary socialism. The group was violently anti-police and anti-Semitic. Whatever the original intent, the group soon broke down into gangster activities and perpetrated a series of murders and engaged in drug dealing.

The Weather Underground

The communist-inspired Weather Underground (WUO) operated between 1969 and 1977 and aimed to foment revolution and was not averse to perpetrating bombings to achieve that goal. It was an offshoot of the socialist college group, the Students for a Democratic Society. WUO perpetrated several acts of terror. In 1970, San Francisco policeman Brian V. McDonnell died in an unsolved bombing that many suspect involved Weathermen. Three of their own members also lost their lives when a bomb prematurely detonated in a Greenwich Village townhouse in 1970.

The Symbionese Liberation Army

Between 1973 and 1975 the Symbionese Liberation Army, which styled itself as part of a rapidly aging "new left," kidnapped Hearst newspaper heiress Patty Hearst and embarked on a campaign of terror. In one incident in 1973, the group killed African American Oakland school superintendent Marcus Foster. The group also robbed several banks and got in shootouts with police, including one in Los Angeles that witnessed 10,000 bullets fired and a half-dozen SLA members killed.

FALN Terrorism

Starting in 1974 the FALN, or the Armed Forces of National Liberation of Puerto Rico, launched a campaign of terror to force the United States to bestow independence on its Island Protectorate. FALN took responsibility for about a dozen bombings between 1974 and 1979, one of which was the Fraunces Tavern bombing in New York City in 1975, which killed four and injured more than 40 others.

Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber


Ted Kaczynski was an anarchist with leftist, neo-Luddite, and environmentalist views who launched a 17-year bombing campaign starting in 1978 that killed three and injured 23 more.

Environmental and Animal Rights Terrorism

Eco-Terrorism and animal rights activists have also been responsible for numerous acts of violence starting in the 1970s and continuing right up to today. Members of groups such as the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), Greenpeace, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Earth First! have all been identified as perpetrators of acts of terror over the last 30 years by the FBI.

Again, this article is by no means an exhaustive list of left-wing terrorism in the U.S. The record shows that terrorism in U.S. history has been largely a history populated by leftist activists. In fact, a 2001 report prepared for the for US Department of Energy Office of Safeguards and Security noted that, "Leftist extremists were responsible for three-fourths of the officially designated acts of terrorism in America in the 1980s."

The lineage of left-wing violence carries on right to this very day. We see it in the form of the so-called "Antifa" movement responsible for political violence on the nation's college campuses, as well as the Black Lives Matter movement which has been responsible for a string of riots over the last five years after the death of Trayvon Martin in 2012. But it was also seen in the riots and property destruction wrought a year earlier by the short-lived Occupy Wall Street movement.

There is also a growing list of violent acts being perpetrated by liberals in this era of Trump and at least 30 acts or threats of violence have already been committed against Republican politicians.

Without a doubt, ideologies other than leftism have been at the root of political violence in America. There was the anti-government bombing in Oklahoma City in 1995 committed by Timothy R. McVeigh. We also saw the case of murderer James Charles Kopp who was goaded by his opposition to abortion when he murdered a physician in 1998. And then there is the 2014 case of Matthew Frein who shot two Pennsylvania State Troopers to "spark a revolution." These acts are arguably not based on left-wing ideals. But, the number of acts of terrorism committed by Americans holding views other than leftism pales in comparison.

So, when celebrities such as Kathy Griffin, Madonna, Robert De Niro, and Johnny Depp echo calls for political violence, they are bowing to well over 100 years of left-wing terrorism perpetrated in the United States.

Then there's these:

Perhaps it should simply be illegal for Democrats to own guns.

All of these murderers were/are progressive liberals.

Why are so many mass murderers Democrats?

And, of course, the latest Democrat to pick up a gun to attack the lawfully elected government, James Hodgkinson, a Bernie Sanders volunteer.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #17 

Alinsky, #FakeNews, Hollywood and the Left


Alinsky's Rule 12:  Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

Alinsky urged his followers to cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. He directs his followers to go after people and not institutions. He says correctly, that people hurt faster than institutions.

Alinsky acknowledges that this is cruel, but it is very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works. Remember, we're dealing with "the end justifies the means" crowd.

If you will notice, the attacks on Trump are always personal. When the Left occasionally attacks Trump for his policy, such as his temporary ban on six mostly-Muslim states, the Left doesn't argue the merits of the policy, they call Trump anti-Muslim and a xenophobe.

Currently, because the Left doesn't approve of Trump's policies, the Left wants to either impeach Trump or drive him from office because he's "insane." They attack him as "crazy," "dumb as a rock," "sexist," "repulsive," "grotesque," "deranged," "odious," "vile" and always the big ones -- "racist" and 'homophobe."

Following Alinsky's rule, this is all personal. The attacks on Trump and everybody in his family -- unusually successful people -- are all nasty and personal, and what is driving the Left absolutely crazy is that Alinsky's rule don't seem to apply to Trump.

When they attack him and his family, Trump punches them right between the eyes, and this makes the Left even crazier.

We are witnessing organizations, such as CNN, and individuals destroy their reputations because of their frustration -- and because leftist are emotional -- their frustration is manifesting itself as pure, unadulterated hate.

The Left's hatred of all things Trump has led to riots, assaults, batteries and attempted murder.

And they're good with that!

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #18 

Progressive journalists are outraged at the NRA for pointing out leftist violence


Sean Davis (TheFederalist) is reporting that barely two weeks after a progressive Democrat activist attempted a mass assassination of Republican officials, progressives are outraged at the NRA for noting that the Second Amendment gives people the right to defend themselves, with arms if necessary, from people who might try to assassinate them or their families.

You might not remember it because the news media pivoted away from the story as quickly as possible, but just two weeks ago an anti-Trump Bernie Bro tried to assassinate a bunch of elected Republican officials while they practiced for the annual bipartisan Congressional baseball game. Just days after the New York Times revealed that Republicans regularly practiced at a public park in Alexandria with minimal protective detail, the shooter showed up at the park and started surveilling it. According to the FBI, he even took pictures of the location. Before opening fire on the lawmakers, the shooter also confirmed that the assembled officials were Republicans.

Unsurprisingly, a lot of Republicans responded to the attempted massacre by noting that unconstitutional laws in D.C. actually prevented the Republican officials from carrying firearms for the purpose of self-defense (although the shooting was in Virginia, most lawmakers reside in D.C., meaning D.C. law effectively bans them from carrying anywhere in the area since they would eventually have to return to their homes with the firearms).

Progressives, however, are outraged at Second Amendment defenders for having the audacity to claim a right to self-defense in the wake of a mass assassination attempt. On Thursday, failed Baltimore mayoral candidate and Black Lives Matter gadfly Deray McKesson raged at Dana Loesch and accused her and the National Rifle Association (NRA) of "white supremacy" for noting in a prophetic promotional video filmed in April that progressive activists were becoming increasingly violent.

"They use their media to assassinate real news. They use their schools to teach children that their president is another Hitler. And then they use their ex-president to endorse the resistance," Loesch states in the video. "All to make them march, make them protest, make them scream racism and sexism and xenophobia, to smash windows, burn cars, shut down interstates and airports, bully and terrorize the law abiding until the only option left is for the police to do their jobs and stop the madness."

"And when that happens, they'll use it as an excuse for the outrage," Loesch concludes. You can watch the full video here. Rather than undercutting Loesch's claim that progressives reflexively scream racism whenever anyone challenges them, McKesson only underscored her point by accusing her of being a white supremacist for pointing out violence committed by leftists.

On June 12, just two days before the progressive Democrat activist opened fire on GOP members of Congress and other innocent civilians just minding their own business, the NRA reposted the video on Facebook. That aroused the ire of Michael Goldfarb, a liberal journalist who writes for the Guardian, who took to his Facebook page to condemn the NRA.

"This new NRA propaganda piece is the most disturbing video I've seen," Goldfarb wrote in response to the June 12 NRA post on Facebook featuring the Loesch video. "Not surprising but disturbing. Reinforces my despair that America is not going to get out of its mess without bloodshed."

Two days after that Facebook post by the NRA, a Democrat political activist tried to murder a park full of Republican politicians.

Judging by his Twitter and Facebook feeds, neither of which mentions the June 14 anti-GOP assassination attempt even a single time, Goldfarb appears to be unaware that bloodshed happened quite recently, that it wasn't perpetrated by the NRA, and that the shooter was a vocal progressive activist who loved Bernie Sanders and hated President Donald Trump. Goldfarb did, however, take time to attack Trump and his supporters, Vice President Mike Pence, "GOPygmies," and British conservative Boris Johnson. He does not appear to have ever condemned the June 14 shooter who nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.)

Anne Applebaum, another liberal journalist and former member of the Washington Post editorial board, hopped onto Twitter and did her best to amplify Goldfarb's rage at the NRA for noting on Facebook, two days before an anti-Republican assassination attempt, that progressives were becoming increasingly violent and unhinged in their opposition to the Trump administration and the Republican Congress.


Like Goldfarb, Applebaum also appears to be under the misimpression that no major political violence occurred in the U.S. in recent weeks.

Rather than attempting to exploit what happened in Alexandria earlier this month, Dana Loesch and the NRA predicted it. And rather than acknowledging the reality of what happened, McKesson and Goldfarb and Applebaum chose instead to close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears and scream at the NRA and its allies for pointing out the need to protect the right of self-defense in the wake of a politically motivated assassination attempt on Republicans. Projection — in this case, progressives accusing people on the Right of plotting violence while completely ignoring excusing constant violence being perpetrated by the Left — is one thing. But what we see in these examples isn't just projection. It's outright denial of reality. It's the Big Lie on steroids: don't just refuse to acknowledge one of the most heinous acts of political violence in recent memory, convict the other side for acts that haven't even been committed.

The fact of the matter is that it wasn't the NRA that tried to murder a bunch of its political opponents. It wasn't the NRA that published the location and security details of its foes. It wasn't the NRA that surveilled a park and confirmed that everyone in it had the "wrong" politics before unloading on them. No, that was done by a progressive Democrat activist. All the NRA did was point out leftist violence and note that Americans have a God-given right, affirmed by the U.S. Constitution, to defend themselves and their loved ones from that very violence.

To Golfarb and Applebaum and McKesson, the NRA's crime wasn't committing or fomenting violence. The NRA's crime was refusing to let leftist violence go unnoticed.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #19 

12 Ways progressives and Americans differ on public policy


Doug Ross says: I paraphrased a few, knowing that some progressives' heads might explode without a proper warmup:

  • We believe in the Constitution, they believe in centralized government.
  • We believe in individualism, they believe in the collective.
  • We believe in private property, they believe in collective ownership of material goods.
  • We believe in prosperity, they believe in redistributing wealth with them determining who gets ripped off and who gets the drips remaining after they've taken their cut.
  • We believe in separation of powers, they believe in a monolithic, all-powerful, administrative state.
  • We believe in eternal truths, they believe in ideologically meandering social engineering.
  • We believe in cultural stability, they believe in never-ending transformation of our society.
  • We believe in real science, they believe in social science (e.g., "environmental justice").
  • We believe in the rights of man, they believe in the power of centralized government.
  • We believe in the moral order, they believe in situational ethics.
  • We believe in individual liberty, they believe in authoritarianism, with no limits ever defined.
  • We believe in education, they believe in indoctrination.
  • We believe in civil society, they believe in the federal leviathan.

You can find Mark's latest bestseller here -- Rediscovering Americanism: And the Tyranny of Progressivism[image] -- once you read it, there's no going back.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #20 
This guy says "this is not your history."  Are you kidding me?  DEMOCRATS have always been about violence to get their way.  These are the same Democrats of the Confederate South who succeeded from the Union in protest of Lincoln and the Republicans winning the presidency and their goal to abolish slavery in 1860.  These are the same Democrats who created the Klu Klux Klan (KKK) who are designed to terrorize white and black Republicans to destroy their ability to gain power politically.

The mainstream media is so dishonest and have not properly EXPOSED these demons and rats and evil and wicked folks for who they are.

These are the same Democrats who with President LBJ after he couped to have JFK assassinated stating that he will have those "N-words voting Democrat for the next 200 years."


Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #21 

Griswold on the rise of threats against GOP congressmen

The Washington Free Beacon is reporting that tits reporter Alex Griswold discussed his story about the recent surge of threats on Republican congressmen Friday on Fox News, saying the political Left should do a better job of calling out illiberal behavior by their supporters.

Host Neil Cavuto introduced the topic by playing a recent recording of a Nebraska Democratic official who said he was "glad" House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R., La.) got shot last week and wished he was dead.

Griswold reported this week that 30 Republicans in Congress have been either attacked or received death threats since May. In addition to the shooting of Scalise at a Republican baseball practice, Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah), Steve Stivers (R., Ohio) and Claudia Tenney (R., N.Y.) have been among those getting death threats.

"Most liberals are better than this," Griswold said. "We talk about why isn't the media calling this sort of behavior out. Liberals, it's on you, too. You should be calling this out as well. This is not part of your tradition. It's not liberal at all. It's not even American."

Griswold said he couldn't believe how many GOP representatives had been under duress when he first looked into the story.

"It was just mind-boggling," he said.

Cavuto wondered how the media would treat the story if the politics of the shooter and victim were reversed, as last week it was a Bernie Sanders supporter attacking Republicans. Griswold pointed to how the press treated the shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in 2011, leaping to blame of Republicans like Sarah Palin for heated rhetoric, when it was later revealed the shooter had been obsessed with Giffords for years.

He and Cavuto agreed the anger in politics was out of control, with some of it even coming from the celebrity community. The most recent performer to receive attention for charged language was Johnny Depp on Thursday after he joked about assassinating President Donald Trump.

"It is nuts," Griswold said. "I'd like to think it's probably the worst that we've seen since at least the Civil War, politicization of this factor. It's been fomenting for years as we all know, but this is the first time we've seen it get really as violent as it has."

America's "liberals" have finally removed their masks, revealing the deep hate and viciousness that smolders in their hearts.

This does not bode well for the future.

I am beginning to work on something. Stay tuned!

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #22 

Illinois man arrested for threatening to kidnap and murder President Trump

Cristina Laila (GatewayPundit) is reporting that Joseph Lynn Pickett of Edwardsville, Illinois was arrested and charged on June 15 for threatening to assassinate President Trump in a series of Facebook posts.


Pickett, like every other radicalized liberal, is obsessed with Trump-Russia conspiracy theories and wants to kill Trump because he believes he's a traitor to the U.S. This lies directly on the liars in the mainstream media for peddling the false Trump-Russia narrative.

Via Belleville News-Democrat:

U.S. Secret Service Special Agent Vincent Pescitelli said Pickett threatened to "take the life of, to kidnap, and to inflict bodily harm" against Trump on Facebook, according to a criminal complaint filed with the charges. The complaint included screenshots of Pickett's Facebook posts.

"Before I die I want our president and congress to sign a treaty to never side with Russia or any enemy of the United States of America! If one will then that person deserves to be shot," his post read. "Guess what Trump? I'm waiting for the right time…and I KNOW your (sic) Putin's (expletive)! The secret service now has a heads up as to my plan to assassinate Trump…let's see if they act."

After the original post, Pickett continued to comment, saying he was "still waiting" for the Secret Service to knock on his door and arrest him.


"Honestly am I really going to have to kill trump before our fine Government (the jack booted thugs they are) actually takes me into custody for threatening to assassinate President Donald Trump?" Pickett wrote. "I mean he sold our country to The Russians. He is a Benedict Arnold but hey the (expletive) is our President even though he needs a blade in his neck. And you dumb, asses who stick up for him…who's gonna protect you when someone like me comes t (sic) take you out."

Here we have another violent liberal threatening the President of the United States, but the Democrats and the mainstream media will continue to blame conservatives.

This screwball thought threatening the president was a joke -- until . . .

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #23 

30 GOP congressmen have been attacked or threatened since May

Alex Griswold (FreeBeacon) is reporting that a total of 30 Republican members of Congress have either been attacked or revealed that they were the victim of a death threat since the beginning of May.

May 8: Wendi Wright, 35, was arrested after stalking Rep. David Kustoff (Tenn.) and trying to run him off the road. After pulling over, Wright "began to scream and strike the windows on Kustoff's car and even reached inside the vehicle."

May 9: Virginia Rep. Tom Garrett needed heavy security at a town hall after receiving a series of death threats in May that police "deemed to be credible and real."

"This is how we're going to kill your wife," one message said. Others detailed how they would kill his children, and even his dog.

May 12: A town hall participant accosted North Dakota Rep. Kevin Cramer, shoving fake dollar bills into his suit jacket. A Kramer supporter grabbed the same man by the neck. Both men were ejected by law enforcement, but neither were charged.

May 12: A Tucson, Ariz. school district employee was arrested by the FBI for sending several death threats to Arizona Rep. Martha McSally. The man threatened to shoot McSally and told her to "be careful" because her days "were numbered."

May 21: Florida Rep. Ted Yoho described his office getting vandalized by protesters. One female constituent left a voicemail on an office answering machine, promising, "Next time I see you, I'm going to beat your f**king ass."

June 14: Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.), and Reps. Steve Scalise (La.), Kevin Brady (Texas), Jack Bergman (Mich.), Mike Bishop (Mich.), Mike Conaway (Texas), Roger Williams (Texas), John Moolenaar (Mich.), Gary Palmer (Ala.), Chuck Fleischmann (Tenn.), Ron DeSantis (Fla.), Barry Loudermilk (Ga.), Mark Walker (N.C.), Steve Pearce (N.M.), Brad Wenstrup (Ohio), Rodney Davis (Ill.), Jeff Duncan (S.C.), Trent Kelly (Miss.), Mo Brooks (Ala.), and Joe Barton (Texas) were attacked by a gunman during a baseball practice in Alexandria, Va.

Scalise, the House majority whip, was shot in the hip, and remains in the hospital. Four others were injured, including a staffer for Williams and two Capitol Police officers assigned to Scalise.


The same day, New York Rep. Claudia Tenney received an email reading, "One down, 216 to go."

June 17: Missouri Rep. Ann Wagner revealed that she had gotten five death threats in the weeks leading up to the Scalise shooting. Wagner said that protesters had been "vandalizing my home, showing up with masks and gravestones, and laying down on my driveway and drawing chalk outlines of dead bodies. Picketing my church at 8 and 10 o'clock Mass."

June 22: An Ohio man was arrested for leaving a voicemail threatening the life and family of Rep. Steve Stivers (Ohio).

"We're coming to get every goddamn one of you and your families. Maybe the next one taken down will be your daughter. Huh? Or your wife. Or even you," the man said.

The same day, Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz played a threatening voicemail he had received on "Fox & Friends."

"I suggest you prepare for the battle motherf**ker, and the apocalypse," the caller yelled. "Because we are going to hunt your ass down, wrap a rope around your neck, and hang you from a lamppost."

The worst part of this news is that US Attorneys will not prosecute the threats against the GOP lawmakers .

I don't understand this. These threats and attacks are an assault on the government and the law.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #24 

Violent liberal rhetoric

If you are wondering why Rep. Scalise and two protective officers were shot last week, just watch this short video:

Democrats, the Left, progressives -- whatever -- have completely lost control of their emotions and are resorting to violent rhetoric and even violence -- all the while referring to conservative Americans as "haters," racists," "homophobes," "NAZIs," "fascists," and other pejoratives.

They are actually promoting the notion of civl war -- a conflict that would last for three days.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #25 

The Left has one more argument -- kill them!


Ann Coulter (FrontPage) says after a Bernie Sanders supporter tried to commit mass murder last week -- the second homicidal Bernie supporter so far this year -- the media blamed President Trump for lowering the bar on heated political rhetoric by calling his campaign opponents cruel names like "Crooked Hillary" and "Lyin' Ted."

As soon as any conservative responds to Trump's belittling names for his rivals by erupting in a murderous rage, that will be a fantastically good point. But until then, it's idiotic. Unlike liberals, conservatives aren't easily incited to violence by words.

What we're seeing is the following: Prominent liberals repeatedly tell us, with deadly seriousness, that Trump and his supporters are: "Hitler," "fascists," "bigots," "haters," "racists," "terrorists," "criminals" and "white supremacists," which is then followed by liberals physically attacking conservatives.

To talk about "both sides" being guilty of provocative rhetoric is like talking about "both genders" being guilty of rape.

Nearly every op-ed writer at The New York Times has compared Trump to Hitler. (The conservative on the op-ed page merely called him a "proto-fascist.") If Trump is Hitler and his supporters Nazis, then the rational course of action for any civilized person is to kill them.

That's not just a theory, it's the result.

A few months ago, 38-year-old Justin Barkley shot and killed a UPS driver in a Walmart parking lot in Ithaca, New York, then ran over his body, because he thought he was killing Donald Trump. During his arraignment, Barkley told the judge: "I shot and killed Donald Trump purposely, intentionally and very proudly."

In the past year, there have been at least a hundred physical attacks on Trump supporters or presumed Trump supporters. The mainstream media have ignored them all. You can click the Anti-Trump Hate Map that documents more than 200 attacks on conservatives.

Schoolchildren across the country are being hospitalized from beatings for the crime of liking Trump. In Pasco, Oregon, a 29-year-old Trump supporter was stabbed in the throat by a Hispanic man, Alvaro Campos-Hernandez, after a political argument.

Last month, the anti-jihad scholar Robert Spencer was poisoned in Iceland by a Social Justice Warrior pretending to be a fan, sending Spencer to the hospital.

It's become so normal for leftist thugs to assault anyone who likes Trump that, in Meriden, Connecticut, Wilson Echevarria and Anthony Hobdy leapt out of their car and started punching and hitting a man holding a Trump sign, rolling him into traffic right in front of a policeman.

If any one of these bloody attacks had been committed by a Trump supporter against a Muslim, a gay, a Mexican, a woman or a Democrat, the media would have had to drop its Russia conspiracy theory to give us 24-7 coverage of the epidemic of right-wing violence.

The liberal response to this ceaseless mayhem toward conservatives is to produce a single nut, who fired a gun in the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington, D.C., last December (hurting no one) to "rescue children," after reading on obscure right-wing blogs that the restaurant hid a Democratic pedophilia ring. (They've also hyped a long list of "hate crimes" that were utter hoaxes.)

Congratulations, liberals! You got one. And some tiny number of girls raped men last year. QED: Both sexes have a rape problem.

Liberal aggression has ratcheted up dramatically since the dawn of Trump, as has the dehumanizing rhetoric, but epic violence from the Left is nothing new.

We don't have to go back more than a century to note that every presidential assassin and attempted presidential assassin who had a political motive was a leftist, a socialist, a communist or a member of a hippie commune. (Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosz, Giuseppe Zangara, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme and Sara Jane Moore.)

Instead, we'll start in the 1990s. Al Sharpton's speeches helped inspire people to murder two people in Crown Heights in 1991 and seven people at Freddie's Fashion Mart in 1995. As scary as David Duke and Richard Spencer are, I've never heard of anyone committing murder after listening to one of their speeches.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, among other acts of violence, Obama supporters Maced elderly volunteers in a McCain campaign office in Galax, Virginia. They threw Molotov cocktails at, stomped and shredded McCain signs on a half-dozen families' front yards around Portland. Another Obama supporter broke the McCain sign of a small middle-aged woman in midtown Manhattan, then hit her in the face with the stick.

(All this for John McCain!)

At the Republicans' convention that year, hundreds of liberals were arrested for smashing police cars, slashing tires and breaking store windows. Police seized Molotov cocktails, napalm bombs and assorted firearms from the protesters. Elderly convention-goers were Maced and sent to the hospital after protesters threw bricks through the windows of convention buses. On the first day alone, the cops made 284 arrests, 130 for felonies.

That same year, California voters approved Proposition 8, banning gay marriage. In response, left-wing opponents of the measure ferociously attacked Mormon and Catholic churches, smashing glass doors, spray-painting the churches and burning holy books on their front steps. The mayor of Fresno and his pastor received death threats serious enough to require around-the-clock police protection.

(Although the measure would not have passed without the support of black voters, liberals held black people blameless for their opposition to gay marriage. Mormons and Catholics were a much funner target.)

In 2009, one conservative had his finger bitten off at a Tea Party rally in Thousand Oaks, California, by a man at a counter-protest. At a St. Louis Tea Party rally, an African-American selling anti-Obama bumper stickers was beaten up by two Service Employees International Union thugs, resulting in charges.

For the past few years, the media have enthusiastically promoted Black Lives Matter, hoping to galvanize the black vote. The mother of Michael Brown was even invited to appear on stage at the Democrats' convention. But, as the British discovered with their Indian auxiliaries during the Revolutionary War, having ginned them up, they couldn't calm them down.

As a result of the media's tall tales about homicidal, racist cops, Black Lives Matter enthusiasts staged sneak attacks, executing two policemen in Brooklyn, five in Dallas and three in Baton Rouge.

Liberals know damn well that their audience includes a not-insignificant portion of foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, prepared, at the slightest provocation, to smash windows, burn down neighborhoods, physically attack and even murder conservatives. But instead of toning down the rhetoric, the respectable left keeps throwing matches on the bone-dry tinder, and then indignantly asks, "Are you saying conservatives don't do it, too?"

No, actually. We don't.

A man that lies about who he is will never have a problem lying about what he does
Previous Topic | Next Topic

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

Help fight the

The United States Library of Congress
has selected for inclusion
in its historic collection of Internet materials

Be a subscriber

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011 - 2017
All rights reserved