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 4 of 10      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   Next   »

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #76 

The Left's continuing war to take over America


Larry Klayman (WND) says this week, the outgoing president, Barack Hussein Obama, gave an interview to his fellow Muslim at CNN -- the Clinton News Network and rabid Trump-hating cable franchise -- Fareed Zakaria, and unloaded on white people in the South, in effect blaming them for obstructing his socialist, pro-Muslim, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian agenda over the last eight years. Here is what Obama told Zakaria:

Well, I have news for this failed president, whites in the North generally despise him as much as whites in the South, or for that matter the Midwest and West. Indeed, as a quasi-Southerner myself -- I graduated from Duke University and Emory University School of Law and have lived most of my adult life in Dixie -- I can tell you from personal experience that the overwhelming majority of modern-day Southerners do not harbor antipathy much more prejudice toward blacks anymore than they do for Jews, which is my ethnic heritage. The South has come a long way in becoming tolerant to diversity since the days of the Civil War, and while slavery can and should never be condoned, there is a time and place to let the past be just that, the past.

Obama, realizing that his female soulmate, Hillary Clinton, lost the presidential election (and with it the Democratic Party failed to retake either chamber of Congress,) because the Wicked Witch of the Left wholeheartedly embraced his agenda, including his orchestrated, anti-white and anti-law enforcement chants charging white racism in order to gain African-American votes, is now on the defensive. To try to influence how historians will view what largely is his defeat, Obama must now trash whites in the South and look for a scapegoat to rationalize his and the Democratic Party’s resounding demise.

Obama and Clinton, throughout the run up to the presidential and congressional elections of 2016, excoriated Republican presidential candidate Trump for his proposed temporary ban on Muslim immigration into the United States. They made a false point that this was "destructive" if not counterproductive, as in their contrived view it would serve as a so-called recruiting tool for ISIS -- but, ironically, if there has been any uptick in white supremacists, such as the Klu Klux Klan, it was caused by the Obama/Clinton drumbeat of labeling any white who opposed their agenda as racists. Couple this with Obama and Clinton’s unconditional support for the likes of Black Lives Matter, the New Black Panthers, so-called Reverends Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, all radical black groups and white haters who had openly advocated killing cops of all stripes, but mostly white, and its no wonder the KKK and its evil ilk have arisen from the dead to ride once again.

In the case of Hillary Clinton, while refusing to accept any endorsement or even recognition from the Fraternal Order of Police in exchange for calls to end the violence, she effectively endorsed the anti-cop and anti-white incitement to violence of Black Lives Matter and their allies, following the lead of Obama himself, as well as his two attorneys general, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.

Now that Obama and Clinton have been shown the door by the American people, rather than seek reconciliation to bring the nation together, to further the socialist agenda of the Left, financed largely by the Nazi collaborator and self-hating anti-Semitic Jew George Soros, they are engaged in a concerted effort to burn down "Rome," as they and their fellow barbarians are forced to flee. Once Rome is destroyed, the Left will seek to move in once again to reclaim what they believe is their rightful heritage to enslave and rule over us as the Pharaoh did in Egypt. This is why I had to laugh when reading Time magazine this week, which, while depicting on its cover for "Person of the Year" and insinuating in not too veiled a fashion that Donald Trump is the modern American equivalent to Adolf Hitler, saluted Hillary Clinton as the female version of Moses. While pathetic in its crass stupidity and bias, Time failed to mention that Moses never had a girlfriend named Huma Abedin, a Palestinian with family ties to the granddaddy of all terrorist groups, the Muslim Brotherhood.

But Obama, Clinton and their Black Lives Matter comrades are not alone in stirring up hatred and a race -- if not civil -- war. Even school districts like the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) are engaged in efforts to push our nation to the extreme left. Unbelievably, LAUSD authorities, as I was informed by a friend who passed along an audio message sent out to the families of school students -- my friend’s child is in the second grade -- have set up a hotline so children can get counseling over trauma caused by the election of The Donald. This brainwashing, which I discuss in the YouTube video below, smacks ironically of what Hitler and his fellow Nazis attempted with their "Youth Schools" in the years leading up to and during World War II:

In short, having been rejected by the majority of Americans -- I do believe Trump also won the popular vote given the millions of fraudulent votes of illegal immigrants, criminals and "the walking dead" -- the Left, while branding Trump as the new Hitler, is embracing the Fuhrer’s evil techniques to mold our youth in their image. And, as Sean Hannity has rightfully exposed on Fox News, Los Angeles is just one of many examples.

The bottom line is this: We the People must not rest with the election of Donald Trump. There is no political messiah. The Left is poised to tear down the wall of freedom, whether it be on the Mexican border or figuratively and actually throughout the nation. We together are the army if not militia as envisioned in the Second Amendment to our Constitution, to make sure, peacefully, that the likes of Obama, Clinton, Black Lives Matter, George Soros and their Bolshevik and black Muslim comrades like Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, whose disciples have killed and seriously injured many cops and others who oppose them of late, never are allowed to rise again! The future of you and your loved ones hangs in the balance.

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  #77 

Michael Moore calls for protesters to "disrupt" Trump’s inauguration


Fox News is reporting that Michael Moore -- who predicted Donald Trump would win the presidency months before his surprise victory -- is now encouraging people to protest the President-elect's upcoming inauguration.

"Disrupt the Inauguration. The Majority have spoken – by nearly 2.7 million votes &counting! Silence is not an option,” Moore tweeted Wednesday.

The liberal filmmaker shared a link to the website for DisruptJ20, a campaign for "a bold mobilization against the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017."

The website states, "We call on all people of good conscience to join in disrupting the ceremonies. If Trump is to be inaugurated at all, let it happen behind closed doors, showing the true face of the security state Trump will preside over. It must be made clear to the whole world that the vast majority of people in the United States do not support his presidency or consent to his rule."

DisruptJ20 is planning D.C.-based protests on the day of Trump's inauguration, but also asks people to protest on "the streets wherever you are."

The social justice organization also calls for worldwide action.

"If you are living outside the US, you can take action at US embassies, borders, or other symbols of neocolonial power. Our allegiance is not to 'making America great again,' but to all of humanity and the planet. #DisruptJ20."

Michael Moore is jumping on the bandwagon. He knows that it is the International ANSWER coalition that has been organizing a MASSIVE demonstration with the goal of interrupting the inauguration since 15 minutes after Hillary conceded.

International ANSWER has twelve chapters located in major cities throughout the country and is behind all the big "protests."

Some of the coalition organizations as listed on ANSWER Website:

Al-Awda (Right of Return Coalition)
IFCO/Pastors for Peace (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Free Palestine Alliance - U.S. (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Partnership for Civil Justice - LDEF (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Nicaragua Network (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Bayan - USA/International (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Korea Truth Commission (ANSWER Steering Committee)
International Action Center (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Muslim Student Association of the U.S./Canada (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Kensington Welfare Rights Union (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Mexico Solidarity Network (ANSWER Steering Committee)
Middle East Children's Alliance (ANSWER Steering Committee)
National Council of Arab Americans
National Lawyer’s Guild
Not in Our Name United for Peace and Justice
Stalinist Workers World Party

Michael Moore was a guest on the Dec. 7 "Late Night with Seth Meyers," and he predicted 'something crazy' might happen to prevent Trump from becoming president (Photo: screenshot)

Does leftist activist and filmmaker Michael Moore know something the rest of us don't?

Moore predicted President-elect Donald Trump may not become America's next president, saying anything can happen between now and Jan. 20, 2017.

If that is not a implied threat, I don't know what is. I'll let the Secret Service decide:


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  #78 

The Left's last stand


Becky Noble (Politichicks) says the presidential election cycle is thankfully over, and for most of us things will return to normal and we will turn our attention to other things. It was a big win for conservatives, not only did we capture the White House but it was a big night all over the country for governors and state legislatures as Republicans cut a wide swath of victory across the nation. But as recent election history tells us, hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned, or one who lost an election.

In the days and weeks leading up to the election, the hand-wringing du jour for the Left was would Donald Trump accept the results of an election that by their assumption was just a formality really, why even vote? Hillary was clearly going to be the winner. Let's just save everyone a lot of time and just declare her the president. But that is not what happened. The American people profoundly fed up with executive orders, regulations, and candidates they did not like being shoved down their collective throats pushed back. And now, irony of ironies, that very question is being asked of Hillary Clinton and her supporters. The answer looks to be a big fat no.

On Nov. 25, Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein presented to the state of Wisconsin a petition for a state wide recount. Stein also plans to mount a recount in Michigan and Pennsylvania. This will be a costly endeavor; however the Stein campaign claims that they have raised roughly $4 million to undertake the recount. Because Stein only received 1% of the popular vote nationally, most political experts do not think this is anything more than a fundraising stunt for the Green Party. But could this just be a distraction for a much more sinister, more organized attempt to delegitimize the incoming Trump administration and ignore the voice and the will of the American people?

Presidential electors from all over the nation are receiving letters, emails, and even phone calls urging them to change their votes to Hillary Clinton when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19 to officially elect Donald Trump president. Some electors are getting hundreds of these letters a day. As would be expected, these letters and emails are filled with erroneous information, all designed to cast doubt. In many states, there are laws against electors who change their votes to go against electoral votes that are awarded each candidate in every state. The penalties differ by state some will impose fines on what is known as "faithless" electors, others can carry up to a year in jail. But a handful of states have no such penalties. Those are the states in which electors face the most harassment, and in a few cases, there are even death threats being issued to electors.

So is there anyone who does not live under a rock that thinks this is a purely grassroots spontaneous movement? Is this really nothing more than just a bunch of left wing hippies rolling out of bed around noon one day and deciding then and there that they would launch this attempt to get their gal Hillary to the White House? Hardly.

What is a more likely scenario is the fact that this is one of those instances where the Left runs rings around conservatives. Even though six months or a year ago it would have not occurred to liberals that Donald Trump would today be the president-elect. But even the most unfathomable of outcomes must be planned for. And a safe bet would be that liberals started planning this effort long ago. They lined up their money guys, their IT guys, and their volunteers just in case. Whether or not the Democrat Party is officially involved is unknown. What is known is that at any time the Clinton campaign or President Obama could call off the dogs and urge their supporters to accept the outcome of the election. That will not happen because the dirty little secret is that Clinton and Obama are no doubt enjoying it. Anything that will weaken the Trump presidency or just make trouble for it softens the drubbing their Party took on Election Day. Chances are the only sound coming from the White House will be crickets. Call it unrealistic, naiveté, or something else, but for the most part conservatives are well aware how the Left operates, but they believe that everybody operates the way they do, by the book.

This effort is quite possibly taking place in every state where the Left thinks they can flip electors. Most electoral college experts say the percentage of electors that would be needed to toss out the election results and give the win to Hillary Clinton is virtually impossible and therefore not a threat. Is the real goal here to prevent the states in question from certifying their election results and ultimately that states electors not being allowed to vote? This is also a possibility. But what does the Left do when this effort fizzles as badly as the Clinton campaign?

This may be the last stand for liberals this election cycle, but don't expect them to hear the fat lady warming up any time 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  #79 

The Left's inability to face reality


News with Views says we are seeing a complete meltdown on the left because of the results of the election. In my life I have never seen such pathetic reactions to a general election. To some extent some of these reactions would be justified because of the election then re-election of Obama, a man who was the most unqualified person to ever hold the office of the president. He had never held a job, run a company, been responsible for making a payroll, knew absolutely nothing about business, foreign policy, had never accomplished anything in his life and was not even qualified under our Constitution to hold the office not being a Natural Born Citizen. For that I blame on Congress as they ignored the part of our Constitution, as well as many other parts of the Constitution during his presidency, that requires that both parents must be citizens to be a NBC. It was never questioned by Congress and the MSM never brought it up even though they did questioned McCain's eligibility because he was born out of the country while his father served our nation.

The left, though mostly through paid protestors, are have having a fit about Trump being elected. I am sure that they thought they had enough illegals and dead people voting to overcome and beat Trump. But because they didn't, so now they are pounding on the fact that Hillary won the popular vote. Well, only if you count the dead people and the illegals. But what they need to understand is the United States has NEVER elected a president via the popular vote. It has always been through the Electoral College. They seem to forget that Nixon won the popular vote but Kennedy won the Electoral College. Republicans didn't complain and Nixon even shunned a recount. Too bad the left doesn't have half the class of the only president to have been pushed from office because of a scandal. Now the Democrats tried to elect the most corrupt person with so many scandals it would take four or five columns to discuss them.

The protests in the streets, the violence, the destruction of innocent people's property because your candidate didn't win is a disgrace to the heritage of our nation. Of course all the violence and destruction is being done by people who are being paid to do so: A Craigslist ad allegedly posted by Bernie Sanders supporters offered people $15 an hour to protest at Donald Trump's rally in Janesville, Wisconsin, on Tuesday.

The ad, which was removed from the site, said it would provide shuttle buses, parking and signs to protesters who attended the Republican presidential front-runner's event, in addition to $15 an hour for up to four hours.[1]Thousands of people marched in Denver on Thursday night to protest the election of Donald Trump.

Protesters, chanting and carrying signs, bemoaning the president-elect, started from the west steps of the state Capitol just after 5:30 p.m. and marched down the 16th Street Mall.

So many people marched that some chants drowned out others. Employees of businesses along the mall came out of shops and captured images of the throng as it streamed by. Some diners in restaurants along the way did the same, with some waving at protesters.[2]

What direction is our nation taking when we have to pay people to protest the outcome of an election? What direction is our nation taking when colleges have to offer counseling because a democrat lost an election?[3], [4]

They're offering coloring books, crayons and puppies all to help them deal with the results of the election. These are college students! Supposedly grownups. This is what happens when you don't have winners and losers in school functions, sports, contests and other things. Everybody gets a participation trophy. Schools are supposed to be training students to be successful, productive members of society. Participation trophies don't cut it. In the real world there are winners and losers. In the real world things don't always go the way you want it. When that happens our kids will have to know how to handle that setback. Kids today freak out, demand that the election be reversed so their candidate wins. It doesn't help when their candidate declares that if you don't accept the results it is a threat to our democracy:"To say you won't respect the result of the election, that is a direct threat to our democracy."[5] then she joins in on the recount effort. By the way, Hillary is wrong, we don't have a democracy we have a Constitutional Republic. There is a difference.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg concerning what our kids are being taught or not being taught. These supposedly mature people needed counseling earlier in the year when the saw 'Trump 2016' written in chalk on the sidewalk on their college campus.[6] These poor little snowflakes even had to have counseling for seeing Halloween costumes that offended them![7]I remember a song that the late Merle Haggard did back in the 1970's, yes I'm that old and I do like the song, called The Fighting Side of Me and one verse in that song states:

I read about some squirrelly guy
Who claims he just don't believe in fighting
And I wonder just how long
The rest of us can count on being free
They love our milk and honey
But they preach about some other way of living.

That's the part I don't think these fools, including their so-called teachers/professors, understand. They love what we have in America. Our freedoms and our prosperity but they don't want to do what it takes to get it or keep it. The worst part is I don't think they even know what it takes to get it. We don't teach our history anymore because it has too much religion in it, like that's a reason to not teach our history. Kids today have no idea what our Founders believed and sacrificed so they could have the freedoms they have today. It is a disgrace what we call an education system.

Today's college grads couldn't pass an eighth grade final exam. What used to be the number one education system in the world is now 14th.[8] When it comes to knowing what is going on in our nation we are generally stupid! Most people don't have a clue. We rank second in ignorance concerning what is going on in our nation. According to the research firm IPSOS Mori, the United States ranks second out of fourteen countries in general ignorance about social statistics such as teen pregnancy, unemployment rates, and voting patterns. Italy is the most ignorant of the fourteen countries.[9]

Donald Trump has stated all through his campaign that he wants to make America great again. I believe that he can do that. He has been very successful in his business ventures and knows how to make things happen and get things done. He isn't even in the office yet and he has already saved 1000 jobs from going to Mexico and is working on keeping more here. Under Obama we have less manufacturing jobs today than when he took office but Obama's press secretary Josh Earnest claims that 805,000 jobs have been saved by Obama.[10] It must be nice to live in a dream world where you can make up your own stats.

If nothing else it will be nice to have a president that loves his nation, is truthful, will actually have a transparent administration and is placing people in his administration whose goals are the same as the peoples, Make America Great Again. He may be the devil we don't know, what candidate isn't, but Hillary is a devil that we do know and we know that we don't want her or her policies under any circumstance.

Trump stated he wants to rebuild our military and have a military that will be a force that the rest of the world won't want to mess with. Today he chose General James Mattis as Secretary of Defense. He will be a no nonsense leader. His pick for Health and Human Services, Representative Tom Price, has been working on getting rid of Obamacare since its inception.

We should give him the opportunity to perform just as the Democrats said we had to do with Obama. He never did. Of course he had never done anything in his life so that is no surprise. Trump has accomplished things and has been successful. We will be eagerly waiting to see what he will do, at least those of us that aren't snowflakes and not in counseling.

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  #80 

"After terrorist attack I've learned the Left's more scared of Trump than ISIS"

The College Fix is reporting that Ohio State student, named Mackenzie called into the Hannity show and said:

"After this terrorist attack I've truly learned that the left is more scared of conservatism and Trump and Republicans than they are of ISIS and terrorists. Because after this terror attack I haven't heard anything about, you know, 'We're praying for the victims' or this and that. I've heard things about how we need to understand Islam, the vibrant Somali community we have here, how we need to embrace them even though this is the third attack by a Somali in the last year here in Columbus, and all this stuff about, you know, Muslim sensitivity."

"That's all they care about, and they are more scared of the Right and Trump than they are of this terrorist attack that just happened on our campus. It's sickening to me because I feel like they are gambling with my life in order to reach this multiculturalism lie that they worship in all of my classes -- and it's crazy."

Compare that with the hysterical reaction on campus after Trump was elected.

Mackenzie continued:

"After the election, my professors went crazy. I remember calling my mom and saying 'You would think Hitler just got elected and massacred half the country.' It was ridiculous. Trump was called a Nazi, a rapist, a white supremacist -- one of my professors actually said we should be terrified because Mike Pence believes women don't have the right to exist, or deserve to exist is actually what she said. People were crying, my classes were canceled, massive protests on campus -- emails from professors about staying strong and how we are all going to lose our rights but it's going to be OK. And it was crazy. I just couldn't believe it."

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  #81 

Anti-Trump forces are planning an "all out" legal assault on the Electoral College (lawsuits in 29 states)

Law Newz is reporting that anti-Trump forces are apparently planning an all out legal assault on the Electoral College in a last ditch effort to keep Donald Trump from taking office in the White House. The plan? To file legal action in all 29 states which have laws that prohibit electors from "voting their conscience." In other words, laws that prevent electors from going against the state's popular vote.

The inside scoop on what is being planned:

Leaders of the effort, mainly Democrats, have plans to challenge laws in the 29 states that force electors to support their party's candidate. Those laws have never been tested, leaving some constitutional experts to argue they're in conflict with the founders' intention to establish a body that can evaluate the fitness of candidates for office and vote accordingly.

They'd still have to get 37 Republican electors to turn against Trump to have an impact on the election outcome. That's going to be a tough task especially because there have been few reports that Republican electors are willing to abandon their party to vote against Trump. Sources said they will also have a coalition of lawyers that will be ready to defend (for free) anyone who votes in opposition to their party's candidate when then the Electoral College meets on December 19.

Last week, Lawrence Lessig, a well-known professor of law at Harvard University and a political activist, penned an opinion piece in The Washington Post encouraging electors to cast their votes for Clinton despite Trump winning more votes in the Electoral College. His theory is that, while it has never been tested like this, the Electoral College is a "safety valve" that is intended "to confirm -- or not -- the people's choice.

Other legal scholars believe that if the Electoral College abandons Trump, it may go against the rule of law. "Turning the electors into mighty platonic guardians doesn't seem to be the right way to go," UC Irvine Law Professor Rick Hasen wrote in a Friday blog post.

"So yes, I'd love to get rid of the Electoral College," he wrote. "But not ignore it in an election where everyone agreed it was the set of rules to use." will follow this legal effort closely, and update you on this website.

The "will of The People" means nothing to these left-wingers.

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  #82 

The Left continues to self-destruct


Michael Brown (WND) says rather than learn some valuable lessons from the resounding electoral victory of Donald Trump and the Republican Party, it appears that the Left is lurching further leftward, thereby paving the way to its own demise.

Here are some recent examples.

The Washington Examiner claims that, according to inside sources, "CNN is taking an increasingly negative approach toward its coverage of President-elect Trump, causing at least some tension within the network."

Another inside source told the Examiner that, "CNN has always pledged to hold Trump accountable, and that's what we should be doing." However, "Since the election, CNN has out MSNBCed MSNBC," meaning, become even more liberal than the very liberal MSNBC. "In the long term," the source said, "that's a dangerous place to be."

Does CNN not recognize that its reputation for being the Clinton News Network has greatly damaged its credibility? Does the network not understand that appearing to be even more blatantly biased against the president-elect will do far more harm than good?

Perhaps even worse is a major article in the Washington Post, claiming (in the words of the Post's executive editor, Marty Baron) that a "Russian propaganda effort helped spread fake news during election," according to "independent researchers." (These "independent researchers" are behind the anonymous PropOrNot website, which was the primary source of the attempted exposé.)

According to Ben Norton and Glenn Greenwald, writing on Nov. 26, "This Post report was one of the most widely circulated political news articles on social media over the last 48 hours, with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of U.S. journalists and pundits with large platforms hailing it as an earth-shattering exposé. It was the most-read piece on the entire Post website on Friday after it was published."

And what, exactly, did this article claim? (Remember that we're talking about the Washington Post, not the National Enquirer.) Norton and Greenwald explain that, "The group's list of Russian disinformation outlets includes WikiLeaks and the Drudge Report, as well as Clinton-critical left-wing websites such as Truthout, Black Agenda Report, Truthdig, and Naked Capitalism, as well as libertarian venues such as and the Ron Paul Institute."

So, it is the evil and ubiquitous Russian Empire that is fueling the right-wing fires of Drudge Report (which, of course, is simply a news aggregator rather than a news manufacturer) along with the libertarian fires of the Ron Paul Institute. Who knew?

So much for the liberal media being careful not to discredit itself in the aftermath of its election misreporting, because of which one can only wonder how long the New York Times' slightly introspective mea culpa will last and how deep it will go.

The Times did, though, make a strong appeal for the Democrats to put their emphasis back on the economy rather than on leftist agenda items. But have the Democrats learned their lesson? Their consideration of Rep. Keith Ellison for party chairman indicates that they are not getting the message, either.

As noted by Fred Lucas on the Stream, "The leading candidate to be the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., has said he wants the Democratic Party to come out against the Second Amendment, compared the 9/11 attacks to the Nazi Reichstag fire, and was affiliated with the controversial Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam."

Lucas also points out that Ellison "once said eventual nominee Hillary Clinton would have to prove she's not a Republican to get his support." Seriously?

Do the Democrats really think that identifying a radical-left Muslim as their party chairman will help them regain political power in America? Have they learned nothing from the Trump victory?

To give just one more example of the left's failure to put its finger on the pulse of America, consider ESPN's response to the death of Fidel Castro.

But first, to put this in context, note that, in the month of October alone, ESPN lost 621,000 subscribers, which is a staggering number. And while it is impossible to state with certainty that some of this loss was due to ESPN's liberal political views (baseball legend Curt Schilling accused ESPN of being "bigoted and intolerant" toward conservatives like himself), it is interesting to note that in January 2016, an ESPN memo advised that "we should refrain from political editorializing, personal attacks or 'drive-by' comments regarding the candidates and their campaigns (including but not limited to on platforms such as Twitter or other social media)."

How, then, did ESPN report the death of the Cuban dictator? It praised him for his sporting accomplishments, with the headline of the 1,100 word article reading, "Fidel Castro, 90, fused sports into Cuba's national identity."

To be fair, the extended obituary did speak candidly (albeit non-condemningly) of Castro's conflicts with America and did mention the negative effects of some of his economic policies.

But rather than devote even one syllable to the many atrocities committed by Castro, ESPN chose to celebrate Cuba's athletic prowess, noting, "Soon after coming to power, Castro recognized the potential benefits of national excellence in athletics, and Cuba eventually became one of the strongest sporting nations in the world -- despite a population only slightly greater than New York City's."

Yes, EPSN reminds us, "At the Olympics, Castro's athletes were at their best," closing the article with a recent (and representative) quote from Castro, one meant to present his defiance of America in a positive light. What fight he had, to the end!

In light of this small but representative sampling, I have a word of free advice for the "progressive" left wing, including CNN, the Washington Post, the Democratic Party and ESPN: Just as communism rose and fell, you, too, will go into extended decline unless you learn from the error of your ways and make a course correction.

For the media, that means reporting the news rather than manufacturing the news and striving for unbiased, honest reporting. For the Democrats, that means stepping back from radical leftist causes. For ESPN, it means staying out of politics and being a network devoted entirely to sports.

Will the Left learn? I do hope so, but I'm not holding my breath.

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  #83 

Angela Davis urges progressives to "accelerate our activism"


Matk Tapson (TruthRevolt) is reporting that in an article late last week at the Chicago Readerthat borders on the hagiographic, Maya Dukmasova reports on a speech on the election aftermath given by "legendary" Marxist, feminist, racialist, radical academic Angela Davis at the University of Chicago's Rockefeller Chapel.

"Seventy-two-year-old Davis looked regal," Dukmasova gushed, "her gray-gold Afro in a halo around her face, her gap-toothed smile and lilting voice as captivating as it was 50 years ago." Dukmosava wrote disingenuously that Davis "was depicted in the media as a dangerous terrorist" back in the day, when Davis was on the FBI's most wanted list.

Um, Davis wasn't just "depicted" as a dangerous terrorist by the media -- she was a dangerous terrorist. To read more about Davis' radical history, check out her profile here at the Freedom Center's Discover the Networks resource site.

Dukmosava breathlessly described the audience of approximately 1,600 people as "a racially diverse who's who of progressive and radical Chicago -- including Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis, and the leadership of Black Lives Matter Chicago, Black Youth Project 100, Assata's Daughters, and the #LetUsBreathe Collective. Two of Sandra Bland's sisters were there. John Cusack sat in a front pew with black baseball cap pulled low." Oooh, a celebrity!

Davis urged the audience to move beyond mourning and accelerate grassroots political organizing in response to the election of Donald Trump: "How do we begin to recover from this shock? By experiencing and building and rebuilding and consolidating community," she said. "Community is the answer" -- because it takes a village to tear down the capitalist heteropatriarchy, don't you know.

In her presentation, Davis praised Chicago as one of her "political homes," an "antiracist, anticapitalist, feminist political community." She warned that the election showed we can't underestimate "the extent of the ideological influences of racism, of islamophobia, anti-Semitism, heteropatriarchy, xenophobia," and that Americans should "reflect on the extent to which we are living with the relics and ghosts of slavery."

Though she supported Hillary Clinton's campaign, Davis criticized the "outmoded notion of feminism that revolved around white, middle-class, and bourgeois women." And though she praised socialist candidate Bernie Sanders for making his critique of capitalism public center stage, she also criticized him for needing "a crash course on intersectionality," a popular feminist concept that refers to the intersection of the various feminist and racial identity groups.

Davis also praised the Black Lives Matter movement and called for free health care, free education, and the abolition of prisons and police ("because we need new notions of security. Why do we accept forms of security that are fundamentally grounded in violence?" she demanded as the audience exploded in applause). She emphasized civil disobedience, called for every city to be a sanctuary city for immigrants, and named the mythical Islamophobia as "the most salient form of global racism today."

Following the lecture, the majority of questions posed to Davis were about what to do in the the face of a Trump presidency, according to Dukmasova. Davis didn't claim to have all the answers. "Whatever we are already doing, we need to do more," said Davis. "We need to accelerate our activism."

Trump plans to ban government workers from becoming lobbyists after their government service.

Perhaps he should ban terrorists from becoming college professors after they stop blowing stuff up and killing 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  #84 

The Democratic party doubles down on hard-Left ideology


S. Noble (IndependentSentinel) says George Soros and other deep-pocketed leftist members of Democracy Alliance are meeting this weekend with far-left "liberals" including Elizabeth Warren, Keith Ellison and Bernie Sanders. Democrats are losing elections because of their "progressive" -- aka hard-left -- policies, but it doesn't appear that George Soros, the Hungarian-born globalist-Socialist, is going to let them move back towards the center.

Calling leftists "liberals" does a disservice to true "liberals," but nonetheless the paradoxical use of language continues by progressives and others who don't want to call them out honestly. "Liberal," as a word, is a subterfuge for "leftist".

Soros' group, Democracy Alliance, has orchestrated a weekend-long retreat at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, inviting the leaders who represent the future of the party. They will discuss keeping Donald Trump from fulfilling any of his agenda in the most important first 100 days of his presidency.

They will map out interventions at local and state levels. Soros and his colleagues on the hard-left are behind instigating most of the violent riots/protests currently underway in at least 17 of our cities. Those will undoubtedly continue.

Rep. Seth Moulton (D., Mass.) said Thursday that Americans have sent Democrats a "clear message" that they need to change after a recent spate of "horrific" elections.

Will they go further left or right?

They appear to be doubling down on left. Keith Ellison, a radical black-Muslim congressman who has taken money from front groups for the Muslim Brotherhood, is poised to take over the DNC. He's far-left in his ideology and once worked for the anti-white, anti-Semitic, anti-law enforcement hater Louis Farrakhan.

While Ellison was a student at the University of Minnesota Law School, he wrote several articles for the Minnesota Daily that defended Farrakhan, saying that he is not anti-Semitic, according to The Washington Post. One of these articles was dug up during Ellison's congressional campaign in 2006. It was also revealed that Ellison had worked with the Nation of Islam for about 18 months and had helped Farrakhan organize the 1995 Million Man March in Washington.

Rep. Moulton is the one who was able to delay Nancy Pelosi's anointing as party leader in the House to give Democrats time to review the situation though he still sings her praises.

"What I am saying is that we need to have a serious discussion within our party, because the last few elections have been horrific," he said. "The last three or four elections in the House have been terrible. We lost the White House and the Senate … We only have 16 governorships across the country, and we don't have a majority of the state legislatures, so the American people have sent a clear message to us Democrats that the status quo is not acceptable."

Moulton said Pelosi has done "extraordinary" things for the Democratic Party, but he still wanted a plan for the future.

"What I'm saying is we ought to have several different competing views and lay out a plan for the future, the best strategy to carry our caucus and our party forward," he said. "If Nancy Pelosi has the best strategy, then we should vote for her, but let's hear some competing views."

The plan is the Democrat Party platform which reads like something one would see in Venezuela.

No one has yet come forward to challenge Pelosi.

There is no hard-left stance that Pelosi won't accept, and if she continues as House minority leader, there is no hope for the party.

In the Senate, New York hack Chuck Schumer will be the minority leader. Apparently, there is no left-wing notion he won't accept. Schumer is a Jew and he has said he would accept Keith Ellison as DNC chair.

Ellison has called Israel an apartheid state, has taken donations from CAIR and other Islamic radicals, and has been a harsh critic of the State of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. Schumer said Ellison has supported the Democratic Party's pro-Israel policy and convinced others to support the platform.

Schumer is also "all in" on Bernie Sanders.

Democrats want Bernie's votes no matter how hard-left they have to go.

Rep. Moulton wants the party to listen to the people of the United States to win elections but this is the party that has readily accepted George Soros and his money and who pushed out so-called Blue Dogs. Molten might want a serious discussion but the only serious discussion going on is at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel with their leader George Soros.

This would seem counterintuitive but the hard-left has many of the youth, the Democrat Party, the media, the arts, the universities, and they are so close to their goal. Everyone, including the right, will continue to have their paradoxical reaction to the misnomer "liberal" and they will continue to think they are fighting "liberals."

I can tell you right now, the Democratic Party will move even further to the left.

Emotion, not logic, rules these people and their Marxist agenda is more important to them than life itself.

They were so close with Hillary -- so close -- and now, with the election of Donald Trump, it's all gone.

They can't accept 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  #85 

Three battlefield tactics for fighting Soros' revolution


Scott Lively (WND) says the hard left across the globe is gearing up for a campaign of international "resistance" to the worldwide populist/nationalist/conservative revolution represented by Brexit and the election of Donald Trump. It has already started in some U.S. cities in the form of riots, but those actions and the planned mega-protest of the Trump inauguration on Jan. 20 are only to prime the pump for a much larger and more sophisticated counter-revolution. The key leaders and financiers of the Left have just met with Chief Puppetmaster George Soros behind closed doors to plan the implementation of the American version of his "Color Revolutions," which have been successful at taking down the governments of several foreign countries.

Tellingly, given the association of the color with the LGBT movement and agenda, it has already been designated the "Purple Revolution."

The new battlefield

I more-or-less predicted the Trump candidacy back in 2009.

And in May 2016 I predicted Mr. Trump's election if Christians could broaden our "values voter" mentality to embrace populist issues (which we did in historic numbers).

I also more-or-less predicted the Purple Revolution in my October 2016 columns "The Borking of Donald Trump" Part 1 and Part 2.

Now I'd like to make a few predictions about the Purple Revolution before offering my suggestions for how to counter it.

First, the Leftist campaign will have both domestic and global components. I will address the global components in a future article, but discuss the domestic component here. That domestic campaign will be multifaceted and involve:

1. An army of faceless anarchists engaged in civil disobedience and property destruction on an "anti-fascism" theme. (Imagine the explosion of street violence in the late 1960s but employing "social justice" rather than anti-war rhetoric -- like #BlackLivesMatter but bigger and broader). This is designed to terrorize the public but also to deliberately provoke police reactions that can be documented on film and edited to misrepresent the police as Brownshirt-style fascists.

2. A coordinated propaganda campaign by all the usual suspects on the Left in media, academia, Hollywood and the nonprofit/foundations sector, branding the Trump administration as a fascist regime akin to the Third Reich. This will build slowly but inexorably as the Left gathers and weaves together its case like a crooked prosecutor in the courtroom of international opinion.

3. Obstruction of conservative policy through guerrilla litigation tactics by groups such as the Center for Constitutional Rights and Southern Poverty Law Center, and their silent partners in the federal judiciary.

How to beat the Left at their own game

In my previous column, I explained how the delusional Left is entirely defined and driven by its social justice narrative and follows long-standing formulas for implementing it. This makes them highly predictable and thus as vulnerable as British Redcoats at the hands of the American Colonists -- IF we're willing to use guerrilla tactics. I suggest three tactics that correspond to the three aforementioned threats:

1. Defeat the social justice narrative by exposing and ridiculing the criminal conduct, dirty tricks and hypocrisy of the street activists. The model is James O'Keefe's brilliant Project Veritas, which could easily spawn 10,000 copycats overnight. All it takes is a conservative truth-seeker with some spare time, a button-hole camera and the ability to play the role of a liberal (just act stoned). Every leftist demonstration from this day forward should be infiltrated by conservative activists either individually or in small groups gathering intelligence and posting it online. Every bus convoy of Soros goons should be filmed and exposed. Every professional street agitator should be identified and cataloged online. Every evidence of criminal conduct should be reported to the police in an attachment to an anonymous open letter to the authorities in the appropriate jurisdiction.

2. The traditional media is the weak link and key linchpin of the leftist institutional coalition. Now is the time for a boycott of the companies that advertise in the leftist print media. They're already struggling to survive. A populist campaign to punish companies that support leftist rags such as the Washington Post and the New York Times could be highly effective. These two leviathans might need a seasoned boycott group like the American Family Association (AFA) to force a change, but it wouldn't take a very large group (tea party anyone?) to run a boycott of a local lying newspaper until it agrees to formally require ideological balance in its newsroom and editorial board subject to review by a citizens watchdog committee. Every media misrepresentation should earn a picket in front of its most vulnerable advertisers.

3. If President Trump keeps his promise to appoint constitutional originalists to the Supreme Court, the leftist litigation strategy will eventually run into a brick wall in years to come, but in the short term, the best way to deal with groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center is mockery. Their goal is to strike fear into anyone who opposes the leftist agenda, but they really are just a bunch of self-important boobs that imagine Nazis and the KKK lurking behind every flower pot. The SPLC should be exposed as the laughingstock of the far left, especially to the law enforcement community on which they rely for so much of their public credibility. I'd also love to see a comic book about the buffoonery of the SPLC for distribution at the same public schools that receive SPLC hate propaganda every year.

Turnabout is fair play, the saying goes, and the leftist institutions that have been running and ruining the country should get a taste of the tactics their own activists perfected in the 1960s to force social change and get their people into the seats of power. It's time for the newly awakened populists to read a few books like Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" and employ some of those methods against the institutional left, such as the universities, the foundations and the public employee unions.

What beats the George Soros narrative-driven leftist culture-war machine? The simple truth, boldly proclaimed, by people not afraid of name-calling by the Leftist bullies they're exposing.

We needed Donald Trump to serve as a rallying point for American patriots, but we don't need him to single-handedly drain the swamp. We can do a large part of that work for ourselves, and we should all roll up our sleeves and start today.

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  #86 

Activists and anarchists plan "non-peaceful" action at Trump's inauguration

Vocativ is reporting that when Donald Trump is sworn in as president on January 20, there will protesters with signs and people marching in opposition to the newly elected president. But others are planning "direct action" activism that will leave Washington D.C. in "total paralysis," according to an organizer of activists and anarchists who plan to create chaos across the capitol city in an attempt to disrupt the inauguration and mobilize people in the growing movement against Trump.

Since Trump's election, a movement called DisruptJ20 has taken off online among activist groups, anarchists, and the anti-facist movement. The goal is to organize the groups and ideologies under a shared goal: disrupting Washington D.C. on inauguration day in protest of Trump's presidency in any way they can.

"We're not just organizing some boring-ass march," one of the organizers, Legba Carrefour, told Vocativ. "We want direct action."

The goal, he said, is to simply create a disruption and "build on an evolving movement."

Carrefour, who has been involved in "radical activism" for about 20 years, said he expects the activists to do things similar to what activists in the Black Lives Matter movement have done like block highways around the city, as well as other "direct action" that may or may not involve violence or destruction. To properly define "direct action" he pointed Vocativ to a Wikipedia page, that describes it as "when a group takes an action which is intended to reveal an existing problem, highlight an alternative, or demonstrate a possible solution to a social issue. This can include nonviolent and less often violent activities which target persons, groups, or property deemed offensive to the direct action participants."

You can see this developing over social media. They want to cow Trump into not being able to hold a public ceremony outdoors because of potential threat.

It seems to me that the organizers can be and should be charged with a crime.

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  #87 

The Left's moronic, infantile response to election


Erik Rush (WND) says one of the most important takeaways from the recent election which resulted in real estate mogul Donald Trump becoming president-elect did not coalesce until after Trump was declared the winner. While the election cycle certainly gave rise to more than its share of subterfuge and illegal shenanigans (they don't sound quite so threatening when you call them "shenanigans"), it has been the post-election reaction on the part of Hillary Clinton supporters and the political left in general that is most noteworthy.

I dearly hope that all of those who voted for Donald Trump for the reasons we've been discussing throughout the campaign have taken note of the truly toxic, juvenile response the left has offered to his election. Demands for the electoral college to change its vote as though the result was a bad call at a Little League game, fake news stories about Trump's potential Cabinet picks and the possibility of a radical Muslim being tapped for the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee are among the inane institutional responses, but some of the individual rejoinders have actually been rather frightening.

For example, it is nearly incomprehensible that certain prominent entertainers who are in the public eye continually and whose audiences often include young people and children, opted to the use of some of the most odious and disempowering verbiage to accentuate their displeasure with Trump's election. There's certainly a place for irreverence in entertainment, but the tsunami of profanity, threats of suicide and portends of imminent doom issued publicly by dozens of Hollywood celebrities and music industry icons evidenced not only a childish worldview, but fundamentally infantile mental processes that ought not be envied nor emulated by any thinking individual.

The thousands of inarticulate babies who took to the streets in some American cities when Clinton's loss became apparent may seem par for the course to those familiar with the character of the left, but to many of the millions who voted for Trump for practical rather than political reasons, those demonstrations and the moronic rhetoric of dejected, infantile, left-wing brats should be a wake-up call regarding the decidedly base, puerile level at which these people operate.

Then, there is the fact that mobs of dejected, infantile, left-wing brats seldom do much of their own accord. Their passion is usually ginned-up by some group of individuals or organization with an agenda, and this has been no different.

Among the pre-election WikiLeaks high-level document dumps were emails that revealed strategies involving the left-wing organization This outfit is a major vehicle for the Hungarian-born billionaire and former Nazi collaborator George Soros, who has enjoyed a free hand in his subversive attempts to redesign America in his oligarchical, collectivist image. has made no bones about its efforts to foment unrest in the wake of Trump's election. Last Wednesday, the organization issued a press release announcing the multi-city demonstrations. "The gatherings -- organized by and allies -- will affirm a continued rejection of Donald Trump's bigotry, xenophobia, Islamophobia and misogyny and demonstrate our resolve to fight together for the America we still believe is possible," the statement read in part.

Utterly baseless charges aside, at this point it should be clear that the America these reprobates still believe is possible -- a morally ambivalent, Balkanized, insolvent, neutered America -- is only the desire of a miniscule faction of deviants, George Soros and his ilk, Beltway elites and their corps of celebrity morons.

One aspect of the post-election controversy has been rather gratifying, and I hope that this also is not lost on those Trump voters who are anxious about the nation getting its bearings as a new administration takes power. I refer to the many conversations that concerned citizens are now having on social media, talk radio, blogs and amongst themselves regarding issues that are symptomatic of the reasons they voted for Trump in the first place. These go beyond what were major talking points during the campaigning, but which are all-important as they relate to the corruption, greed and power-brokering that's been the hallmark of our government for too long.

Over the past few days, I've heard more questions such as these from average Americans than I've heard over the course of several years. Although I am paraphrasing, it doesn't get any more germane than this when one considers the sort of promises Donald Trump made as a candidate:

Why, for example, do we have a Hungarian-born former Nazi collaborator who, naturalized citizen or not, has enjoyed a free hand in his subversive attempts to redesign America in his oligarchical, collectivist image?

By extension, why do we allow the openly subversive to freely act to the detriment of constitutional authority on the basis of perverted interpretations of the First Amendment when we should be prosecuting, imprisoning and in some cases deporting such entities?

Why do we have expansionist federal agencies that have increasingly and unilaterally exercised powers not bestowed upon them by the Constitution, such as the seizure of property and assets, and the unlawful imprisonment of American citizens?

Why do we allow incestuous and detrimental relationships to exist between certain federal agencies and those in the private sector, such as key industries and banking, or allow members of Congress to engage in activities like insider trading, which would land the rest of us in prison?

Wouldn't now be a very good time to consider an investigation of the current administration given the Cyclopean heap of evidence that its principals committed not only treason, but war crimes and crimes against humanity?

These questions and others are the ones we should be asking of the nascent Trump administration going forward, rather than engaging in echo chamber discussions around what the new president might do about jobs, trade and national security.

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  #88 

How to water-cannon the delusional Left


Scott Lively (WND) says the rioting of leftist street activists in response to the election of Donald Trump is entirely predictable and will quickly morph into a very large and highly destructive international "resistance" movement if is not effectively countered. To respond appropriately, we must first understand that the political left is delusional and implacable, but easily defeatable if we act quickly and don't waste our time trying to bargain or compromise with them.

The top tier of the leftist elite is not populated by the self-righteous know-it-alls of academia, nor the Stalinist autocrats of the Democratic Party, nor the utopianist manipulators of the foundations and "nonprofit" sector: It is ruled by the story-tellers and dream-weavers of Hollywood. That is because the core of the Cultural Marxist worldview -- what defines its purpose and drives its zealots -- is "The Narrative." According to this narrative, the world is enslaved to an ancient and deep-rooted system of institutional bigotry of various forms to which the masses are largely blind, but thankfully there exists a growing network of enlightened social justice warriors. It is the role and duty of these brave and selfless champions of the oppressed to replace the evil established order with an egalitarian socialist utopia only they are privileged to envision and implement. The urgency of this need, and righteousness of their goal, justifies whatever means are necessary to achieve it.

This is roughly the same narrative introduced by Karl Marx in the 19th century, refined by the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism in the 1920s and '30s and embraced with religious fervor by American liberals since the 1960s. It is what drives every aspect of the leftist political agenda.

If you've ever tried to debate a true-believer liberal on any aspect of that agenda, you know that facts, reason and logic are frustratingly unpersuasive. That's because their "reality" is the closed universe of the social justice narrative. Like the schizophrenic, the leftist ideologue interprets all facts, reason and logic as confirmation of their delusion or disregards them as if they don't exist.

However, while the fantasy of the schizophrenic is uniquely personal to him, the leftist narrative is a common, shared mass-delusion that is continually being both self and mutually reinforced. It is Hitler's "Big Lie" phenomenon on a massive scale, and its impact on the society as a whole is dramatically compounded by mutual reinforcement across multiple spheres of social influence.

For example, when Donald Trump recommenced a temporary moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries conditional on proper vetting procedures for applicants, the Left (some disingenuously, some delusionally) instantly began misrepresenting that as a "ban on Muslims." In a truth-oriented culture that claim would have been quickly dismissed, but in our leftist-dominated culture the lie was then continually repeated by leftist media organs, establishment Democrats and Republicans, leftist college professors and street-activist organizations. The chorus of multiple false witnesses created a "false reality" in the general public that persists to this day. It is one of many such misrepresentations fueling the hysterical moral outrage and street violence of the anti-Trump rioters whose narrative-driven sense of purpose and identity blinds them to actual reality.

I have also been and am currently a victim of the leftist "narrative." A subplot of it holds that all disapproval of homosexuality leads inevitably to hatred, violence and murder of homosexuals. It is a paranoid delusion within a delusion, but when the Ugandan government put forward a bill proposing severe criminal penalties for homosexuality and pederasty following my visit there in 2009, and later, David Kato, a leader of Ugandan's "gay" movement was murdered in his home, the global leftist media named me as the evil mastermind of a campaign of genocide against homosexuals. It never mattered to them that I opposed the Ugandan bill as written from the beginning and had advocated for rehabilitation and prevention during my visit. Nor did they care that the confessed and convicted murderer of David Kato was his own "gay" lover whom he had bailed out of jail to be his live-in boyfriend. All that mattered was the narrative -- and so the whole truth was suppressed in favor of only those facts that fit the false reality.

I've endured four years of intensive litigation charging me with "Crimes Against Humanity" as a direct consequence of the leftist commitment to their narrative. As U.S. president, Donald Trump, and what's left of normal society in this nation, is facing (at least) four years of similar leftist hatred and delusion but on a much, much larger scale.

To paraphrase a famous Hollywood movie, The Terminator, "That army of social justice warriors is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear! And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!" The hard Left is the terminator of the cultural/political sphere. It's mission is conquest, supremacy and elimination of Judeo-Christian civilization. Any attempt at compromise with it is just perceived as weakness to exploit. In the end either the truth or the leftist narrative will prevail.

It's highly significant that despite its utopian rhetoric, Hollywood's vision of the future, as portrayed in nearly every forward-looking film, is so dark and dystopian. Subconsciously, the leftist writers, actors and directors know that their worldview produces chaos and disaster, but their fanatical loyalty to the social justice narrative blinds them to the truth, even at the top of the Marxist food chain.


The only effective response to the leftist narrative is the continual reaffirmation of the plain truth without apology or compromise. No spin. No waffling. No pandering to political correctness, I believe this plainspoken approach on policy matters by Donald Trump was by far the single most important factor in his victory over the unified leftist lie-machine. It will define him as one of the greatest American presidents if he continues on that track. He and we must resist the pressure of the GOP establishment and the "experts" on cultural and political matters to trade plainly spoken truth for manipulative "messaging" and public-relations strategies, no matter how well-intentioned.

Trump's campaign exposed the whole network of hard leftists across the entire culture and every sphere of public influence, including the media. They knew that if Hillary won, they would be vindicated by the elevation of their narrative to the status of officially accepted "reality," allowing them to lie and spin forever after with impunity. So they came out of hiding, thinking a Clinton presidency was inevitable. Thus, Trump's victory has made the job of "draining the swamp" all the easier. It is now incumbent upon all of us who love truth and the former truth-based culture we once enjoyed as a nation to work quickly and vigorously to take back all of the seats of power, and use them probatively to affirm truth, like water cannons dousing street anarchists' fires. If one truth-teller rises up for every leftist liar, their "uprising" will quickly 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  #89 

Soros prepares for war on Trump


Christian Datoc (DailyCaller) is reporting that George Soros, Tom Steyer and their fellow liberal mega-donors are currently readying the post-Hillary Clinton Democratic party to oppose President-Elect Donald Trump.

According to Politico, Soros Steyer and other key members of the so-called "Democracy Alliance" met in Washington, DC at the Mandarin Oriental hotel on Sunday for the first day of the group's three-day investment conference.

The Democracy Alliance has funneled upwards of $500 million toward liberal activist groups and candidates since Soros co-founded the group in 2005.

DA requires all members -- which in 2016 includes more than 100 "finance titans" -- to donate at least $200,000 a year to approved activist groups.

But the issues the DA and DNC traditionally use to mobilize liberal voters -- a la climate change -- failed to pull white, working class support away from Trump and the GOP, which as one Democrat operative put, should "[call] into question… the DA itself."

Therefore, at this year's meeting, Soros and other liberal leaders -- including Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren and Keith Ellison -- will discuss opposing Trump's plan for his first 100 days in office, a plan the DA called "a terrifying assault on Barack Obama's achievements, and our progressive vision for an equitable and just nation."

Trump's plan consists of seven points and several legislative initiatives centered on limiting the power of the federal government empowering the American working class.

  1. A Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress
  2. A hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health)
  3. A requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated
  4. A five year ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service
  5. A lifetime ban on the White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government
  6. A complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections
  7. Cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America's water and environmental infrastructure

I remember when Rush Limbaugh said in 2009, that he hoped Obama would fail -- referring to Obama's progressive agenda -- the Left went crazy.

But here are those same people -- not just hoping Trump will fail -- but raising money to ensure Trump will fail by openly and actively planning to wage war against Trump and his agenda.

If the Left didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

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  #90 

The Left throws itself a pity party


Scott Greer (DailyCaller) says Donald Trump's shocking victory Tuesday night sent leftists throughout the world into uncontrollable levels of grief.

America saw this development first hand as Hillary Clinton's "victory" party quickly descended into a sobfest, providing terrific images of smug liberals bawling their eyes out that America was too sexist to vote for Crooked Hillary.

Liberal Twitter users were more than willing to let the world know they were "literally shaking" at the prospect of Trump becoming America's next president.

Campuses hosted "cry ins" throughout the week for their students to express their utter despair and classes were cancelled to help kids cope with such devastation. Protests broke out in cities across the nation to block traffic and exclaim that Trump was not the president of the demonstrator. (Who is their president was left unsaid.)

To let allies know they were safe and not scary Trump supporters, safety pins were adopted as a badge by the distraught.

Leftist journalists threw out self-awareness to pen pieces cataloging their profound sadness and how average Americans should care about that.

Slate took the cake for this kind of journalism Wednesday morning with pieces from pretty much every staffer on how Trump makes their specific identity feel unsafe in America right now. Christina Cauterucci wrote of how Trump made her feel unsafe as a "queer woman." Jamelle Bouie declared white supremacy had won and now felt unsafe as a black man. Mark Joseph Stern wrote he is afraid "for his life" because he is a gay Jew in Trumpland and made the subtle move of bringing up the Holocaust to add to his commentary on Trump's win.

All of these outbursts would have -- and should have -- been greeted with full-blown laughter and mockery if the roles were reversed with Trump supporters. America hates sore losers, so playing that role doesn't win you any favor for your side among the general public, historically speaking. Just imagine cry ins in the age of Jack Kennedy.

But there's a reason for the wailing among the young leftists. As amply pointed out in a groundbreaking study by the sociologists Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning, there's a new moral culture rising in our society that encourages this kind of behavior. Campbell and Manning call this new morality "victimhood culture."

Status and virtue in this moral culture are doled out based on a person's ability to prove that they are a victim. Victimhood is desired rather than avoided, and to have it means you stand at the top of the moral hierarchy. Instead of basing status on the dignity inherent to all Americans or on honor earned by deeds of strength, victimhood is the highest virtue. The worst attribute one can have is privilege, because it means you unfairly lord over those that are oppressed.

Disputes are settled by independent, third party authorities rather than between the actors in conflict. Whoever can lay out the case that they are more victimized based on their identity wins out in these disputes, as we can discern from how college administrators handle controversial speakers by cancelling them to protect the "oppressed."

What we are witnessing in all these tearful protests and hyperbolic columns is an attempt by the aggrieved to persuade the powers that be that Trump cannot be president because that act would damage their sense of security. It makes no sense to discard calm and embrace the nihilism of thinking a Holocaust or a "Second Redemption" (in reference to when white southerners toppled Reconstruction governments) is right around the corner to those who do not buy into victimhood culture.

But to those who do, it makes for a persuasive argument to fortify their resistance to Trump.

The problem with their strategy is that all the relevant authorities have come to terms with a President Trump. The outgoing president had a friendly meeting with his successor this week and is fully committed to handing over the reins of power to The Donald. Hillary Clinton conceded to Trump. The rest of the government and most of America's institutions have also come to terms with Tuesday's results.

There is an effort underway to get the Electoral College to change its votes, but that attempt is likely to fail miserably.

So there is no real authority these "victimized" protesters and journalists can hope to convince to change the results. All the whiny protests and sobbing articles amount to is one giant pity party -- with nothing to gain from it.

Regardless of your opinion of Trump, it is nice for those who love to play the victim card so much to lose so badly. Let's hope victimhood culture gets deflated during Trump's tenure.

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  #91 

And the political Left responds like a child who doesn't get its way

The Soros-paid community organizers must have these people on robo-call.

The gang at the White House were all wearing their pouty-faces:


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  #92 

Harvard Prof encourages "riots in the streets" to block "sociopath" Trump

Jim Hoft (GatewayPundit) is reporting that liberal constitutional law prof Sanford Levinson (currently teaching at Harvard), in a recent Wall Street Journal interview, stated that "some" describe Trump as a "sociopath," and he opined that if Trump's elected, it might be necessary to stage a military coup to take him out.


Fortunately, an American military coup such as that discussed by Levinson would almost surely fail, as law professor Glenn Reynolds has explained in a USA Today essay, and in a longer scholarly article.

Levinson was even more candid in a talk at Harvard on October 21, in which said he said he personally thinks Trump is a "sociopath," and that it would not be legitimate for the "rigged" Electoral College to elect Trump with only 43% of the vote -- and that riots in the streets might be warranted to block Trump from taking office.

Don't believe a Harvard law prof is this radical?

Badger Pundit has excerpted his remarks in this 7-minute video, embedded below. It supplies a stark window into the radical liberal "elite" mindset.

If this guy is a constitutional law professor, you have to wonder what goes on in his classroom. The man is a freaking nut!

Reminds me of another alleged "constitutional law professor" from the University of Chicago.

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  #93 

The Left's impulse to bully is universal


John Hinderaker (Powerline) says it is widely understood that the Left wants to impose censorship on the rest of us, and where it can, it will. The experience of conservative speakers on university campuses is the most obvious proof. But the truth, I think, is worse. It isn't just censorship. The Left wants to bully disagreement out of existence.

Hence the astonishingly long list of acts of political violence and low-level terrorism that have been carried out by members of the Democratic Party against Donald Trump supporters and Republicans in the current election cycle.

In Europe, the Left's eliminationist impulse is most often vented against those who disagree with the policy of mass immigration from non-European countries. A striking example has just occurred in Sweden, where the Sweden Democrats hosted, on Friday, an event at which they awarded a prize -- the European Freedom Award -- to former Czech President Vaclav Klaus. The event took place at Stockholm's renowned Grand Hotel. It prompted a chorus of outrage against the "far Right."

Stockholm's Grand Hotel has issued an unprecedented public apology for hosting an awards ceremony for European right-wing politicians, following a storm of angry protest.

The anti-immigration Sweden Democrats party hired the upmarket hotel, which boasts views over the Royal Palace and Gamla Stan, for its "European Freedom Awards" on Friday evening.

As soon as the news became public, the hotel faced a storm of angry protests on Twitter, with thousands protesting by giving it one-star reviews on its Facebook page. Meanwhile, hotel staff gave anonymous interviews criticising the event, and several customers cancelled event contracts.

So who are the outrageous "far Right" figures that brought about this storm of protest?

On Friday, the hotel was still defending its decision to host the awards, which included speeches by Nigel Farage, the unofficial leader of the campaign to bring Britain out of the European Union…

Brexit won. If Brexit is the knock on Farage, it is a majority view, not a "far Right" fringe position.

…and Jimmie Åkesson, the leader of the Sweden Democrats.

In the 2014 election, the Sweden Democrats won 49 of the 349 seats in the Swedish Riksdag. As of June, the Democrats polled as the most popular party in Sweden.

The award, styled as an "alternative Nobel", was won by the Czech politician Václav Klaus.

Klaus, an economist, is by far the most popular Czech politician since that country became independent. He served as President of the Czech Republic from 2003 to 2013, having been Prime Minister from 1993 to 1998. Klaus's supposed sins include skepticism toward catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (he is right about that, based on the science) and toward the European Union -- a view that he shares with a large and growing number of Europeans.

Nevertheless, the Left's bullying tactics were too much for the Grand Hotel:

In the press release, the hotel's chief executive Pia Djupmark claimed that managers had tried to wriggle out of hosting the event as far back as seven weeks ago, but had been unable to do so due to the contract they had signed.

"One of the most difficult things about all of this is that so many people thought that we didn't understand, that we had no moral compass whatsoever," she said. "Breaking a contract is a big step, and we decided to stick with our tradition of fair-dealing, that a contract should not be broken. In this case, we should have broken it."

The hotel claimed that this was the first time in its near 150-year history that it had made a public comment on any of its guests.

"We have always wanted to be a neutral meeting place that does not judge our guests or their opinions and use that to decide whether they are welcome or not," it said. "At the same time, there is a limit."

Heh. The limit is reached, apparently, when you disagree with Europe's left-wing elites, regardless of how widely your views may be shared by the population at large.

Here in the U.S., we are witnessing a populist revolt against bullying liberalism, but what we are seeing here is mild, I suspect, compared with what is in store in Europe. And, of course, when all dissent on what millions see as the most vital issues of the day is barred as "far right," it is inevitable that unsavory elements will be part of the populist uprising. Having sown the wind, Europe's Left will, in all likelihood, reap the whirlwind. If the consequences are not to its liking, it has no one to blame but itself.

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  #94 

The racist Left is openly promoting the killing off of white males

Jim Hoft (GatewayPundit) says this should infuriate any decent American -- white, black, Asian, Hispanic or whatever!

Left-wing ditz Lena Dunham has this posted on her Twitter page:

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  #95 

The second civil war is underway -- Obama and Clinton push toward the ultimate goal -- and by any means


Allan Erickson (WesternJournalism) says the man most effective at inspiring far Left radicals was Saul Alinsky, from Chicago. He taught his community organizers that capitalists and most white people are the enemy. He taught his acolytes to fight dirty, that any means was justified, that because the goal -- communism -- is so beautiful, any useful tactic is acceptable. He essentially declared war on traditional America.

The following statements illustrate the core of Alinsky's approach to community organization, beliefs and tactics personified by people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Both were adoring students.

"One acts decisively only in the conviction that all of the angels are on one side and the devils are on the other."

"Our enemies are always immoral."

"Allow no middle ground. 'Reconciliation' means that when one side gets the power and the other side gets reconciled to it, then we have reconciliation."

"The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength."

"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage."

"The organizer dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community. "

Alinsky went on to tell his disciples they should cut their hair, wear suits and ties, and speak the language of compromise, liberty and equality, all to hide the real motive and the true nature of the struggle: complete destruction of the old order by any means, in order to usher forth the utopian communist state.

And so, after about 60 years of Alinskyite tactics employed throughout most every major institution in the country, roughly half of our people have been "rubbed raw with resentments" while the other half have been bullied into submission, still thinking they can negotiate and compromise and work with radical Democrats, people who view all outsiders as enemies to be destroyed.

Both Obama and Clinton believe they have turned the corner. They believe they can now come right out and state clearly their real beliefs and aspirations. Both have said, for example, that Christians do not have a right to conscience nor do they have First Amendment rights. Both have said Christians must reject opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, and if they do not submit to the new secularism, they cannot participate in this democracy.

However, not satisfied with dominating the legislative and judicial processes in this country, Obama and Clinton now push toward the ultimate goal, by any means.

Thus, all "enemies" (Republicans) are isolated, ridiculed and attacked, mercilessly, with increasing frequency and viciousness. For years, instead of fighting back, aggressively, they have conformed, submissively.

To accelerate "change," Obama and Clinton conspire and employ the following:

  • Paid thugs are deployed, trained instigators, sent to spark violence at rallies for GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump so that the complicit media will characterize Trump supporters as violence-prone knuckle-draggers.
  • Accusations of sexual deviance are leveled daily.
  • Christians are attacked, set up for prosecution, marginalized, ridiculed and silenced.
  • Muslims are used as pawns in the general effort to demoralize, demonize, divide and destroy. Syrian refugees, created by Obama's Iraq policy, are especially convenient pawns.
  • Voter registration includes the dead, illegal aliens, felons, whomever.
  • False accusations of racism proliferate, "rubbing raw" unfound resentments against police, who are targeted for assassination.
  • Even the Justice Department is riddled with "activists," willing to break the law to organize the community.
  • So powerful is the Far Left that even the FBI submits to its authority.
  • Congress? Merely a sideshow, filled with the greedy, the comical, the self-absorbed and "bipartisan" co-conspirators.
  • Anyone with a contrary point of view is attacked, labeled "racist," "sexist," "homophobic," "Islamophobic," you name it.
  • Conservatives are charged and prosecuted for the slightest infraction, but gross violations by Democrats are ignored.
  • It has become such a political mosh pit that there is no longer such a thing as an "outrageous" lie.
  • The corruption runs so deep that Democratic National Committee community organizers justify sabotaging Sen. Bernie Sanders, with Clinton's blessing, then ignoring that political assassination. Sanders smiles, knowing team players get special appointments.

Mayhem by design is the Democrat playbook, taken right out of Alinsky's teachings. They call it a revolution, but it actually amounts to civil war, one they've waged for 60 years. It is civil war because there remains a substantial army of traditionalists who are finally waking up. They are finally realizing the radicalized Democrat Party is the real enemy of freedom, and they are just now starting to fight back.

We are beginning to realize the theory of man-made global warming -- like all radical environmentalism -- has nothing to do with stewardship for the common good. Rather, it is a tool for installing world government and wealth redistribution: all for the purpose of control, control, control -- tyranny.

We are beginning to wake up to the fact gun control has nothing to do with public safety but everything to do with control, control, control -- tyranny.

We are finally realizing that so-called social justice is a fake-out, a distraction, the real purpose being to cause such friction and pain and chaos that people will gladly endorse the strong man promising deliverance.

Finally, majorities must acknowledge Obamacare was nothing short of a planned catastrophe in order to pave the way for full-scale socialized medicine to accomplish central control -- tyranny!

Have we finally faced the fact we are in the midst of the Second Civil War, that one side or the other will prevail? Given the nature of the enemy, will this result in violence on a scale we have never seen? All this is likely, for the Far Left is animated by a religious frenzy, and it will never relent short of complete defeat. It is indeed a War of Leftist Aggression.

With the election of Hillary Clinton, it is likely this Civil War would escalate out of control, something our enemies overseas observe with happy expectation.

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  #96 

The Left in power


David Horowitz (FrontPage) says the seventh volume of the Black Book of the American Left reviews the administrations of three presidents and the transformation of the Democratic Party from a party of the American center into a party of the political left. The magnitude of this change can be measured in the distance Democrats have traveled since the presidency of John F. Kennedy, once a liberal icon. The Kennedy policies -- militant anti-Communism, hawkish defense, a capital gains tax cut and balanced budget -- are now firmly identified with the Republican right. At the same time, Barack Obama's Democrats are committed to the agendas of the Left -- income redistribution, socialized health schemes, and military retreat abroad.

Going into the 2016 elections, the views held by the Democratic leadership on national security were virtually indistinguishable from those of the Progressive Party, whose 1948 presidential campaign behind the candidacy of Henry Wallace defined itself by opposition to American "militarism" and rejection of the Cold War policies, that the Democratic Party was then pursuing against the Communist threat.

A salient but often resisted fact about this era is that progressives supported the Communist enemy in its conflicts with the United States. In other words, progressives worked as apologists, appeasers and enablers on behalf of a global movement openly dedicated to the destruction of their own country. Understanding this mentality is crucial to understanding the progressive political outlook and the movement that followed from it -- specifically, the will to jettison America's allegedly outdated constitutional structures, and to cripple American power -- all in the name of furthering economic equality and social justice.

The 1948 progressives failed to defeat Harry Truman or achieve their foreign policy objectives, and became marginal to the political dramas of the next decade. Then, in the 1960s, a younger generation of progressives created a political movement that described itself as the "New Left." But while New Leftists developed an innovative rhetoric to distance themselves from their Communist forbears, they were in fact mobilized behind the same antiindividualist, anti-capitalist and anti-American agendas as the Communist movement from which they sprang.

As the Sixties progressed, the New Left became more and more overtly radical until, in 1968, activists staged a riot at the Democratic Party convention to destroy the candidacy of Hubert Humphrey over his support for an anti-Communist war. Following the convention debacle and Humphrey's electoral defeat, New Left activists moved from the streets into the ranks of the party. With the support of the Democrats' 1972 presidential candidate, George McGovern, who had begun in his political career in the 1948 Henry Wallace campaign, the New Left radicals were able to take commanding positions in the party's congressional apparatus, and eventually in its national leadership.

As the activists acquired power, their aggressive tactics achieved a series of political victories: the betrayal of the Vietnamese and Cambodians by the "Watergate class" of congressional Democrats who cut off military and economic aid to the anti-Communist regimes; the appeasement of Communist insurgencies in Central America and obstruction of the Reagan administration's anti-Communist policies such as support for the Contras; the betrayal of Iraq and sabotage of the war on terror; the thirty-year assault on the nation's borders; the undermining of public health measures during the AIDS epidemic; the traducing of the civil rights movement and its transformation into a lobby for race-based policies and racial preferences; the subversion of the modern research university and the suborning of its liberal arts divisions into training centers for the Democratic Party and the radical cause; and finally the rise of a campus support movement for Islamists and anti-Semites. These victories -- documented in previous volumes of the present series -- culminated in the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and the institutionalizing of the policies of the Left in government over the next 8 years.

Barack Obama was born, bred and trained in the progressive movement. His mentors were Communists and their progressive successors. On entering the Oval Office, he launched his administration with a global "apology tour," conceding America's "guilt" not only towards the Muslim world, but also towards surviving members of the Soviet bloc in Central America. The signature foreign policies of his administration were retreats from America's battlefronts against Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq; tepid and therefore ineffectual responses to terrorist forces in the Middle East; support for Palestinian terror regimes in the West Bank, Gaza and Egypt, this last under the Muslim Brotherhood; and a major foreign policy effort to bring America's mortal enemy, the Islamic Republic of Iran, into the community of nations, fund its terrorist regime and provide its leaders with a legitimized path to nuclear power.

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

Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #97 
When Prayers were taken out of schools, we lost the covering....

The Devil uses deception to claim power, but it is not too late to be awakened to what is going on and fight back....

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #98 

Where did my America go?


Dan Perkins ( says: I am four years short of having lived for three quarters of a century. I was born just before the bombing of Japan, so I was a first post-war baby. I grew up in the Midwest in the town of Columbus, Ohio, where even today people would not be surprised to see a farm tractor driving down Broad Street.

Growing up, we could go outside and play all day and our parents never had to worry about where we were or if we were safe.  We rarely had to lock the front door of our house during the day, and most of the time, not even at night. We celebrated America. We celebrated the men and women who gave so much in the Second World War to keep us free, and we celebrated our flag and the Republic for which it stood.

In school every day we started with the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. We went to parades on the 4th of July and Veterans Day and watched the men and women who served to protect our country, march in review. We were told that the policemen were our friends and if we were ever in trouble, to try and find a policeman who would help you. Most of the time we did our homework from school, did our chores around the house, and went to church every Sunday.

In school we learned about the history of America and the people who made it great.  Our teachers taught us about the men and women who formed our nation, what they believed, and what was their dream for America.  My generation saw a president assassinated; we saw his murderer killed on live television; and we cried. We watched as his body was taken through the streets of Washington DC and on to Arlington Cemetery.

After Kennedy's death, our government leaders made decisions that changed my country forever.  Lyndon Johnson committed more troops to Vietnam, and young people in America were sent off to the war and died, over 58,000 of them.  Other young people protested the war by burning the American flag and left the country rather than serve.  Some confronted the returning soldiers with distain and abuse.  Lyndon Johnson, while expanding the fighting in the Vietnam War, started a new war here in America. He started the War on Poverty.

This fight on poverty has forever changed the black family, and in many respects, the relationship between blacks and whites in America.  Government handouts are now considered by many to be a right, not something for a short-term need.  Martin Luther King Junior was assassinated, along with Bobby Kennedy.  The nation that had not seen an assassination of a political leader in over 62 years, in a short period of time saw three go down to assassins' bullets. America erupted with violence at the death of these leaders and the violence is still with us today.

Many people began to think that America was wrong and needed to change. There were ever increasing tears in the fabric of the country. Segregation was made illegal, which lead to protests, death and the destruction of property.  America had turned ugly, but I didn't.  I believed that every American, regardless of their race or religion, had the right to be free.  But as I would learn in my advancing years, your freedom, in most cases, came at the expense of somebody else's freedom, or their life.

Political correctness was driven by the intellectual elite around the world, starting with Karl Marx in Russia and the Frankfurt School in Germany in the 1930's.  This elite believed that the state was the great arbiter of right and wrong.  When the war protests broke out in colleges in the 1960's, those students were converted to political correctness by their college professors.

Over the subsequent years and decades, I sat back like millions of Americans and watched what was going on. I didn't give these events much credibility and they didn't get my serious attention. I went to work, raised my four sons, and had a good life with my wife.  I had lived the American dream going from a middle-class family in Columbus, Ohio to a successful businessman.  But with that lack of attention, I lost my country.

Now, towards the twilight of my life, I and many other Americans are desperately trying to atone for our sins of omission.  We didn't take the protesters to heart. We didn't pay attention to changes in the curriculums in our schools. We didn't pay attention when the laws were changed that overturned our values.  We now have a deeply divided country.  For some time we have had a portion of the community who believes that they are right and that anybody who is against them has no right to speak.  They question the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as being outdated, no longer functional in our contemporary society.  We have built a society that has no understanding of its past, and if one has no idea of where he or she came from, how can they know where they are going?

The truth is, it was not the antiwar protesters of the 60's, or the communists, the Nazis or fascists of the 30's who took away our country. The truth is, I let them take it.  I am the one responsible. I'm the one who didn't pay attention to the people I was electing. I didn't follow what our country was doing while trying to be all things to all people. The old hymn sums it up very well, "Lord I was blind, but I could not see."  I find myself wondering if now that I can see, is it too late to save, "my country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty?"

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  #99 

Where Democrats learned the art of racial tribalism


John Perazzo (FrontPage) says Mary Frances Berry has been around, seemingly, forever. Today she is a Board of Directors member of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, a Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania, and a Distinguished Fellow of the American Society for Legal History. But notwithstanding these, and many other, impressive titles, Berry made her most lasting mark as an enthusiastic admirer of Communism who played a key role in transforming the once-noble civil rights movement into an ugly, pathetic racial-grievance industry whose principal objective is to pit whites and blacks against one another from now until the end of time.

In 1977, when Berry was chancellor of the University of Colorado, she accepted President Jimmy Carter's invitation to serve as the Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education. Berry was in the habit, at that time, of carrying Mao Zedong’s Little Red Book in her purse wherever she went, and in 1980 she took a trip to Communist China. When she returned home, Berry publicly urged Americans to respect the Chinese education system for requiring students to "develop what they call socialist consciousness and culture." Somewhat embarrassed by Berry's remarks, President Carter transferred her to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, where she remained a member for the next 24 years -- including 11 years as the Commission's chair.

From the earliest days of her career in government and academia, Berry has routinely denounced what she views as America’s systemic flaws while comparing the nation unfavorably to Communist states. In 1982, for instance, she lamented that the U.S. media’s "massive barrage of propaganda" had rendered black Americans blind to the many virtues of the Soviet Union, including its "safeguards for minorities," its "equality of opportunity," and its "equal provision of social services to its citizens." Further, Berry characterized the 1960s as an era when blacks in America had lived under a perpetual "threat of genocide" that was "roughly comparable" to what Jews faced in Germany under Hitler.

Throughout her years with the Civil Rights Commission, Berry continued to articulate her belief that capitalism is an inherently inequitable economic system that feeds American racism. In a 1991 Journal of American History article, for example, she wrote: "The legal system supports our capitalist economic system. Because capitalism requires inequality, the only real question is who will be the repositories of the inequality. To date, black people have disproportionately been those repositories."

Berry has long viewed America as a nation awash in white racism:

  • "The primary explanation for racially motivated violence against blacks," she said in the 1980s, "has been the need of a segment of the white population to preserve [its] belief in the inferiority of blacks, and to maintain the social and political subordination of an historically outcast group by any means, including violence."
  • In 1985, Berry and a fellow Civil Rights Commission member issued a joint statement saying that "civil rights laws were not passed to give civil rights protection to all Americans," but rather, "out of a recognition that some Americans already had protection because they belong to a favored group," while "others, including blacks, Hispanics and women of all races, did not because they belonged to disfavored groups."
  • On another occasion, Berry describedthe placement of family-planning clinics in inner cities as part of an effort to inflict "genocide" on black people.
  • A strong advocate of racial preferences in employment and education, Berry unapologetically supportsracial quotas as a necessary means of preventing Jews and Asians from occupying too many seats in America's colleges and universities.
  • During the George W. Bush presidency, Berry chargedthat when Bush appointed blacks like Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell to some of the highest positions in his administration, he was merely using them as tokens for the purpose of fooling African Americans into complacency and a false sense of well-being.
  • Demonstrating her devotion to purposeful, tactical race-baiting, Berry in 2010 endorsed the practice of gratuitously smearing conservative Tea Party political activists as racists. "Tainting the Tea Party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats," she said. "There is no evidence that Tea Party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness."

These are the sentiments of a thoroughly corrupt and deceitful individual.

Center for Equal Opportunity chair Linda Chavez, who served for a period of time alongside Berry in the Civil Rights Commission, once wrote: "To describe Mary Frances Berry as a liberal, as she is frequently referred to in the media, is an insult to liberalism and Berry. She is a political radical well outside the mainstream of American politics."

But Chavez wrote those words 12 years ago. Much has changed since then. Berry is no longer outside the mainstream. She is now emblematic of precisely what the Democratic Party has become: a party of rabid tribalists obsessed with identity politics and the promotion of racial hatred in every direction.

Mary Frances Berry was, in so many ugly ways, a woman ahead of her time.

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  #100 

Globalism, Soros, and Charlotte -- now I get it!

Christopher Chantrill (AmericanThinker) says for the last few months I've had a question in my mind: Just what is George Soros up to? Because I could not understand why a great capitalist speculator, a financial operator who makes the Koch Brothers look like altar boys, would be interested in funding a lefty activist group like Black Lives Matter. It didn't compute.

But now I understand. No doubt you readers already figured it out. Alas, I am not so smart.

The light went on when I was reading "Progressivism Goes Global" by John Fonte and John Loo in National Review about the plans of the progressive global governance guys. The key point is articulated in a quote from Anne-Marie Slaughter, the head of policy and planning at the State Department under Hillary Clinton. Her idea is that the "global administrative state would work through the 'coercive power of vertical [government] networks'":

Vertical government networks pierce the shell of state sovereignty by making individual government institutions -- courts, regulatory agencies, or even legislators -- responsible for implementation of rules created by a supranational institution.

Don't you just love that? The globalists get the power, and get to pull the strings behind the national governments, and coerce them into doing their global will.

But first, before the globalists ascend Mt. Olympus, they need to "pierce the shell" and destroy the prestige and the power of the nation state; otherwise the national governments will still have the power to tell the globalist gods to go pound sand. How do the globalists do that?

It's obvious. They divide and conquer. They set the people in each nation state against each other. They divide them up by class, by race, by gender, by tribe: Black Lives Matter; La Raza; Human Rights Campaign, CAIR. With one ring to rule them all.

So that is why George Sauron and all the top-tier foundations are funding groups like Black Lives Matter. That is why the globalists are all in favor of unlimited immigration. The more that the people in America think of themselves as black or white or Hispanic or gay or Muslim rather than American, the easier it is for the global elite to "pierce the shell of state sovereignty" while we are all busy fighting each other.

So far so good. But there is a problem, as the globalists are finding out, to their horror.

The problem with globalism is what to do when things go wrong, as in the Euro, as in Muslim rapists in Europe and no-go areas in Sweden.

In the nation state, when things go wrong, the voters throw the rascals out and elect a new government. They might elect a Roosevelt over a blundering Hoover. Nothing changes, of course, unless they elect a Reagan, for the ruling class is still the ruling class blundering from crisis to crisis; but at least the people have a new leader and new hope.

What happens under global governance when things go wrong? Huh? Appoint a committee?

Exactly. You globalist geniuses didn't think of that, did you?

That is what Enoch Powell meant when he said that the European project could not work because there was no European demos, no European people. You need a "people" when things go wrong, so the polity hangs together rather than separately.

Right now, of course, things are going wrong with the globalist project, and the result is that the people in the various nation states in Europe are rallying to politicians that want to re-establish the powers of the nation state to throw the globalist rascals out. While they still can.

What luck that the globalist project ran off the road so soon. Given another 20 years of Soros-funded identity politics, with Muslim Lives Matter making Black Lives Matter look like a walk in the park, the people of Europe would have split up into squabbling racial and religious identities, and with things going wrong and the failure of the globalist elite there would be no demos to throw the rascals out.

Hello globalists, progressives, and all the ships at sea. The whole point of constitutions and laws and separation of powers and elections to secure the consent of the governed is this. They help stop civil war. The political furniture that you want to "pierce" is the way for the people to check their rulers short of bloody civil war.

It is telling that in the aftermath of the Charlotte Riots, President Obama is burbling about white police officers learning about discrimination, and Hillary Clinton is missing in action. It is Donald Trump that is calling for unity.

Of course. Donald Trump stands for Making America -- the nation state of Americans -- Great Again. Obama and Clinton are globalist progressives. They don't care about unity; they care about divide and conquer.

Now, finally, I get it.

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