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 6 of 10     «   Prev   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   Next   »

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #126 


Charles C. Johnson exposes the anti-Trump community organizer vet who's working for George Soros against @RealDonaldTrump.

Editor's Note: worked with real veterans on this post to expose Perry O'Brian's dishonestyThank you for your service in and out of uniform. 

Organizer Perry O'Brien is a far left radical activist who has a history of fraudulently claiming to represent grassroots organizations.


The conscientious objector (we'll get to that in a moment) with an honorable discharge been all over the media attacking Donald Trump as part of a Soros-funded campaign.

O'Brien lied in an interview with Don Lemon that he was part of a grassroots organization that was "spontaneously" anti-Trump.

In fact O'Brian is involved with the Veterans Progressive Leadership Institute, which is itself affiliated with Beyond the Choir, a Soros-funded astro-turfing organization described on its website thusly.

"Beyond the Choir partners with social justice organizations to craft resonant messaging, plan strategic campaigns, and mobilize larger bases of support. Our name captures the core of our mission: in order to build movements capable of winning real change, we need to do more than just "preach to the choir."

The director of Beyond the Choir is Jonathan Matthew Smucker. Mr. Smucker has a book coming out in January entitled Hegemony How-To: A Roadmap for Radicals.

Smucker is also involved with Story-based Strategy (@Smartmeme) and Wildfire Project (@TheWildFireTeam). The Center for Story-based Strategy is a "national movement-building organization dedicated to harnessing the power of narrative for social change."

The Wildfire Project is, in turn, sponsored by Res Publica, a Soros-funded civic advocacy group.

O'Brien also worked with Chas Davis, a so-called peace activist, who encouraged military officers to desert. 

O'Brien's status as a conscientious objector was extremely rare when he sought the status in 2004 after a tour as a medic -- a tour he described as "like the Peace Corps with guns."

Here's how O'Brien's hometown press described it.

According to Maj. Elizabeth Robbins with the U.S. Army office of public affairs, the number of requests for conscientious-objector status has declined since Sept. 11.

There are two types of conscientious-objector designations: one where you are removed from combat and put in another specialty field; or, as in O'Brien's case, discharged from the service entirely.

In 2001 there were nine approved. Last year there were 31 approved and 29 denied.

The process takes time and leads all the way to the Pentagon, where the final decision is made. Officers carefully check a person's history as far back as high school. Typically he or she will have shown signs either of support or questioning the Army, Robbins said.

Though the Army knows a change of mind is possible while in combat, it's also not common among the ranks. Now new recruits sign a statement saying they are not conscientious objectors. "It's extremely rare," said Robbins. "We're a large army with roughly upwards of a half million (soldiers) on active duty." (Justin Ellis, "Objection Sustained," January 3, 2005).

In other words and contrary to what O'Brien has claimed his military experience wasn't all that typical.

The Portland Press Herald ended it's article thusly:

Now he wants to work with groups like Veterans for Peace and the Maine People's Alliance to help those in or outside the Army who may be in a situation like his. "I don't just want to sit around and have conversations about these things," he said.

He plans to head back to college in the fall, studying political science and philosophy at Cornell University in New York.

In the meantime, adjusting to life back home hasn't been too hard. For all his adventures and experience, one thing still makes him like many other 22-year-olds in Maine.

"I'm looking for a job," he said.

And now O'Brien has one shilling against Donald Trump.

Professional activism is one of the best jobs out there, especially when George Soros picks up the tab.

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  #127 

How the minority rule the majority in the USA


S. Noble (IndependentSentinel) says the minority now rule the majority in the United States, but how did this happen and do people even realize it? We should fear it and change it back.

Minority rule is what is needed to turn the USA into the Socialist USA. It's tyranny.

Minority group rights are very important but they are being exploited by the Left to extinguish the alleged white majority rule aka white supremacy and white privilege. The identity politics being played by Democrats is part of a dangerous game and one used successfully by the worst statist nations in the world throughout history.

The Left has successfully used political correctness and minority rights to divide and conquer Americans with the express purpose of creating a one party USA.

There is no pushback from Republicans to Obama's strident "do it or else I will" approach to running what used to be a representative Republic. The Imperial president has used his "pen and phone" to fundamentally transform education, the economy, climate, immigration, financial institutions, the military, and if he gets a chance, the Supreme Court of the United States.

Immigration takes foreigners with little understanding of what the USA is about will form their Army which will one day be the majority that will replace the more traditional Americans.

Politico referred to it as a "no congress" strategy and Obama was applauded for it as the Republicans allowed them to be whipped into easy submission by the Democrats and the media.

Alveda King said:

"Let's be honest about this; the liberal agenda with failed stimulus plans and government entitlement programs is crippling our economy and our quality of life."

The freest of nations is submitting to the ideology of control.

Communists, Socialists, Progressives all have the same goal of overturning our Capitalist system and replacing it with a centralized statist government. They are doing it through minority rule because the majority would never go along with it if they understood what was going on.

Since the 1930s, the communists have used the term "Progressive" to hide their true nature and intent. Communism is not dead, they've morphed and exploit the label "Progressive" to their great advantage.

The "living wage" is patently absurd when talking about giving it to people flipping burgers but it is a Marxist ideal and a way to redistribute the wealth. They are erasing the idea of part-time and temporary labor and entry-level jobs because business and Capitalism is opposed to their goals and cannot co-exist with their statist agenda. By making the minorities who take these jobs into "oppressed workers", they get the majority to go along with their living wage.

"Disparate outcome" is yet another effective means. They no longer use logic to determine who is "oppressed", they use only outcomes to determine everything. It's how Obama will decide who gets to live in what neighborhood. As he ushers in a massive influx of foreigners here illegally and as Hillary promises them full amnesty in her first 100 days in office, Obama is changing neighborhoods with the concept of disparate outcome.

What that means is, if there are fewer minorities in a given situation or locale, all has to be made equal and socially just by spreading them out. Punishment will follow and sometimes Federal dollars will be withheld if locales or companies or whatever do not comply. Can prison be far behind if this doesn't work?

You give minorities and protected left-wing classes the power over the majority by giving agencies the power of elected representative. You let them write laws.

The Commerce Department, an agency of unelected pencil pushers considered classifying Arab-Americans as a socially and economically disadvantaged minority in 2013. Arabs are not a race but it's another way to redistribute wealth as was Obamacare.

Agencies like the EPA and the IRS are writing laws to take our funds and tell us what to do, when, where and how to heat our homes, when we can keep our money in our accounts, and don't forget they want our retirement savings. Congress just had to pass a bill to stop Obama from going after private retirement savings.

Climate change is a valuable way to redistribute wealth and the Left will cling to it with lies and desperate attacks. Currently the Fascists among them are using it to silence dissenters and indirectly destroy the First Amendment.

Transforming the military into a social welfare agency is yet another way to destroy traditional America. For minority rule to makes us into a one-party country, traditional America must die.

A 2008 Gallup poll showed that 6% of the U.S. population believe that no god or universal spirit exists and 34% of them reside in Vermont, coincidentally, the state is also famous for the highest number of pedophiles.

That means 94% of the U.S. population either believe in God or are not sure. So why do the atheists get to say where and when God's name is mentioned? The minority is erasing U.S. history and heritage while taking away the rights of the majority.

They have decided to pit Atheists against people who believe in God, especially Christians with Jews a close second.

Most people want a Second Amendment but the Left will lie about wanting to destroy it until they destroy it because the ultimate goal is to destroy our Bill of Rights and substitute it with the socialist UN Declaration of Human Rights, the one FDR liked so much.

Loretta Lynch has been busy silencing dissenters against leftist agendas and leftist supporters in the name of tolerance. The DoJ since Holder has been transforming rules about discipline and imprisonment to nationalize both, taking away states' rights, all in the name of protecting the "oppressed minority" in schools and in prisons.

The minorities are any of the groups that vote left.

They've even decided what colleges will do in sexual assault cases, inventing a rape epidemic crisis allegedly perpetrated by white males of course -- they're still a majority and the minority must rule.

Harry Reid used his nuclear option to help Obama fill up the courts with large majorities of radical leftists so the minority could rule.

The judicial nominees Mr. Obama pushed through were not all filling vacancies, they were often added positions for far-left judges who turn around and use the US District Courts to fulfill the Obama agenda, giving him unprecedented power.

Imagine if Hillary gets to appoint 2 to 5 Supreme Court Justices.

Obama took over the National Labor Relations Board and filled leadership positions in all agencies with far-left revolutionaries.

Common Core is of course the same thing. It's nationalizing our schools. Obama's fake crises in Ferguson and elsewhere is to nationalize the police.

Centralized government is the way the minority gets to rule and to do so despotically.

This is how the minority become the power brokers.

This quote from SDS member Mike Goldfield recorded in "New Left Notes" in 1966 describes what is happening qute well:

"You have to realize that the issue didn't matter. The issues were never the issues… It was the revolution that was everything. The only thing that mattered was what you were doing for the revolution. That is why dope was good. Anything that undermined the system contributed to the revolution and was therefore good."

We now have Bernie Sanders, only an inch away from being a communist, wooing the populace with the promise of freebies and a minority must rule platform. He will push the Democrat Party to the far-left which means a small number of elite will govern us in the name of fairness and social justice.

Bernie has a plan for making this happen and Hillary, already quite Left and dictatorial, will comply.

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  #128 

At Harvard, leftist professors inspire leftist students to "rebel"

John Hinderaker (Powerline) says a common political strategy among environmentalists is called "sue and settle." An environmental group will sue the EPA, alleging a failure to do one thing or another, likely something that wasn't within the EPA's powers in the first place. The lawsuit is collusive, so, after a decent interval, the EPA will agree to a settlement that results in a court order requiring EPA to do something that it wanted to do all along. This technique is wholly corrupt, but effective.

Something similar is at work when leftist students mount protests at leftist universities. Radical students make demands to which radical administrators are only too glad to accede. I have sometimes wondered, is the whole thing a put-up deal? Was the supposed protest against a "reactionary" administration set up with radical professors or administrators from the beginning?

Usually, we have no way to know. But at Harvard Law School, the truth is leaking out: left-wing students met with left-wing professors to plan their supposedly adversarial demands on the school. The creators of the Royall Asses web site, a group of intrepid non-left-wing Harvard Law students -- I am old enough to remember when non-left-wingers were the majority at HLS! -- have the story, due to a leftist student who had second thoughts:

The [student] movement turned radical, at least in part, we submit, because some of the most radical-left professors at Harvard Law School set out to use their students as puppets -- to co-opt the movement, turning it into little more than a front group to serve the agenda these and other professors have been pursuing for years: to transform the school into a far-far-far-left institution.

Don't believe us -- believe your own eyes. Here are rough notes typed by one of the Royall Asses during a meeting held on Dec. 5 between protest leaders and radical-left professors. ***

The meeting involved at least a dozen Royall Asses (identified in the notes) and three left-wing professors. … During the meeting, two professors (Desan & Hanson) urged the students to take advantage of the "crisis" they'd created, and specifically urged them to play the race card to inflame passions. Hanson emphasized the need for the students to "[t]ake advantage of evident racism in the legal system and connect that to this law school," in order to "[g]et people to the table because they have to respond based on the embarrassment." Desan similarly emphasized: "Very important that this is about race -- keep the focus there." All three professors endorsed the idea that the students focus on "making people uncomfortable. That's how you got here and you have to keep doing it."
Hanson, in urging the need to take advantage of the crisis the students had created, commented that the leftists on the faculty had been "waiting forever to do this."

There is much more, all worth reading. Whatever might be the case at other institutions, it seems clear that at Harvard Law, far-left students mounted a "rebellion" in concert with equally far-left faculty members.

But what about Harvard's administrators? Were they in on the joke? The whole racial drama at the law school began with a supposed "hate crime" that was an obvious fake. I wrote about it several times, e.g., here and here. I even wrote to the Law School's Dean, Martha Minow, volunteering my services as an investigator to unravel the supposed "crime." She didn't respond, of course.

What happened was that after a lot of initial hand-wringing about how terribly racist Harvard is, and after launching a supposed investigation into the "hate crime," the law school's administration went silent. The purported investigation was allowed to fade quietly away. No perpetrators were apprehended. The blindingly obvious fact that the "hate crime" was a hoax was never acknowledged. Instead, the school's supposed "serious problem" with racism became an argument for more left-wing "reforms," of the sort that far-left administrators and faculty members were happy to embrace.

It is a sad, corrupt story, but one that I suspect has played out at many campuses over the last year or two.

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  #129 

Bernie's thug life


Matthew Vadum (FrontPage) says the reason Bernie Sanders pointedly refuses to condemn his supporters for throwing chairs and making death threats against Democrat officials at and after the party's Nevada convention is because he doesn't actually object to their violent behavior.

Sanders blew off pressure from Democrat leaders to disavow ugly tactics by his supporters at the event Saturday evening, calling the complaints "nonsense" and arguing that his supporters were not treated with "fairness and respect."

Remember that Sanders is seeking the presidential nomination from a party that officially endorsed the pro-cop-killing Black Lives Matter movement and whose leaders swooned over the even more violent Occupy Wall Street movement. As the unrest in Ferguson, Mo.. and Baltimore showed the nation, these people believe that rioting and looting are legitimate forms of political activism.

The pro-violence radicalism among Sanders supporters comes straight from the top. The Vermont senator vocally supports unrepentant Marxist terrorist Oscar López Rivera whom he describes as "one of the longest-serving political prisoners in history -- 34 years, longer than Nelson Mandela."

Sanders told a town hall meeting in Puerto Rico that if Obama doesn't release López Rivera, "I will pardon him" if elected president.

Here is what the longtime prisoner did:

"López Rivera conspired to transport explosives with intent to destroy federal government property and committed other related crimes -- or that the [Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional Puertorriqueña terrorist group] was deemed responsible for a reign of terror that killed six people and injured 130 others in at least 114 bombings. They includes the 1975 bombing of historic Fraunces Tavern in the city's Financial District, which left four people dead and wounded more than 50 others, and a New Year's Eve 1982 bombing at Police Headquarters that maimed three NYPD cops who tried to defuse the explosives.

"On January 24, 1975, a ten-pound dynamite bomb planted by the FALN at Fraunces Tavern in lower Manhattan exploded, killing his father, 33-year-old Frank Connor. In 2011, Joe Connor attended a parole hearing for López Rivera in Terre Haute, Indiana. He and the other survivors of the FALN's murder spree offered López Rivera 'multiple opportunities' to express remorse. He rebuffed all of them."

That Sanders would support granting clemency to such a man tends to undermine his ad nauseam-repeated claim to be a "democratic socialist." Ideologically, Sanders is a communist, though he never joined the party. Of course he is comfortable standing with a violent leftist revolutionary who waged war against the United States.

And like Barack Obama, Sanders pals around with terrorists and their backers. In March he met with the Florida chapter of the Muslim terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Sanders strongly supports the Apollo Alliance, a left-wing enviro-pork barrel group that wants the government to take over America's energy industry and one of whose leaders is Weather Underground terrorist Jeff Jones. Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union and is a fan of Fidel Castro and Daniel Ortega.

So when Sanders denounces violence, don't be impressed: it is a tactic. Nothing more, nothing less.

Distancing himself from his unhinged followers would be both disingenuous and absurd of Sanders, reminiscent of Barack Obama's half-hearted shrug after the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's crazed anti-American rants became headline news. "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community," Obama said on the campaign trail in 2008 of his deranged pastor of 20 years.

Sanders is following the Saul Alinsky playbook. As an aide to the Rules for Radicals author wrote, while Alinsky was shying away from praising violence in public and sounding "the trumpet blast for democracy," in private "he would say that violence has its uses." Saying you support politically motivated violence implies you don't support democracy – so Bernie lies.

Note that he refused to apologize for – or even criticize – the actions of his supporters at the state convention. Like many leftist radicals, Sanders is skilled at bouncing between studied reverence for nonviolent action and refusing to condemn violent left-wing activism, which is a slippery way of endorsing violent left-wing activism. He offered a milquetoast, perfunctory, blanket condemnation of violence in general, the kind of thing any competent left-wing politician could do sleepwalking.

"Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals," Sanders said of the mostly peaceful convention.

He then rubbed salt in the wounds, complaining in detail about the perceived railroading his side experienced at the convention. "The Democratic leadership used its power to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place," Sanders said.

Lying about violence comes naturally to left-wingers.

Although right-wing political violence doesn't take place a lot in modern American politics, Sanders and the media want Americans to believe otherwise. This helps to explain why they falsely accused Tea Party groups of violence (and racism and other undesirable isms) during the fight over Obamacare. The right-wing populism spurred by Obama's un-American policies presents an existential threat to the Left.

Sanders accuses Donald Trump's supporters of unprovoked physical aggression against his supporters, while at the same time denying that he is encouraging his supporters to rough up Trump rally attendees.

Of course Sanders' denials, however passionate at times, ring hollow. It is a longstanding practice of the Left to accuse its enemies of its own antisocial misdeeds in order to avoid accountability. (This is not to excuse or make light of the relatively few incidents in which Trump supporters have thrown punches at Sanders-supporting protesters, but for the most part fans of The Donald were trying to deal with obnoxious protesters who were disrupting Trump rallies. Excessive enthusiasm in cracking down on the rude is not the same as trying to prevent free speech and political expression.)

On the weekend, Sanders' backers acted out their unhappiness with Nevada's byzantine delegate-selection process. They became abusive and physically aggressive as they tried to silence speakers like Hillary Clinton surrogate Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) with loud boos and profanities. The Nevada Democratic Party went as far as writing the Democratic National Committee accusing Sanders supporters of having a "penchant for extra-parliamentary behavior -- indeed, actual violence -- in place of democratic conduct in a convention setting."

According to one news report:

"Democratic officials released text messages and voicemails with threats against the Nevada Democratic Party chairwoman Roberta Lange. They included such comments as 'Hey bitch, loved how you broke the system, we know where you live, where you work, where you eat, where your kids go to school ... You made a bad choice, prepare for hell, calls won't stop.' Another one said, 'You're fired bitch, #FeelTheBern, speak or else, corrupt bitch, answer the phone you pussy.'"

Alarmed at the prospect of internecine violence, party elites put the heat on Sanders to denounce the obnoxious behavior forcefully.

"There is no excuse for what happened in Nevada, and it is incumbent upon all of us in positions of leadership to speak out," said Clinton marionette Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Florida congresswoman who heads the DNC.

"I grew up in Brooklyn. I'm not afraid of bullies," Boxer said at the convention. "We need civility in the Democratic Party," she said with a straight face. "Civility."

Stephanie Schriock, president of EMILY's List, a pro-Clinton PAC, added, "These disgraceful attacks are straight out of the Donald Trump playbook, and Bernie Sanders is the only person who can put a stop to them. Sanders needs to both forcefully denounce and apologize for his supporters' unacceptable behavior -- not walk away."

When left-wingers complain about the violent tactics other left-wingers use against them you just know something big is afoot.

It could be that the Democratic Party is just as fragmented, or even more bitterly divided, than the Republican Party.

Bernie Sanders is fine with that.

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

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #130 

Why don't Republicans name the enemy?


Dennis Prager (FrontPage) says in the Wall Street Journal last week, two influential billionaires -- former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a very moderate Republican, and Charles G. Koch, the libertarian chairman and CEO of Koch Industries Inc. -- wrote an op-ed piece decrying the suppression of free speech taking place at universities across America.

You have to salute their good intentions. But as well-intentioned and accurate as their critique is, the Bloomberg-Koch column is largely useless.

Why? Because they assiduously avoid identifying who or what acts are causing our universities to mimic fascist institutions, namely: ruining dissenters' careers; penalizing dissenting students; not hiring dissenting professors; disinviting the few invited speakers with whom the majority differs; shouting down dissenting speakers; students and faculty occupying and taking over college administrators' offices, etc.

The Bloomberg-Koch column is like going to your doctor and getting back a fully accurate report that you are dying that doesn't even hint at why you are dying.

Why don't Bloomberg and Koch mention the words "left" or "progressive" or "liberal" even once? The entire deterioration of the American university (and high school and elementary school) is the result of leftist influence. How could they not mention this?

One hint at an explanation is the one example Bloomberg and Koch give of students protesting a campus speaker: Scripps College students and faculty denounced former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, a liberal, as this year's commencement speaker. The ratio of leftist speakers to rightist speakers invited to American campuses is about 100 to 1. And of the thousands of liberal-left speakers, you would be hard-pressed to come up with five examples of any of them being shouted down and driven from the microphone. Yet the authors' one example is one of the only of students attempting to intimidate a liberal speaker.

So why did they choose this outlier as their example? Lest, God forbid, a reader infers that the suppression of free speech on American college campuses overwhelmingly shows the Left is suppressing the right.

The Left is destroying the foundational values of this country, including, but hardly limited to, free speech. In 2013, the Los Angeles Times actually announced that it would not publish certain letters to the editor -- presumably no matter how pre-eminent the scientist who wrote the letter is -- that challenge the anthropocentric global-warming-will-lead-to-worldwide-destruction hypothesis. Likewise, the science and technology magazine Popular Science announced it would not even allow such opinions in the comments section on its website except in certain cases.

Yet, with all the damage it does, including, of course, its destructive impact on universities, the Left is almost never mentioned by name. Not just by Bloomberg and Koch, but by all Republicans and conservatives.

Republicans and conservatives have spent almost eight years attacking President Barack Obama. For good reason, to be sure, as the case can and should be made that he has done more harm to America than any president in American history. But all harm he has done -- massively increasing the national debt, weakening the American military, withdrawing from a pacified Iraq, enabling ISIS to replace America's presence there, worsening race relations, alienating American allies, aiding America's enemies, such as Iran and Cuba, and much more -- is a function of his being a man of the Left. No more; no less. Vice President Joe Biden, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Bernie Sanders and virtually any Democratic senator would have tried to do similar damage to America.

But Republicans focus their ire on individuals -- first Barack Obama, and now Hillary Clinton -- as if they individually, not the Left and leftism, are the problem.

Think, for example, about how much conservatives attack political correctness. They are, of course, right to do so. But all their attacks are almost meaningless because they never mention the source of political correctness: the Left. In fact, the very definition of "politically correct" is "that which is acceptable to the Left"; and the definition of "politically incorrect" is "that which is unacceptable to the Left."

In other words, virtually no one, from Bloomberg and Koch through the entire conservative and Republican worlds, connects the dots. If Donald Trump becomes the Republican nominee, as is expected, he will probably never mention the Left. He may not even know that it is a factor, let alone the factor, in America's decline from the greatness he wishes to restore.

Our colleges have been ruined, free speech is increasingly suppressed, the economy is stagnant, the federal debt is doubling, and young Americans no longer see America as exceptional in any way -- all because of the Left. But almost no one dares mention the word. Why?

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  #131 

Harvard law professor says conservative Christians should be treated like NAZIs


Aleister (ProgressivesToday) is reporting that a left-wing law professor at Harvard recently declared that progressives have won the culture wars and should start treating conservative Christians like NAZIs.

Doesn’t that kind of make him the NAZI in this situation?

The Daily Signal reported:

Liberals, stop being so defensive. That’s the message of Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet in a new post at Balkinization, titled “Abandoning Defensive Crouch Liberal Constitutionalism.” The problem, according to Tushnet, is that liberals have been too defensive when it comes to advancing their agenda in the courts.

Now that Barack Obama has reshaped the federal judiciary, liberal causes can win easily in court. And now that Justice Antonin Scalia has died, “judges no longer have to be worried about reversal by the Supreme Court if they take aggressively liberal positions.”

Tushnet blames what he calls the “culture wars” on conservatives, and he says liberals should now make conservatives pay. “The culture wars are over; they lost, we won,” he writes in italics. Tushnet claims that conservatives “had opportunities to reach a cease fire, but rejected them in favor of a scorched earth policy.”..

Tushnet explains his unwillingness to respect the rights of the “losers”: “Trying to be nice to the losers didn’t work well after the Civil War, nor after Brown. (And taking a hard line seemed to work reasonably well in Germany and Japan after 1945.)”

Ah, yes, if the “losers” of the American “culture wars” are the functional equivalent of racists and NAZIs, then Tushnet’s argument works wonderfully.

This is the Left.

They don’t respect people who oppose them at all. They want them destroyed.


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  #132 

Seattle anti-capitalist protesters scrap with police

Cheryl Chumley (WND) is reporting that anti-capitalist protesters took to the streets of Seattle for May Day rallies.

May Day protests in Seattle driven by an anti-capitalist sentiment led to clashes with police -- five of whom were injured -- and to the arrest of nine for assault, property destruction and obstruction.

One of the injured officers was treated for a head laceration from a thrown rock; another was hurt by a tossed Molotov cocktail, the Seattle Times reported. Yet one more officer was bitten by a protester, the newspaper said.

The protests took place largely near a Costco, with reports coming in that angry protesters were "assailing shopping carts" flipping over pallets outside the store.

"Good thing Costco closes at 6 on Sunday #MayDaySeattle," one witness posted on Twitter, alongside a video of the chaotic scene.

"Group now assailing shopping carts in @Costco parking lot #MayDaySea" the Seattle Police Department tweeted.

Police reported Molotov cocktails, rocks and bottles were thrown at officers near the stadium, and at stores and windows in the area, forcing them to disperse the crowds with blast calls.

Some of the protesters marched the streets carting a banner that read, "We are ungovernable," the Seattle Times reported.

Others carried a massive Donald Trump pinata on a pole, touting a message of workers' rights and solidarity.

Social media posters were quick to point to the oddities of the protesters.

One wrote on Twitter: "Always funny to watch these Anarchists wreck things while they retain their bourgeois backgrounds. #MayDaySea"

And another referenced the fact it appeared the protesters seemed to be "angry white kids who hate capitalism," but watchers were asked to "please ignore their Nikes & iPhones."

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

Avatar / Picture

Posts: 12
Reply with quote  #133 
Well said.

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #134 

Why the Left loathes Western civilization

Dennis Prager (WND) says, this month, Stanford University students voted on a campus resolution that would have their college require a course on Western civilization, as it did until the 1980s.

Stanford students rejected the proposal 1,992 to 347. A columnist at the Stanford Daily explained why: Teaching Western civilization means "upholding white supremacy, capitalism and colonialism, and all other oppressive systems that flow from Western civilizations."

The vote -- and the column -- encapsulated the Left's view: In Europe, Latin America and America, it loathes Western civilization.

Wherever there is conflict between the West -- identified as white, capitalist or of European roots -- and the non-West, the Left portrays the West as the villain.

I am referring to the Left, not to liberals. The latter generally venerates Western civilization. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, for example, frequently spoke of defending "Christian civilization." Today, the Left would likely revile any Westerner who used such language as xenophobic, racist and fascist.

The Left similarly describes any suggestion that anything Western is superior to anything non-Western. Likewise, it dismisses virtually all Western achievements, but regards criticism of anything non-Western as racist, chauvinistic, imperialist, colonialist, xenophobic, etc.

That is why the Left is so protective of Islam. America's left-wing president, Barack Obama, will not use, and does not seem to allow the government to use, the words "Islamic terrorism." And, criticism of Islam is labeled "Islamophobic," thereby morally equating any such criticism with racism. It is not that the Left is sympathetic to Islam, for it has contempt for all religions. It is that many Muslims loathe the West, and the enemies of my enemy (the West) must be protected.

That is why the Left loathes Israel. If the Left actually cared about human rights, women's rights, gay rights, or freedom of speech, religion and press, it would be wildly pro-Israel. But Israel, in the Left's view, is white, European and colonialist, or in other words, Western. And the Palestinians are non-Western.

So, the Big Question is, why? Why is the Left hostile toward Western civilization?

After decades of considering this question, I have concluded the answer is this: standards.

The Left hates standards -- moral standards, artistic standards, cultural standards. The West is built on all three, and it has excelled in all three.

Why does the Left hate standards? It hates standards because when there are standards, there is judgment. And leftists don't want to be judged.

Thus, Michelangelo is no better than any contemporary artist, and Rembrandt is no greater than any non-Western artist. So, too, street graffiti -- which is essentially the defacing of public and private property, and thus serves to undermine civilization -- is "art."

Melody-free, harmony-free, atonal sounds are just as good as Beethoven's music. And Western classical music is no better than the music of any non-Western civilization. Guatemalan poets are every bit as worthy of study as Shakespeare.

When the Nobel Prize-winning American novelist Saul Bellow asked an interviewer, "Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? The Proust of the Papuans?" all hell broke loose on the cultural Left. Bellow had implied that the greatest writers of fiction were Western.

Why such antagonism? Because if some art is really better than other art, your art may be judged inferior. The narcissism of left-wing thought does not allow for anyone to be better than you artistically or in any other way. Therefore, all art and artists must be equal.

In the moral realm, the same rejection of standards exists. Thus, the Left loathed President Ronald Reagan for labeling the Soviet Union an "evil empire," because that would mean America was morally superior to the Soviet Union. And such a judgment was unacceptable. The whole left-wing moral vocabulary is a rejection of Western moral standards: "tolerance," "inclusion," "anti-discrimination" (by definition, standards discriminate), "non-judgmental," and even "income inequality," which deems some peoples' work more valuable than others.

Every civilization had slavery. But only thanks to Judeo-Christian civilization was slavery abolished there, and eventually elsewhere. Nevertheless, to speak about any moral superiority of Western or Judeo-Christian civilization is completely unacceptable, thanks to the Left's stranglehold on education and most media.

In this regard, the protection of Islam by the Left is so thorough that one cannot even say such obvious truths such as that the status of women has been far superior in the Judeo-Christian West than in the Islamic world. The veil women wear, for example, is dehumanizing. Yet, in a speech at the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America, a rabbi who, at the time, was the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, said that a woman's voluntary choice to wear a head scarf "deserves our respect."

And finally, we come to the Left's loathing of the religions of Western civilization -- the Judeo-Christian religions, which have clear standards of right and wrong.

Bible-based religions affirm a morally judging God. For the Left, that is anathema. For the Left, the only judging allowed is leftists' judging of others.

No one judges the Left -- neither man nor God.

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  #135 

"Democracy Awakening" -- the radical Left's latest makeover


John Perazzo (FrontPage) asks if you have heard about the latest intellectual "awakening" that's being led by a brand new "progressive" movement called Democracy Awakening? Oh, it's a real thrill, loaded with a host of bold, fresh ideas that'll make you downright grateful for the fact that such brilliant folks are looking out for you. Ideas like these:

  • repealing all Voter ID laws, on the premise that they're nothing more than racist schemes designed to disenfranchise nonwhite minorities; 
  • overhauling every facet of the criminal-justice system -- police, prosecutors, courts, and prisons -- on grounds that they are currently infested with racism and discrimination against blacks and Hispanics; 
  • supporting the agendas of the Black Lives Matter movement, which detects white racism lurking around every corner and hiding under every rock;
  • permitting Washington, DC to have representation in the U.S. House, Senate, and Electoral College, so as to further empower the Democratic Party; 
  • implementing publicly funded elections, thereby preventing citizens and corporations from donating money to the political candidates of their choice; 
  • "striking a blow to the military-industrial complex" by gutting the national defense budget and redirecting those dollars to a bloated welfare state; and
  • depriving Americans of their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

What's that you say? You've heard all this before, a thousand times, from the mouths of a thousand left-wing activists and political candidates seeking to erode American liberties? Don't tell that to the good folks at Democracy Awakening. It might hurt their feelings. They kinda like thinking of themselves as intellectual trailblazers.

Democracy Awakening was officially launched a few days ago in Washington, DC, when it led a series of workshops and demonstrations outside the U.S. Capitol -- all to promote the ideals and agendas listed above. Among the guest speakers at these events were such notables as Democratic Congressman Raúl Grijalva, an "immigrant-rights" champion who says that "in a perfect, perfect world we'd have an open border"; labor activist Dolores Huerta, a former honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America; Phyllis Bennis, whose Institute for Policy Studies has long supported Communist agendas while publicly smearing the United States as the world's principal wellspring of evil; and activist Medea Benjamin, a dyed-in-the-wool communist who has lavished praise on Castro's Cuba, the theocratic hellhole of Iran, and the Hamas barbarians of Gaza.

The list of Democracy Awakening's nearly 300 member organizations provides further insight into the coalition's worldview. Among those members are:

  • The Agenda Project, which believes that society can only function efficiently when the influence of government dominates the workings of the marketplace; 
  • American Family Voices, which advocates increased government control and intervention as the keys to improving healthcare, the environment, and the economy; 
  • The American Friends Service Committee, which sided with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War and has long agitated for the unilateral disarmament of the United States; 
  • Code Pink, a pro-Marxist group that supports the Hamas-loving Free Gaza Movement, characterizes Israel as an oppressor nation, and is backed by former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn; 
  • Global Exchange, which seeks to "advance social, environmental and economic justice" by promoting an "alternative," socialist-style system that "transform[s] the global economy from profit-centered to people-centered"; 
  • The SEIU, which donates millions of dollars annually to Democratic lawmakers and politicians who promote government expansion and higher taxes; 
  • The United For Peace and Justice antiwar coalition, founded by Leslie Cagan, who proudly aligns her politics with those of Fidel Castro's Communist Cuba; 
  • Tikkun, which aims to "saveour planet from environmental destruction and from the perversion of human relations generated by the globalization of selfishness and materialism popularly known as capitalist globalization"; 
  • The NAACP, which views America as a racist cesspool where blacks are victimized at every turn; 
  • The Network of Spiritual Progressives, whose work proceeds from the premise that "from the divine perspective there is no such thing as a right to private property," and that all "inequalities of wealth [should] get abolished"; 
  • Greenpeace, which views the emissions resulting from every form of human industrial and recreational activity as the chief causes of potentially catastrophic global warming; and 
  • Bend The Arc, which condemns Voter ID laws as barriers that "make it harder for communities of color, women, first-time voters, the elderly, and the poor to cast their vote."

There's nothing new in any of this. Same old talking points. Same old Marxist, anti-American claptrap, dressed up as an "awakening." At its core, Democracy Awakening is the quintessential embodiment of the Left's retrogressive ideology -- smearing and demeaning one American tradition after another, all for the purpose of expanding government, crushing free enterprise, and shrinking individual 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  #136 

Park Ranger mocks Constitution while leading tour of Independence Hall


Paul Mirengoff (PowerLine) is reporting that Mary "Missy" Hogan, a National Park Service employee who gives guided tours of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, stunned a group of tourists this week by telling them that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were the product of "class elites who were just out to protect their privileged status." Christian Adams has the details at PJ Media.

Hogan isn't just a park ranger. She's the chief of Operations for Interpretations and Visitor Services at Independence Hall, the birthplace of our Constitution.

Hogan is also a fount of left-wing propaganda. In addition to parroting the long-discredited economic interpretation of the Constitution, she informed her tour group that "the Founders knew that when they left this room, what they had written wouldn't matter very much," according to Adams. The "most important part of the Constitution written at Independence Hall was the ability to change it," she explained.

Hogan even offered an apology for King George III. She contended that he "paid more attention to Parliament" than the colonists "because they were right there and could remove him from office." But in fact, as Adams points out, Parliament did not possess the power to remove the king from office in the 1770s, and still doesn't.

Do other rangers who lead tours of Independence Hall similarly slander America's Founders, apologize for King George III, and advocate a "living Constitution"? I don't know, but apparently they are free to do so.

Hogan has said that "the story of Independence Hall is the story of Independence Hall, it doesn't really change." Thus, "the rangers give them same information but the way they tell it is going to be different; everyone has a different and interesting slant."

Translation: Once we tell the folks when Independence Hall was constructed, what it was used for, and how many rooms it has, we can spout whatever rubbish we picked up from our lefty college professors.

It occurs to me that liberal-progressives are a miserable lot. They hate everything about America.

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

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #137 

Democracy Spring -- an assault on free political speech


Discover The Networks says "Democracy Spring" is undermining America's election system, in the name of "the People."

Democracy Spring (DS) was established as a political movement in early 2016 to warn Americans that “our democracy is in crisis” because U.S. “elections are dominated by billionaires and big-money interests who can spend unlimited sums of money on political campaigns to protect their special interests at the general expense.” Though DS did not mention Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump by name, it was clearly alluding to him in its vow to “make this election a referendum on whether our democracy should belong to the People as a whole or to the billionaire class” wherein “the super-rich dominate the 'money primary' that decides who can run for office.”

In its earliest days, DS identified four specific reform bills that were already pending before Congress as “exemplary actions that can be taken” toward the goal of minimizing the influence of money in political elections: (a) Implement “small-dollar citizen-funded elections,” where candidates are required to accept public money for their campaigns in exchange for a promise to limit how much they spend on any election and how much they receive in donations from any one source; (b) “Combat voter suppression” efforts like the enactment of Voter ID laws, which DS falsely characterizes as efforts to “disenfranchise ... people of color and the poor”; (c) “Empower citizens with universal suffrage,” meaning that all adult U.S. residents should be eligible to vote in political elections, without any citizenship or voter-registration requirements; and (d) “Introduce a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United,” a landmark 2010 Supreme Court decision that had struck down the McCain-Feigold Act's restrictions on what corporations could spend to support or oppose political candidates during the weeks immediately preceding primaries and general elections. 

In its effort to gain support for the aforementioned agenda items, DS vowed to “call on every member of Congress and candidate for office in America” to join its “citizen equality champions” in taking an “Equal Voice for All” pledge that “commits them to fight for pro-democracy reform.” This pledge read as follows: “I pledge to fight to ensure that our government is free from the corrupting influence of big money in politics and solely dependent upon the people as equal citizens, by supporting pro-democracy reforms including voting rights protections, anti-corruption measures, citizen-funded elections, and a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.”

In March 2016, DS announced that its activities as an organized movement would begin officially on April 2, in “the heart of the [political] primary season,” with “one of the largest civil-disobedience actions in a generation”—thousands of participants making a ten-day, 140-mile march from the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia to the U.S. Capitol in the District of Columbia. Upon arriving in Washington, the demonstrators would proceed to stage a series of massive sit-ins at the Capitol and in Congressional offices throughout the week of April 11-18, to drive home their “demand” that Congress “take immediate action to end the corruption of big money in our politics and ensure free and fair elections in which every American has an equal voice.” Many of these protesters, said DS, would be quite willing to get arrested for their disruptive activities as a means of drawing public attention to their cause: “With hundreds of patriotic Americans being sent to jail, day after day for at least a week -- simply for sitting in to save our democracy—the drama in Washington will rock the business-as-usual cycle of this election and catapult this critical issue onto center stage.”

Calling itself “a deeply nonviolent campaign, in the tradition of the American civil rights movement,” the fledgling DS announced that anyone planning to risk arrest during a demonstration would be required to first participate in one of the numerous “nonviolent civil disobedience” training sessions which its organizers were conducting on an ongoing basis. Moreover, DS arranged for a team of pro-bono lawyers to provide legal counsel and representation for anyone who was in fact arrested.

Though DS claims that it is “not affiliated with any political candidate or party,” the 100+ Endorsing Organizations that collaborated to launch and support the movement were all left-wing entities that typically back Democratic Party agendas. Among these groups were American Family Voices, the AFL-CIOAvaaz, the Backbone CampaignBrave New FilmsCatholics UnitedCitizen Action NY, Code Pink, Democracy for AmericaDemocracy Matters, the Democratic Socialists of America, Demos, the Dolores Huerta FoundationFriends of the Earth, the Institute for Policy StudiesJewish Voice for PeaceMoveOn, the National Organization for Women,National People’s Action, the Network of Spiritual Progressives/Tikkun Magazine, Office of the AmericasThe Other 98%Peace Action, People for Bernie [Sanders],People for the American Way, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Progressive Democrats of AmericaPublic CitizenUnited for Peace and Justice, the United States Student AssociationUnited We Dream, the Working Families Party, and the Young Democratic Socialists.

Among the prominent individuals who have committed themselves as “Public Pledgers” in support of DS and its objectives were Medea BenjaminHeather BoothJohn CavanaghJodie EvansBill Fletcher Jr., and Jim Hightower.

The hypocrisy of the Left is overwhelming.

They have no problem with billionaires such as George Soros (who is funding Democracy Spring and dozens of other left-wing causes) or Tom Spier, or organization such as the Tides Foundation, that can spend unlimited sums of money on leftist political campaigns -- and don't forget the unions or corporations such as the Audubon Society or the Communist Party USA.

The Left just wants to silence every entity that they politically disagree with -- and that's fascism.


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  #138 

#BlackLivesMatter "activists" stand and spit on U. S. flag in front of veterans

Aleister (ProgressivesToday) is reporting that the incident captured in the videos below took place at a Donald Trump event in Wisconsin. It's amazing that some people in media still treat #BlackLivesMatter as if it was some sort of civil rights group.

The Daily Caller reports:

"F**k this flag. F**k this country" -- BLM agitators spit and stomp on American flag

A "peaceful protest" at Donald Trump's Sunday rally in West Allis, Wisconsin featured several Black Lives Matter supporters standing on the American flag.

In the videos, -- protesters stated that the "red, white and blue -- this sh!t is the new swastika."

"F**k this flag. F**k this country," one man explained. "It's hypocritical."

The protesters -- who claimed to support the #BlackLivesMatter movement despite not being officially affiliated with the organization -- were allegedly drawing attention to the 2012 death of West Allis teenager Corey Stingley.

Watch the videos below (language):

There's a couple of more videos here . . .

Why is it that these idiots never burn a foreign flag?

The "hypocritical" jerk in this video repeatedly justifies his disgraceful actions based on the 1st Amendment to the U. S. Constitution while showing contempt for the symbol of that Constitution.

What an ignorant person. I guess "irony" wasn't part of his education.

But the reason these black activists are doing this is to start a fight so the media could run another 72-hour newsfest about Trump inciting violence.

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  #139 

Wackjob student activists overrun Portland State University (PSU) Board Of Trustees meeting


Michael Strickland (ProgressivesToday) is reporting that the  Board Of Trustees attempted to hold their quarterly meeting on Thursday, March 31st.

The wackjob students from the PSU Student Union (PSUSU), Black Student Union (BSU), Students United For Palestinian Equal Rights (SUPER), and other cultural marxist groups crashed the meeting.

They assembled out in the hallway, putting duct tape over their mouths to symbolize that they were being silenced. Yet the trustees' board meeting started off with open comment period, where anyone could come up and speak to the board. Five students chose to speak in this formal setting. The board then heard some comments from Olivia Pace of the BSU and Dana Ghazi, President of the Associated Students of PSU, the formal student body group.

Then the commie mob decided to straight up take over the meeting, calling for "MIC CHECK" while they all started shouting random drivel. The board members fled, and campus security monitored the situation yet did nothing.

Olivia Pace went on another unintentionally hilarious monologue, filled with random, incoherent commie term word soup. Can someone please translate this into English? Does anyone speak Wackjob?

"I'm with the Student Labor Action Project (SLAP), the first, and only, student labor action project ran by women of color… Our message in SLAP is that diversity, no matter how plentiful, does not equal equity. A task force which examines issues of race on campus is not going to change the fact that, while all of us who are working on this campus, are student workers, are making below minimum wage, that is still disparately, turn people of color, specifically women, a teach in on Islamophobia does not change the fact that if violent suppression exists against muslim students at this university, that is not going to be taken the same way as if they were hurting somebody's precious white child… The idea that diversity can mean equity creates a climate of violence on campus. Once people in the community and people (???) on the board, they start to ignore the problems and our bodies become solely for profit and we are not safe anymore."

Then you have this Muslim student who says she's going to get gunned down by whitey. "I am black and muslim, and this school is pretty much 70% white, and I will be targeted," after saying the univeristy is racist, and that she will die on this campus. Also something about $15 Now, because, stuff!

Then this Vietnamese transgender person-thing went on a rant, complaining that it is a "slave" and "stuck" at PSU getting a college degree, after its mom escaped captivity in Vietnam in order to bring it to America. It goes on to shame a black campus security officer, and says it does not feel safe on campus. It complains that decades ago people were lynched in certain areas, and claims that is still happening today. It complains about a poster put up by the Students For Donald Trump group. It claims that it is a slave to the PSU Board of trustees. It admits that it is complicit "in the destruction of other countries." It complains that it is a "colonial subject," and complains that the US is the land of opportunity. It ends by saying that we need to "smash shit" and says "there are more people that are enslaved now than you think."

Also featured was PSU's most infamous commie, saying:

"I'm drowning in over $60-80,000 of debt… And you know what? I'm not paying that shit off! We know this corrupt, decadent, white supremacist, capitalist patriarchy, hetero patriarchy, doesn't give a shit about any of us who are pushing back against it… Because until the system is smashed, nobody that doesn't look like me can have any fair chance in this society, and we know that. So until the system is smashed, it's gunna stay the same… This is a corrupt capitalism system. Don't feel the Bern, don't fall for Hillary's BS… "

Also featured was a middle aged SJW, who complains that students in the business and engineering programs get new building, while the SJWs majoring in gender and race studies are left with a free 60 year old building. Her child is transgendered, and she's worried about kids who aren't white or cis-gendered when police confront them during a protest or other action. She ends by telling the students to "bother those in power."

There's a bunch of videos of this freak show here . . .

The political Left is a haven for freaks, psychos, malcontents, losers and contrarians.

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  #140 

The political Left's unholy alliance with Islam


Nick Short (CounterJihadreport) says the Islamic State terrorist organization known as ISIS first outlined their strategy to attack the West in a 99-page manifesto issued in January of 2015 under the title of "Black Flags from Rome." ISIS states that their strategy in the West is to do "hit and run tactics and then go into hiding in order to waste millions and billions of dollars on police while shutting down major cities."

The manifesto further notes that, "once the media attention dies down, the Islamic State will tell another 'Sleeper Cell' to carry out another attack again." Their reason being that "this will put the police on high alert again, forcing them to shut the entire city down again, causing the [economic] loss of billions, so the people of Europe will realize that there is a constant war in their country, they will not feel safe."

On Tuesday, March 22, ISIS followed through on this strategy as they carried out a deadly assault in the heart of the European Union's administrative capital in Brussels, Belgium, making this the third such terrorist attack on European soil in just over a year. The Brussels assault involved simultaneous, coordinated attacks on key infrastructure sites hitting at least two major public sites. The first, occurred shortly after rush hour at 8 a.m. as two suicide bombers detonated their explosives at the departure hall of Brussels' Zaventem airport, the country's international airline hub, killing at least 11 people and injuring another 80 or so more. One hour later, another suicide bomber detonated his suicide belt in the Maelbeek Metro station in central Brussels, killing another 20 people and injuring over 100. The Maelbeek station was targeted deliberately as it services the modern headquarters for the 28-nation E.U.

In response to the attack, Belgium's government raised its terrorism-threat risk to the maximum level, appealed to people to stay home, and shut down the airport and Metro system while canceling the high-speed Eurostar and Thalys trains linking the city to London, Paris and Amsterdam. ISIS succeeded, once again, in carrying out their strategy outlined in their initial manifesto as the people of Europe are coming to the harsh realization that their country is in a state of constant war.

As John Schindler of the Observer notes, "the game changer [for Europe] was last November's horrific attacks in Paris, the bloodiest events on French soil since the Second World War." The November 13, 2015, attack in Paris that killed 130 people and injured 368, was carried out in virtually the same manner of the Brussels attacks, albeit on a smaller scale, but with the same modus operandi featuring simultaneous attacks on soft targets in various locations by multiple shooters and suicide bombers. The Paris attacks "turned out to have a significant Belgian footprint, with several of the attackers linked to Molenbeek, a notorious Brussels suburb that's half-Muslim and known to authorities as a hotbed of radicalism. For the police, Molenbeek has been a no-go area of sorts for years, leaving jihadists free rein to raise funds, collect arms, and plot mayhem elsewhere," writes Schindler. In short, Europe is now reaping what they have sown as Europe itself has imported a major threat into its countries based upon the utopian liberal policies of multiculturalism, open borders, and an unwillingness to address the underlying religious cause of jihad.

It is due to the unholy alliance between the modern day leaders of the left and Islam itself that is to blame for the war like conditions in which Europe is currently living under. This utopian agenda of the left is being exploited by jihadist sympathizing European Muslims as they have begun to ally with Left-wing activists in order to pave the way for what ISIS has calls the "conquest of Rome." This was specifically mentioned in the ISIS manifesto alluded to earlier as the terrorist organization explained the following:

A growing population of left-winged activists (people who are against; human/animal abuses, Zionism, and Austerity measures etc) look up to the Muslims as a force who are strong enough to fight against the injustices of the world. Many of these people (who are sometimes part of Anonymous and Anarchy movements) will ally with the Muslims to fight against the neo-NAZIs and rich politicians. They will give intelligence, share weapons and do undercover work for the Muslims to pave the way for the conquest of Rome.

So how will this happen? ISIS writes:

If you have ever been at a pro-Palestine/anti-Israel protest, you will see many activists who are not even Muslims who are supportive of what Muslims are calling for (the fall of Zionism). It is most likely here that connections between Muslims and left-wing activists will be made…they will start to work together in small cells of groups to fight and sabotage against the 'financial elite'

This not only applies to Europe, but the United States as well as we have seen a growing alliance between America's own radical Left and those within the Muslim community who espouse the ideology of jihad. For instance, in 2011, we saw the formation of an alliance between anti-Israel and Muslim-American advocacy groups in the United States who capitalized on the Occupy Wall Street Movement (OWS) to promote this agenda. Recalling the Occupy movement, it started in New York's Zuccotti Park on September 17, 2011, and spread to more than 100 cities. According to the movements website, the movement was "inspired by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia aiming to expose how the richest 1 percent of people are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future."

It didn't take long till Muslim Brotherhood front organizations such as the Council on Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) joined the fray in supporting the Occupy Wall Street Movement. In a press release issued on November 2, 2011, ICNA invoked classic leftist warfare rhetoric stating that, "Real progress and development of a country depends on prosperity of society as a whole, not just that of a selected portion of society. Yet the income gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow, and uneconomic recovery across the country has been uneven and unstable at best." Continuing this leftist sentiment, the press release goes on to conclude that, "ICNA sympathizes with the message of Occupy Wall Street protesters and supports their cause. These protesters are raising legitimate concerns regarding income disparity, unemployment and the state of our economy that cannot be ignored. As American Muslims we stand in solidarity with them across the country."

In his book The Brotherhood: America's Next Great Enemy, Erick Stakelbeck explains the underlying motivations behind this alliance writing that the "Occupiers hate America, loathe the free market, want to weaken the United States, overthrow capitalism, and divide the spoils among themselves. Islamists hate capitalism as much as any socialist Occupier does, because they seek to install a global Islamic financial system based on sharia precepts. Additionally, the Islamists and the radical Left both regard the United States -- the standard bearer and chief protector of Judeo-Christian Western Civilization -- as the Great Satan that must be destroyed."

This is the ultimate culture war, Islamists take advantage of the left's moral relativism, its default disapproval for non-Western, non-Judeo-Christian forces, and its tendency to pathologize any opposition to its causes as bigotry and "phobia," notes Stakelbeck. While the Occupy Wall Street Movement has flamed out, the unholy alliance continues to metastasize like a cancer throughout our nation.

The latest alliance being the growing nexus between Islamist groups like CAIR, ICNA, and many others with the radical leftist "Black Lives Matter" movement which casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner city frustration while its agitation has provoked police killings, violence, lawlessness and unrest in minority communities throughout the U.S. Simply put, Black Lives Matter is the exact organization that a terrorist group like ISIS could only have dreamed of and as Kyle Shideler of TownHall documents, jihadist front organizations like the Muslim American Society (MAS) and ICNA have already crept their way in.

Detailing a conference between MAS and ICNA in 2015, Shideler highlights that at the event, MAS leader Khalilah Sabra openly discussed the importance of Muslim support for Black Lives Matter, and urged "revolution." Comparing the situation in the United States to the Muslim Brotherhood-led Arab Spring revolutions, she asked, "We are the community that staged a revolution across the world. If we can do that, why can't we have that revolution in America?"

Reporting on this merging "revolutionary" alliance goes back as far as the first outbreak of disorder in Ferguson, Missouri writes Shideler, noting that "few may recall the attendance at Michael Brown's funeral of CAIR executive director Nihad Awad." Awad was identified in federal court as a member of the Palestine Committee, a covert group of Muslim Brothers dedicated to supporting Hamas in the United States. CAIR joined other Muslim Brotherhood organizations in Ferguson, and from then on the alliance between Black Lives Matter has only become emboldened. Look no further than the massive civil disobedience movement set to begin next month under the banner of Democracy Spring to confirm that the Muslim Brotherhood has embedded itself nicely within Black Lives Matter and other leftist groups.

To conclude, radical Islam and the radical Left in Europe is the same as radical Islam and the radical Left here in America. The Left, no matter where it is, uses Islam as means to achieve their radically different ends, which ultimately boils down to power and control. In Europe you're currently seeing what those ends look like while here in America, the means are only beginning to take shape. The lesson to be learned from Europe is that the unholy alliance between the Left and Islam inevitably leads to the latter taking over the former. Europe is at war with not only an enemy it cannot contain in Islam, but with itself as well.

America too will soon follow suit if we continue down Europe's utopian path of multiculturalism, open borders, and political correctness. We are living on borrowed 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  #141 

Leftist publication calls for burning the U. S. Constitution

Dave Blount (Moonbattery) says moonbats don't always dress in sheep's clothing. Sometimes they come right out and tell you who they are and what they want:

Jacobin, a new socialist magazine, has published an essay advocating destroying the U.S. Constitution.

The magazine, which was launched in 2011 and is published four times a year, is the creation of Bhaskar Sunkara. Sunkara, 26, is the son of immigrants from Trinidad and Tobago. He lives in Brooklyn.

A new profile on argues that "Jacobin has in the past five years become the leading intellectual voice of the American left, the most vibrant and relevant socialist publication in a very long time."

Jacobin claims a circulation of 15,000 with a web audience of 750,000 a month. A 2013 profile of Sunkara in the New York Times revealed that when Seth Ackerman, a graduate student at Cornell, wrote a piece critical of the U.S. Constitution, Sunkara came up with the title: "Seth had a title with nine words and a semicolon. I crossed it out and wrote 'Burn the Constitution.'"

Ackerman's article argues that the Constitution, with its governmental checks and balances, prevents "the democratic will" and "popular sovereignty."

It sure does. Students of history will recognize these terms as euphemisms for mob rule leading to authoritarian statism. Jean-Jacques Rousseau famously propagated the notion that government represents the will of the people. It follows that government has the right to impose whatever it wants on those same people, no matter how many it has to kill to get them to comply. Rousseau's toxic ideology helped create the French Revolution and the following Reign of Terror, the template for authoritarian revolutions to follow.

Speaking of the French Revolution, here's what "Jacobin" means:

a member of a radical society or club of revolutionaries that promoted the Reign of Terror and other extreme measures, active chiefly from 1789 to 1794

The American Revolution resulted in a government whose power is limited by the Constitution. It was the polar opposite of the French Revolution, producing freedom and consequently wealth rather than tyranny and consequently terror. All politics boils down to which revolution will prevail.

burning constitution

Their openly stated objective.

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  #142 


Daniel Greenfield (Politichicks) says the paradox of the individualistic society is that it can only exist if individuals embrace virtues that are greater than their own needs and whims. A society where each individual acts as a little tyrant, pursuing his desires with total selfishness at the expense of everyone else becomes collectivist as the little tyrants turn to a series of big tyrants to get what they want no matter who gets hurt by it.

Social compacts are the alternative to big government. Communities built around unwritten laws in which people do the right thing keep government at bay better than a million laws ever could. No Constitution can protect a people that does not know or care about what it says. Laws embody ideas about what a society can be. But only the people can actually live out those ideas in their lives.

As individual virtues and social compacts break down, selfish squabbles escalate. Tribalism turns into legal civil war. Laws become the means by which one group imposes its will on the other and by which one man seizes the property of another. The people come to view the system with contempt. All virtues and principles are abandoned as neighbor turns on neighbor in resentment and hatred.

Our society has cultivated narcissism as its highest virtue. Even liberalism has become condensed to an identity politics of narcissism in which each victim gets to talk about their feelings for fifteen minutes before crybullying for someone's head. Political discourse has become an exchange of feelings. And unlike contradictory ideas, clashing feelings of entitlement cannot be resolved.

Ideas can exist objectively. Feelings only exist subjectively. Identity politics resolves this problem by treating the objective response to feelings as privilege. But even subjective empathy can never truly approach the subjective experience of the crybully. Even a member of that same identity group will differ in some way from the multiple intersectional identities of the crybully. And that difference is its own privilege. This isn't really politics. It's self-help narcissism crossbred with stale Marxism.

Marxism pretended to be a science. Its idiot inheritors use the same highly specialized vocabulary to describe their imaginary science of feelings to decide whose feelings get hurt microscopically worse.

But that's the only kind of politics that narcissists can be expected to embrace. The left has personalized the political as much as it has politicized the personal. Its politics is purely personal. Its ideas can be condensed to "X upsets Y." With the corollary that in the future X will not be allowed to upset Y because Y will be in charge of everything and stupid people like X will all die off so that history is on the side of Y and not X. This is a seven year old's politics with better vocabulary.

But narcissism of the kind that our society has cultivated is a formula for perpetual childishness. Adulthood means doing things you don't want to do and discovering that they can make you the person you want to be. That's how virtue is born. Perpetual childhood prevents virtue from ever forming. Instead public life is cluttered with oversized children who have the language skills, resources and political power of adults, but none of the virtues that come with maturity.

They blame everyone else for their failures. Nothing is ever their fault. Everything is unfair. They can never admit they were wrong. Every failure adds more grievances and enemies to be blamed. They are incapable of acknowledging simple facts. Instead they lash out when they are shown why they cannot have what they want. The immature mind treats reality as a personal attack. It does not care what the truth is. It only wants its feelings validated by blaming someone, anyone else.

A childish society is an "I Want" society in which everyone wants everything and no one wants to do the hard work of getting it. The clamor of demands is negotiated through the childish hierarchies of bullying, shame, braggadocio, tears, outbursts, violence and deceit. Any social compacts or laws that interfere with "I Want" are always unfair. Anyone who doesn't agree is the enemy.

Denying a narcissist anything hurts their feelings. And so they lash out in retribution. They are immune to facts or explanations. They know what they want and they know that society isn't fair because it isn't oriented around their feelings, but they think it will be once they get their way.

Democracy can't exist under these conditions. No civil society can. Without common virtues, there can be no enduring common ground. One side makes concessions while the other celebrates its successful bullying until the first side finds its own bully. Without a consensus, winning becomes everything and the winners are those who break the most rules while complaining the hardest.

And refusing to live by any rules while playing the victim is what narcissists are so good at.

Ideas, virtues and principles are the enemies of narcissism because they imply that there are greater and more important things than its feelings. To the perpetually immature, everything is personal. The attempt to move from the subjective to the objective is treated as devaluing the importance of its feelings. The narcissistic refrain of crybullies in campus debates is, "Stop talking and listen to me."

The safe space represents the total rejection of all dialogue. It is also the ideal metaphor for the politics of an immature mind. It extends the entitlement of the crybully from its mind into the physical space with the ultimate goal of expanding that physical embodiment of its entitlement to the entire world.

All rights become condensed to self-esteem. Individual virtue is reduced to a lack of shame. Narcissists are always fighting battles of personal self-expression against "haters" who make them feel bad about themselves. Freedom of speech, and any other freedom, can't exist in this space of emotional tribalism where negotiating the validation of your identity is the only thing that matters.

And yet it's ideas that resolve personal conflicts. They allow us to set limits of mutual respect. These principles make it possible for us to exist as individuals without big government to watch over us. Principles check our entitlement. They tell us that there are things which matter more than what we want or the anger we feel. They tell us that we are not entitled to steal from someone just because we really want to. They remind us of the price we end up paying for winning at any cost.

These are the things that set apart society from savagery and human beings from animals.

A narcissistic society only empowers individuals to destroy their individual freedoms and the society that made it possible. The self-centered logic of narcissism can justify anything as long as it feels right. Principles are abandoned, virtues are mocked and morality is meaningless. The longer this goes on, the worse society becomes since the very worst way of finding happiness is perpetual immaturity.

Narcissists who can't win their own battles turn to bigger narcissists. Little tyrants become big tyrants. Anything is justified and the very idea of a truth apart from feelings dies away. All that's left is a brutish scramble to find the power proportionate to the feelings of everyone in Youmerica.

And these days we all live in a Youmerica where feelings matter more than facts, where narcissism is the only politics, where the only way to win is to hate and cry harder and where the future is a government as big as the ego of its rulers. Youmerica is our culture, our government and our creed.

Youmerica is the nightmare of the Founding Fathers come to live. "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion," John Adams warned. "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The same is true of all the rest of it.

We have no government capable of contending with human passions unbound by any code. The only government that will serve is tyranny. We can have a virtuous society of free men and women. Or we can have what we have now, and that is only a taste of what is still to come in the dying days of an empire whose people are busy trading their virtues for pottage without counting the cost.

Without virtues, all politics are reduced to their basic roots of tribal emotion and personal greed.

Without personal responsibility and truth, the cycle of decline will never be broken. Instead it will intensify. There will be scapegoats and circuses, massacres in the forum and fires in the night. There will be a new tyrant on the balcony every week and a new mob in the streets calling for blood.

And the country we once had will never return. There will be no America. Only Youmerica.

The country that we once had was not merely documents or buildings or territory. It was people. They were not a perfect people. Far from it. Like all of us, they were deeply flawed. But they believed in things. And as flawed as these things were, many were willing to live and die by them. They were willing to seek truth even if where it led did not please them. They made mistakes, but they grew up and became the men and women who tamed a land, build a nation and saved the world.

If we are to deserve the inheritance they left us, we must become better than we are. All of us.

We have been betrayed, undermined, misused, lied to and exploited. But in the end only we are capable of that final betrayal of our dreams and our heritage. We can choose to rebuild a social compact, a moral society that can undo the damage that has been done. Or we can let it all go.

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  #143 

American fascists

Left/right, Progressive/Conservative, Democrat/Republican -- the names change and evolve but the core difference remains constant -- the Collectivists vs. the Individualists.

In his latest FIREWALL video, Bill Whittle shows how violence, disruption and intimidation have always been the tools of the Collectivists.

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  #144 

Murder and mayhem -- courtesy of the political Left


Ray Starmann (USDefenseWatch) says as the world lights candles, ISIS deals Europe another Dead Man's Hand…

As the Eifel Tower is illuminated in Belgian colors, ISIS plots another attack…

As the wreckage of glass and body parts are swept up, Obama sings "Take Me out to the Ballgame" with Raul Castro…

As Brussels smolders, Angela Merkel still believes the Muslims invasion of Germany is just a wunderbar idea.

At 8:00 AM, Belgian local time today, terrorists detonated two suicide bombs in Zaventem Airport and one at the Maalbeek metro station. As of tonight, there are 34 dead and 200 wounded, including nine Americans.

ISIS is on the move and there is not one leader in the West with the intestinal fortitude to stop them.

Today's terrorist attacks are the result of failed immigration policies for over thirty years in leftist Europe that have created a perfect storm of unassimilated, unemployed and violent Muslims who hide out in Sharia Law No Go Zones, as they plan their next attack against their benevolent hosts.

As the bombs explode and the machine guns riddle innocent people, Angela Merkel, David Cameron and Jacques Hollande wring their hands and apologize and claim that everything is okay, it will all work out in the end.

No, it won't.

Nothing ever works out when your enemy consists of psychotic murderers who make Charles Manson look like Mr. Rogers.

Nothing ever works out when the good guys and girls are left-wing politicians.

Across the Atlantic Ocean, the level of denial and hand wringing and failure to face reality is equal to that in Europe.

Barack Obama took 51 seconds yesterday out of his busy schedule to discuss the attacks and hurriedly denounced the act of terrorism, but not Islamic terrorism. Then he went back to his main focus, posing for pictures in front of a Che Guevara mural.

Obama has no desire to wage war against ISIS, to the dismay and death of hundreds of thousands of people across the world who suffer at the hands of the ISIS butchers.

Following Obama's spineless lead was Hillary, who stated today that the terrorist attacks in Brussels should have no effect on our current open borders.

Of course not, why would we ever want to secure our nation's borders? That would be racist.

What is it going to take for the Left in Europe and the U. S. to pull their proverbial head out of their proverbial backside and face and deal with reality?

Obama's plan is to run out the clock and retire to Rancho Mirage or Hawaii where he can have afternoon tea with Bill Ayers and Daniel Ortega. What ISIS does in the meantime is of no concern to Obama. He is what the Army used to call ROAD, Retired on Active Duty.

Europe is waiting for the U. S. to take the lead. They won't get leadership from Obama, but God willing and the river don't rise, a President Trump or Cruz would lead and would vanquish ISIS from the face of the earth.

The US needs a leader who will take off the gloves and give ISIS a good Old Hickory, Andrew Jackson beating. We are at war and the war can only end with the complete and utter destruction of ISIS.

It's either us or them.

Right now, it's game, set and match, ISIS.

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

Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #145 
These protesters are CRIMINALS (LAWLESS) HOODLUMS who are paid by George Soros to start civil war and chaos.  All they need to do is hire the Oath Keepers to patrol these events like what happened in the Ferguson 2 riots that were squashed. 

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #146 

Beware "Democracy Spring"


Mark Tapson (FrontPage) says as the 2016 field of election contestants narrows, Republican Presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has become the stormy center of campaign news coverage and a lightning rod for violent tension at his rallies. Many in the left-leaning media place the blame for the heated confrontations at his events on Trump himself -- others on his supporters. Few are pointing the finger at the swelling numbers of leftist protesters aggressively organizing to shut Trump down altogether.

A recent analysis of ABC, CBS and NBC news coverage found that all three broadcast networks have made the violence plaguing Trump's rallies the near-exclusive focus of their campaign coverage. Their reporters specifically placed 94% of the blame -- 46 instances to 3 -- on Trump and his campaign, while virtually ignoring the protesters such as those who forced the cancelation of Trump's recent appearance in Chicago.

As Monica Crowley observed in the Washington Times, the hordes of protesters who swarmed the Chicago arena and forced Trump to cancel were operating "straight out of the Alinsky playbook: create chaos, blame the victim, stop free speech and advance progressivism." It is "the same leftist revolution that's been roiling America for decades." That is evident if for no other reason than the fact that domestic terrorist Bill Ayers showed up at the Chicago protest to give it his imprimatur.

In conversation with Sean Hannity on Fox after the Chicago cancelation, Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke called the protesters "a totalitarian movement":

"You have cop haters. You have anarchists. You have criminals. You have some rowdy juveniles. You have organized labor. And there is a spattering of well-intentioned people who are being exploited in this, and they're the ones pushed out front, and those are the ones pushed out in front of the camera as they do their dirty work."


Aaron Klein wrote at Breitbart that some of those same radicals are now plotting a mass civil disobedience movement to begin next month called "Democracy Spring" -- a name which echoes the "Arab Spring" that unleashed not democracy but bloody Islamic fundamentalism across the Middle East. Democracy Spring was organized ostensibly to transform a political system corrupted by "big money interests." The members intend to meet up on April 2 at the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia, then march to the Capitol building in Washington D.C. for a sit-in that will constitute the "largest civil disobedience action of the century." They claim to be fully prepared to provoke and accept the arrest of thousands of their activists, in preparation for which they will be holding mandatory nonviolent civil disobedience trainings twice a day and securing pro-bono legal counsel.

Though Democracy Spring claims to be nonpartisan, signatories to this movement include leftist actor and Occupy Wall Street supporter Mark Ruffalo and Code Pink founders Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans, as well as progressive organizations such as NOW, People for the American Way, People for Bernie, Young Democratic Socialists, the George Soros-funded groups and the Institute for Policy Studies (the left's oldest think tank and a supporter of Communist and anti-American causes), and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the largest socialist organization in America. The DSA's Chicago branch literally transported protesters to Trump's canceled Chicago event, according to Klein.

As the Democracy Spring website declares, "The stage is set for a bold intervention to turn the tinder of passive public frustration into a fire that transforms the political climate in America, that sparks a popular movement that can't be stopped." The "drama in Washington" they are planning "will rock the business-as-usual cycle of this election and catapult this critical issue on to center stage."

Klein notes that Democracy Spring's website does not mention Trump by name, and it stresses nonviolent intentions. But considering the aggression inherent in the radical left, as evidenced in the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter movements, it is highly likely that demonstrations involving mobs of thousands will result in violence somewhere along the line, and the news media will find a way to characterize it sympathetically as understandable pushback against the rise of "fascist" Trump. At the very least, the Democracy Spring mob and their radical ilk likely hope to provoke violence from Trump's followers, which they can then use to deflect responsibility and pin it on the billionaire candidate who has become the target of their hate.

As the election season heats up, the proper response to the left's violent provocations must be zero tolerance. It is time progressives were held accountable for their criminal aggression and for their totalitarian impulse to silence conservative candidates and disrupt the election process. As Monica Crowley wrote, Donald Trump's campaign "is merely the current pretext for the latest battle of a revolution that seeks nothing short of the destruction of the American democratic and capitalist system." That revolution cannot be allowed to gather momentum. Trump got it right when he announced recently that he would begin pressing charges against protesters who broke the law. That's a good start.

Here's a police officer's comments about these so-called "protesters":

Add to that list of "leftist" groups (above) International ANSWER and the Revolutionary Communist Party (RevCom). These two organizations are rarely mentioned.

International ANSWER is the clearing house for ALL leftist organizations. Every leftist organization is affiliated with International ANSWER. Every leftist action is coordinated by ANSWER. It's the heart of the beast.

RevCom, led by Bob Avakian, is where all the really hard-core leftists lurk. Any time you see a "protest" look for the yellow posters. That's RevCom and they are everywhere. These are the people who are working every day towards a violent communist revolution. These are really bad guys.

Here's the link to the "Democracy Spring" website.

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  #147 

In case you haven't noticed, the Left says every Republican is Hitler

Aleister (ProgressivesToday) says the Left is pushing the idea that Donald Trump is Hitler but that's only because he's the front runner. If Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie or even Carly Fiornia was the leading candidate they would be called Hitler.


Daniel Greenfield of Frontpage Mag points out that this has been going on for years:

Every Republican Presidential Candidate Is Hitler

"Except for Adolf Hitler's extermination of the Jewish people, the American bombardment of defenseless peasants in Indochina is the most barbaric act of modern times."

That quote didn't come from some Soviet hack coughing up copy for Moscow, but from Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern. (Some years later, McGovern would compare the Communist massacres in Cambodia to the Holocaust and call for some of that barbaric military intervention.)

Vice President Hubert Humphrey also brought out Hitler when running against Nixon, declaring, "If the British had not fought in 1940, Hitler would have been in London and if Democrats do not fight in 1968, Nixon will be in the White House." Chicago Mayor Daley had accused Nixon of "Hitler type" tactics.

McGovern had set a record for comparing Nixon to Hitler, which made him very popular with the Left, but he hadn't originated it. Comparing any Republican presidential candidate to Hitler had been a standard Democratic political tactic for some time no matter how inappropriate it might be…

To most people, Nazi analogies summon up images of the Holocaust and a ruthless dictatorship. To the Left however, any populist reaction against their rule is Nazism. In their world, there is a battle between progressive and reactionary forces. Any movement that dares to run for office by challenging progressive policies is reactionary, fascist and the second coming of the Third Reich. Republican victories are lazily attributed by liberal hacks to mindless public anger being exploited by right-wing demagogues.

And so the only thing we can truly be certain of is that any Republican nominee will be Hitler. It doesn't matter what he believes. It doesn't matter if Democrats considered him a moderate 5 minutes ago. Accusations of Nazism remain the default argument for a Democrat Party turned far to the Left.

Republicans aren't progressive. Therefore they're Hitler. It's really that simple.

The Left has been playing this game for decades but the media acts like it's a new phenomenon in every election cycle.

In reality, it's total crap.

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

Posts: 884
Reply with quote  #148 
Aren't they already released especially with the supposed MSM called "peaceful protesters" at Trump's rallies?

Super Moderators
Posts: 23,050
Reply with quote  #149 

The Left's plan to cut loose 1,000,000 convicts


Matthew Vadum (FrontPage) is reporting that radical left-wingers want to free half the nation's prisoners --including many violent offenders-- a move that would cause an upsurge in crime rates for decades to come.

To many of today's leftists criminality itself is an illegitimate concept. The mindless chanting of the slogan "no one is illegal" at open-borders rallies is part of the same school of thought.

Spearheaded by the American Civil Liberties Union and bankrolled by radical speculator George Soros, the "end mass incarceration" movement wants to reduce the U.S. prison population by 50 percent within the next 10 to 15 years.

"We have the largest incarcerated population in the world despite the fact that we're a democracy and that we value individual freedoms," Alison Holcomb, national director of the ACLU Campaign to End Mass Incarceration told public radio station KUOW in Puget Sound, Wash.

"The overuse of our criminal justice system has resulted in expanding a caste, a second class of citizens that lose their right to vote, that won't be able to get loans to go to school, that will probably have difficulty renting an apartment and that is not healthy for our society and it's actually compromising our safety."

Like #BlackLivesMatter supporter and Baltimore riot organizer DeRay Mckesson, Holcomb doesn't care about property rights.

She doesn't want thieves and robbers jailed even briefly. If someone steals property, "why is the response to put that person in a cage?" she said.

Holcomb's comrades want to unleash more than a million inmates -- including violent offenders -- on American society.

"With 2.3 million Americans incarcerated in prisons and jails, a 50 percent reduction would mean changing sentencing and parole rules to cut the net population by more than 1 million people, either by releasing current inmates or by not incarcerating future offenders," reports the sympathetic left-wing media site

Halving the prison population would require changing sentencing rules "not only for the so-called 'non, non, nons' -- non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offender criminals -- but also for some offenders convicted of violent crimes."

Shortening sentence lengths, relaxing parole criteria, shifting convicts from incarceration to probation or community service, sending more inmates to mental illness programs or addiction treatment, "and even redefining what offenses are considered violent in the first place."

"Violent offenders would have to be part of any serious attempt to halve the number of prisoners," the news report states.

Some of the violent offenders could be made to disappear simply by wordplay, explains self-described communist and former Obama green jobs czar Van Jones.

"We might want to look at whether someone who had a gun but didn't use it should be considered violent," said Jones, co-founder of Rebuild the Dream and plenty of other hard-left groups. "People will say that's gun crime and you can't talk about them. Well, I think that's ridiculous."

Murderers would have to be given lighter sentences to hit the target of 50 percent of prisoners released. To underline the point, wheels out University of Pennsylvania political scientist Marie Gottshalk. She laments that in the U.S. murderers typically get life without parole, whereas in Europe a 10-year prison term for murder is considered severe.

But it needs to be noted that prisoner recidivism rates in America are already sky-high so maybe giving legions of inmates get-out-of-jail cards isn't such a good idea.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) has warned that "when we release large numbers of criminals early, we know that a substantial number of those individuals will commit murders, rapes, assaults, robberies, and other violent crimes that would have been prevented had they remained in prison."

Science is on Sessions's side.

Within a year of release, 43 percent of state prisoners are arrested for committing a new crime. By the end of five years the figure jumps to 77 percent, according to "Multistate Criminal History Patterns of Prisoners Released in 30 States," published by the U.S. Department of Justice in September 2015.

The recidivism rate among released federal prisoners, a much smaller cohort than released state prisoners, is lower but still quite high. According to a recent report from the U.S. Sentencing Commission "nearly half (49.3%) of [federal] offenders released from prison or placed on a term of probation in 2005 were rearrested within eight years for either a new crime or for some other violation of the technical conditions of their probation or release."

So if the activists get their way, how big will the crime spree that follows be?

Assuming there are 2 million prisoners and a roughly 70 percent recidivism rate among all released prisoners, if half of the prisoners are released and each one commits only one crime, 700,000 criminal acts that otherwise might not have happened will take place.

Call it a social justice-inspired crime wave.

The push to liberate lawbreakers comes as Barack Obama, the most radical left-wing American president in history, is defining deviancy down by attempting to de-stigmatize criminality. The Left views criminals -- especially minorities -- as victims of society, oppressed for mere nonconformism. Because it needs their votes, the Left is pressing for the restoration of felons' voting rights. And it also supports legislation "banning the box," that is, banning employment applications that ask if the applicant has a criminal record.

Of course, a criminal record carries with it a degree of social stigma, as it should. Removing or watering down that socially beneficial stigma reduces disincentives to commit crimes and hinders the marginalization of the antisocial. Without stigma and social ostracism, society would eventually collapse.

So-called sanctuary cities are another arrow in the Left's anti-incarceration quiver. Hundreds of jurisdictions throughout the country frustrate immigration enforcement efforts and shield illegal aliens from federal officials as a matter of policy. The sanctuary cities movement gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans and is the product of decades of concerted activity by radical groups like the ACLU and the pro-Castro Center for Constitutional Rights.

The desire to empty the prisons goes back to Sixties radical Angela Davis.

The two-time Communist Party USA vice presidential candidate, now a beloved figure in the groves of academe, blazed a trail decades ago. Davis demanded the release of all minority criminals because they were "political prisoners" of the racist United States, victims of a capitalist "prison-industrial complex."

Davis hasn't moderated over the years.

"We cannot simply call for reform," she told an audience last month at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. "We want an end to incarceration, period."

Davis blathered on, railing against the mythical prison-industrial complex and "the deep structural racism embedded" in the American criminal justice system. Radicals like Davis have no interest in facts that undermine their narrative so they bandy about the structural racism claim routinely even though it lacks empirical support.

"Racism continues to play a determining role in who gets stopped by the police and who doesn't," she continued. "It determines who gets arrested and who goes free, who gets longer sentence and who gets shorter sentences."

These things are true -- but only in the deranged minds of radicals.

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  #150 

Leftists are upset that Obama's Supreme Court pick is an old white guy


Aleister (ProgressivesToday) is reporting that progressives are rallying around an old white guy for president but that doesn't count for some strange reason.

For the Left, there always has to be something to be outraged about and when it comes to Obama's pick for the Supreme Court, he’s just too old and white.

This is from the liberal journal The New Republic:

Why Would Obama Nominate an Old White Guy to the Supreme Court?

Barack Obama's decision to nominate Merrick Garland, a 63-year-old white moderate and perennial short-lister, to the Supreme Court, has political junkies and lawyers scratching their heads.

Speculation had swirled for weeks that Obama would select a young, qualified, liberal ethnic minority to fill Antonin Scalia's vacancy -- a decision that would've turned the GOP's promise to obstruct any nominee into a racially fraught proposition, and possibly elicit the same kind of ugly, racially tinged attacks that Justice Sonia Sotomayor faced seven years ago, but this time in an election year.

A conventional wisdom is already forming that Obama chose Garland to wrongfoot Republican senators, who were expecting a more liberal nominee.

Merrick is a liberal nominee, by the way. He has a horrible record on the 2nd Amendment.

The fact that the Left doesn’t view him as a liberal is more evidence of how extreme they’ve become.

What puzzles me about Frank Joyce historical comment (above) is why 500 years? Why not 400 or 600 years? What was the historical event that occurred in the 16th century that made the white man evil?

And watch how the little girl -- the whitest little girl you ever saw -- has been propagandized to hate her own race:

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