When This Blows Over

Click your screen, then “Full Screen”

this compilation was

drawn from extensive

personal archives &

many hours of

exploration,

rummaging, research

and bemused /

befuddled awareness...

The concept,

organization, lay-out,

excerpt from

Lay Off Rafael, He’s a

Respectful Employee

and most of the

photography is mine -- the method, purposeful

-- therefore this unique unoriginal edifying essentially

plagiarized work is

© Copyright 2020

Take One Productions / Russ

cameravision161@gmail.com

When

This

Blows

Over

Sit down, sonny - I've answered

enough questions.

- George Burns, “Oh, God”

Q: Did you ever think we would have the Federal

Intelligence, the Federal Police involved in a political

spying campaign in 2016, 2017 - which probably will,

when we find out the full facts, overshadow

Watergate.?

…It’s different than Watergate in the

sense that it’s not an isolated branch of

government.

It’s not a rogue group -- it’s not a cover up. It’s a

systematic weaponization of the hierarchy in the

Obama administration…of the CIA, the FBI, the

Department of Justice, elements of the State

Department, and it follows on the heels of the

weaponization of the IRS, with Lois Lerner going

after the Tea Party movement.

With Watergate you had an adversarial press as a

self-appointed watch dog. We have a fusion now

between the DNC, the progressive movement and

the media.

So, all of a sudden, the media… We used to say that

they were the icons of civil liberties protection.

Now, they are saying you cannot investigate the

FBI. We do not want you to endanger the actions

coming out of the CIA. Don’t dare suggest that

members of the State Department or the DOJ were

involved. That’s new. That’s very scary because

freedoms are usually lost when the media joins the

government.

Whatever happened in 2016, and we still don’t know

the full extent of it… I don’t think there’s a parallel,

unfortunately, in American history. I’m afraid this is

going to be ranked as the biggest political scandal

ever.”

Q: It is hard to credit that this scandal would simply

be the result of individual actors who suddenly

decided to do nefarious things out of the blue. There

has to be a broader context. How imperative were

radical Leftist ideologues and ideologies?

“In a general way, they enhance this sort of

arrogance, that these people were progressive social

warriors and they saw a chance for a 16-year regnum

[kingdom] of Obama and Hillary that would

fundamentally transform the nation, and therefore

the details of how that noble crusade would be

adopted were not as important as the crusade itself.

That gave these people like Peter Strzok or James

Comey or John Brennan – many of them just

bureaucratic careerists - it gave them a sense of

impunity or exemption from accountability.

The other thing is more banal, and that is, you have

to go back to the climate of 2015-16 when

everybody was saying that Donald Trump was

going to wreck the Republican Party, he had no

chance, he would not get the nomination; if he got it,

he would not be elected, if he’s elected he would

destroy the country. And so there’s a sense that,

well, as an insurance policy - to quote Andrew

McCabe - you could do all these things because

Hillary is going to be president. And what would

[ordinarily] be illegal behavior, given her reputation

would be rewarded as service to a noble cause.

These people were really in a competition to prove

to a president-elect Hillary that they were

responsible for her landslide mandate. Once you

start looking at the whole thing in that prism or that

matrix, then it makes a lot more sense. It explains

why these people were not just arrogant, but so

careless in the manner in which they operated.”

Q: I think this last point is very interesting, because

very few people ever mention it. There is a propensity

on the Right to jump to the deep swamp, uber

sophisticated, conspirators’ theory, but there really is

not just a level of arrogance but a level of

dilettantism… This really does undergird the analysis

that these people are nefarious, but also incompetent.

“Why would Andy McCabe think that after his wife

was a recipient of nearly $700,000 in Clinton related

PAC money that he would not - just a few weeks

later – that he would not have to recuse himself from

investigating her emails? Why did Hillary Clinton

think she could destroy 33,000 emails under

subpoena and destroy the devices with sledge

hammers and think she would get away with it?

There was something about the milieu or the attitude

of the country in 2015-16…We really have to

remember that Obama had kind of checked out; his

poor popularity had gone up the more people didn’t

see him, and they liked the idea of Obama’s

presidency, rather than the reality of it. Hillary was

supposedly the sober and judicious Democratic

stalwart whose time had come; everybody was

jumping on the bandwagon to prove they were more

loyal than the next and they were going to get a

better job than the other. All of that encompasses

such an outsider - an outlier – and that’s the climate

moment which this all took place.

So, they weren’t careful – they were arrogant; they

were sloppy, but they were also nefarious, because

deep down inside they felt that they had the right to

act against the Constitution of the United States.

They tried to destroy a campaign and tried to destroy

a presidential transition, and then they tried to

destroy a presidency.”

Q: How much of this was a function of their unalloyed

belief that Donald Trump could not be President and

that when 63 million Americans chose him that they

chose the wrong candidate?

“I think almost all of it was. Remember that almost

immediately, we had an effort to sue in three states

to overturn the voting – claiming that the machines

were corrupt. And that didn’t work. And then on

Inauguration Day, there were protests. Madonna

promising - or dreaming I should say - of blowing

up the White House. Then there were articles of

impeachment. Then there was that weird appeal

earlier to the electors of the Electoral College not to

follow their mandate - that they should be renegades

to deny Trump.

And then we had the flirtation with the Logan Act –

they went after Michael Flynn. Then they had the

flirtation with the Emoluments Clause. Then the 25 th

Amendment - maybe we’ll get psychiatrists to

testify. And then finally the Mueller investigation

and we had the pseudo coup by Andrew McCabe

and Rod Rosenstein. There were a series of efforts

to destroy the Trump administration; they were all

based on the idea that this cannot stand because

these are not the right people to be in positions of

power – they’re not in the Brookings Institution,

they’re not in the Council on Foreign Relations,

they’re not from the Economics Department at

Harvard.”

Q: Let’s go to this phenomenon – I tend to agree with

General Mike Flynn, who I served with in the

transition team and in the White House, that on

November 16 th 2016 we saw a peaceful political

revolution in the United States. Donald Trump would

not have been possible, in my opinion, were it not for

the abject failure, the moral and technical bankruptcy

of the quote-unquote elite on both left and right. In

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, he gave a rally speech not

too long ago where he said basically, the elite are dead

and he pointed at the audience and said “You are the

super elite.” Is the quote-unquote “elite” dead in

America?

“There’s always going to be an elite in every

society. We’ve come to view it in the post-war

order - that is, the Ivy League degree elite, the

corporate elite, the globalist elite – I think they’ve

lost a lot of prestige. On the major issues of our

time, they’ve been on the wrong side. The mess we

see at the border… they were either - on the Left,

hoping for demographics from illegal immigration

that would enhance their power - on the Right, cheap

labor. They misread the American people and they

were discredited. When you look at China, what

you’re seeing now is the elite in the corporate world

and in the so-called humanitarian Left, they’re

scrambling, without evoking the word Trump,

to kind of emulate this tough approach to China.

Where did it come from? It’s only possible because

Trump threw a hammer in the glass, and now they’re

all suspicious of China. Same thing with the Iran

deal; same thing with moving the embassy to

Jerusalem.

Trump disrupted a lot of assumed status quo

pretension, and people were bewildered because

their orthodoxy said “you can’t do that”, and if you

do, chaos will ensue - and not only did chaos not

ensue, but foreign policy and economic successes

did. Now they’re trying to either piggy back on it or

deprecate Trump’s contribution, but whatever

they’re doing, the message is they could not do or

they would not do that and people are showing their

class tag.”

Q: Does that mean that the change is so tectonic in

2016 that the stranglehold of the Brookings

Institution, know-it-alls, the op-ed writers has been

broken for good or will we snap back to business as

usual when Trump is gone? How large is the impact,

historically, of the 2016 election?

“I think it’s pretty large. There are force multipliers

like the internet and blogging and Twitter that allow

messaging to go out, regardless of the imprimatur

from the elite – it doesn’t matter anymore.

You can see it in the Democratic Party – We’re not

talking about all these supposed senior statesmen of

the Democratic Party – they’re completely irrelevant

now. That elite has been discredited. There’s been a

Jacobin revolution on the Left – we’ve got street

fighters and brawlers and baristas; we’ve got

everybody in there – a mob. You’ve got a 77-yearold

socialist; you’ve got a 29-year-old basically

know nothing, and all the other candidates worry

that the Democratic establishment – the whole thing

– is in flux. You can see what happens when their

gatekeepers are overrun by the mob and the mob is

in the street, and that’s what’s happening to the

Democratic Party.

On the Republican side, I don’t think if Mitt

Romney or Jeb Bush weighs in, or George Will or

Bill Kristol – these were the voices of sober and

judicious Republican establishment – or the Koch

brothers – I don’t think anybody in Michigan or

Pennsylvania or the Central Valley of California

listens anymore.

They have just been tuned out, because it is sort of

like the boy who cried wolf one too many times.

Trump is a monster; Trump can’t be nominated;

Trump can’t be elected; Trump can’t succeed…and

after a while people think, “you know just go away.”

And I think that’s the attitude they have towards a

lot of those people.

I’m just thinking, maybe we can have a more

meritocratic elite – Where one went to school, or

what the letters are behind one’s name don’t matter

as much as the track record of the actual

performance. That would be welcome. There’s

always going to be a need; I just hope it’s not this

aristocratic East Coast-West Coast traditional

corporate media university elite.”

2019

Meet the Press

@MeetThePress

· May 10

Replying to @KerriKupecDOJ and @chucktodd

You’re correct. Earlier today, we inadvertently and

inaccurately cut short a video clip of an interview

with AG Barr before offering commentary and

analysis. The remaining clip included important

remarks from the attorney general that we missed,

and we regret the error.

Michael Goodwin

@mgoodwin_nypost

·

May 10

Ok, now correct your commentary too

“…These are the people who once upon a time believed

that when the government had railroaded an innocent

man, justice demanded that that person be released and

the government be held accountable. But when it

comes to someone close to Donald Trump, they’re happy to shoot

the innocent as well as the guilty. Michael Flynn never could have

been convicted at trial on this, because the government withheld

all of the evidence that would have shown he was not guilty.

That is what Attorney General Barr released.

The sudden re-appearance of Barack Obama on the stage to

criticize this and to criticize Trump’s handling of the pandemic, to

me, it’s instructive of how nervous he must be. The Flynn case

shows that the President – Barack Obama himself - was directly

involved in the spying: the spying we now know was

unauthorized. It had no legitimate purpose for law enforcement.

Barack Obama knew about it, had a role in it, discussed it. We

now know that for a fact. So, of course he’s going to try to

change the subject – The far left would rather have a few choice

words from their dear leader, than the facts of the case.

The idea that General Flynn pled guilty to something, ergo it must

be a crime…Would it be ok if you tortured him and then he pled

guilty? That’s in effect what they did by threatening his son. He

pled guilty to something that he didn’t do. That’s a show trial.

That’s what Stalin used to do. And the Nazis. That’s what makes

America different. We don’t do it that way. We don’t withhold

evidence and then pressure somebody to plead guilty for some

ulterior motive. That’s what happened in this case. The

government withheld important information, including the plot to

entrap him.”

Michael Goodwin

“You know folks, some days… sometimes… maybe…

just maybe… the good guys win. Just maybe. No time

to let our guard down. But the past 24 hours have been

revelatory, to say the least. The wizard’s been totally exposed

now. Now it’s time to double down and go after the real bad

guys.

This whole thing starts in the Spring of 2016, and in August

they get the idea that they’re going to go for a FISA warrant

to spy on the Trump team. That appears right now to be the

“insurance policy”: God forbid Trump gets elected, we’ll spy on

him now, we’ll have a dossier of information, and we’ll get him

out later.

Their reasons for opening up a case on Mike Flynn, which are

tragically hilarious…their reasons are so embarrassing that the

Department of Justice is going to be walking this back and

investigating people for decades after this.

We have the EC now – the FBI Electronic Communication

used to document the opening of a case – we didn’t have this

up until yesterday. We have the EC that they wrote up on

Mike Flynn. And it is tragic.

Notice what they write for their reasons…

He’s advising Trump – that’s clearly criminal. He knows

Russians. He’s a three-star military general, definitely criminal

there. And he traveled to Russia in 2015. As reported by open

source information. They Googled it. Lock this guy up.

Lock him up.

That’s their actual EC. Now you know why they were hiding

this? Is this a joke? Do you understand?... follow me, please,

for a minute here, because I know liberals with your 72-footthick,

titanium laden, vibranium coated skulls…none of this

makes sense to you because of your just uncontrollable rage

towards Trump…

Please replace Mike Flynn in that EC with anyone from the

Obama administration. Was Jim Clapper advising President

Obama as his Director of National Intelligence? Yeah. Does he

know Russians? You bet your ass. Has he traveled to Russia?

You bet your ass Part Two. Why isn’t Jim Clapper under

investigation? Because he’s not associated with Donald Trump.

John Brennan. Does he know Russians? Was he advising

President Obama? Has he traveled to Russia? He fits all three

criteria.

Are you grasping the severity of the Constitutional crisis we’re

in right now? Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence

– his chief intelligence official in the entire country – has never

seen any direct empirical evidence [of collusion between the

Trump campaign and Russia].

But don’t worry media people. Keep sweepin’ it all

under the rug.”

- Dan Bongino,

former Secret Service agent, author “Spygate”, daily commentator & show host

BOSS 350z 1 day ago

This divide may not be repairable... as I watch the media's response

to a three-star general who was railroaded, financially broken,

practically blackmailed into signing a false confession and wrongly

incarcerated by crooked cops for the sole purpose of political gain...

I can't help but feel like I am watching an enemy nation spreading

propaganda in my homeland... I honestly had held out hope, minimal

yes, but nonetheless, that once all of this went public, the media

would at the very least admit they were wrong... instead, they

double down and continue poisoning the well of liberty in this

nation, preying on people's ignorance... how can this end any other

way than a civil conflict? These people won't stop... their thirst for

power is insatiable... I fear for our nation and all of its people. These

people are evil incarnate.

Mephistopholese 20 hours ago

You have to stop making it sound like anybody was fooled, especially the

mainstream media. They were aware, but as with any propaganda entity,

they have to pretend that they were fooled if the truth comes out.

Paul Quintana 1 day ago

Dan, as you have said: they all know each other, which leads me to believe

that the people who deserve punishment won't get theirs. People are

forgetful. They don't remember all of the lies. I hope I am wrong, but with

this media giving “a” story and not “the” story, justice will never be done.

Melvin Wagner 23 hours ago

I really want to see "Journalists" who lied to our faces for

years be held responsible - taken to court for their part in the

coup. It would have no legs without them.

“ To all the talking heads out there who continue to go on

cable news and embarrass themselves and talk about Flynn –

these people who couldn’t blow Mike Flynn’s nose – they’re not

even worth the time. Mike Flynn’s a patriot – these people

don’t know what they’re talking about.

I ask you this: If there is evidence out there anywhere that

Mike Flynn lied to the FBI – besides the plea he withdrew,

successfully by the way… If there’s any evidence out there, why

hasn’t it been leaked? Where are the whistleblowers? We’ve

had whistleblowers for everything, including the leak of a

classified phone call – which is a felony. A felony… whoever

leaked Mike Flynn’s phone call.

Where’s the evidence? Why hasn’t it leaked yet? Where are

all the whistleblowers? Where are the FBI whistleblowers going

‘This case shouldn’t have been tossed out – I have direct

evidence Mike Flynn lied to the FBI.’ - Dan Bongino

Mark D. 8 hours ago

Just start a Go Fund Me page and build up a reward for

the evidence that Flynn lied. Put an expiration date on it.

If no evidence is produced by the expiration date, then

give the money to Flynn.

Jason Chicoine 21 hours ago

Stephen Colbert will give an apology to Flynn for sure

“The left and journalists which is to say the left which is to say

journalists are outraged at the miscarriage of justice that has brought

justice to Michael Flynn who you’ll remember is the retired lieutenant

general who confessed to lying to the FBI after FBI agents held him

off the edge of the building and said confess to lying to the FBI. New

documents reveal that former President Barack Obama and former FBI

director James Comey conceived of this daring plan in hopes that Flynn

could be convicted of violating the Logan act, a law passed in 1799.

Only two people have ever been indicted under the act, one in 1802 and

one in 1852, both of them at the suggestion of Barack Obama and

James Comey. Now to understand why the Obama administration’s

dealings with Flynn were so corrupt you have to understand that Hillary

Clinton hired Christopher Steele to collude with Vladimir Putin to give

disinformation to John Brenan who gave it to James Comey who

decided that Donald Trump was colluding with Vladimir Putin by

Christopher Steele who’d been hired by Hillary Clinton. And since you

can’t possibly understand that, the left is screaming about a

miscarriage of justice in the hopes that you’ll believe them because

you’re ignorant and confused. In a speech given before donning a fake

mustache and buying a one-way ticket to Caracas, Barack Obama said

quote, “it’s a dangerous threat to the rule of law to expose the fact

that I’m a dangerous threat to the rule of law”, unquote. The New

York Times - a former newspaper - editorialized, quote, “Attorney

General William Barr has perverted the Department of Justice by

turning it into a department that seeks justice”, unquote. And CNN’s

Brian Stelter complained, quote, “Conservatives are seizing on the lies

we told about Russian collusion to distract America from the lies we’re

telling about the Chines flu”, unquote.’

Andrew Klavan

The Hill@thehill

Over 90 percent of protests this summer were peaceful,

report shows http://hill.cm/Gy5huZl

Only 7 of the 100 jelly beans in the jar are poisonous. Enjoy!

Abraham Lincoln enjoyed 90% of the play

Over 90% of the Titanic's cruise was fun.

My oncologist told me I’m 90% cancer-free!

Mostly law abiding 21-year-old has only shoplifted on 220 days.

“Only 10% of protests are destroying the nation’s cities.”

O.J. didn't kill 90 percent of the people he saw that day.

Over 90% of people who got COVID this summer are mostly fine

Elizabeth Warren is between 1/64 and 1/1028 Native Indian ancestry.

99.9% of planes landed safely on 9-11

90% of the M&Ms in this bowl are not poisonous.

Only ten percent of leftists were hurling Molotovs and shooting people.

Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy and OJ were peaceful 90% of their lives

More than 90% of the mostly peaceful protests were peaceful. Big win.

Over 99% of covid cases are mild

"Most of New York's skyline unaffected by September 11th attacks."

9-11 was Fiery but mostly peaceful.

99% of Manhattan's buildings weren't hit by airliners

97% of Planned Parenthood's procedures don't involve the death of an unborn child.

The Titanic was a mostly peaceful cruise

90% of what Hitler did was good for Germany.

90% of the world was peaceful from 1939-1945

“Over 90% of the 1865 Ford's Theater production of 'Our American Cousin'

was wonderful."

Over 90% of COVID deaths aren’t deadly.

90% of those murdered in George Floyd’s name were killed peacefully.

The Nazi party was peaceful to 90% of the people in Germany.

Over 90 percent of the year I am faithful to my wife, report shows

100% of the riots were riots.

Only 10 percent of Russians were sent to gulags and died.

Over 90 percent of Americans had a peaceful 9/11/2001.

A GUN is peaceful 99.99% of the time

The other 10% was just looting, riots, murders and arson

The riots were violent 100% of the time

The other 10% got a little out of hand.

“Think of all the property we DONT burn or the people we didn’t assault."

I’m positive they have infallible methodology.

“Just a few blocks at a time boys”

90% of the time, there were fine people on both sides

That used to be a “B.”

10% were unconstitutional.

“If you’re gonna cheer for failure, we’re gonna enjoy your pain”

“Everybody, everybody everywhere, has his

own movie going, his own scenario, and

everybody is acting his movie out like mad,

only most people don’t know that is what

they’re trapped by, their little script.”

― Tom Wolfe

The Devil, that proud spirit,

cannot endure to be mocked.

- Sir Thomas More

We are a nation of sheep, and someone else

owns the grass.

- George Carlin

Happiness depends more

on the internal frame

of one’s own mind

than the externals in the world.

- George Washington

to Martha Washington, February 15, 1787

Woe to philosophers who can’t laugh away their wrinkles.

I look upon solemnity as a disease.

- Voltaire

“Revenge is for suckers…I’ve been grifting for 30

years and I‘ve never gotten any.”

Johnny Hooker: Then why do you do it?

Henry Gondorf: Seems worthwhile.

- “The Sting”

This commemorative doorstop began to be

assembled about a year before the arrival of

the 2016 political / sociological hurricane -- initially

nothing more than a very loosely organized personal

“scrapbook” -- compiled solely for my own amusement

and occasional refreshment / enlightenment.

Along the way – actually, near the very end - it

morphed into a [groan]… “snapshot of an era” …

“a collage of conflicting ideologies” … “a

barometer of divergent political pressure” …

…“A unique and powerful blending of Founding

Principles and Contemporary Electoral Debate”

… “a simplistic, misleading jumble of random

partisan opinion clippings” …“a finger on the

pulse of … [bigger groan] …

Insert the obligatory over-used / over-blown tag-line if

you wish, but in all honesty – almost right up to post

time - there was never an overarching (love that

word) …anything here. For as long as I’ve been

around… I’ve taken the temperature of environments,

situations, systems, things … routinely… just

because… as a matter of course… like drawing air

into my lungs and brushing my teeth. It just seems

…worthwhile.

That this time the exercise happened to spawn a hefty,

sprawling diary that does, in fact, tell some sort of

wildly fascinating tragi-comic-edifying tale was a

last-minute revelation - not an original design.

Chronology is loose, to say the least, but not ignored

either -- Some clippings and topics are introduced to

give general bearings along an admittedly rough

timeline, beginning at election season 2016 and

flashing back again somewhere in the third (fourth?)

act. Poke around – have fun; dig deep or skim. What

was said then is the main attraction here…

Well-expressed viewpoints that clarify and counter

the mob narrative are generally favored, but I

consider myself more of a curious alien, than a rabid,

defiant partisan. As one media commentator wisely

observed, the whole concoction is best described as a

collective hallucination – not a coherent community.

I am a huge fan of Voltaire – less for his works, than

for his free-style attitude towards all things

sanctimonious.

Since this was never intended to be a “scholarly” work,

and I was (selfishly…) more interested in getting my

grubby hands on the daily prize / opinion than

digging for the identity of the wise soul who actually

left it in the box, there are unreferenced gems

throughout.

Before anyone starts screaming about “journalistic

ethics” and “sloppy notation”, recognize that any

author omissions have their origins in public domain

comment sections … the new Gold Rush!... where

opinions are pounded out, blasted forth, thrashed

about, boomeranged back, and yes, even politely

discussed in (relatively) anonymous, ever-evolving

“conversational” threads. Typically passionate, often

eloquent, frequently devolving into varying degrees of

pointless character assassination, the best passages /

exchanges are valuable, illuminating, and, at times,

downright hilarious. While the ideas and opinions

may or may not be reflective of my own principles,

they surely belong to the individuals who penned and

posted them for all to see.

As I sifted through literally acres of this stuff,

I routinely saved the best nuggets for my private stash

… That gold mine is now housed under a more

structured, accessible roof -- supported throughout by

some of the wisest, most prescient individuals you’ll

ever “encounter” - if you’ll allow yourself to encounter

them… grapple with them… and hopefully, even

embrace and understand them. For all the warts and

inherent conflicts of their times, they saw far into the

future and set up a system that covered a whole lot of

bases… and has held up remarkably well over time.

The legion of modern day “opinion makers” and

“keyboard warriors” is also formidable; the

compendium of ideas and debate is staggering…

Is what we’re witnessing here unprecedented? Does

any of it actually “matter”? Or is it little more than

empty “theorizing” and angst – now delivered on a

boundless, unfathomable scale?

What all of this opining and fervor means in the

moment or actually amounts to “in the end” is

anybody’s guess, but the kaleidoscope of thought - and

palpable energy behind it - seemed like it needed…

context?... surroundings? … knick-knacks? …

binding?... That’s all I brought to this table …

So, thank you, contributors -- this novel historical

work is yours, and I hope everyone is OK with a

missed or omitted credit here and there.

If someone spots their own uncredited comment /

opinion in these pages and wishes it acknowledged or

withdrawn, by all means contact me – just don’t come

looking for a prize...or a piece of something… because

all of this surely has not been about money.

This collection…this study… ( and it is indeed a

fascinating psychological study) … is carefully

arranged, deliberately fragmented and unavoidably

out-sized …tiny bites are not just advisable, they’re

essential to your health and well-being.

What started out as something of an after-thought –

a little addendum to a much larger educational

program that I have been developing for many years -

- ultimately ballooned into the 100,000+ word salad

behemoth before you… a revolting, revealing,

damning, jarring, inspiring, thought provoking and

highly entertaining retrospective – “fine family fun”

for seasoned political junkies and newly minted

acolytes swept up in some pretty epic whirlwinds.

These pages loosely chronicle the genesis and arc of a

political era like none other and may be the best place

to start working on possible solutions. Or maybe just

drop anchor near your bathroom door and ignore all

of this. Be careful what you wish for.

My hope, always, has been for increased

awareness…of everything…again, it just seems

worthwhile -- a better approach than bumbling along

blindly (destructively?...) without a clue. Or worse,

trying to run something in that state.

R—

"Never attribute to malice that which is

adequately explained by stupidity"

Politics, of course, only pretends to lead society. Its role is captured by

a tried and true definition of a politician: someone who sees which way

the parade is marching and rushes to get in front of it.

That’s getting harder to do as the parade marches faster and makes

more sudden turns. The volume of social change is staggering and,

driven by technology, the speed is overwhelming.

Michael Goodwin

Politicians are the only people in the world who create

problems and then campaign against them.

__________________________________________________________________

What mental torture these people must put themselves through each

day. It’s obviously not enough to be guided and rooted in what you

believe. All of this… all of this is based on what other people think of

them. And what other people think of them apparently is superior and

more important than the core principles that they claim to have.

_________________________________________________________________

“We can’t fix anything…” - Russian diplomat on 2016

election meddling

“As a previous Houston Chronicle reporter, it breaks my

heart to see how far journalism has fallen from its

watchdog role. You may not change many minds, but you

will bring comfort to those shaking their heads at the

lunacy. Thank you.”

To the press alone, chequered as it is with

abuses, the world is indebted for all the

triumphs which have been gained by reason

and humanity over error and oppression.

- Thomas Jefferson,

Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, 1799

...I wish that I may never think the smiles of the

great and powerful a sufficient inducement to

turn aside from the straight path of honesty and

the convictions of my own mind.

--David Ricardo

...mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent...

--Adam Smith

If I could think that I had sent a spark to those who come

after, I should be ready to say Goodbye.

--Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Certainly, it is a world of scarcity. But the scarcity is

not confined to iron ore and arable land. The most

constricting scarcities are those of character and

personality.

--William R. Allen

The gods mercifully gave mankind this little

moment of peace between the religious

fanaticisms of the past and the fanaticisms of class

and race that were speedily to arise and dominate

time to come.

-- G. M. Trevelyan (on post-WWII era)

The quality of ideas seems to play a minor role

in mass movement leadership. What counts is

the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of

the opinion of others, the singlehanded defiance

of the world.

--Eric Hoffer

There are many who find a good alibi far more attractive

than an achievement. For an achievement does not settle

anything permanently. We still have to prove our worth

anew each day: we have to prove that we are as good today

as we were yesterday. But when we have a valid alibi for not

achieving anything we are fixed, so to speak, for life.

--Eric Hoffer

Alas, how many have been

persecuted for the wrong of

having been right?

--Jean-Baptiste Say

It takes considerable knowledge just to realize

the extent of your own ignorance.

-Thomas Sowell

agonistic : combative, aggressive

agora : (in ancient Greece) a public open space for assembly

amelioration : improvement, enhancement, amendment

antebellum : colonial, pre-war

approbation : approval or praise

arable : suitable for crops (arable land)

blinkered : narrow-minded

cudgel : bludgeon

detritus : debris

dyspeptic : disagreeable

imperious : domineering, authoritative

impertinence : lack of respect

invective : insulting, abusive or highly critical language

logos : means of persuading others to believe a particular point of view

loquacious : talkative

lugubrious : gloomy

mendacious : dishonest

meta-realm : “meta” in front of anything suggests that the “anything”

may be absorbed on more than one level … it is an abstraction…and an

abstract one at that…

mutatis mutandis : another abstraction, that has linguistic merit when

used properly (here) and contractual merit when not used lazily (in

some legal documents)...

essentially, “look at the topic in question and carry it forward into

the current circumstances, making any obvious, clarifying and

necessary changes”

nepotistic : displaying favoritism in filling competitive / plum positions

nihilism : negativism, anarchism, emptiness

obdurate : inflexible

prescient : perceptive, prophetic

pro-forma : as a matter of form or politeness

putative : presumed, acknowledged

rent : divided

sophistic : wise, scholarly (but with an implied element of deceit)

straw man

ˌstrô ˈman / noun

1. an intentionally misrepresented proposition or narrative that is set up because it is

easier to defeat / discredit than an opponent's real argument.

"Her familiar procedure of creating a straw man to cover her tracks, while temporarily

effective, continues to engender no long-term allegiance, admiration or respect"

2. a person regarded as having no substance or integrity.

sub-rosa : done in secret

supercilious : condescending

venal : indicating susceptibility to bribery

I deplore with you the putrid state to which

our newspapers have passed and the

malignity, the vulgarity, and mendacious

spirit of those who write for them.

- Thomas Jefferson to Walter James,

January 2, 1814

“…Politics today is the art of saying nothing with great

passion. Politics is the art of convincing people you're

something that you're not, and it's disguised as super

intellectualism, brilliance. ‘It takes a requirement of

many years’ experience to understand these things. You

neophytes outside, yes, you're the voters, and, yes, we

love you, but you clearly don't know nearly enough to

judge what we do here.’ And Trump comes along and his

common sense is so stark… it is so stark in comparison to

what we get from both parties in Washington that people

are just latching on to it because it's comforting, it's

common sense. It's spoken fearlessly.

So it's not simplistic… I think it's just because of the stark

contrast … the manner of speaking here, that has

overtaken Washington. It's one of the reasons why

there's so much distrust [for the Establishment]. You

can't even for sure find out what those people inside the

Beltway really do think about something. You get the

impression that whatever they're saying, it's designed to

not anger you or to not send you running away, but it

doesn't at the same time come across as sincere.”

- James Madison to W.T. Barry

August 4, 1822

Don’t muddy my opinion with your

facts.

- Chris Moore*

Color-Heads 3 months ago

39:19 "in matters of opinion debate is pointless"

REPLY

Hide 5 replies

Zee H 2 months ago

Absolutely

ONE

a liar, a loser, and a

psychopath

(walk into a bar…)

various euphemisms that have been used by the

press or members of the Obama administration

when they were caught lying or attempting to

promote a false narrative (which is political speak

for lying):

Rhetorically overreached

Spontaneously spoke

Colloquially spoke

Speaking metaphorically

Misremembered

Speak-O (typo with your mouth

not your keyboard)

Recalibrate message

Walks back words

S/he was joking...

Remark was misinterpreted

Mocking ironically

“The excitement of a campaign event”

(Madeline Albright)

Misinterpreted / misspoke

terminologically inexact comments

My last tweet was satirical.

"I was taken out of context."

see more

After John Stewart soundly thrashed the media and

Republicans, David Axelrod asked him how he felt

about Hillary Clinton, and if she were on his show

what his commentary would be. He sighed, smiled,

then explained,

“I imagine her to be a very bright woman without the

courage of her convictions, because I’m not even sure

what they are. When I watch her campaign… She

reminds me of Magic Johnson’s talk show. Magic

Johnson was a very charming individual, but he was

not a talk show host… It never seemed authentic or

real in his personality, it seemed like he was wearing

an outfit designed by someone else, for someone else,

to be someone else. That is not to say that she is not

preferable to Donald Trump, because at this point

I would vote for Mr. T over Donald Trump. But I think

she will be in big trouble if she can’t find a way…

maybe I’m wrong, maybe a real person doesn’t exist

underneath there. I don’t know.”

“…People think that the arrival of Trump on the scene and the

success he's having has blown whatever alignment there was

between the so-called conservative movement and the

Republican Party, because what is happening here -- what is

being exposed, what's being demonstrated -- is that, yeah, there

are a lot of people who are conservative, but many will not call

themselves that, and they are not conservatives because of

conservative policy.

In other words, they're not wonks.

They don't understand all the ins and outs of classic

conservatism. They're just who they are. Therefore, it's not

conservatism that is the glue that has this group of people in

this coalition held together. It's quite a number of other things,

and right now the glue is an absolute opposition to the Democrat

Party, to the American left, to the worldwide left, and

everything they have done and want to continue doing.

If somebody comes along and convinces them that they're

serious about stopping this and reversing it, they don't care if it's

somebody from Mars!

It doesn't have to be a classical conservative promising this.

It can be anybody who makes them trust him, anybody with

credibility. So the fear is, when you get inside the Beltway,

that all of the conservative institutions -- in media and in think

tanks, you name it. All the various components are being

exposed as really unnecessary and irrelevant, and really haven't

done anything for people…

The Tea Party's a different thing, obviously.

So the Trump triumph, the Trump coalition is exposing the fact

that it isn't conservative orthodoxy, or conservatism, or any of

the hard work of the conservative elite in persuading people and

educating them and informing them that is causing people to be

conservative.

No, it's something really basic and simple. They are fed up with

the modern-day Democrat Party. They're fed up with Obama

and all of these people who have set out to transform, which

means destroy, this country and rebuild it in ways it was never

founded to be or intended to be. They want it

stopped. They've shown up at the polls twice, 2010, 2014, to

get them to stop.

The Republican Party establishment does not understand

this. They do not know who their conservative voters

are. They've overestimated their conservatism, and by that is

meant they think they're dyed-in-the-wool conservative

theoreticians absorbed in such things as the free market and all

these other bells and whistles, and they're not. They're not

liberal. They're not Democrat. Many of them do not want to be

thought of as conservatives, for a host of reasons. So somebody

who comes along and is able to convey that he or she

understands why they're angry and, furthermore, is gonna do

everything they can to fix it, is gonna own them.

So what's happening here, nationalism, dirty word, ooh, people

hate it, populism, even dirtier word. Nationalism and populism

have overtaken conservatism in terms of appeal. And when this

has happened, when it exposes -- what people in Washington are

afraid of -- and that is, you know, all this money we've asked

people to send us and all these donations people have made,

support this movement, promote that movement, where is

conservatism in Washington, they're asking. Where is it? The

Republican Party isn't conservative. Where are all these

conservative people that are contributing to policy being

implemented in Congress or in the Senate. They don't see it.”

_________________________________________________________________

…In short, Trump has become the Walmart version

of retail politics. His political message is easily

packaged and consumed with minimal

understanding of the intricacies of the issues. His

solutions to making America great again are simple

and appeal to voters' nostalgia for an era where no

country dared mess with the USA.

It would be easy to blame these voters for not doing

their homework and falling victim to a Ponzi scheme,

but democracy can be a messy process. By

definition, it requires deliberation, negotiation and

compromise. However, the American electorate

typically lacks a basic understanding or appreciation

for the democratic process.

Instead we would rather place our trust in

candidates to save the day. Political campaigns

encourage simplified messages based on style over

substance. The Obama campaign gave us hope that

he could unify the country, but that hope has failed

to materialize. Instead, partisanship in America

increased, and now some voters are simply looking

for the next unlikely hero to save America from itself.

- Jonathan Rothermel

"People can’t tell the difference between someone who sounds as if

he knows what he’s talking about and someone who is actually

serious about the issues."

This is an elitist view commonly shared by liberals… Liberals really

believe this supposed deficiency of American voters to be fact.

*Tellingly, that's how the Affordable Care Act was presented and sold to

the American public by its developers and President Obama.* Liberals

take it for granted that the public is stupid, ignorant, selfish and easily

swayed - it's the basis of all their entitlement laws, restrictions, policies

and bombast. Of course Trump is boorish - but to any clear thinker, so is

a Hillary Clinton; and she is far more skilled at bending the truth.

Maybe this speaks to the lamentable lack of obligation to good citizenship

of so many Americans. Many of these Trump supporters don't vote and find

it easy to condemn politicians in Washington. Yet Trump and other nonpolitician

aspirants have never done the heavy lifting of actual governance

or legislating and would almost certainly make awful political leaders.

In order to get a perspective on current events politically, perhaps two things;

either one might need to be born in the late '20's, or be a student of our history.

Love him, or hate him, Trump is forcing the political system to acknowledge

where they really stand ideologically. WWII brought this country together in one

common goal. One really had to live those years to understand the magnitude

of effort it took to mobilize on two fronts. We were as one. Not so much today. I

really view it much like the Middle East. We have polarized, and allowed

complacency to separate us in to 'tribes'. This is not the America that helped to

win WWII. This is the America that has not responded to the call of potential

invasion of a different kind. Yes, Trump is provocative, and unlikely to be

president, but he has definitely exposed the underbelly of what is eroding this

nation today.

What this all boils down to is an argument that says “Trump is saying and

doing all the right things, the things we want a leader to do, so, by god, we

have to find somebody else who will parrot his message.” Why is that?

The study of history is a powerful antidote to

contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover

how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us

novel and plausible, have been tested before, not

once but many times and in innumerable guises; and

discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false.

--Paul Johnson

…Trump’s speech in Dallas, a 70-minute

stemwinder, came out like a zigzagging rocket

attack against the many sectors of the political

establishment. If, as Mario Cuomo said, a

politician campaigns in poetry and governs in

prose, we can shove that notion aside in the

case of Donald Trump. He campaigns in

poetry in much the same way a wild hog sips

chardonnay.

But what was more compelling to me about both the

speech and the spirit of the room was how nonideological

it all was. Other than undocumented

immigrants, who represent a go-to boogeyman for

the right, Trump’s targets consisted of a bipartisan

assembly of the ‘‘permanent political class’’ that

Joan Didion described in her book ‘‘Political

Fictions’’: that incestuous band of TV talkers,

campaign strategists and candidates that had

perpetuated the scripted awfulness of our politics…

“Laurie piped up again. 'At State, everybody calls

diversity dispersity. What happens is, everybody has their

own clubs, their own signs, their own sections where they

all sit in the dining hall--all the African Americans are over

there? . . . and all the Asians sit over't these other tables? --

except for the Koreans? -- because they don't get along

with the Japanese so they sit way over there? Everybody's

dispersed into their own little groups -- and everybody's

told to distrust everybody else? Everybody's told that

everybody else is trying to screw them over--oops!' --

Laurie pulled a face and put her fingertips over her

lips -- 'I'm sorry!' She rolled her eyes and smiled.

'Anyway, the idea is, every other group is like prejudiced

against your group, and no matter what they say, they're

only out to take advantage of you, and you should have

nothing to do with them -- unless you’re white, in which

case all the others are not prejudiced against you, they're

like totally right, because you really are a racist and

everything, even if you don't know it? Everybody ends up

dispersed into their own like turtle shells, suspicious of

everybody else and being careful not to fraternize with

them. Is it like that at Dupont?” ― from “I am

Charlotte Simmons” a 2004 novel by Tom Wolfe

Always start off not believing something. Or, precisely,

not believing in something. Not believing in it doesn’t

mean it’s not true. It’s unproven. It’s like saying you

don’t understand it. If you don’t understand French

that’s not saying you don’t believe French exists.

Jekk Vizla

@JekkVizla

·

Jul 10

Replying to

@ZubyMusic

As a proponent of free speech she offends me, so by her

own rules should be de platformed, but I'm against that.

The genius of our

federal system is that

states and localities

serve as what the late

Supreme Court Justice

Louis Brandeis called

laboratories of

democracy that can “try

novel social and

economic experiments

without risk to the rest

of the country.”

Donald Trump’s rapid ascendency to the top of the Republican polls—and

the blinding media spotlight surrounding him that has rendered all other

2016 contenders seemingly mute—has baffled nearly every observer. Even

his longtime friends (and enemies) are fascinated. When I reached him this

week on vacation, Las Vegas developer mogul Steve Wynn, who has

been on both the enemies and the friend’s side of that equation with

Trump, said simply, “I am as mystified about it as you are.” As he

continued, “It certainly is a spectacular and perverse moment in

political history. There’s no precedent for this.”

“What I am certain of,” the gaming mogul averred, “is that when you and I

have this conversation next year, we will both agree unequivocally how

convoluted and how mercurial the events of the world are. Neither one of

us will have ever predicted the political environment of America [a year

from now] as surely as I know my own name.” Added Wynn, “Intervening

events will be dramatic and unpredictable. That’s the kind of world we’re

living in.” The Trump boomlet, too, Wynn insisted, shall pass.

But how it shall pass is a serious point of debate among campaign

observers. With some help from POLITICO MAGAZINE, Wynn’s challenge was

put to top political thinkers: how does Trump’s unprecedented campaign

end? Will Trump fizzle out soon, or endure for months? Will he succumb to

pressure from the RNC, the GOP establishment and other candidates? Or

only earn more attention as the race drags on? And is Trump ever truly

“done”—or would he jump back into the race as a third-party candidate?

“Maybe people will get tired of me,” Trump mused Friday in an interview

with Morning Joe. Or perhaps they won’t. *Below appear the best

*predictions collected from the respondents who dared speculate

*about how The Donald’s spectacular rise ends* – Jon Ralston,

POLITICO MAGAZINE contributing editor.

By Bob Shrum, Democratic presidential strategist.

Trump is ripe for a Bentsen-Quayle moment in the first debate. Bush,

Rubio, et al—no longer reticent in the face of Trump’s pandering to the

basest elements of the base, the “crazies”—are preparing the putdown

right now. The question is who gets the right opening first.

But one candidate who won’t be looking for the opportunity is Cruz; he’s

angling to take the reins of Trump’s buckboard of bigotry when Trump falls

off and then ride it to the nomination.

He may have to wait. Trump can be scorched in the debate; but he won’t

flame out because he won’t run out of money, even if he is a few billion shy

of ten. He can hold on indefinitely, and he’s not the type to recognize reality

and retreat from the race. In the end, denied a nomination he can’t win,

there’s a more-than-reasonable chance that he pulls a Perot and runs

as an independent. That’s what I’m rooting for and would advise the

Great Bloviator to do. The “crazies” deserve a voice, and he’s it. And

the GOP deserves to pay a price—the presidency—for appeasing and

exploiting the politics of nativism and resentment that has spawned

and nourished the low, mean Know-Nothingism of Donald Trump.

***

By Erick Erikson, frequent commentator, radio host and founder of the blog

RedState.

Congress goes on recess in August, you have the GOP debate and people

will start to take a look at all the other candidates in relation to Trump. I

think he begins a decline toward Iowa. If you delve into the polling, a lot of

people who are right now saying they intend to vote for Trump are really

saying they just like what he is saying. As others begin to get attention, he

fades. One caveat though: if the GOP keeps pounding Trump instead of

ignoring him, they buy him time. The longer the party elite bash Trump,

the more the base loves him.

By Mary Matalin, Republican political strategist.

With apologies to, and respect for, my conservative friends and colleagues,

Donald Trump is not only not hurting the GOP, he is a boon to it.

Candidates would be well advised to pay close attention to the forensics of

his approach, and apply their own unique personalities and policies to their

campaign efforts. And the GOP leadership should quit insulting him, giving

him an excuse to mount a third-party candidacy.

Among other strategic and tactical triumphs, Trump is exhibiting in pulsing

neon colors the contemporary political parallel universes of Common-Sense

America and Conventional Wisdom Establishment. *Common Sense*

*America is, and has been for some time been, so over the incompetent,*

*posturing national politicians as well as their irrelevant agenda issues and*

*their counterproductive policies. They are aching for candidates with*

authenticity who will address their everyday concerns. AND do not presume

a preference for their common sense world makes them redneck philistines.

Further, he is exposing the multiple fallacies of CW Establishment politics, to

wit: appealing to nontraditional GOP voters requires narrow and corrupt

Identity Politics tactics; message resonance demands mandatory acceptance

of any and all CW Politically Correct premises, including gratuitous, phony,

solicitous kowtowing to the media; that strict avoidance of

establishmentarian “third rail” issues is political kamikaze.

Once he gets to the debates, he will have to connect his bombastic

iconoclastic antics to authentic policy prescriptions, as well as demonstrate

his potential effectiveness by past performance metrics

Bottom line: he will not blow up, but could pump up overly-reserved

candidacies.

‘He is the voice of the GOP. Hell, he’s even the hair of the

GOP.’

By Paul Begala, political analyst for CNN and counselor to President Bill

Clinton.

When it comes to Mr. Trump, I know this: he reflects the views of today’s

Republican Party. Here’s proof: 64 percent of Republicans agree with the

broader statement that, “President Obama is hiding important information

about his background and early life.” And 34 percent of Republicans go fullon

birther: saying 34% of Republicans think it’s likely that president Obama

is not a US citizen; that he was not born in America (Fairleigh Dickinson

Univ. poll, Dec., 2014). This, of course, is an issue Mr. Trump has

highlighted. 68 percent of Republicans say Mr. Trump is right on

immigration. (Fox News poll, July 17, 2015). This was after he said those

rather, umm, controversial things about Mexican immigrants. 22 percent of

Republicans even agree with his hateful attack on John McCain—saying

McCain was not a war hero (PPP Poll 7/22/15).

Mr. Trump is the face of the GOP: angry, white and male. He is the

voice of the GOP. Hell, he’s even the hair of the GOP.

‘How long? As long as he wants.’

By Joe Trippi, Democratic political strategist.

INever, ever ever underestimate Trump’s staying power and ability toI

Idominate media attention. In a field this large he could be around forI

Ia long time—potentially a lot longer than many of the other GOPI

Icandidates who have derided his chances of being their nominee.I

On running as a 3rd party candidate—someone should remind the GOP

that Trump is a tough as nails negotiator and he would have plenty of

leverage. How long? As long as he wants.

By Rick Wilson, national Republican message and media strategist.

The Trump show ends when the other candidates follow Perry and

Rubio, get off their asses and knock his dick in the dirt. Do a deep

oppo dive on Trump and go to work. Trump’s verbal incontinence prevents

him from being able to restrain himself, and as they start banging him on

his liberal political background, his casino deals, rickety real estate empire,

multiple bankruptcies, the Trump-U scam, and so on, Trump will respond,

over and over. He can’t sustain the weight of multiple attacks.

Exquisitely packaged Constitution, Declaration of

Independence, plus accoutrements, for presentation

to embassies worldwide (by celebrities : fanfare;

parchment, mahogany, glass cover, trimmings).

Here is our system – it’s worked for us, you try it!

May take a while; it’s hard work, but keep at it and

you’ll obtain positive results.

Jotun Dovreguben • 5 hours ago

Trump's foreign policy, his major points:

"America firstI will be the major and overriding theme of my administration."

"We went from mistakes in Iraq to Egypt to Libya. Many trillions of dollars

were lost as a result. A vacuum was created that ISIS would fill."

"Our resources are totally over extended...IWe're rebuilding other

countries while weakening our own."I

"The struggle against radical Islam also takes place in our homeland. There

are scores of recent migrants inside our borders charged with terrorism.

We must stop importing extremism through senseless immigration

policies."

"We're also going to have to change our trade, immigration and economic

policies to make our economy strong again. And to put Americans first

again. This will ensure that our own workers, right here in America, get the

jobs and higher pay that will grow our tax revenues, increase our economic

might as a nation, make us strong financially again."

"We have a massive trade deficit with China that we have to find a

way quickly to balance."

"Unlike other candidates for the presidency, war and aggression will not

be my first instinct."

"Instead of trying to spread universal values that not everybody shares or

wants, we should understand that strengthening and promoting Western

civilization and its accomplishments will do more to inspire positive reforms

around the world than military interventions."

"Americans must know that we're putting the American people first

again on trade."

"NAFTA has been a total disaster, literally emptying our states of our

manufacturing and our jobs."

RoadKill

Jotun Dovreguben • 3 hours ago

He sounds like the Devil, no doubt! Crucify him!

LOL!

insprt • 5 hours ago

The coloreds and the spanish love him. They really, really

love him, the coloreds and the spanish.

Tmpl t • 5 hours ago

The 80% against Trump by Latinos' is easy to explain.

They've seen conservatives posting that the 'real' number of illegal

immigrants in the USA is 30/35/40 million, and they're terrified that when

Trump starts rounding people up and can only find 11 or 12 million, he's not

going to let something like citizenship get in the way of reaching the

number that the right 'knows' is true

The Latinos aren't against Trump because they're pro illegal immigrant.

They're scared of being the next Japanese.

o

Reply

Canuck Slr


BS. If nothing else, the man will follow the rule of law –

unlike President Obama who has had the Supreme Court knock

down several of his 'pen and telephone' attempts to change how the

country operates.

Brian


Do not compare the Japanese "rounded up" in WWII to

"illegal" immigrants of today. That minimizes the shameful

treatment of the Japanese 'legal' citizens’ at the time.

Get your history straight, and perhaps find a more apt

analogy to the 'Illegal" immigrant’s plight. There is no

legitimate analogy to the Japanese at the time. What a false

(and insulting) comparison.

matt • 4 hours ago

Do big city progressives see southerners and

Midwesterners as part of the American "we"? Based on my

recent visits to the northeast, I'd say no.

o 4

o •

o Reply •

o Share ›

• Twitter

matt • 4 hours ago

How do ethnic-identity politicos claim that ethnic and racial distinction

are both good and bad at the same time? It's a kind of collective

schizophrenia.

Of course, they aren't good, they are just bad. Race exists for the

purposes of racism and for no other reason. That's its history since it

began in the 17th century British Caribbean and North America.

Brian • 3 hours ago

IAs for suggestions that if Trump promised to subvert our immigrationI

Ilaws and made false promises to African Americans, he would be betterI

IoffI with the electorate: There is a wisdom there, borrowing from theI

IDemocrat campaign playbook. But Democrat's already have a monopolyI

Ion that strategy. A cynical playbook.II

So who desires a race to the bottom of political pandering? The answer is

not even debatable. Repubs cannot win at that game. Dems win that ruse

hands down.

Reply

Dana • an hour ago

The question isn't whether he'll lose, but whether he'll take the GOP

down with him?

Dudes, you had Rubio. Not the greatest, but he had a shot vs. Hillary.

Trump will crash and burn in the first debate.

o

Outlander 1 day ago

I'm betting on Trump's ego and stealth. If he is

handed the keys, he will take possession and treat the

United States' business-of-politics as his own. He's a

phenomenal poker player, and is highly skilled at pushing

people’s buttons to get results. Don't have to like him, just

appointing representation here.

Face it, there are too many people on this planet, and things

like terrorism and bigotry and radical religion are merely

manifestations of the natural animal response to thin the herd

when required. There's gonna be a fight. A big fight. The

government doesn't even bother to try and hide their

scheming and conniving anymore; they are above the

law since they control it, and seem to thrive on

keeping the world at a slow boil.

America will soon be at the mercy of the ideologies of groups

most hell-bent on procreation; imagine twice the population

(current growth rate it will take 60 years), 1/2 of them under

30, and on a constant diet of propaganda from whatever

faction rules their development. Whatever is left of the school

system will teach 10 different languages, and little else.

Rather than "plan" for such a dismal future with

open arms, why not throw a few wrenches in the

Establishment machine? Ever see that picture of the

crowd of thousands smashed against one side of a

ten-foot wall, and just one man holding the door to

the city shut on the other? Which side do you want to

be on?

Half the harm that is done in this world is

due to people who want to feel important.

They don't mean to do harm -- but the harm

does not interest them. Or they do not see it,

or they justify it because they are absorbed

in the endless struggle to think well of

themselves.

-- T. S. Eliot

We're told that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified woman -- uh, person --

who's ever sought the presidency. Barack Obama at the Democrat

convention told us that she is the most qualified person that's ever sought the

office, bar none -- Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Bill Clinton, you name it.

We've been told she's the smartest woman in the world. She's told us that she's

devoted 25 years in Washington to caring. She has devoted every ounce of her

being to children and to women. This is a woman uniquely qualified to be

President of the United States. This is the mumbo jumbo we're told.

"Hillary Clinton began conducting focus groups and polling swing state voters as

early as December 2014 to figure out how to brand herself and find a 'rationale' for

running for president. Nearly two years before the election, Clinton’s team

circulated a timeline of research objectives for which the nascent campaign would

spend $2 million on focus groups and surveys, according to recently released

hacked emails. A 'fundamental question' was how to brand Hillary as either

'Badass/hip,' or a 'Grandma.'"

Do you know what they call Hillary's campaign plane? Broomstick One. That's

the name for her campaign plane given by Secret Service and State Department

agents because of how rudely she treated them. This is in the emails as well, in

addition to forthcoming books, that she was mean and rude and had no time for

people she thought were there to serve her… foul mouth and liberal use of the

F-word in dealing with these people, and they named her plane Broomstick One.

Well, the latest email dump says that one of the ways they struggled was trying to

figure out how to brand Hillary -- remember, smartest woman in the world, most

qualified. They ought not have to brand her. They ought not have to tell people

who she is. She ought not have to fake behavior. She is so wonderful and so

accomplished and so good and we so need her that she should just be able to be

herself.

They had to test-market various reasons that she wanted to be president and run

those reasons by people and see how people reacted, and the number one reaction

would be the persona she would adopt. Now, why do you suspect nobody in the

Clinton campaign was comfortable just having her say, "I want to be President" for

whatever reason she really wants to be President?

'Cause it obviously wouldn't work. 'Cause she wants to be President... Folks, it's

all fake. The bottom line is everything that you're seeing in the Clinton campaign

is fake. It's strategized, it's marketed, test marketed, focus grouped. It's scripted,

and the script is prepared every day in coordination with members of the media

who attend dinners with the Clinton campaign team, where they coordinate

strategy. It's all in the emails! And this is not the first day this news has come out

about the media.

They are co-conspirators in this. What we can infer is that Mrs. Clinton has not

been honest with us about why she wants to be president, otherwise they wouldn't

have spent $2 million over two years focus-grouping it.

Apparently, they all concluded the real reasons she wants to be President; we can't

go with those. Is it because she's entitled? Is it because the Democrats owe her for

what she did for Bill by standing by him? Is it because she's power mad? It's

because it's her turn? Is it because...? What? We don't know, because everything

we have been shown as to why Hillary wants to be President is the result of testing

and focus group research. In other words, it's phony. It's fake.

Can you imagine Trump doing focus group research to find out who to be? Can

you imagine Trump doing two years of test marketing and focus-grouping to find

out how he ought to behave? Hell, his advisers are telling him, "Stay on

message! Do not start defending yourself against these attacks!" And he says,

"Nope. I'm gonna do it." He's real. Whether you like it or not, there's nothing fake

or phony, and when you're talking Clintons, you are talking fake and phony and

worse.

Lydia: “Daddy, are people who see things and daydream, are they, well, normal?”

John: “No, they’re much better than that. Why, for heaven’s sake, they’re the artists, the poets,

the bums, the cream of society. They get a lot more out of life than normal people. For one thing,

they’re never lonely or cold or hungry,

because they’ve got their imagination to keep them warm and to keep them company. And, don’t

you believe for a minute that because they see things that you don’t, that those things aren’t

there.”

-My World and Welcome to It,

based, loosely, on the cartoons and writings of James Thurber

…The point is that while media puff pieces have portrayed

Mr. Trump’s rivals as serious men — Jeb the moderate, Rand

the original thinker, Marco the face of a new generation — their

supposed seriousness is all surface. Judge them by positions as

opposed to image, and what you have is a lineup of cranks. And

as I said, this is no accident.

It has long been obvious that the conventions of political

reporting and political commentary make it almost impossible to

say the obvious — namely, that one of our two major parties has

gone off the deep end. Or as the political analysts Thomas Mann

and Norman Ornstein put it in their book “It’s Even Worse Than

It Looks,” the G.O.P. has become an “insurgent outlier …

unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence,

and science.” It’s a party that has no room for rational positions

on many major issues.

Or to put it another way, modern Republican politicians can’t be

serious — not if they want to win primaries and have any future

within the party. Crank economics, crank science, crank foreign

policy are all necessary parts of a candidate’s resume.

Until now, however, leading Republicans have generally tried to

preserve a facade of respectability, helping the news media to

maintain the pretense that it was dealing with a normal political

party. What distinguishes Mr. Trump is not so much his

positions as it is his lack of interest in maintaining appearances.

And it turns out that the party’s base, which demands extremist

positions, also prefers those positions delivered straight.

Why is anyone surprised?...

Reading through this elitist, out of touch review of a 2-hour debate

and then concluding that everyone who is GOP or votes GOP is a

moron, is the reason why the DNC has LOST the last few elections

(and Congress).

To state that the GOP candidates are all below standard, while offering

up Hillary Clinton and Sanders - doesn't ANYONE see the irony?

Mr. Krugman’s hope that the feet on the street will bow down to

the academic elites on every Progressive opinion - from heavy

government intervention into the markets, to increasing

government debt, to climate change to the impact of supporting

illegal immigration - is the real conventional rhetoric.

What Mr. Elitist does not realize, is that the feet on the street NO

LONGER TRUST that government or the "experts" have their best

interests at heart. He is a big cog in the wheel of the government

debt; every voter knows that bill eventually comes due.

He is slippery to say government spending is the true stimulus, but

never provides the boundaries of when to stop spending, and

HOW to pay it back.

So yeah, continue to ridicule the voters, continue to believe that

the voters HAVE to trust the "experts" on government spending, on

climate, on illegal immigration, on environmental protections;

present the US voters the choice of HRC and watch the Dems lose

complete control.

Voters NO LONGER TRUST the experts; a thousand years of data

proves they are as often wrong as they are right.

Blulots LA 1 hour ago

When fascism (as opposed to the callous oligarchy we

have now) comes to America, it won't just be "draped

in the flag and carrying the cross." If it comes in the

next 30 years, chances are it will begin with attacks

on "political correctness" before proceeding more

openly.

I've been laughing at the Trump circus for a while now, but

it's worth pointing out that from the little we know of his

ideas -- hostility to "elites" who are only defined by the

degeneracy of their culture, never by economics;

scapegoating immigrants for crime and economic problems;

"running the country like a business;" "negotiating from a

position of strength;" "getting things done;" appeals to the

homeland and its glorious past, threatened by internal elite

treachery ("Make America Great Again") -- they basically

sound like textbook fascism.

The point isn't even that textbook fascism is

what Trump believes in, or would carry out. I'm

genuinely not sure if he believes in anything

beyond his own self-aggrandizement. It's the

fact that an insubstantial but skillful charlatan

sees these ideas as the best way to pander to

the masses that most disturbs me.

Reader Comment

The article makes the interesting point that Americans are afraid of the past

and don't want to look back on it, which is absolutely true. It's a good point,

but why then are they also so enamored with Donald Trump, who would do

nothing but take the country back into the past in so many different ways?

Certainly, Hillary's campaign slogan might as well be, "I Strongly Believe In

One Thing Or The Other!", but at least people can vote for her safe in the

knowledge that no matter what it is she believes today or tomorrow, odds

are it's going to be some indirect mashup of what is good for the country

mixed with what is good for the people.

Bryan ·

Indiana University

"but at least people can vote for her safe in the

knowledge that no matter what it is she believes today

or tomorrow odds are it's going to be some indirect

mashup of what is good for the country mixed with what

is good for the people. "

No, we can feel confident that she will believe (or

purport to believe) whatever is in the best interest

of securing her own power. That MAY in fact

coincide with the best interests of the country, but

then again, maybe not.

Red LaX3 months ago

I will and the wall just got ten feet taller.

Kkn_2 weeks ago

This man made watching politics and political campaigns really

really entertaining, and fun.

You will never be able to convince me that The Donald has not crawled into bed with

the NRA and the military industrial complex behind closed doors

Who gives a damn about the NRA? They have nothing to do with

Trump’s campaign. He is self-funded. He is not bound by

lobbyists or PAC's. That's what makes him uniquely qualified. No

one owns him. And if you think your Democrats aren't having any

affairs with the same parties you're referring to, I think you should

really spend some time learning about politics. Politicians would

sleep with farm animals if there were votes and money in it.

He is likely to start a war with his big mouth!

Do you really believe that? He’s not going to get us into any more

trouble than we’re already in. And if you haven’t been paying

attention, we’re already at war, and in wars. It’s a non-issue really.

Trump is a risk, because he is both an outsider, and lacks

political experience in the traditional sense. I don’t think

with Trump there’s going to be a middle. His presidency

is either going to be an epic success or an epic failure.

Failure meaning business as usual in DC. No one knows

for sure what to make of it. I’m willing to put my vote on

the line for a chance at true political change, and to

possibly open the door for other outsiders. He’s breaking

that legal ceiling in DC, and possibly redefining who

qualifies for the job in the future.

@KS1... Yes, no doubt. But clearly, he does not have a

loving relationship with the Republican party. It's

downright adversarial if you ask me. The elites don't want

him to win. They've said that much already. Neither side

wants him to win. That's why I like him. It forces him to

the middle. Odd man out. He had to team with one side

or the other to have a chance. Obviously, a man like

Trump with business interests throughout the globe is going

to lean right. I'm a right leaning independent myself.

The issue is not whether the Republican Party

will nominate Trump or whether Clinton will

win the general election. The issue is what

conservatives will do after Clinton is

inaugurated. Pollsters and sociologists have

opined that Trump supporters and the rest of

those who oppose big government have their

backs to their economic wall.

If the analyses are correct, how far can those

who cling to their guns, religion and their

threadbare bank accounts be ignored before

they . . . do what?

The gloves come

off in the CBS

News Republican

debate

[CITE YOUR SOURCE HERE.]

Debate rips open GOP wounds, and

party risks tearing itself apart

GOP debate is most

watched debate of 2016

…Tell me truly—how does that spectacle not destroy the

credibility of the Republican Party for at least a decade?

How does that freak show not blow up the party's claim

to have serious policies to help govern the country? How

does that carnival of unimaginative invective add up to

a governing philosophy? How does that massive, chewy

clusterfuck add up to a single rational moment of

human thought? I don't care if these guys believe in

evolution or not, but they at least should try to

demonstrate while they're on TV that, somehow, we've

come a respectable distance as a species since we

tottered out of Olduvai Gorge. I've seen better

organized riots. I've heard more coherent dialogue from

cats mating in an alley. I once heard a squirrel being

eaten by a coyote. The squirrel had better manners

while it was being devoured, and was better spoken

besides. Christ above, somebody separate these clowns

before they hurt their brains some more. Tail gunner Ted

Cruz said more than he knows, not least because he

doesn't know what "literally" means…

…It was sadly fascinating to watch most of the

commentary on television in the wake of this rock fight.

The English language was torn to shreds in the attempts

by the folks on the electric teevee machine to avoid the

obvious reality that was lying there bleeding out from

every orifice right in front of them.

By Charles P. Pierce Feb 14, 2016 (excerpted)

After constantly characterizing Obama as weak and ineffectual, the

Republicans created a demand in their party for a Superman. Who

turned out to be Donald Trump. And to the GOP Establishment, the

Superman who showed up is their Frankenstein's monster, beyond

their control.

You think people are not only rational, but should be rational. Hence

your deep insights into what ought to happen is quickly followed by

your “utter (and daily) bewilderment” at what is occurring.

There is nothing wrong with the Republicans. They are revolting. This is

what a revolt among ideologues who are hurting looks like. Angry

people are not motivated by reasoned arguments of economists, or by

the effete and feckless Democrats, they are motivated by wrecking balls

on the left (Sanders) and right (Trump).

Trump will be done in September along with the Republican Senate

and the Supreme Court flips to liberal. Which is the most important

effect of the election. It's all on the line…

I'm not sure Trump is electable. But his ideas certainly are popular, along with

his "brand." And it's not so much Trump... I firmly believe he's a symptom of

our country's state of mind at the moment. It may have well been another -

but clearly our country is ready for radical change, and they're sending that

message to Washington. Jeb Bush has been beside himself in disbelief.

The media has become the instrument politicians use to brain

wash people. This is no longer a democracy based on the

constitution or the rules of law; this is a money motivated

parliamentary structure designed by the media and orchestrated

in Washington with the same musicians. Unless we liberate

ourselves from these corrupted politicians and set new rules for

the media, we are doomed. At this time - like many Americans -

I feel that Trump-Carson are our last hope.

The typical critique of politics today is that the ruling class

has been corrupted by

There's too much money

in politics; there's too much of a cult of access; the tropes

go on and on. Trump's not saying that. Instead, he's saying,

the ruling class has been corrupted by

The

problem isn't that "the politicians" have vanished behind

the velvet rope. It's that they've vanished up their own rear

ends. Obsessed with themselves, they have forgotten who

they are. They have lost their way — and ours.

Hard as it is to stomach or say, that is a kind of wisdom so

deep, so populist, and so potent that many conservatives

can't help but flutter toward it. Then again, neither can

many moderate or liberal Republicans, which is why Trump

performs well across all groups.

To be sure, in some ways Trump is a dreadful messenger for

this dreadful message. Then again, watching him at work up

there like a Soviet wrestler, it's clear this man is not riding a

fad or indulging a fantasy. An immense physical and mental

strain is involved in hitting his fellow candidates — hungry,

disciplined men — on issue after issue. He is delivering an

intense message that no one else has proven capable of

delivering with the requisite intensity: a shocking insight,

when you pause to think about it, but for the fact that in

this election year, nothing can shock anymore. - James Poulos

Why are Democrats so concerned

that Donald Trump might be the

Republican Party's nominee for

President that the NY Times trots

out editorials psycho-babbling about

his sleep deprivation?

This is hilarious stuff. Trump may

be all that the intellectual elite

deride him for. Guess what? The

people who support him don't care.

They are tired of being told how to

think by people who suppose

themselves to be their betters. They

will cast their votes and throw

their support behind whomever they

please, thank-you very much. That,

much to the chagrin of the

Progressive idealists who always

believe they know better what

people should need and want, is

democracy in action.

It may be ugly at times, but it is

much preferred over every other

form of governance.

In fact, articles like this, while red

meat for establishmentarian dogs,

serve only to strengthen Trump's

bona fides among his supporters.

And really, does Timothy Egan really

believe Donald Trump doesn't know

what he's doing or saying? Because

of sleep deprivation? Note to Mr.

Egan: Whatever is Trump's sleep

schedule, it seems to be working

well for him. He's winning.

S.D.Keith

Birmingham, AL 2 days ago

JOAN DIDION – EXPLAINED (very well): Though there have been other

essayists who share Didion's disdain for simplistic narrative, she really

does not belong to any tradition of American essayists.

The traditional essayist is a sense-maker and an imposer of order,

and in order to make sense and impose order, traditional essayists

assume an authorial command over their material (which is often their

own lives, and/or their own historical period). But the really good

essayists do not present themselves as authority figures who have

the power to make sense of themselves and/or of the historical period

they are living through. The good ones know that ages do not have

names and that people remain mysterious, even to themselves.

Didion’s temperament is conservative (she wants things to make

sense, to cohere) but never governed by or determined by any ideological

preconceptions of how things should be or how we would like them to be.

Her work presents a challenge to what we know, as well as our ways of

knowing. Therefore, reading Didion is unsettling, discomfiting. Her essays

succeed precisely because she does not try to name the thing that she

writes about with nice clarifying titles or topic sentences, rather she

presents her own competing impressions and competing ideas about the

unnamable something that has her interest.

She is very good at conveying her own singular impressions of

particularly chaotic times, or, more accurately, her own motions of

thought and cognitive insecurities during that moment in time when

no event or person encountered seems to be operating according to

rational or knowable laws. She is in many ways our poet of the

irrational. Instead of presenting her observations in neat linear patterns

that follow a single structuring logos, she presents them as the myriad

fragmented interventions that they are. She leaves the sense-making, the

imposition of order, to others.

3. Oct. 18, 2016:

In a Washington Post piece not labelled opinion or analysis,

Stuart Rothenberg reported that Trump’s path to an electoral

college victory was ‘nonexistent.’

TWO

I didn’t know

...you can never be happy and dress yourself solely

in the glass of other men's approval.

--Nicholas Flood Davis

_________________________________

Godwin's Law

A term that originated on Usenet, Godwin's Law states

that as an online argument grows longer and more

heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will

bring up Adolf Hitler or the Nazis. When such an event

occurs, the person guilty of invoking Godwin's Law has

effectively forfeited the argument.

Facebook Comments Plugin

from the Washington Post article that is referenced -

"We define low-information voters as those who do not

know certain basic facts about government and lack

what psychologists call a “need for cognition."

Need for cognition is what I wonder about when

NFL linemen in a crucial third down jump off sides

because they forgot about that arcane and

complex rule.

Facebook Comments Plugin

Somehow I'm reminded of the quote usually attributed to

John Kenneth Galbraith: "Faced with the choice between

changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do

so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."

There's surely plenty of evidence that those with greater

cognitive ability use that ability to confirm and support their

existing views and not so much to question them.

_____________________________________

Gathering "information" is often confused with "thinking".

People gather lots of information; some people more than

others. That gathering of information doesn't necessarily

correlate to lots of thinking.

Mike said...

Everybody thinks people who disagree with them are "low

information" and the fact is we all pick our own

information sources.

The regular Rush Limbaugh listener isn't likely a regular

DailyKos reader, and they all are very well informed with

the information they curate to validate their worldview.

Sometimes many of them try to break out of their comfort

zones and see what the other side has to say, but they'll still

approach that with a more critical eye.

True "low information voters" don't follow any of it at all,

and give about as much a rat’s ass about political matters

as I do about Pakistani cricket heroes.

Your last sentence is exactly the description Rush used, as

stated by others above. Most people intentionally avoid news

and are therefore Low Information Voters. It's not a

pejorative, as Ms. Lehmann assumes, but the people she

thought were using it were using it as an insult.

The broader point you appear to make may be valid,

but studies have shown that conservatives rely on a

wide range of sources from liberal MSM which are

everywhere and unavoidable to the news consumer

- from academic journals, internet, and association

with other free-thinking types. Progressives tend to

cocoon themselves in places like KOS and HuffPo so

they do not encounter those rude people who think

differently.

Owen said...

"The ancient arts of rhetoric, including logic and analysis, are

not in the current curriculum. This is a sad thing."

Word. I think the curriculum you speak of is ancient for a reason -- it

works. It is part of our toolkit as reasoning creatures to survive and thrive -

- particularly when many of the threats come from other reasoning

creatures who want our votes, our money, our bodies.

Many good comments here on a huge and important

topic: how we connect with what's outside our heads.

Matching the internal model to the external

source/target. Doing so efficiently. All that dopamine

we give ourselves? It is an adaptive signal: do more of

this, less of that.

In a complacent life among fellow believers, there is perhaps a steady

drip of dopamine from the echoes and mirrored pleasantries. There

is NO incentive to look farther. Doing so will almost certainly

cause inconvenience or even pain: having to fit new and

conflicting data into a perfect or perfectly-satisfactory model.

So only the perverse intellect will go there, starting fights and

staying up late to worry about competing hypotheses.

So it goes on. Until of course it doesn't.

I would argue that the greater the hubris, the closer to nemesis. One signal

of hubris is a refusal to engage challengers on the merits of their ideas; an

eagerness to attack them on their putative motives or character. Right now,

we see a lot of ad hominem dismissal of other viewpoints, much summary

condemnation of "fake news" channels. It suggests to me that the Progs

have consumed the entire design margin. In the analogy to the O-rings in

the Challenger disaster, they have burned all the way through.

The intuitive brain is fast, efficient, and transparent. The

analytical/contemplative brain is slow, inefficient, and

laborious. The extent to which people gather information

has nothing to do with their likelihood of analyzing it.

I know many people with brains full of news stories and TV

soundbites whose thinking never diverges from the social

preconceptions of their circle. Everything they think they

think is an echo.

The author thinks Low Information Voter is an insult, but it isn't necessarily.

Rational Ignorance : In an environment of rational ignorance,

broad themes matter most especially when delivered with the

aura of authority or expertise. This is why political radicals have

spent a century and a half trying to control the media and

academia, and why they won't tolerate competing views in

institutions they control.

Q: What produces "low information voters"?

A: Government.

If a person is powerless to effect a change, practicality

and sanity urge to just accept it and move on.

The less control the voter individually has over

Government, the less sense it makes for that voter to

invest in becoming informed about issues and candidates.

The more choices (for example, the purchase of medical care

insurance) that Government forcefully removes from the

individual, the less sense it makes for the individual to

become informed or concerned.

…The tail now wags the dog. Not long ago the DNC nobs

would collaborate with the ruling-class elitists to develop

talking points to be disseminated to, and broadcasted by the

propaganda arm of the DNC, the Main Stream Media.

Because the DNC is in such disarray, the Sorospeak narrative

now originates from the MSM and is then parroted by the

DNC. It is no longer a question of ‘who’ is the leader of the

DNC; it is the MSM.

____________________________________________________

I have to thank Matt Taibbi for this article and wish that he and

more like him would get on CNN and try to restore some sanity.

The other day Gloria Borger was going nuts over Trump allegedly

tweeting to Flynn - telling him to hang in there. She could not

believe that Trump would still be communicating with him, as if

Flynn had already been tried and convicted of treason or

something. Amazing that a simple encouraging word to a man

who has not even been charged with any crime would drive her

crazy.

Clearly there is no real crime to investigate or we would have

heard what it is by now. They are trying to kill Trump by a death of

a thousand cuts.

Like one sane individual once said...."“If the president puts

Russian salad dressing on his salad tonight, somehow that’s

a Russian connection.”

“…It all goes down in January, folks – January of 2017. A panic breaks

out. Donald Trump has been elected. President-elect since November of 2016.

He’s about to take office in just weeks in the middle of January and be sworn

in.

They’re in a panic – the FBI knows it has started a case because

of a fake dossier. The FBI knows it’s been lying about it.

Outgoing Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper has no

evidence. Outgoing National Security Advisor, Susan Rice has no

evidence that any of the stuff in the dossier is true.

They know Mike Flynn - the incoming National Security Advisor - an

experienced intelligence professional with decades in the military

and in the intelligence-space is going to uncover all of this.

They know Mike Flynn has gotten wind of some dirty dealings under

the table. And in January a full-blown panic breaks out.

January 4 th , 2017 : They’re about to close out the case against

Mike Flynn because despite all of their machinations and devious

plots to take General Mike Flynn down – they can’t find anything.

They’ve tried everything; they’ve thrown the kitchen sink at

Mike Flynn.

They’ve used spies against him. They’ve set him up. There is clearly some

kind of a FISA warrant up on Flynn or people in the Flynn orbit.

They are watching Flynn. They are listening to his phone calls.

And they’ve got absolutely nothing.

January 4 th, they freak out. They’re about to close the case.

They have nothing. They’ve thrown the kitchen sink at this guy

and they have zero derogatory information on Flynn.

And they decide at the last minute to give it one last shot.

Why?

Because they cannot…cannot…under any circumstances let

trained intelligence professional American patriot Mike Flynn see

what they’ve been doing…”

Dan Bongino, former Secret Service agent, author & radio show host

cliff ramsey 19 hours ago

If you want to know what’s inside the onion listen to Dan.

He peels it back all the way. Can’t wait to hear the bell again

SP TheGoat 22 hours ago

This truly is a blockbuster 15 season mini-series. Amazing.

James Andrews 23 hours ago

I was appalled by that montage of MSM coverage of General Flynn.

Shep 22 hours ago

Obama just overtook Nixon as the high-water mark for political corruption.

Dennis Smith 1 day ago

We need to add another 4 years for Trump. I want a redo.

We as Americans were totally scammed

.

OldManWinter 19 hours ago

Fantastic news stories, but without action it's all useless.

“…What are friends of the Flynn family saying

— why do you think Flynn did what he did? What have you heard that

explains Flynn admitting and copping the plea that he lied to

investigators? What’s the Drive-By Media telling you? They’re telling

us that he felt abandoned by Trump and he’s so hurt by that.

He was Trump’s original supporter, he was loyal to Trump, he did

everything Trump asked, he helped Trump win the nomination. Trump

has thrown him overboard and so Flynn is gonna drop the dime on

Trump and Jared and Ivanka and even Barron for doing whatever he did

to the swing set. He’s gonna unload on all of them, right?

That’s not what Flynn’s family and friends are saying.

Friends of the Michael Flynn family say he entered into the plea

agreement because he has been broken emotionally and

financially, that his family could not face another two to three

years of this. And what is “this”? “This” is Flynn as a reprobate,

degenerate, lying scumbag every day in the media for two to

three more years. They just couldn’t put up with it.

They were going after Flynn’s son as well, and Flynn wanted to protect

his son, so he copped the plea to stop them from also trying to destroy

his son. Because if Flynn hadn’t copped the plea, they wouldn’t have let

go of him until Trump is out of office. Believe you me, this is gonna go

on for as long as Trump is in office. They wore Flynn down.

This guy wore the military uniform in this country. He was a deep

patriot. He ran the defense intelligence agency, and look at him now

caught up in this massively powerful deep state federal justice system

that has been corrupted in this case to get rid of somebody the deep state

doesn’t want there, Donald Trump. Flynn’s sister and brother have

started a legal defense fund to pay for his attorney…” (early 2017)

Dan Bongino podcast

Russ <cameravision161@gmail.com> 11:02 AM (0

minutes ago)

to Green Stanley, Moe Bender, Frankie Pistol Rings, Peetie Wheatstraw, Silas McGhee, Weezer, Uncle Fester,

Skinny Little Jack, Bandwidth Charlie, Heiney Dimples, Ignatio Coker, Donkey Hoty, Petite Nightmares,

Dangerous Fool

The Destruction and Redemption of General Flynn

May, 8, 2020

His shows lately have been riveting. He's pissed and dialed in

https://youtu.be/ZUxi9oHlRb8

LeifOreilly1 day ago

The media knows perfectly well what happened to Mike Flynn.

They just think it was a good thing.

AtomicDog1 day ago

This was a coup. Plain and simple. People hang for treason.

AtomicDog1 day ago

I would accept tarring and feathering

Tina Arko1 day ago

Must suck to have to continually defend the indefensible,

especially when documents keep getting released making it such

an absurdity to do so.

Nick V1 day ago

This episode should be required watching by every citizen of

the entire world. Nice work, Dan.

Spectre3261 day ago

Damn fine synopsis, Dan. It's amazing how they thought this

would all remain buried. I'm going to enjoy the show.

“No U.S. attorney I ever worked with would have

tolerated for two seconds the behavior that I saw

that caused me to write this book. They all were

adamant that we do it right, that we seek justice,

that we be fair and that we carefully exercise our

discretion to prosecute only cases that we had all the

evidence and were sure the person was guilty. We

didn’t have time to go - or interest in - looking to find

something to pin on someone. That was not our job. No U.S. attorney I

ever worked with believed that was our job.”

- Sidney Powell, seven years before exposing the perjury trap set up against

former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn

…House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff’s claims on his many

television and media appearances during the early days of the Russia collusion

narrative have aged poorly. *

In early February 2017, Schiff fanned the narrative that former National

Security Adviser Michael Flynn may have sought to undercut President

Obama’s sanctions on Russia during a phone call with the Russian

ambassador and should be prosecuted under the Logan Act.

“Trump’s team, through Flynn, reaches out to the Russian ambassador and potentially

says, 'Don’t worry about those sanctions. We’re going to take care of business. We’re not

going to bite the hand that fed us.' That’s something that needs to be investigated. That’s

hugely consequential,” Schiff told The Atlantic magazine in Feb. 14, 2017.

By the time Schiff uttered those words, the FBI agent who had investigated

Flynn’s contacts with Russia had already concluded on Jan. 4, 2017 that there

was “no derogatory information” about Flynn’s contacts and recommended

closing down the case, according to recently declassified FBI memos.

- John Solomon, 2020

directly contradicted by intelligence evidence in recently declassified or released FBI and

Justice Department memos and reports

THREE

Orange

Crush

“I’m a bluesman; he’s from Long Island”

- Willie Brown,

“Crossroads”

Why Hillary Clinton would make the perfect

US president

Deborah Orr -- The Guardian April 13 2015

Hillary Clinton will be the youngest woman ever to be president of

the United States if she makes it to the Oval Office. She’ll be less

tainted by the scandals and mistakes of previous administrations

than any woman ever has been. She’ll be the first American

president who has experienced childbirth, or even admitted to

wearing a bra. She’ll be the first spouse to have followed her

partner into office. She’ll be the first president to have prompted

the need for an answer to the question: who is that guy then, if he

isn’t the first lady?

And that’s a question that needs answering. First lady? Eh? No title

could better advertise the longstanding structural fact that the

White House is open only to men. The idea is that any American

can be president. The truth is that when the founding fathers came

up with this lovely idea, what they actually meant was that any

American of the same sex as they were could be president. Their

institutionalized sexism has proved enduring.

After announcing her decision to seek the Democratic nomination,

Clinton will visit states whose initial lack of support undermined

her entire campaign in 2008.

So, it’s interesting that so many people are fretting now that United

States politics has become too elitist, too dynastic. Critics may

complain that it’s grim that again Americans may well be deciding

between a Clinton and a Bush. But you do have to ask yourself

why, if it helps so very much simply to be a member of certain

families, such advantage hasn’t thus far managed to put any

woman from one such a family into the White House.

America does have a number of problems with lack of accessibility

to public life. But the biggest one is that women have historically

had no actual access to the presidency at all – rich, poor, black,

white, young, old, experienced or fresh. This problem needs

sorting more urgently than any other. Happily, the means by which

the sorting can start have been, since Sunday, easily to hand.

Nothing would break the male monopoly on the US presidency

quite like a female president would. Quite clearly.

But the plain truth is that it has proved impossible up until

now for a woman to be head of the US. (Or the “free world”,

as they like, hypocritically, to put it.) The US may have been

offered a choice between a Bush and a Clinton before. But

they’ve never been offered a choice between a man and a

woman, let alone opted for the latter. Some Americans are

more free than others: which, in the land of opportunity, is

catastrophically appalling, a huge, oppressive stain on the

world.

And I do mean the world. How can America complain about the

treatment of women in other countries and cultures – which it does

– when its own democratic system is so manifestly inadequate in

this regard? America’s biggest problem is that it over-idealizes its

own perfection, and therefore believes that what it has to offer is so

perfectly precious that corners can be cut in inducting the rest of

the world into its joys. America still kills and tortures because it

believes its moral authority is impregnable. It’s quite astounding

that a country that still refuses to be led by a person who is a nonman

believes that its own pure and refined liberal democracy is

ready to be gifted to the rest of the globe.

No doubt many people consider it wrong to believe that Clinton

should be president “just because she’s a woman”. No doubt many

feminists are troubled by the way that Clinton is following in

footsteps trodden first by her husband.

No doubt many people would prefer a candidate less steeped in

what Nick Clegg was once able to call “the old politics”. But

sometimes you have to concede that monopolies are hard to break

and that compromise is needed if you hope to do so.

The US has got to start somewhere in addressing its historic

problem with male hegemony.

I’m troubled myself by all the issues I have listed above. I’ve never

been a big Hillary fan. I don’t expect her to be the best president

ever. In my book, anything more than competence would be a

bonus. But who knows how many times really wonderful

presidential minds have remained entirely unrecognized because

the bodies that contained them also contained some ovaries? Men

and women must feel equally able to enter public life because it

doubles the possibility that splendid leaders will emerge. That’s

not feminism. That’s probability.

Gender bias – any identity bias – is a wanton waste of human

potential. The US has got to start somewhere in addressing its

historic problem with male hegemony and Clinton is the one

appointment that could kickstart the change most quickly and

strongly. That’s why the symbolic power of her appointment

transcends all else. Anyone who doesn’t understand that, in this

one respect, Clinton is an absolutely perfect presidential choice, is

simply refusing to acknowledge reality.

There is no perfect female candidate and there’s no more time to

wait for one. God knows, anyway, that the US has long enough

been happy to overlook its propensity for anointing imperfect

males. There is no choice between a woman laden with baggage

and a woman unencumbered with it. But there is an opportunity to

signal to all women, everywhere, that “anyone” can mean them.

Hillary Clinton is still standing after all these years. And that is

good enough.

Reader Comments

When Branch Rickey moved to integrate baseball, he

knew that if he backed a failure, the cause of integration

would be set back a generation. Rickey very consciously

selected Jackie Robinson for the task, knowing that

Robinson had both the baseball skills and the personal

attributes to take on the challenge and keep on coming.

By contrast, if Hillary Clinton -- false, fleeting, perjurious

Hillary -- is the first woman president, she will be the last.

She is simply not in the same league as Diane Feinstein,

Olympia Snowe, Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice

and a large number of women whose political

accomplishment extend beyond riding hubby's coattails

even as she provided cover for his sex crimes.

India had a woman Head of State, Indira Gandhi, and it

remains unchanged. Firmly in place is a culture of a cruel

abusive criminalized system of lawless male

disparagement of women with vicious and murderous

power over women, deeply tolerated and protected and

cast in cement. This lawless male barbarity to women

stretches to all classes, educated, uneducated, rich or poor,

high or low "caste".

Maggie Thatcher was Head of State in Britain and the

nation regressed under her ruthless onslaught of

disenfranchisement of whole communities which affected

women deeply and made them even more vulnerable to

male domination and power, and poorer, much poorer.

Just by being a woman Hillary Clinton will bring nothing to

set up a fairer society for women in the US. Her candidacy

has to be judged by other values, and Hillary Clinton lacks

vision or wisdom.

Hillary Clinton plays the same arrogant and shallow power

game in Washington DC as most male politicians,

including her husband.

She brings zilch relief to women in the US or anywhere

else.

She is very ordinary and below par in her understanding of

the world.

•

whatdidyouxpekt

13 Apr 2015 15:36

She'll make a great president because she's got

tits and a fanny - is that it?

Reply | Pick

o

muttlee79 whatdidyouxpekt

13 Apr 2015 15:46

Congratulations for slipping that one through past the

Guardian mods!

It’s amusing to me that outlets like NYT always quote liberals who

are perplexed at how Hillary’s handled the email situation.

As if the problem is that she should be able to perfectly navigate

out of this, but she’s bungling it for some inexplicable reason.

She’s doing what she has to do, because the content of her email

server would destroy her and probably many others politically, if

not criminally.

All that can be said is she will hopefully do no worse

than Dubya did to cause colossal damage worldwide or

the damage his brother is likely to do if he is President.

She plays the game just like any man does, for power

and from knife-edged ambition and little else in vision,

and from that never will grow any new rights for

women anywhere.

Reply | Pick

• Need I remind you that no candidate for US

presidency would be remotely eligible for

consideration unless she or he was cynical, amoral,

utterly ruthless, 100% reliable in terms of readiness to

serve the interests of corporate and military power

and the super-rich. Clinton ticks all of these boxes,

and brings an added dimension of mendacity,

arrogance, disregard for international law or decency:

and as regards her well established, belligerent

support for Israeli crimes, her election would be very

bad news for world peace. An odious nasty piece of

work, totally irrespective of gender.

joejukkee

13 Apr 2015 15:37

This is preposterous nonsense. Why is it so hard for

certain people to believe that one might dislike Hillary

Clinton (as a politician, that is) for reasons that have

nothing to do with her gender? Her politics are

loathsome, pure and simple, from supporting the

invasion of Iraq, to supporting the Patriot Act to

supporting the bank bailouts, to a hundred other

things one could name. But apparently nothing of that

matters, because her gender alone qualifies her to be

president. That's not feminism, that's madness.

Reply | Pick

o

Rdrcitizen

13 Apr 2015 17:38

Imagine 8 years of that kind of madness,

during which no one can criticize the holder of

the most powerful office on the planet without

being slandered by radical feminists, who will

not tolerate any criticism of their Great Leader.

BlgrAnarchist

13 Apr 2015 15:39

Why not just put the US back under the British

Crown? Then they'd have a female leader without

even bothering to have an election - hurrah and an

end to the Clinton and Bush Dynasties.

Reply | Pick

BgBenBoy

13 Apr 2015 15:40

By the same logic, Sarah Palin would have been the

perfect vice-president and, potentially, president. Her

symbolic value as a female candidate was the only thing

that mattered.

o

DayseePetunia BgBenBoy

13 Apr 2015 15:59

I couldn't stand her either.

Reply | Pick Report

wndrby 13 Apr 2015 16:27

Mike Littwin frames the larger issue for the

Democratic Party

If many Democrats love Bernie and love Bernie’s passion but

fear that Bernie can’t win, and if they don’t love Hillary and if

Hillary is faced with a long slog against a message candidate

and winds up too damaged to win, where does that leave them

— other than with a cleared-for-Hillary field that doesn’t

provide any alternatives? No Biden. No Warren. No time for a

1968-style Bobby Kennedy intervention. Even Martin O’Malley

has dropped out.

Having put all of their eggs in one basket that best reflects the

1990s as opposed to 2016, where does that leave Democratic

voters?

I have no problem with whatever damage the demographic

supporting Bernie Sanders wants to inflict on Hillary

Clinton. She's a lousy choice made by a group of party insiders

who have utterly no use for the voters in any age group.

Sanders' supporters are welcome to cripple her any way they

see fit. But, if people are increasingly fed up with the LOTE-

VOTE [lesser of 2 evils] option, the alternative is to stay home,

and I genuinely can't blame people for making that choice;

particularly, voters under 40.

Share Like Reply

Trump_Fedaykin

4 months ago

"You're gonna make the same if you do as good a job." -The Donald

Zen Of Tupac 1 month ago

The woman at 4:00 I’m sure thought she was really

participating in a moment that would become

motivational, but upon re-watching ... I wonder if she

sees how badly she came off? The hands on hips and

head tilt killed her credibility.

grannypat → Nick • 11 hours ago

No woman will ever be president.

Ignorant men and stupid women

will do ANYTHING to defeat or

destroy an intelligent woman.

bendix20→ grannypat • 11 hours ago

Same old same old. If you don't agree with Obama you are

a racist. If you don't agree with Hillary you hate women.

“All at once Sherman was aware of a figure approaching him on

the sidewalk, in the wet black shadows of the town houses and

the trees. Even from fifty feet away, in the darkness, he could

tell. It was that deep worry that lives in the base of the skull of

every resident of Park Avenue south of Ninety-sixth Street—a

black youth, tall, rangy, wearing white sneakers. Now he was

forty feet away, thirty-five. Sherman stared at him. Well, let him

come! I’m not budging! It’s my territory! I’m not giving way for

any street punks! The black youth suddenly made a ninetydegree

turn and cut straight across the street to the sidewalk on

the other side. The feeble yellow of a sodium-vapor streetlight

reflected for an instant on his face as he checked Sherman out.

He had crossed over! What a stroke of luck! Not once did it

dawn on Sherman McCoy that what the boy had seen was a

thirty-eight-year-old white man, soaking wet, dressed in some

sort of military-looking raincoat full of straps and buckles,

holding a violently lurching animal in his arms, staring, bug-eyed,

and talking to himself.”

― Tom Wolfe, “The Bonfire of the Vanities”

feelings Aren’t Arguments 1 week ago

@Knowble Phantasm Funny to see the left cry about fascism. Yet

when they encounter a right leaning minority, they see them as

traitorous apostates who must be silenced and destroyed... Kanye

West was a great example of this: he knew the backlash he would

face and still came out for Trump. Hopefully the left’s reaction

opened the eyes of other black Americans. The left has become

little different than the religious ideological right during the 90's.

They have become authoritarian, couching their collectivist

totalitarian dogma in pretty words. Equality, now means identify

as an ally or be cast off as an apostate to be silenced and

destroyed. I legitimately feel sad for those who have been

emotionally manipulated through race baiting and propaganda.

For the sake of power, they will keep minorities poor and angry;

they have mastered identity politics, and our nation will reap the

whirlwind before it's over...

Reader David P articulated the same sentiment in a broader context,

writing, “It occurred to me that this election might actually be a

referendum on the media and its role in today’s world events.”

experiment43 3 weeks ago

Trump says he'll create more jobs. Trump wins Presidency.

Thousands say they are leaving the country. Trump just created

those jobs.

17Seventysix 3 weeks ago

George Soros paid protesters; you can say Trump

has already created jobs

Pete Buttigieg

We're in danger of a majority of Justices on the Supreme Court

being chosen by Presidents who didn't even get the majority of

the popular vote. Any way you look at it, we're getting less

democratic by the day.

UNI

In ONE of the last 7 elections, a Republican has earned the most

votes. That is ridiculous. Abolish the electoral college.

the kahoona :: That's enough, Mr. Kahoona. ::

Again. It's like the World Series, if your team outscores my team 100-0 in

three games, but my team wins the other four games by a single run each,

my team wins the trophy. Winning the sh*t out of a few populous states

doesn't matter to the final outcome. Every state matters.

kaw

We’re not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, Pete. Sheesh,

Civics 101

6% Dagney

Thats a pretty weak argument, Petey. The electoral college is there to

ensure that the smaller states are represented and eliminate mob rule.

rr1979

We’re a Republic Mr Buttigieg! You know, if you thought it through, a 100%

“democracy” as you call it would mean politicians would only have to

appeal to the most populated states thereby subjugating the remainder to

mob rule. Federalism is the most practical and fairest model!

NotJohn

A judge is supposed to make a decision fairly based on the Constitution

and the law. It shouldn't be relevant who the president that appointed

them is. That you think that it is a problem is a problem itself.

Shibu

Sir, you have got to go study the federal government you're a part of,

about how it works, and about the constitutional law it follows. It was set

up to prevent the tyranny of the majority that you and your comrades so

badly desire.

Noneya

I’m getting tired of repeating myself. We don’t live in a democracy. The

United States of America is a republic. Mob rule is for the literal, lowest

common denominator.

GoGo

That's how the founders set it up brother. Thank God they were

far smarter than the sort we have today!

Mike

Ever hear of the ELECTORAL college? Why should a small part of

the country dictate to EVERYONE!!!?????

Charity

I Pledge Allegiance To The Flag Of The United States Of America, And To

The REPUBLIC, For Which It Stands, One Nation, UNDER GOD, Indivisible,

With Liberty And Justice For ALL. Our Constitution PROTECTS us from MOB

RULE. Deal With It

When successful politicians who know better say things like this, the word

for it is “demagoguery.”

Patrick

Tyranny of the majority will not stand and is resisted as it rises.

The right combo of being right and being popular rules our

republic.

Vibhuti

As a legal immigrant from India, that had “Socialism” inserted in the

constitution during draconian Emergency, only TWO states controlled

India’s destiny! It’s in US I appreciated the value of Electoral College

wherein the voice of smaller states had value!

Get That Crap Off Your Face

Popular vote means exactly nothing, Peter. Thanks for playing.

Nick

Well @PeteButtigieg, here in the United States of America, presidents are

not chosen by popular vote. If they were, elections would be decided by

NYC, LA, Chicago, basically the large cities. Small states would have no

voice. Also, we are a Republic, not a Democracy.

Mental mis en place

Replying to@PeteButtigieg

That’s called an “opinion” and “hyperbole” for those playing at

home.

Eye.Q.

Looks

Pretty

Popular

to me

I am not celebrating the Trump victory, because I have

huge concerns about what his election will mean for the country

and the conservative movement at large. But before I go

deeper there, let’s be very honest about what happened last

night. The Democrats nominated a God-awful candidate, with

abysmal baggage, non-existent trustworthiness, and someone

who represented everything this election turned out to be

against – cronyism, insiderism, establishmentism, and

whatever else you want to call it.

The left faces an internal crisis in the years ahead

that I think will be brutal. In short, they are going to

have come to terms with what they did – they

nominated a totally corrupt and scandal-plagued

person when almost any level of a normal, measured

candidate could have won the race.

And let’s be clear here – I do not mean that James Comey or Trey

Gowdy or Donald Trump got to unfairly pin a corrupt label on her –

I mean she is corrupt. The left decided to ignore the content of

the WikiLeaks emails, and I really do not know why. They showed

in clear English for anyone who cared to read that she and her

husband were running a Clinton Inc. enterprise that was riddled

with pay-to-play, quid pro quo, and nefarious, dirty, ugly

activity. Did Comey ever produce emails from Hillary

that represent a criminal indictment? No. But can we please put to

bed once and for all why those emails are not

forthcoming? Because she deleted them. 33,000 of them. And

then took bleach and hammers to the whole residue apparatus.

I am the furthest thing from an alt-righter and from a

conspiratorialist, but these things are not up for debate: Hillary

brought the email scandal on herself because she was hiding

something, and you know it. If you are a liberal Democrat who

hates Trump, you still know it. If you are a conservative

Republican repulsed by Trump (like me), you know it. Hillary is

the reason Donald Trump is the President elect. Period.

Let’s gladly go to where some of you want me to go with this

piece. I thought Hillary would beat him anyways. Yep. And

based on the fact that nearly every Republican race

OUTPERFORMED Trump in the key states he won, I’d say the

data backs up the major thesis I have always had: Trump was

the least likely to beat Hillary (look at how much Rubio won by

in Florida and Portman in Ohio, etc.), and that was empirically

and demonstrably true. Now of course, where I and everyone

else was wrong, was that him being the least likely candidate to

defeat Hillary meant that he wouldn’t do it. He did do it. The

rather remarkable string of catastrophic self-induced mistakes

he made proved not to be enough to defeat him. So I celebrate

Hillary’s loss, admit I predicted wrongly on Trump’s outcome,

celebrate the GOP Senate victories, and then turn now to the

future.

Here are the major takeaways I have had throughout the night:

(1) The concerns I have about Trump’s competence,

temperament, and reliability are real and justified. That does

not mean I will ROOT for him to be incompetent, unmeasured,

and unreliable. I genuinely and prayerfully hope he will

surround himself with wise and intelligent people, and that his

worst instincts will lose out to his best instincts, and that his

genuine love of his country (which I do not question) will enable

him to realize that he lacks policy gravitas, and needs men and

women of experience and wisdom and conviction to advise

him. I won’t spend this article telling you what I predict is going

to happen. I will just say that it is a given that I am rooting for

him to defy conventional wisdom and outperform expectations.

(2) I have been an outspoken, unrepentant opponent of

Trump’s from day one, and that is because I have

been appalled by his vulgarity, immaturity, narcissism, and

instability. I can’t think of one point I have made about his

business biography or personal character that is untrue. And

yet, even an anti-Trumper like me found myself

almost rooting for him when held up against the

disgusting arrogance and smugness and elitism and

foolishness of the Hollywood culture opposing him. Beyoncé

and that silly Fight Song video and all the pop culture

elites threatening to leave our country repulsed voters, and

made people want to vote for Trump. That is a fact. They are

the big losers last night…

George S 3 months ago

"Rats panicking. Timing is everything. Enjoy the show."- Q

The good news is that we dodged a bullet in

this election. The bad news is that we don’t know

how many other bullets are coming, or from what

direction.

A Hillary Clinton victory would have meant a third

consecutive administration dedicated to dismantling the

institutions that have kept America free, and imposing instead

the social vision of the smug elites. That could have been the

ultimate catastrophe — not just for our time, but for

generations yet unborn.

In one sense, Donald Trump's victory was a unique

American event. But, in a larger sense, it represents the

biggest backlash among many elsewhere, against smug elites in

Western nations, where increasing numbers of ordinary people

are showing their anger at where those elites are leading their

countries...

- Thomas SowellI

…This was a whitelash. (pause) This was a whitelash against a

changing country. It was a whitelash against a black president

in part. And that's the part where the pain comes. And Donald

Trump has a responsibility tonight to come out and reassure

people that he is going to be the president of all the people who

he insulted and offended and brushed aside…

--Van JonesI, Election Night 2016

John F

5:38 PM EST

Trump won because the American people rejected the failed policies of the Liberal

Democrats. Joblessness, homelessness, high medical insurance deductibles, drugs

being smuggled thru an open border, and jobs leaving our country. It was about

policies, not race. Aren’t you a racist, Van for saying that?

LikeReplyShare

Arthur Fonzarelli

5:01 PM EST

How did Van explain to his kids what Donna Brazille did and how dirty it was for

Hillary to cheat and accept Debate Questions beforehand that Auntie Donna got at

CNN where Daddy works?

LikeReplyShare

DiamondGirl

4:44 PM EST

I am a woman, I am Jewish and a registered Democrat and I voted for Trump. I

can't stand Hillary Clinton and her lies, her arrogance, her attitude that laws do not

apply to her. I work in the government and know if I mishandled classified

information the way she did I would probably be in jail. Finally, she gets what she

so heartily deserved... a "NO MORE"!

LikeReplyShare

AmzgGrce

4:52 PM EST [Edited]

You will never understand it Van because to you it's all about race and race was

not the issue nor was gender. You and your liberal friends propped up a liar and

completely corrupt candidate who almost got away with it with the media's help,

but in trying to fool the public you ended up fooling yourselves. Now Deal with it

.

LikeReplyShare

Dan in Ga

4:44 PM EST

Come on, Van. This was about people wanting a change in economic direction and

not having confidence in Clinton to lead it. You know better.

"My accomplishments as Secretary of State? Well, I'm glad you

asked! My proudest accomplishment in which I take the most

pride, mostly because of the opposition it faced early on, you

know, the remnants of prior situations and mindsets that were too

narrowly focused in a manner whereby they may have overlooked

the bigger picture and we didn't do that and I'm proud of that. Very

proud. I would say that's a major accomplishment."

- Hillary Clinton

An Arkansas man has requested in his obituary that loved

ones do not vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016

election, making him at least the third individual to do so

since Clinton launched her campaign in April.

The obituary for Richard Buckman of Beebe, Ark., reads,

“In lieu of flowers, please do not vote for Hillary,” mirroring

text that was included in a recent obituary for a deceased

New Jersey woman. Buckman died on Aug. 22 at the age of

75, three days after news broke that the obituary for 63-

year-old Elaine Fyrdrych of Gloucester Township, N.J.,

advised funeral goers, “Elaine requests, ‘In lieu of flowers,

please do not vote for Hillary Clinton.’”

Indeed, such requests have become something of a

trend. The obituary for a 81-year-old North Carolina

man who died the day after Clinton launched her

presidential campaign also asked loved ones to refrain

from voting for the Democratic presidential candidate.

“The family respectfully asks that you do not vote for

Hillary Clinton in 2016,” the obituary for Larry Darrell

Upright read.

blakeusa

4:57 PM EST

A WHITE LASH ?

Really.

It's a lot more than Black and White.

After 8 years what specifically did Obama do for inner cities and black

people --- look at Chicago, look at Rahm Emanuel his former Chief of

Staff as Mayor... crime up, drugs up, murders up.... it’s really bad.

Van - it's called Democracy. Explain this to your friends and children.

L B

5:17 PM EST

I think you misunderstood. The City of Chicago regardless of race, gender,

socioeconomic status or crime rates primarily voted for Clinton, not Trump.

African Americans across the country overwhelmingly voted for Clinton not

Trump. Van Jones was making a point that the election results might be a backlash

of whites who had been uncomfortable with people of color gaining political clout

and influence against the establishment that allowed it to happen. I don't know that

I agree with that. I don't think a vote for Trump necessarily means the voter was

voting against African Americans. Each voter has their own reasons for casting

their ballot.

Many who voted for Trump did so out of loyalty to their party. Many

out of concern for the Supreme Court. Many to make a statement that

the establishment isn't doing a very good job of representing their interests.

And quite a few, I imagine, out of an extreme dislike for the Democratic

candidate. So personally, I think it is unfair to characterize the outcome as

a backlash against people of color gaining political power and influence.

Cal35

4:57 PM EST

Jones is just as bad as Trump himself calling those he disagrees with

stereotypic names like 'racist', 'homophobic' and 'xenophobic' while using the

tool of PC to silence opposition voices---that is not inclusive talk. It reminds

me of Clinton's damaging language - disregarding the whole middle of the

country… seeing herself innately superior to those that disagree with her----

they are both hypocrites.

Note: I am not even a Trump supporter but I am constantly embarrassed by this

elitist attitude of so many of us liberals who see ourselves as superior and don't let

people with different voices also be seen as legit people -- TRUE diversity means

not just accepting those we agree with (Blacks, Hispanics and women's rights

types) but letting working class whites and less educated whites know that their

fears and complaints are also real -- we won't get together on this until we

(liberals/democrats) expand to be truly inclusive of those 'deplorables' who have

real gripes and fears and who were rightly offended by Clinton's East Coast private

university worldview that only the upper middle and upper classes and the

educated from the coasts are worthy people who have legitimate worries. She

deserved to lose and we deserve what we get now…

Mark1234

But Cal, when someone is a member of the KKK, they ARE racist. When they

belong to a pray-away-the-gay group, they ARE homophobic and when they want

all the immigrants to be deported, they ARE xenophobic. And all the members of

those three groups are vocal Trump supporters. It's not divisive to call them what

they are any more that it would be divisive to call you black if you were, or male if

you are. It's just a statement of fact.

If you can find where Jones said ALL Trump supporters were racists or

homophobes you might be on to something, but he never did, and all the

members of those groups ARE Trump supporters…

Cal35

5:10 PM EST [Edited]

you missed the point--not all who were leery of Clinton deserved to be called

those terms---that was my point ok.

Also, I repeat, those like Jones like to bandy about those terms to scare reasoned

people away from speaking--and that is intentional--that's what the misuse of PC

does. It's a form of censorship and I don't like left wing nor right wing censorship

(the Right constantly has used PC --not called PC however- when they silence antiwar

types by calling them 'anti-American' or 'anti-Christian' and so forth). Both

sides overuse and misuse PC and this needs to stop so that we can get some real

dialogue going on race and class without using PC to stall debate and therefore

action. People who want more class equality are not necessarily 'socialists' and

people who may not like every aspect of Affirmative Action are not necessarily

'racists'--my point…

Friday night on the season finale of his HBO program Real Time.

Maher zeroed in on political correctness, discarding white people

problems as "mansplaining," and the inability for Democrats to

acknowledge Islamic terrorism for what it is.

"They made the white working man feel like you're problems aren't

real because you're 'mansplaining' and check your privilege," Maher

said Friday. "You know, if your life sucks, your problems are real.

What should I do? Cut my dick off and check my privilege?"

"Don't be mean to Muslims instead of how can we solve the problem

of shit blowing up in America," is not a good political policy, Maher

said.

Guest panelist Ana Marie Cox of MTV News accused Maher of

wanting to cater to "white men" by calling Islamic terrorist attacks for

what they are.

"The problem with American politics is we don't cater enough to

white men?" a bothered Ana Marie Cox asked the host.

"No, I didn't say that," he responded.

"You did, actually. You literally did. You literally did, actually!" Cox

said back.

"Democrats have become to a lot of Americans a boutique

party of fake outrage and social engineering and they're

not entirely wrong about that," Maher said.

…It's all Talmudic BS. It's an ideological supremacist minority

who've erected an aggressive intellectual framework, to

delegitimize a people they've always hated. Full stop.

These nobs deny their own history, they do not acknowledge

that it was an *explicit* strategy to name "whiteness" and then

delegitimize it. As in 1000's of words committed to paper to

elucidate and propagate the strategy. Non-white immigration is

an explicit tactic. Non-Christian is an explicit tactic. Nonheterosexual

is an explicit tactic. The stuff is written by their

own "thought leaders".

What Talmudic BS will they now offer to assuage the whites

they've endeavored to attack? Maher says "TV is very

important". Uh huh.

Brutus873 Scott M. • a day ago

Great game. Cubs are the WORLD SERIES

CHAMPIONS!

No one remembers the losers.

see more

“There’s been a sense in the media that Trump’s

election constitutes a kind of national emergency

because he’s such an unqualified character and so

likely to lead us off of a cliff that it is the job of the

media to join the resistance and find out what must be

behind his election.”

“Yeah, part of that’s true, that they can’t believe how

it happened. They thought they had the election wired.

Hillary was gonna win hands down. They’ve had to

concoct the excuse to explain why she and they lost.

But I don’t think that the media gives a whit about the

country falling off a cliff. I don’t think they have the

capacity to care about that. I don’t think that’s what

the resistance to Trump is all about. I don’t think the

resistance to Trump has anything to do with these

people worried about what it means for the country.

I think it all has to do with them being worried about

what it means for them. These people all think they’re

elites! You know, when you get inside the Beltway,

when you get inside the Washington establishment, it’s

kind of like going to Davos. Class distinctions don’t

exist inside the establishment. You’re either in it and

you’re an elite or you’re not. There’s not elite level one

and elite level two and elite level three.

You’re just in or you’re out. And it doesn’t matter if

you’re in media or at a think tank or the State

Department or in the administration or on the staff of

an elected congressman or senator - you are an elitist.

You’re there. You’re in the club. You’re in the

establishment. And that’s what they think is

threatened here. They’re worried that their little

fiefdom is gonna be blown sky-high. They’re worried

that their little protective club where everybody’s

looked out for and protected and their futures are

guaranteed - that’s what they’re worried about.

Plus, they’re worried about their own influence

and effectiveness. How could this have happened?

They own everything, in their minds. They own

public opinion. How could this guy survive

everything they did to take him out? They’re

taking it personally. They can’t believe it. And

they’ll be damned if it’s gonna happen again and

damned if this guy’s gonna succeed. They can’t

afford for him to succeed at anything! It blows up

the illusion that only they have the brains and the

smarts to run things.”

_________________________________________

tragicliform 3 months ago

This man’s balls have balls of their

own.

Catherine A 2 months ago

tragicliform

Elise 1 month ago

We just need regular people in office. Representatives. Trump is hysterical

and us everyday people love him.

Sneja Hiham 1 month ago

I totally enjoy watching Donald J Trump and his brutally honest views.

He is very blunt with his opinions, but at least he speaks his heart out

without political filters. We need more politicians like him in this world.

Marvel - Movie clips 1 month ago

Sneja Hiham Same here

Trump must deliver improvements in the US business

environment to fulfill his promise to improve middle class

employment prospects. Trump supporters believe he is

dedicated to that mission. Given the level of opposition from

Congress and the MSM, it is expected that many course

reversals and coalition shifts will occur as the broken field run to

mission accomplishment takes place. While opponents can

criticize tactical shifts as inconsistent with campaign

statements, supporters see pragmatic tactical shifts that move

closer to mission goals. "Consistency" is the last refuge of the

unimaginative - It’s also a key to "gotcha" politics.

Try harder to understand use of the "bluff" in statesmanship.

Trump contacts Taiwan, accuses China of being a "currency

manipulator", and suggests that tariffs could be employed. We

are now talking with China about NK, our key issue, the other

non-issues magically drop.

Trump acts methodically, but you can't see it...

Sherry B 11 months ago

The elite know it on some level, but can’t fake it...we can tell the

difference because we are focused on what’s important....and it’s not the

packaging.

Red Trek 11 months ago

The really funny part is Trump is a left-brain liar and

right-brain soothsayer. When it comes to numbers and details

everything is as exaggerated as possible. When it comes to

the big picture and his underlying ethos, he's spot on.

majungasaurusaaaa 11 months ago

Being ostracized by swamp dwellers is not a bad thing.

4TrueTime 11 months ago

The "Lofty" Academics, reminds me of what my Aunt told me in regards to

a very smart religious person I was holding in high esteem. "Let's hope this

religious person is not so heavenly, they are of no Earthly good."

Lepepelepub 11 months ago

Didn't vote for Trump, I thought the same things many thought. I didn't

like the whole NY reality show gimmick. However, can't argue with

results. There is a certain satisfaction in seeing Trump go after obvious

issues and sanctimonious institutions that people thought were

untouchable and still require a national conversation. Social media is not

representative of anything. I was hopeful for the Democrats after the

election, because there was a lot of soul searching and there were actual

conversations on why they lost. *

I

I

I

I

I

I

…Strategically, Trump is correct: Russia is a paper tiger

apart from its nuclear weapons, has a GDP smaller than

Canada’s, and Putin is conducting a clumsy imitation of

Charles de Gaulle’s elegant restoration of France as a

serious power by being a nuisance to the Anglo-Americans

in order to redeem the fiasco of the French surrender to

the Nazis in 1940.

The danger with Putin is to drive Russia into the arms of

China and Iran, and the goodwill of the Kremlin can be

had by the United States for less than continuing the

present NATO pocket-picking. NATO can be reformed

and Russia can be made a semi-cooperative state of

convenience. These are reasonable goals and they are

attainable.

Yes, There Was Illicit Meddling in the 2016 Election

What makes this controversy so unique, riveting, and

infuriating, is the ability of the palsied Democratic leaders,

with their media accomplices and dupes, to keep this dead

pigeon of collusion alive by pretending Mueller is

conducting a serious investigation; and that they may ride

the traditional wave of midterm congressional losses for the

administration to distract and paralyze the government with

a fraudulent impeachment debate and hopeless Senate

trials, consuming much of 2019 and deferring the day of

reckoning for the culprits of the Clinton campaign and the

Justice Department and intelligence agencies.

They are trying to cover up the greatest illicit meddling

in an American election in history: by American

intelligence agencies. In their desperation since the

defeat of the candidate they covertly supported, who

would have covered it up for them, they have been

trying to maintain the fraud of collusion and conflate it

with the trivial and routine interventions of some

Russian operatives in the 2016 election.

The president saw that the only way to resolve this is to

campaign energetically in the midterms (which no

president has really done before), in opposition to open

borders, a rollback of tax cuts, and this dishonest and

unconstitutional skullduggery. He should celebrate Labor

Day by ordering the release of what the congressional

committees have been demanding from Rosenstein for

many months.

Trump could have handled things better in Helsinki, and

should not have provoked a clarification from National

Intelligence Director Dan Coats. But fundamentally he is

right. And he will win.

If you hate Trump, you’re instantly an expert

- Mark Simone

…It is impossible to paste a classified document into an unclassified

email accidentally, because the three computer systems (Unclassified,

Confidential/Secret, and Top Secret) are physically separate networks,

each feeding into an independent hard drive on the user’s desk. If a

classified document appears in an unclassified email, then someone

downloaded it onto a thumb drive and manually uploaded it to the

unclassified network — an intentional act if ever there was one.

One of Clinton’s emails suggests that downloading and uploading

material in this fashion was a commonplace activity in her office. In

June 2011, a staffer encountered difficulty transmitting a document to

her by means of a classified system. An impatient Clinton instructed him

to strip the classified markings from the document and send it on as an

unclassified email. “Turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and

send nonsecure,” Clinton instructed.

On three separate occasions staffers got sloppy and failed to strip the

“nonpapers” of all markings that betrayed their classified origins.

The FBI recovered one email, for example, that contained a “C” in

parenthesis in the margin — an obvious sign that the corresponding

paragraph was classified “Confidential.” When an agent personally

interviewed Clinton, on July 2, he showed her the document and asked

whether she understood what the “C” meant.

For anyone who has ever held a security clearance, “C’s” in

the margins are more ubiquitous than “C’s” on water

faucets — and no more baffling. But Clinton played the

ditzy grandmother. She had simply assumed, she said, that

the “C” was marking an item in an alphabetized list.

In the 2,500-year life of the alphabet, this was a first: a list that started

with the third letter and contained but a single item. The explanation was

laughable, but any sensible answer would have constituted an

acknowledgement of malicious intent. Her only out was the “wellintentioned

but careless” script that Obama had written for her. In other

words, she lied to the FBI — a felony offense.

Before she ever told this howler, however, Comey had already prepared a draft of

his statement exonerating her. The FBI let Hillary Clinton skate.

But give Comey his due. If he had followed the letter of the law, the trail

of guilt may have led all the way to Obama himself. As Andrew C.

McCarthy has demonstrated at National Review Online, Obama used a

dummy email account to communicate with Clinton via her private

server. Did this make Obama complicit in Clinton’s malfeasance?

Anyone in Comey’s position would have thought twice before moving

to prosecute her — and not only because the case might have ensnared

President Obama himself.

excerpted from “The Real Collusion Story”

FOUR

you’re not

welcome here

Dallas15m ago

It's like crying wolf, but worse.

The article fails to correctly address WHY there's a 'deepening

bond' with Trump voters and in doing so exposes her own bias.

It's not about being "numb to outrage" in the sense that the

author describes (that the outrage is true), it's about being

numb to repeatedly hearing an outrage, investigating its

validity, and repeatedly discovering that the outrage of the

day is based on a lie.

Take the migrant crisis, for example. A little research (god forbid

'respected reporters' have to do such a thing) by 'us rank amateurs'

reveals that the separations were (1) a result of the Wilberforce Act

(2008), (2) Flores vs. Reno (as in Janet Reno, Clinton's AG), (3) that

Obama not only supported the policy, he expressly advocated it as a

way to punish and "discourage" law breaking/abuses by the

immigrants (the rationales of (1) and (2) were to stop sex

trafficking/child slavery). Once you learn the facts, while you may be

outraged, you wonder why the heck it's directed at Trump (other than the

obvious answer -- which is the media hates him (HATES!) him).

So a 2 year old crying is a tragedy? This is the standard? I've

raised six kids and have a 2-year-old grandson. Believe me,

2-year-old kids will cry over dropping a potato chip on the

floor and the dog eating it before they can pick it up. TIME

MAGAZINE is a bad joke.

• Diane Reynolds (Paul.)|6.20.18 @ 4:54PM|#

At least we're not talking about guns. Man, that

Hogg kid is probably gonna need therapy now

that he's been kicked so far to the curb.

• Earth Skeptic|6.21.18 @ 10:57AM|#

• Gear Grimrud|6.20.18 @

8:28PM|#

•

Yeah I absolutely disagree with

Trump's southern border policies.

Freedom of movement is a natural,

individual, human right. Period.

Any law or policy that prevents

people from attempting to create a

better life for themselves is

illegitimate. But after the 11th or

12th article in Reason mimicking

hundreds of other hysterical

articles in the MSM perpetuating

the latest TDS cause du jour until

the next outrage takes over the

news cycle, I started to get weary.

I'm pretty sure next week will

bring yet another Trump scandal

that will lead to an unprecedented

level of weeping and gnashing of

teeth. Meanwhile I can still buy

vaping juice, I just got an

individual health insurance policy

for half of the Obamacare

exchange price, and business has

never been better. If Reason's

favored alternative to Johnson had

been elected, I wouldn't have any

of those things and we'd still have

shitty immigration policies, a

WOD and probably a shooting war

with Russia in Syria. If that labels

me a Trump supporter it's just

another cross I'll have to bear.

reply to this

log in or register to reply

• Jeff70241|6.21.18 @ 8:08AM|#

Freedom of movement into my home or

across national borders is emphatically

not a human right. Anyone in favor of

Go through anything this approximating process about true once open a

month or borders so and is eventually either nuts or THEN incredibly you

get numb naïve. to the I served Outrage in seven of the third-world Day.

dystopias, four of them Islamic visions

Does anyone of what have can any only doubt be described that if Obama as Hell

had been on the Earth, target I of kid similar you not. (even With open

legitimate)

borders

headlines,

the movement

there would

would

be 'fresh

almost

faces' in the

entirely

newsrooms?

be one-way, from the

undeveloped world to the developed.

I'm not exaggerating when I say that

with open borders the developed

nations would effectively be destroyed

• Gear

within

Grimsrud|6.20.18

fifty years, tops.

@

8:28PM|#

According to one U.N. population

Yeah I absolutely

growth model

disagree

the

with

population

Trump's

of Africa

southern border

is projected

policies.

to increase

Freedom

from

of

1.3-billion

movement

today

is a natural,

to 4-billion

individual,

by 2100.

human

If America

right. Period.

& Europe

Any law

were

or

to

policy

each

that

take

prevents

5%, 200-

people from

million,

attempting

they would

to create

quite

a better

literally

life

be

for themselves

destroyed,

is illegitimate.

no exaggeration,

But after

and

the

the

11th or 12th

remaining

article in

3.6-billion

Reason mimicking

wouldn't even

hundreds

notice

of other

they

hysterical

were missing.

articles in the

MSM perpetuating the latest TDS cause du

jour until

The

the next

Japanese,

outrage

in

takes

particular,

over the

understand

news cycle,

something

I started

about

to get

homogeneity

weary. I'm pretty

& social

sure next

trust/cohesion

week will bring

and

yet

demographics

another Trump

&

scandal that

destiny

will lead

that the

to an

West

unprecedented

collectively does

level of weeping

not.

and gnashing of teeth.

Meanwhile I can still buy vaping juice, I just

got an individual

reply to

health

this

insurance policy for

half of the Obamacare exchange price, and

business has

log

never

in or register

been better.

to reply

If Reason's

favored alternative to Johnson had been

elected I wouldn't have any of those things

and we'd still have shitty immigration

policies, a WOD and probably a shooting war

with Russia in Syria. If that labels me a it's

just another cross I'll have to bear,

44. April 1, 2018:

AP’s Nicholas Riccardi reported that the Trump administration had

ended a program to admit foreign entrepreneurs. It wasn’t true.

48. May 16, 2018:

The New York Times’ Julie Hirschfeld Davis, AP, CNN’s Oliver Darcy

and others excerpted a Trump comment as if he had referred to

immigrants or illegal immigrants generally as ‘animals.’ Most

outlets corrected their reports later to note that Trump had specifically

referred to members of the murderous criminal gang MS-13.

49. May 28, 2018

The New York Times’ Magazine editor-in-chief Jake Silverstein and

CNN’s Hadas Gold shared a story with photos of immigrant children in

cages as if they were new photos taken under the Trump administration.

The article and photos were actually taken in 2014 under the Obama

administration.

52. June 21, 2018

Time magazine and others used a photo of a crying Honduran child to

illustrate a supposed Trump administration policy separating illegal

immigrant parents and children. The child’s father later reported that

agents had never separated her from her mother; the mother had taken

her to the US without his knowledge and separated herself from her

other children, whom she left behind.

*Gold numbered / dated entries (here and elsewhere) are excerpted from

Notable Mistakes and Missteps in Major Media Reporting on Donald Trump

By Sharyl Attkisson

J Burrten @JBurrtenPX

What kind of upside-down, nightmare

world are we living in where the President

is deploying troops to secure our own

borders rather than random stretches of

Middle Eastern desert halfway across the

world from us

FIVE

maybe they

should get a

forklift

…With respect to the framing of Trump, however, the second-sight scam

required elaborate orchestration, the work of many hands. The key was

the double-tracking of the dossier. Hillary Clinton’s enablers

channeled it simultaneously into the press and into the government.

They then recruited people inside government to verify to the

outsiders that it was a serious document, a guide to the intelligence

that reporters were not allowed to see. Without this double-tracking

and official or quasi-official authentication, journalists would never

have believed that they were catching a glimpse of what Brennan and

the FBI saw in their crystal balls - pardon me, their top-secret

monitors.

And without leaks about investigations,

journalists would have had no dossier-related

news to report. Official statements that the

dossier “was being looked into” transformed it

into a legitimate topic for reputable news

outlets.

This con failed in its primary goal of preventing

the election of Trump, but it was nevertheless a

partial success. It instilled in a significant portion

of the American public the conviction that Trump

indeed conspired with Putin. This conviction is

especially prevalent among the lofty-minded — a

class of people that includes Republicans as well

as Democrats.

The bipartisan character of the delusion was the greatest factor that

legitimated the appointment of Robert S. Mueller III, the special

counsel leading the investigation into Trump’s alleged relations with

Russia. The lofty-minded have greeted every indictment that Mueller

has handed down as confirmation of their collusion delusion. In

reality, those indictments only prove that a phalanx of crack

investigators armed with nearly unlimited resources, a grand jury, and

an expansive mandate can draw blood almost at will.

If a similar phalanx were to target Hillary Clinton and the

shenanigans surrounding the Clinton Foundation, how much blood

would flow?

In other words, Mueller’s indictments are just the latest form of the

non-verification verification.

Regardless of Mueller’s intentions, his probe serves as precisely the

kind of “insurance policy” that Strzok seems to have been discussing

with his lover, Lisa Page, in August 2016. Trump cannot shut down

the Mueller probe and excise the rot in the DOJ and the FBI without

appearing to obstruct justice. In practical terms, then, the Mueller

probe is the cover-up.

Of course, the lofty-minded refuse to see it this way. The

political damage that Mueller’s team is inflicting on Trump

helps explain why a surprising number of people mount

passionate and sincere defenses of the dossier and the super

spy who compiled it. The logic of partisan politics will always

lead a significant percentage of people to insist, with varying

degrees of true belief, that a sow’s ear really is a silk purse.

But partisanship is not by any means the only factor at work

here. Even people with well-deserved reputations for

intellectual seriousness passionately defend the integrity of

Christopher Steele, a man whom the New York Times insists

on calling, despite all contrary evidence, “a whistleblower.”

For a complete understanding of the

dossier’s tenacious hold on lofty minds,

one must supplement conventional

political analysis with psychology. What

we are witnessing is nothing less than a

textbook case of denial and projection —

the most perfect case imaginable.

• excerpted from “The Real Collusion Story”

Ignore all previous fortunes.

Fortune cookie

Garrett 6 hours ago

So on top of the irrational #Resistance folks that just do drive-by

dislikes, we've got Trump diehards that will support him 100%

REGARDLESS and are hysterical at the slightest criticism...who all of

a sudden think Trump and their zero experience in cyber intrusion

attribution know better than our entire intelligence community. Go

read a CrowdStrike report or something because you're just

embarrassing yourselves with your conspiracy theory nonsense.

Steven 5 hours ago

"…who all of a sudden think Trump and their zero experience in

cyber intrusion attribution know better than our entire

intelligence community."

No, I don't claim to know better than our intelligence community.

They have just proven themselves to be terribly partisan hacks, and

untrustworthy. I don't think I am a better airline pilot than the

jihadist terrorists who ran the planes into the World Trade center,

but if given a chance to be in the cockpit flying a plane or them, I'd

choose me.

…Trump's gravitational pull is such that he

causes his opponents to overplay their hands. In

effect, he trolls them into adopting positions so

far out of the mainstream that they become selfdiscrediting.

Take, for example, the crisis at the

southern border. With the policy of family

separation, Trump found himself on the wrong

side of a 70/30 issue. His administration spent a

lot of time explaining, which in politics means you

are losing an argument. But within days the

president went on offense by signing an executive

order and urging Congress and the courts to

regularize asylum and detention law. The

Democrats? They quickly found

themselves arguing for releasing anyone who

crosses the border illegally with a child— not

only a dumb idea, but also one that would

incentivize future crossings and

even child trafficking. It's

unpopular to boot…

Tommy Lasorda's standard reply when some

new kid would ask directions to the whirlpool

was to tell him to stick his foot in the toilet and

flush it.

Because Trump isn’t part of the club (the ‘club’ George

Carlin states that we’re not a part of nor will we ever be.)

Trump is too brash and doesn’t buy in to the ‘clubs’ party

line. The ‘club’ wouldn’t be able to control him. Trump is

reframing the entire spectacle and not one of the other

candidates have a clue as to what he’s up to. Scott Adams is

right on with his analysis. I also subscribe to Ann Barnhardt’s

claim that ‘anyone running for higher office is a psychopath’.

The ‘club’ would claim that ‘yes, he’s a psychopath but he’s

our psychopath.’ Trump is most likely a psychopath as well,

but no one can claim, except maybe his supporters, that ‘he’s

our psychopath.’ I keep remembering that there’s no one on a

white horse coming to save us, and we’re not going to vote

ourselves out of the mess that’s been made. I continue to take

Carlin’s advice of ‘getting my favorite beverage, pulling up a

comfortable chair, and watching the whole edifice come

tumbling down.’

I’m pondering the similarity between this attitude and the “I

wish I could meet a guy just like you” attitude that

attractive women often exhibit – towards guys who are

totally available to them, but don’t meet the requirements

they don’t want to acknowledge to themselves

READER COMMENT

Every other politician is speaking "politically

correct"… Political Correctness forces you to deny

logic, truth, reason, morality, common sense in the

name of "not offending"

People realize that this is merely the EXACT same

tool as "NEWSPEAK" from “1984” to try and

control/suppress freedom of expression.

It's the government, media and the few (but extremely

loud) Social Justice Warriors aka Useful Idiots, who buy

into this dogma, and light up like a Christmas tree

when they hear their favorite liar pay them lip service.

When somebody like Trump... rough around the

edges, improper and most importantly POLITICALLY

INCORRECT, simply speaks the harsh, inconvenient

(to the Establishment), bare bones TRUTH... it's nearly

impossible for anybody with a moral compass NOT to

support what he says, whether they support him or

not!

"I can NEVER apologize for the truth...

ESPECIALLY if it offends you."

Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government.

It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote

themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that

moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates

promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the

result that a democracy always collapses over lousy fiscal

policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

The average of the world’s great civilizations before they

decline has been 200 years.

These nations have progressed in this sequence: From

bondage to spiritual faith; from faith to great courage; from

courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance

to selfishness; from selfishness to Complacency; from

complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from

dependency back again to bondage." -Alexander Fraser Tyler

your quote is from Alexander Fraser Tytler (not Tyler) who died in

1813 & was a Scottish university professor-- I think our democracy has

done pretty well over the past 203 years since he died, including twice

ending world wars

“The car won’t start.”

“Look for the symptom

code on the dashboard.”

“All I see is a guy

sitting on a toilet

bowl.”

SIX

Happiness is not

permitted

jaz • 18 minutes ago

This is a Cat-5 Panty twist. Best to just look

the other way.

A guy in a hot air balloon was lost. He lowered the

altitude, spotted a man down below and descended a bit

more and then called out to him. He said, “Excuse me,

can you help me? I promised a friend I’d meet him an

hour ago and I don’t know where I am.” The man on the

ground consulted his GPS and replied, “You’re in a hot

air balloon approximately 30 feet above ground

elevation at 2346 feet above sea level. You are 31

degrees, 14 minutes north latitude; 100 degrees, 49

minutes west longitude.” And the guy in the balloon

said, “You must be a Republican.” And he said, “I am.

How did you know that?”

He said, “Well, everything you told me is technically

correct but I have no idea what to make of your

information. The fact is I’m still lost — and, frankly,

you haven’t been very much help so far.”

The other guy said, “You must be a Democrat.” He said,

“I am. How did you know that?” He said, “Well, you

don’t know where you’re going or where you’ve been.

You’ve risen to where you are on hot air. You made a

promise which you have no idea how to keep. You

expect me to solve your problem. The fact is you’re in

the same place you were before we met and now it’s my

fault!”

Progressive, Tenure Track

A College Town 7 hours ago

Attacking Trump is a fool's errand. If we in the

Resist# movement really want to make an impact,

we need to attack his supporters and shame them

out of the debate.

I've already been doing this, by cancelling holidays

with family who support him, by attacking any

students of mine who express Trump-favorable

positions in class (or at least by passive-aggressively

dismissing them if they happen to be physically

large or self-confident and articulate enough to

threaten me - physically or mentally), and by

boycotting any and all Trump-friendly business

owners.

The key is to establish opinion corridors, a common

practice in more advanced societies, particularly

those in Scandinavia. The idea is that if someone

airs an "un-woke" or unsanctioned opinion, we

should immediately deny them respect and contact,

to prevent the odious thoughts from being aired.

Trump is clearly odious, but his wealth, power, and

ability to steal elections with foreign support make

him immune to our resistance.

And while criticism of his supporters from afar may

be psychologically soothing on a personal level, it

doesn't truly counter the damage that he's doing. So

I suggest we target the very people who continue to

support him, by being as shrill, obnoxious, and

aggressive towards them as possible. Many of his

supporters are small minded, unaware, ignorant

rubes. They crave love and affection. If those of us

with superior compassion, love, intellect, and

wealth reject them, they'll dump Trump.

PittsburghSteelersFan

Pittsburgh, PA 6 hours ago

Entertaining satire. I’m sure there are many

vainglorious academics who actually think that

way.

NY 2 hours ago

The perfect satire on "progressives"

❖ Flag

❖ Reply

❖ Recommend

❖ Share this comment on FacebookShare this comment on

Twitter

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised

for the good of its victims may be the most

oppressive. It would be better to live under

robber barons than under omnipotent moral

busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may

sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some

point be satiated; but those who torment us

for our own good will torment us without

end, for they do so with the approval of their

own conscience.

-- C. S. Lewis

History doesn’t repeat, but it

often rhymes

-Paul Joseph Watson

…Behind the social justice warrior’s outbreaks of

self-righteous wrath is a distinct if somewhat

amorphous ideology… At the center of this

worldview is the evil of oppression, the virtue of

“marginalized” identities—based on race, ethnicity,

gender, sexuality, religion or disability—and the

perfectionist quest to eliminate anything the

marginalized may perceive as oppressive or

“invalidating.” Such perceptions are given a nearabsolute

presumption of validity, even if shared by a

fraction of the “oppressed group.” Meanwhile, the

viewpoints of the so-called “privileged”—a category

that includes economically disadvantaged whites,

especially men—are radically devalued.

Because Social Justice Warriors are so focused on changing

bad attitudes and ferreting out subtle biases and

insensitivities, (without for a moment considering their

own deficiencies and delusion) their hostility to free speech

and thought is not an unfortunate byproduct of the

movement but its very essence. You can be welcoming,

respectful, and hard-working, yet still be demonized --

your loyalty to the party line is how you are measured.

Some conservatives describe Social Justice Warriors as

“cultural Marxists”; the “movement” has also been

compared to Maoism, and particularly to the Cultural

Revolution, with its focus on re-education and public

confessions of ideological errors. But, as atheist blogger

Rebecca Bradley has argued, the movement also has many

elements of an apocalyptic religious cult that sees the world

as mired in sin and evil except for a handful of the elect. A

popular post on Tumblr, a major Social Justice hive,

laments, “being on Tumblr all the time gives me such a

deluded view of the world. I start believing that everyone is

pro-choice, open-minded, have moral compass…care about

sexism, racism, body shaming, etc, but then I walk out my

front door and realize that everyone is still just as moronic

as they were two years ago.” This is a classic cult mindset.

There is a word for ideologies, religious or secular, that

seek to politicize and control every aspect of human life:

totalitarian. Unlike the proponents of most such ideologies,

the Social Justice “movement” has no fixed doctrine or

clear utopian vision. But in a way, its amorphousness makes

it more tyrannical.

While all revolutions are prone to devouring their children,

the Social Justice movement may be especially vulnerable

to self-immolation: Its creed of “intersectionality”—multiple

overlapping oppressions—means that the oppressed are

always one misstep away from becoming the oppressor.

Your cool feminist T-shirt can become a racist atrocity in a

mouse click. And since new “marginalized” identities can

always emerge, no one can tell what currently acceptable

words or ideas may be excommunicated tomorrow.

- Cathy Young

❖ NOVEMBER 23, 2013

❖ :

Improved signage at my university’s

construction site

❖ That’s just vandalism. Not protesting, not making a

statement, not progressing feminism or equal rights

in any way.

❖

❖ And people wonder why feminists are despised by

most of the world.

❖

❖ So you took a sign meant to caution people that it may

not be the safest area to walk through and made it worth

a double take… maybe worth getting closer to, because

naturally people are going to want to see why a sign

they’re used to seeing is suddenly different.

Congratulations, you’ve been counterproductive and

probably endangered a rubbernecker.

❖

❖ You know in all my years in construction I’ve never

seen anyone who identified as a woman pick up a

hammer. I’ve seen them in the office, but not on the

actual job site.

❖

❖ I feel so empowered and liberated because you defaced a

sign that was truthful and made it about your precious

feelings! ….. You are just being an eyesore. Unless you are

going to university to actually become one of those

construction workers, then sit the fuck down and complain

about Blurred Lines some more.

❖

❖ Ugh. I’m really ashamed to call myself a woman thanks to

people like this. Literally, what was your fucking point you

useless aluminum can?

Tim

@bprg

Jan 13

I'm very sorry to have to share this video with you.

All of it, every part of it.

Carpe Donktum

@CarpeDonktum

·Jan 14

Replying to

@bprg

Man, I just can't believe how bold some of these Hollywood

people are becoming, first Ricky, and now Vince. If this keeps up

people might realize that they live in a free country, and it's ok to

have different opinions than the ones shouted at you on TV.

Creation Evolution 3 days ago

Competence and compassion, solidarity with trust. Sounds so

wonderful. Now, who fragmented us? Who brought us identity

politics? Who are the elites not held accountable? I am a black

woman who was so relentlessly targeted with Anti Trump

Propaganda, I got suspicious...and now, I am a proud American,

not a bitter minority. I'm ready for a fresh start, to work hard, and

get our country back!

Show less

“Forgive me for virtue signaling here, but I'm a gay man.

If a church told me that my partner & I couldn't hold a

ceremony there, well first of all, I would've done my

research ahead of time, but who cares if they don't want it

held there! For the past few years, I've been sitting here in

shock watching this authoritative leg of the

LGBTQIAK+++++2+ community slowly destroy all the

progress made in the past. Why can't we just accept each

other's differences, and just move on? Why does the

government need to be in control of everything? All I

wanted in life was to be treated like a normal person, but

these progressives & their so called "liberal" counterparts

won't be satisfied until I have a large rainbow-colored neon

sign above my head saying "c*** sucker."

@larklcs

Sick of Cold Coding

·

Mar 3

Replying to

@lhanO

Here's a wild thought. What if progressives, instead of

berating people they deem moderate for not liking 1 guy,

organized with them around issues, realizing that the

differences are miniscule compared to left vs right? And they

stopped thinking twitter is the electorate?

5

23

219

I like to think of it as a blessing really. I remember the old days

when people hid who they really were. Now with TDS you can

tell who the jerks are, right off. No more trying to make friends

with people your parents would have told you to stay away

from

If you were my husband I’d poison your coffee.

If you were my wife, I’d drink it.

-Winston Churchill to a heckler

There is nothing so useless as doing

efficiently that which should not be done at

all. – Peter Drucker

“Knowing others is

intelligence;

knowing yourself is true

wisdom.

Mastering others is strength;

mastering yourself is true power.”

— Lao-Tzu

PRESIDENT PUMPKINHEAD

It's over, America. Trump is the nominee and Clinton is the

president. Cry harder, crybabies. Let me hear the music of your

whining, your mewling, your pathetic infantile responses to the

outside world. You're voting for a game show host because

you've spent your whole life watching reality television in your

trailer and you're too stupid to make decisions for yourselves.

Republican politicians know better than anyone that Republicans

are infants who are too stupid to make decisions, and that's why

they play their constituents for fools.

In reply to:

President Pumpkinhead

First, you predict the future. Next, you explain what other people

do. Finally, you explain how politics works. Not one word about

what you think or feel, except in resentment of others. You must be

pretty frightened.

In reply to:

President Pumpkinhead

Incoherent, hateful rhetoric. Please go back to your bomb-making

table and let the adults talk.

Actually, scratch that. Please keep talking. Please keep supporting

Hillary in your "patriotic" fashion.

You are such a PRIME example of the average socialistic

revolutionary that is supporting Hillary, that every word you type

causes most reasonable, free-thinking voters to question whether or

not they want to be on the same side as people like you.

So please.

Keep it up.

In reply to: Mike-1299632 #6.1

You sound pretty angry. And you should :) Because the world

is not what you think it should be anymore. You guys still live

and think like it's 1820! But your world is gone forever (Not

coming back ever). It is people like you, uneducated, tattooed,

redneck trailer-trashes that ruined that Grand-(but very)-Old-

Party! :) You blame everybody but yourselves for the woes of

your lives! The fact that you are bigots, racists and

uneducated is your problem. The world is getting less

favourable to narrow-minded, uninformed minds like yours :)

But it's ok for Democrats to subjugate black Americans

by convincing them that the keys to their salvation and

prosperity lie with the Democrat party - essentially telling

them that they are too stupid and incompetent to

accomplish success on their own or think for themselves.

This is the height of racist thought - disguised as compassion.

It's condescending and patronizing. Yet, it's the Republicans

who are racists.

I think it's time for the Democrat plantation slave masters

who've corralled black Americans into their Democrat-run

housing project plantations within their Democrat-run

impoverished cities to start talking to minorities differently.

Spoonie Gee • 6 hours ago

Democrats have done such a good job of creating strong

communities and a promising future for the black

community -- how could they vote differently?

Dependence on government has strengthened families,

lowered crime, reduced poverty, and provided a model for

the rest of the country. Go to Baltimore, Detroit, or

Chicago and see the success of 40 years of liberal

dominated politics. Without concern for Republicans

thwarting their initiatives, the politicians who control the

black community have created a near paradise.

The community has been taught that class warfare,

anti-business sentiment and more government will

make things better. Given the obvious success of this

strategy -- how could they open themselves up to

other ideas?

A ruling intelligentsia treats the masses as raw

material to be experimented on, processed, and

wasted at will.

--Eric Hoffer

Steve to jerry p • 8 hours ago

The "right wing" and "left wing" establishments are just

illusions intentionally created to deceive us into believing that

we have a "choice" between two options. We don't.

If Americans realized the truth, that both sides were

one and the same (the globalists), and our slave masters, we

would revolt. And of course, they don't want us to revolt.

They want us, instead, to fight with one another

(left vs. right), rather than fighting against them.

And as long as the blinded sheep of this country continue to

believe they are fighting with one another (right vs. left), they'll

continue to blame one another instead of blaming those (the

establishment) who are actually responsible, and who are

controlling our lives and our future. It's quite brilliant, and it's

worked out perfectly for them for 100+ years.

And as long as people continue to only wise up just before

growing old and dying, while continually being replaced by yet

more young and naive fools, who are oblivious to their game, it

will continue to work. The masses are clueless... exactly the way

they are supposed to be.

Just look at all the commenters here arguing over whose party is

the "good one" and whose is the "bad one"... instead of lashing

out against the real culprits who control both and screw us over,

time and time again, yet remain blameless. It's genius on the

establishment's part.

SEVEN

we don’t want that kind

of familiarity here

…you live in a bubble; you are unable to distinguish

between actual lies and actual truth from both sides —

like a pathetic little league parent who criticizes the

opposing team’s kids, but refuses to ever acknowledge

whenever one of their own kids does anything wrong.

“…Here's a woman who has written a whole

book about -- not a whole book about how

wrong she was, but about how her eyes have

been opened about white middle-class

people who used to be dyed-in-the-wool

Democrats and aren't anymore. And to me

what's fascinating about it is, you expand this

to Trump supporters and what people like this

think of Trump and Trump supporters.

These are the people who are in the media.

These are the kind of people who are opinion

leaders. These are the people who write

columns at newspapers and online. These are

the people who teach your kids. They're

closed-minded and they're wrong about

everything when it comes to who we are and

values. And they're also very afraid. That's

the thing that I really got. They're scared to

death of what they are wrong about. I found it

fascinating. But it explains and illustrates

what we are up against, and she admits her

intolerance and how shocked she was -- the

people she thinks that are intolerant were just

the exact opposite. “

…Southern antebellum chauvinists once

claimed that the culture south of the Mason-

Dixon Line was innately superior to the

grubby, industrial wasteland of the north. A

two-class system of masters and slaves

allowed an elite the leisure and capital to

pursue culture without the rat-race

competition of a striving middle class. So

blinkered was southern arrogance that its

pre-war youth insisted that southern

manhood, with its innate moral superiority,

could defeat a much larger, richer, and more

industrial North — a myth dispelled early on

at Shiloh.

Now the new cultural divide is not North vs.

South, but the blue-state coasts versus the

red-state interior.

The map has changed, but the new mindset

of the chauvinist, mutatis mutandis, is eerily

the same. In their blue-state doctrine, a

sinking middle class in the interior is seen as

inferior to an upscale, hip and cool

professional elite, properly thriving on the

East and West Coasts as never before — itself

often supported by legions of poorly paid and

mostly minority gardeners, housekeepers,

and nannies who free up their supposed

betters to pursue higher things without

tending to the drudgery of mundane chores

60. Oct. 14, 2018

NBC News falsely reports that President Trump praised Confederate General

Robert E. Lee. Actually, Trump had praised the Union General Ulysses S. Grant.

“…Here's the irony of it. You call yourself a traditional

liberal. I call myself a conservative. And what I'm trying to

conserve is liberal principles. I'm trying to conserve liberal

principles. People think “What”? When people were being

held as slaves - I'm a liberal. When women are deprived from

holding office or deprived from jobs at the same pay - I'm a

liberal. I'm liberal on all of these things. But when I become a

conservative is when this situation goes too far. Well, what do

you mean by too far? When it’s equality of opportunity and

equality under the law and when Martin Luther King says “I

have a dream that my children will be judged not by the color

of their skin but by the content of their character” -- I'm a big

old liberal when it comes to that. But when you get to a place

where then you say things like “Black people can't be racist” or

that we need “set asides” or that we should hold people to a

lower standard or whatever -- you've gone too far. Now I want

to conserve these principles. I want to conserve traditional

liberalism. Classical liberalism is not what many people on the

far left would agree with today. Right now, free speech is

number one. Free speech - number one.

The fundamental idea of classical liberalism is: I should be able

to say whatever I damn well want to; you should be able to say

whatever you'd damn well want to -- and you hurting my

feelings is not the same as assaulting me physically. My

feelings getting hurt by you is my problem - not your problem

- and this is a traditional core value of liberalism which

conservatives are trying to conserve in the face of these

progressives who want people to shut up and if they don't

agree with them, they hit them on the head with a tire lock.”

“…We’re in this enormous upheaval.

Why are the sides diverging so much?

We're not even looking at the same news

stories anymore.

Why is it that half the country thinks that

Donald Trump should be impeached

immediately and the other half says that CNN's

already admitted there's nothing to this story?

Why can't the two sides hear each other?

You know the word “meme”-- before it meant a

cat with an impact font at the bottom of it… A

meme was the idea that a thought could be

transmitted the same way as a gene could.

It could be passed on, essentially. So, I think

you can get a pretty good analogy out of

genetics on this. If you have a population that

lives “here” and a significant number of people

move over “there” -- and now there's a

mountain range between them -- something

happens. When everybody is living together –

mixing, socializing, marrying -- they share the

exact same gene pool.

When people go over to a second location, now

“those people” have the same gene pool as

“these people”, but… if they are no longer

intermingling with each other, the normal

evolution that one group has isn't affected by

the other. They now have a whole ‘nother

evolutionary path, and what you find is: you

find this genetic diversion -- and they'll continue

to divert -- and will divert until they become a

different species, because the genes are not

communicating.

We're over here evolving; they're over there

evolving -- and this split is irrevocable

unless you can remix the populations.

I think it's the same thing with memes. We

basically hear - as conservatives - we hear

news; we hear stories; we hear interpretations,

all of it -- that has become part of our memetic

code. And liberals have a memetic code, too.

And we're getting very close to the point now

where these two things can’t even breed

anymore.

You know, you come to a point when

the species diverge enough so that…

that's the definition of a species… is

one that can no longer interbreed

with the other… And this is bad….

…this is bad, bad, bad because even

though this divergence is happening

so much, we're living next to each

other.

These are not

continents that are

going their separate

ways. We're literally

living it…”

“I think things are so acrimonious now because what is not being seen

underneath all the Trump Obama / Obama Hillary blahblah…

underneath all of this -- way underneath it -- is human beings are

going through something that's only ever happened twice before in all

of human history. We are straddling a worldwide fundamental change

in how the world is built. You could make the case with so many wars

and empires and governments… kings and battles and so on… that the

only things that have really happened in history are the Invention of

Agriculture, the Industrial Revolution, and the Information Age. When

we talk about things like our cities being these murder pits - it's not an

easy problem to solve. The reason the cities are murder pits is because

the jobs are going. The jobs are going, because America is now fully in

the Information Age and industrial era jobs have gone to where they're

less expensive -- this is a fundamental problem.

This is the same problem that farmers had to face four hundred years

ago, where farmers were

saying “Well, we can't feed

ourselves.”

“Yeah, you got to go work in a

factory in the city”, and they

didn't want to do that. It

caused tremendous upheaval,

but that's what we're seeing. It

used to be that you could get

off a boat and walk through

Ellis Island, come out on the

other side and get a job in a factory. I mean no disrespect to factory

workers whatsoever, but essentially an assembly line job meant that

your job is to take this bolt and tighten this bolt in this location -- and

essentially anybody can do that – anybody. So industrial era jobs being

relatively repetitive gave people who are hardworking and then

oftentimes very smart -- people who were new here -- people who

needed a chance to get started… it gave them a chance to do some

work and get some decent jobs out of it.

For example, Baltimore - for a brief period there -- the neighborhoods

were integrated; there were people who'd been there for quite a while,

plus a lot of black workers who’d come up from the South after the

war -- but everybody was working at the factory; everybody's working

hard. Everybody had a vested interest in making their yard look nice;

everybody was going to more or less the same churches. They were

hanging out together. Didn't last very long, but it was there.

And it was there because the economic opportunities were there. And

it's not like some company decided “Hey you know what, we make

more money in China.” That’s in fact what happened, but it was due to

a fundamental change. And you can't get people into the information

economy as easily as you could get them into the industrial economy…

… I think there is a fundamental difference between the two camps

that we call liberals and conservatives today. I'm sure that people are

going to find this a self-serving explanation, but nevertheless here it is. I

believe that liberals would rather feel good about things, even if they

do harm, and conservatives would rather do things that made sense,

even if it made them look bad.

The minimum wage is a perfect example. Everybody would like

people to make $15 an hour. If health care were free, I'd be in favor of

free health care. What kind of an animal would I be – “No health care

for you… I don't like the way you look… your skin's a little dark for

me… no health care for you…

go off and die in a ditch.”

Well, I would be the kind of

person that people assume I

am if it were free, but it's not

free -- so since it costs money,

we have to figure out how to

pay for it. “We have to figure

out how to pay for it” means

things like competition. All of

a sudden, you're conservative again - so this is the point of it.

To just feel good about things because everybody else tells you

“You should”… “I'm in favor of this…” “I support that…” “I've got a

bumper sticker on my Prius - it says Free Tibet …see!… see how I care

about Tibet and I'm deeply concerned about the people of Tibet”.

And I don't doubt that they are, but if you want to free Tibet you

need a bumper sticker that says The United States Marine Corps or

National Rifle Association or something like that, because that's

what it would take to actually “Free Tibet” and that's not a pleasant

thought and nobody likes to admit it. And if you had somebody say

that, you'd get a lot of grief for it, but it's the reality of the world. And

so sugarcoating the outcome in order to preserve this sense of this

warm fuzzy feeling I have about myself to me is a form of vanity and

hypocrisy that I can't afford anymore...”

Scott Adams@ScottAdamsSays

Yesterday my most well-informed and highly educated Democrat

friend told me there is no such thing as "fake news," it is an

invention of the right. I gave him six examples off the top of my

head. By tomorrow his brain will have flushed the memory of

them. #CognitiveDissonance

Beorn@Beorn2000

Replying to @ScottAdamsSays

Sounds more like compartmentalization. You have to actually

wrestle with an idea to have cognitive dissonance.

“…I don't want a conservative media. I want a fair media. If we had a

conservatively biased media, we would then fall into the exact same

errors that the Left falls into, because then we have The Ring of

Invisibility. Andrew Klavan pointed this out: what the press bias does is

it gives Democratic politicians the ring of invisibility - they know

they're not going to get caught, and so when people have a sense of

invisibility, they do things that they would never do otherwise. This is

why sometimes in Mardi Gras or something

like that -- when people are wearing masks

-- they'll perform behaviors that would

never ever enter their minds, because they

don't feel directly responsible. This is the

great failure of the modern age.

I want a press that is looking 24 hours a day

to find out whether there is impeachable

information on Donald Trump. I want them

looking all the time constantly to see if

Donald Trump is colluding with the

Russians, to see if impeachable offenses are

there. But I would also like that done for

Barack Obama and

Hillary Clinton and I don't want them to

suppress a story. Not just not cover it -- but

suppress it - because then you've got an

autoimmune disease. If the press’ job is to go

through the political bloodstream and attack

pathogens and destroy them, and it turns out

that it's not doing that, but is in fact a way that

ideology and pathogens are coming into the

system, then the country’s got AIDS --

intellectual AIDS -- the mechanism designed to

defend us is now the mechanism that is in fact

bringing in the contagion…”

“…But there's good news and bad news. The bad news is: it’s too late

to change it. The good news is: it is going to change. I know that

sounds paradoxical. The mainstream media and the entire media

complex and all of this is so heavily invested now -- they’re pot

committed. They've got to play this card. They’ve got to play the hand

to the end of the game. And it is so massive that you can't change it, but

the good news is: You don't have to, because for the first time… I kept

wondering: Why do civilizations collapse? They struggle on the way up

-- there's a struggle… struggle… struggle… and when they finally

reach dominance… you know when Rome finally defeats Carthage and

there's nothing in the way, and it should be pure “off they go”… And

they just collapsed. And I think they collapse because the elites get

bored. But this is the first time in history when common people have

had the means to actually influence other common people in large

numbers and circumvent not just the priesthood of the churches or the

media or the politicians, but also just talk directly with each other.

And that, I think, is our saving grace. Because now there's 160 million

people walking around with high-definition television cameras in their

pockets. They've also got news vans in their pockets – can send up a big

mast like big radio used to…post an

event online. We're in the world of

absolute truth. Once we get video,

we're out of the world of “What

you think of what I think.” There it

is -- you know, “Pics or it didn't

happen, right?” I mean, there it is.

You can't argue with seeing it.

There is the inherent risk of “the

system will have to fight back even

harder against us now.” It's the

inevitable consequence…

- Bill Whittle, on The Rubin

Report, July 2017 (Scott Adams - page break)

John 3 years ago

"You can't argue with seeing it there" ... tell that to the

Project Veritas deniers

Jervis Lambi3 years ago

Common sense is derided by people who have a vested interest

in telling themselves how important they are.

Hairy Pixels 3 years ago

I have far more respect for a less intelligent person who works

hard and succeeds than I do an intelligent person who has

accomplished nothing but still demands respect for simply being

intelligent.

Something Fishie 3 years ago

Whittle says our phones will give us absolute truth, or a near

approximation. On the contrary, we are about to find out just

how deceptive individuals who get paid by views can be, as they

stage interactions to make political points. What we all see on

video is not always all there is to see, and he KNOWS that.

pop9095 3 years ago

Sure, we have the ability to communicate directly and we use it

for showing our friends the burrito we just ate or "political"

nonsense without real validation. Simply having the ability to

communicate does not magically make people 1) give a shit, and

if they do 2) suddenly become well educated or reasonably

intelligent and, and if they are 3) willing to evaluate concerns

based not on ideology but on rational logical analysis.

Mister Mograph3 years ago

sorry pal, but it is extremely dishonest and frankly naive

to say that Conservatives do things that "make sense".

Yes, Liberals do things that make them feel good, but so

do Conservatives, in fact, they were the pioneers of it in

modern day culture cough Religious Right cough. See,

this is why I feel like people belonging to either of the 2

camps are biased. Because they say absolutely silly shit,

like this. Self-serving indeed sir.

mastercilander 3 years ago

>I feel like people belonging to either of the 2 camps are biased

You feel? Interesting. Everyone's biased btw, which he

admitted and has nothing to do with a binary. I'm not a part of

any political group and even I can see the Right tends to be

more evidence driven as a rule.

Mister Mograph 3 years ago

not at all. it's just popular right now to highlight that the Left

dictates their decisions via feelings and so, by default

paints the Right as doing the opposite. But that's just not

so. Among the general population of conservatives, how

many base their decisions in religious reasoning? Almost

always driven by their feelings. Like abortion for example.

While the arguments given in this interview were sound for both

sides, most actual people from either side don't use this same

reasoning. Both sides are emotional. Both sides do things based

in how they feel. Just in very different ways. Trying to absolve all

conservatives of this as if they weren't trying to abolish marriage

equality by using God as their basis makes his statement fall

apart.

NerfGanondorf 3 years ago

Conservatism isn't founded through the religious right; it

goes way past that. Religious Right was founded on

Conservatism.

Mister Mograph 3 years ago

and I never said that it did. But you have to admit at

this point in history, among many Conservative

compatriots, Christianity has become a moral

mainstay.

Tyler 3 years ago

Well, not sure about the others, but I have to agree that

the [common sense] statement was garbage. You can

easily find a news story every week about a politician

from either party being proven a hypocrite.

theaudiocrat3 years ago

the irony in what you espouse is that liberalism (in the

classical sense) can only thrive in a moral and responsible

society where there is a high amount of social capital

provided by institutions such as patriotism, family and

(you guessed it) faith. I'm not religious by any stretch of

the imagination, but I see the importance of it in terms of

social cohesion

Jonathon Peterson 3 years ago

Wait, what about Christianity/religious Right is

convenient? On the one hand, lefties, you have everyone

patting you on the back for doing nothing except casting

the right vote or expressing the right opinion and getting

jerked off by Hollywood and the mainstream media for

saying the popular thing. On the other, you have a bunch

of people dedicated to living a disciplined and moral

lifestyle that they get mocked for in their own country,

states, and towns, on the radio, on TV, on the internet, and

on TV... How is that even remotely comparable? You

don't have to agree with their lifestyle, but it certainly isn't

moral grandstanding when you're rejected wholesale by

the culture and it costs you acceptance and belonging...

HumanPerson3 years ago

One of the characteristics of the modern Right is a seeming

inability to accept uncomfortable facts. When a fact is

inconvenient, they either make an excuse for it or deny it all

together. You can see this on Fox news where uncomfortable

facts are liberal media conspiracies; it's evident in Republican

politicians and commentators, and even in the current White

House. Blame Obama for a financial crisis he wasn't around for,

blame the Democrats for a deficit that was created under a

Republican administration, ignore various important facts about

Trump's business practices and irrational statements. How long

Republicans will defend Trump and the party who support him

openly - no matter what - will say a lot about who the

Republican party are. They care about their team and will ride

this train right over a cliff. They care more about what feels true

than what is true. On top of this, they're really bad at owning up

to mistakes, whether it has to do with Republican policies,

erosion of civil liberties under Bush, voter suppression laws etc.

Once this Trump affair is over, I guarantee the Republican party

and the majority of conservatives will blame liberals. I am

willing to bet my life on this era being rewritten to somehow

blame liberals.

Jonathon Peterson3 years ago

How long will Democrats ignore that the whole Russia debacle

developed out of the Democrats attempt to steal the Democratic

nomination and got caught red-handed. Let's not talk about the facts

revealed by Wikileaks; instead, let’s talk about where the information

might have come from. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

There is no place I can go to escape criticism of Conservatism or

Republicanism. All you have to do is turn on the TV and get fed red

meat...

theaudiocrat 3 years ago

The media is predominantly liberal, so any media conspiracies

are logically going to be liberal. Obama wasn't responsible for the

financial crisis - that was Clinton (who ironically in most other

regards was fiscally conservative) with government intrusion into

lending practices that required lenders to offer mortgages to

people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for them. Obama IS

however responsible for TARP and the ACA which are even more

damning than the lending requirements for which Clinton was

responsible. Neither of which can be remotely evidence-based,

when the "evidence" was collected after the initiatives had been

proposed, and only after the data was massaged to paint a much

rosier picture of the legislation than the naked data that was

presented to them. Jonathan Gruber was caught on tape saying it

was only by the stupidity of the American people that the ACA

was passed and that if the law were more transparent about how

it was funded, it would never have passed the Congressional

budget office.

THX 1138 2 years ago

I just tune in to Bill because nothing else makes

sense.

Sigusen 3 years ago

I'd just like to point out that supporting the NRA will never have

any effect on freeing Tibet. The NRA would only care if they

could start selling guns to Tibetans. Other than that, this was a

great conversation.

REPLY

MyNameIsn'tDave 3 years ago

I completely disagree with much of what Bill Whittle says (a lot of

cheap nationalist rhetoric, pro-war ideologue foreign policy

positions), but I find him so effortlessly articulate, interesting and

enjoyable to listen to that he's still someone I really like. I also

think he's massively exaggerating on the idea that an impartial

media would consistently deliver Republican landslides each

cycle, although I agree [media bias] does give Democrats an

edge each election. I'm also disappointed that his view on the

Civil War is so painfully poorly informed and mainstream - the

Civil War was about far, far more than slavery; it was about the

balance of power in the Union, and whether a state ought to live

under a federal government it does not support.

Main 1 3 years ago

The old GOP are people who advocate for rules in war: line up on each end of the

battle field and shoot each other while standing up. DEMS agree to the rule but

tell the GOP, let’s do this tomorrow. During the night, DEMS sneak into GOP camp

and slaughter half the GOP in their sleep. The surviving GOP look at this, and say,

we can't sink to DEM level, let’s go on the field tomorrow and fight like we agreed

to. This is why GOP is considered the stupid party by so many in the base

REPLY

Freedom Extremist3 years ago

So much bias in one comment

EIGHT

sure you wanna

go down this

path?

…The masterpiece book, Coming Apart, by

Charles Murray, described a sociological

phenomena that came to fruition in the electoral

realm in 2016. These are the areas in which all

of my attentions are focused – how the policy prescriptions and

ideas we believe in as conservatives can be applied to the

segments of society most suffering, so as to create a free and

virtuous society. I fear Trump has bitten off more than he or

anyone can chew, because he has falsely claimed that white

working America is suffering because of bad trade deals, as

opposed to real cultural milieu. Truth be told, the right needs to

listen to the plight of working America and offer solutions; and

those solutions cannot be nationalistic promises of protectionist

nonsense.

IThere are three major divisions now going on in ourI

Icountry that are the defining situations of thisI

Iage. First and foremost, rural America vs. urbanI

IAmerica, or that sociological/cultural divide that soI

Ipolarizes the electorate [outlined at **]I

rural

America

urban

America

• Secondly, the civil war in the left, which my liberal

friends do not yet know how massive it is about to

become. That radical progressive wing of Warren

and Sanders is going to go to war with center-left

moderates, and it is going to be nasty.

radical

progressives

center left

moderates

• And then the one which I believe will dictate so much

of the future of American political life: The civil war in

the right – the battle between populist-nationalists and

idea-driven conservatives. I am well aware of the fact

that Trump’s win grants appearance that the former is

winning over the latter. I am not so sure. The “across

country” wave of ideological conservatives who won

by much larger margins tells a different story.

populist -

nationalists

idea-driven

conservatives

I am convinced of this: The winner of this battle will

determine the fate of conservatism in this

generation. The latter must, must, must defeat the

former.

We found out in 2016 that there is such thing as an

Obama-Trump voter. Everyone wants to believe that the

government can solve their problems, or that a strong

man can. The Obama coalition fell apart for Hillary

Clinton because she was not credible, exciting, believable,

or desirable. Millennials don’t trust her. Working class

whites loathe her. And the African-American vote appears

to have voted for her in expected proportions but with

much lower turnout. But conservatives better admit this:

Trump picked up the votes needed to win for the same

asinine reason Obama initially did – novelty, and

messianic hope.

My prayer for Trump. I pray that he will forfeit all the

demagoguery that defined his campaign, and transition to an

ideas-based administration with competent and outstanding

people ready to execute for the betterment of our

country. I do not believe he will. But I do hope for

it. Stuffing a protectionist trade pact down our throat will

not help factory workers in Ohio who have been

technologically displaced, but it will be fatal if it creates a

trade war with China. There is a policy agenda that can

improve the situation in America dramatically, create

growth, and allow for some of the aforementioned rifts to

begin to heal. And then there is blustery vindictive

rhetoric. You must know what I am hoping for.

“Knowledge has to be improved,

challenged, and increased constantly,

or it vanishes.”

“Company cultures are like country cultures.

Never try to change one. Try, instead, to work

with what you’ve got.”

- Peter Drucker

•donna TO Kordane • 12 hours ago

I will take exception to the leftist part of

your comment, because BOTH parties are

guilty of dividing this country by

demographics, and the Republicans were

founded on the southern strategy.

However, I agree that we have to stop

seeing race, color and religion and focus

on the fact that we are ALL Americans.

We took a wrong path when we started

hyphenating Americans. We are not

African Americans or Mexican Americans

or Asian Americans. We are Americans

period.

Kordane TO donna • 12 hours ago

The Republican Party wasn't founded on

the southern strategy. The Republican

Party was founded as an individualist,

pro-individual rights, slave-emancipation

party... against the collectivist, antiindividual

rights (i.e. collective rights),

pro-slavery Democrat Party.

The southern strategy was an attempt to

gain the southern states after racist

southern Democrats fled to the northern

and western states following the end of the

Civil War and the closing of the doors to

open borders immigration in 1929.

It was hoped that in capturing those

southern states that the Republican Party

could not only hold the west and the north,

but also the south too, and thus solidify a

total dominance over the whole of the

United States.

The problem with the strategy (and this is why I call

it foolish) is that the Republican Party diluted their

numbers across the whole of the United States, thus

allowing racist Democrats who fled to the west and

north to gain a political foothold in these rich, urban

states, eventually turning them into the Democrat

strongholds they are today.

If Republicans hadn't diluted their numbers, but

had fought hard to control the rich, urban states in

the north and west, then Democrats would not hold

control over them today.

The north and west are now held by a party that was

once pro-slavery and the south is held by the party

that was for emancipation. There was a switch in the

territory controlled, but not in the ideas and

principles that guide each party. The Left is still the

same old collectivist Left it always was, and the

Right is the same old individualist Right it always

was. Sure, there are some exceptions, but as a rule

it is true…

I would go further than you and say that we're

not even really Americans, but are all individuals

with unalienable rights.

“If you can feel that staying human is worthwhile, even when it

can't have any result whatever, you've beaten them.”

― George Orwell, 1984

NINE

We’ve

eliminated your

job – Get Well

Soon

“Maybe you can tell me what you think is going on here.

And please, speak as you might to a young child.

Or a Golden Retriever. It wasn’t brains that got me here,

I can assure you of that.”

- Jeremy Irons, “Margin Call”

“If you’re going through hell, keep going.” — Winston Churchill

“It is never too late to be who you might

have been.” — George Eliot

“Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by

the things you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So

throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor.

Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.

Discover.”

— Mark Twain

“Let him who would move the world, first move himself.”

-Socrates

Unrestricted Warfare

…The new way of war – trade, economic, propaganda

and media – has now been unleashed to aid the Chinese

Communist Party. To better understand this, forget everything known about

how the world works. Instead, think of globalization and the internet turned

into a weapon, in a no-holds-barred assault of competitive aggression

unassociated with military might – and this is how China is waging war.

Following the Unrestricted Warfare thought, in CCP hands, globalization

becomes weaponized. The CCP has spent decades utilizing globalization

to slowly take control of the world’s trading system, dominate key industries

and markets, build a global media and internet presence, and deploy

subjects and diplomats around the world. Therefore, when the time comes

these elements can easily be brought together for three intentional actions

– deflect blame, cause panic, take advantage.

Deflect blame. Because the CCP controls Chinese language media

everywhere with an iron grip, they can rile an army of ‘victims’ to deflect

their own culpability for the corona virus pandemic. Chinese language

social media uses the often-utilized practice of crying racism and stoking

nationalism to instill fear and revenge in those inside and outside the

country. These activated citizens can then be spontaneous in their

response by creating “hug me I’m not a virus” campaigns. Meanwhile, the

citizens under lock-down are blocked from sharing their boots-on-theground

point of view as social media is further restricted and

censored. Abroad, a full media and diplomatic blitzkrieg can be levied to

ensure the virus is not named according to its origin, which gives way to

another campaign to establish that it came from another country. Finally,

flush with horded supplies the CCP can feign being good Samaritans as

they earn profits on price gouging the world on personal protective

equipment (PPE). Ultimately, deflecting blame props up the CCP

message about the superiority of their Communist system.

Cause panic. Fear is one of the strongest human

motivators. Since the CCP controls the supply chain, they can

activate internal and external actors to lock down the supply of

medical equipment, fueling fear. This is accomplished by denying

the export of certain items like masks, threatening to ban the

export of others like pharmaceuticals, and buying up any foreign

domestic stock using their networks abroad. The rest is done by

us. Fear is strengthened by hyper-inflated models that are

blasted 24/7 to add to a frenzy that incentivizes even more

media consumption. Panic buying, hoarding, and the political

blame game follow, adding to the cycle.

Take advantage. This is the true goal of weaponized globalization.

The CCP wages a global game of ‘Go’ with a constant focus and

intermittent opportunities for accelerated risk-taking for greater gains. The

first bold move on the Go board was during the 2008 financial crisis, when

the CCP stepped from the United States’ financial shadow. China was the

beneficiary of much of the fiscal stimulus the US created to get out of crisis,

because US banks flush with cash loaned it to China for real estate

development. The difference between the current #CCPVirus-inspired crisis

and 2008 is this time the CCP holds the advantage. They knew about the

virus beforehand and could therefore control the outflow of information and

people. Any Wall Street veteran knows a pandemic will cause a panic in

the market. Thus, the CCP was well-positioned to liquidate positions,

probably quietly before anyone was even paying attention. Their next

educated guess would have been that the US and others would enact a

vast stimulus bill, which would flow into China by virtue of the fact they held

all the supply chains – more profits pour in. Meanwhile, flush with cash,

they can shore up US and other companies with that cash further

solidifying control. As an added benefit, they may reverse or at least slow

down the US effort to prevent the deployment of the Chinese 5G

networks that will take all data back to China and fulfill Kai Fu Li’s dream of

becoming “the Saudi Arabia of data.”

Game. Set. Match.

Without understanding how the CCP views the world and their place in it,

one will never be able to anticipate the threat. In the West, each crisis is

tackled according to its circumstances.

Democratic governments rush to meet the needs of its citizens. But the

CCP’s expertly designed totalitarian system affords its leaders the

benefits of seeing past their subject’s welfare to furthering the CCP

with more power and advantage. They can impose harsh policies and

can comfortably accept the inevitable scorn of having allowed a

pandemic to escape their borders, because in a global game of Go high

risk yields high reward.

In the aftermath, we will endlessly debate whether the #CCPVirus

was deliberately created and released, or a freak of nature. The debate will

be used to deflect attention that the CCP deliberately created the global

pandemic. The United States also tends to project our democratic system

onto the CCP, and loses sight of the fact that controlling the vast

authoritarian enterprise is a mixture of entrepreneurship and direct action,

without the humanitarian spirit. In other words, most are doing it for the

money, while some are deliberately directed.

The book “Unrestricted Warfare” has documented this all. The work was a

perfectly designed guide for manipulating the post-Cold War world. Until

one can see the world from the adversary’s point of view, one will be ever

at a disadvantage. But all is not yet lost. It’s time to protect, encourage

and let loose the one antidote to the CCP pandemic, the enduring

American spirit to throw off and be free from tyranny.

Gen. Rob Spalding is a national security policy strategist, globally

recognized for his knowledge of Chinese economic competition and

influence. He has served in senior positions of strategy and diplomacy

within the Defense and State Departments for more than 26 years, retiring

as a brigadier general. IHe was the chiefIarchitect for the Trump

Administration’s widely praised NationaIlSecurity Strategy (NSS),

and the Senior Director for Strategy to the President at the

National Security Council.

The press takes him literally, but not

seriously; his supporters take him seriously,

but not literally.

- Salena Zito

Post:

There's a great piece today, Salena Zito is

back, and she has a piece in The New York

“Populism isn’t ideology; it’s energy. It is entitled and

noble, naive and skeptical, good-willed, dangerous and

not going away anytime soon, all at the same time. Both

the Democrats and Republicans experienced it in the

primaries. But Republicans actually nominated a

populist candidate, in part because their party

leadership was seen as insufficiently concerned about

the kitchen-table and cultural issues driving a large

segment of the party’s grass roots.

Yet, if folks think this current variant of populism is just based

on economic resentment or racism, they’re vastly

oversimplifying it. Instead, they should be spending the time to

understand all the forces at work here.

Why are many people, particularly white working-class

men, attracted to Trump? Is it economics? Racism? Or

something deeper? There’s an important social and

cultural element to this populism that’s often

misidentified as simple racism. It is more what one

might call 'patriotic chauvinism,' reflected in Trump’s

'America First' rhetoric."

See, they're trying to impugn Trump supporters by

saying they're just a bunch of white racists who are

fed up with the fact that people of color are

becoming a demographic majority. That's what the

Democrat Party's putting out there. That's what

Hillary, her campaign, the whole Democrat

apparatus in the media, in trying to explain Trump,

they say his supporters are a buncha racists, they're

a bunch of old, toothless, white hayseeds worried

that colored people, brown people, red people,

black people, are taking over the country. They're

racist. That's what they're saying.

That is how they characterize the Trump

voter. And Salena Zito is saying they're missing it

as badly as it can be missed. It's not about

race. It's about what kind of country we're going to

have. It's about what they are doing to this

country. It is about how we define America in the

early twenty-first century.

It goes on to describe who Obama really is, a

community organizer, graduated from elite

universities, spent a lot of his youth growing up

overseas, abroad, first president to begin his term

by going to Europe and declaring himself a proud

citizen of the U.S. and a fellow citizen of the

world.

And while Obama's out there wanting to be

president, citizen of the world, we're losing to

China, we're losing to Japan, we're losing our jobs,

we're losing our border, while Obama and the

Democrats seem happy about it and think it's

progress. A lot of Americans don't think it's

progress. They think it's disaster. It isn't about

racism. Democrats like to reduce everything to

racism.

She writes that: "Today’s populist backlash began

in 2009 with the rise of the Tea Party movement,

whose own attempt to 'make America great again'

focused on constitutional restoration. Much of the

media sneered at that movement, using the sexual

innuendo of 'tea baggers' and dismissing critiques of

Obama’s Affordable Care Act as naïve. The Tea

Party movement arose spontaneously, without any

centralized structure." And because of this it

scared the hell out of people and it seemed to be

dissolving on its own.

There's no leader whose fortunes we can track, so

the Tea Party seems to have dissolved on its

own. But the anger and the sense that some things

are not right has not gone away. It's still out there

effervescing and soon to break through the surface

if it hasn't already.

Then here's the meat of this. She says, "A Trump

defeat will be incredibly difficult for his supporters

to accept. Not that all of them admire him as a

person." It isn't going to be that they are

personally devastated if Trump loses. Because --

and as I have pointed out continually on this

program -- it never really has been about Trump.

Trump is the vessel for what this is really about,

and that's why they are not going to succeed, the

left, in stripping Trump's supporters away from

him, 'cause it isn't about him. It's about what his

candidacy presents as an opportunity, and they're

not gonna let the left dispatch it and toss it aside

like they're able to toss every other Republican

candidacy aside.

Therefore, because Trump's campaign is much more

about what he represents than it is about him,

"pushing back against what those supporters see as

nothing less than the end of the United States as

they know it."

And that's why if Trump loses, it's going to be

profoundly tragic. It's gonna hit these people

hard. They're not gonna be sad Trump personally

lost. They're going to be devastated that this

candidacy represented nothing less than the last

chance to preserve the country as they know it.

I think she's right about this as regards many people

who are supporting and planning on voting for

Trump. And I will guarantee you that the elite in

the Democrat and Republican Party, this is foreign

language to them.

The idea that what kind of country we're gonna

have is at stake here? They laugh at that. It's

absurd, they believe. Last chance to preserve the

country as we know it? They think that's

insane. They don't think there's any kind of crisis

at all, particularly like that. That's why they've

never really extended a lot of effort to stopping

Obama. They don't think there's a crisis. And for

them there isn't. I mean, they're gonna have their

exalted membership in the establishment no

matter who wins.

Even if they, on our side, will be the Washington

Generals, they will still be in the club, and they

will still have their connections, and their kids'

futures will be okay. So for them, the idea that

this campaign is about the future of the country

and preserving it as we've known, they laugh at

that. It's just another reason why the whole Trump

persona and campaign totally escapes them.

(October 20, 2016)

63. Dec. 26, 2018

NBC reports that Trump was the first President since 2002 not to visit

the troops at Christmastime. But he (and First Lady Melania) did. NBC

added a note to its story but left the false headline in place.

99. Nov. 19, 2019

Agence France Press publishes a sensational story saying that more than

100,000 children are being held in migration-related detention in the

U.S. under President Trump. It turns out that was the number in 2015

under President Obama.

TEN

We know we’re better

than this, but we can’t

prove it

I like it when a flower or a

little tuft of grass grows

through a crack in the

concrete. It’s so fuckin’

heroic.

- George Carlin

Newly released video clips of Democratic operatives

describing their own attempts to provoke violence at

Trump rallies, their sub-rosa coordination with the Hillary

Clinton campaign, and their active consideration of voter

fraud schemes, are ugly but not surprising.

Rather than try to adjudicate the factual underpinnings or

the journalistic rights and wrongs of this story, I’m going

to focus on Robert Creamer’s background. Creamer has

already made news by “stepping back” from the Clinton

campaign in response to the videos. So at this point, it’s

fair to comment on his background.

Creamer is a longtime Alinskyite activist and a leader in

Obama’s old community organizing network. Creamer

was a key figure in the work of Chicago’s community

organizer training center, the Midwest Academy, to which

Obama had close ties. I write extensively about the

hard-left ideology and hardball tactics of the Midwest

Academy, and Creamer’s role at the center of it all, in my

political biography of President Obama, Radical-in-Chief

(see Chapter 5, esp. 144-45; 186-88). The Midwest

Academy was founded by die-hard socialists who had

once been part of the radical ‘60s SDS (Students for a

Democratic Society).

An influential figure in Saul Alinsky’s early Chicago

operations, Creamer worked with the Midwest

Academy’s founders to persuade young socialist

revolutionaries in the ‘70s to adopt a more “pragmatic”

Alinskyite stance.

In other words, Creamer helped persuade these young

revolutionaries to organize, and provide quiet socialist

guidance, to movements that were liberal in appearance,

yet radical in their ultimate intentions and effects. While

retaining his ties to the Midwest Academy, Creamer rose

to become a prominent Democratic strategist and, as

numerous reports have indicated, a frequent visitor to the

Obama White House. Creamer was an important early

advocate of what we now call the healthcare “public

option,” an idea that appears to have been at least partially

inspired by one of the Midwest Academy’s earlier

organizing campaigns.

In Radical-in-Chief, and in my follow up, Spreading

the Wealth (see Chapter 3, esp. pp. 59-63), I show how

Obama played public good cop during his days in the

Illinois legislature, while coordinating behind the

scenes with Alinskyite allies who used questionable

voter registration tactics, and even intimidated

Obama’s Republican legislative rivals at their homes.

Given the latest videos, it’s hard not to wonder how much

of this sort of thing is going on today, and perhaps with

some of the same players as in Obama’s Illinois years. If

the upshot of these new videos holds up to scrutiny, it

would show that Saul Alinsky is alive, well and living

inside the beating heart of the Democratic Party.

Obama inaugurated the era of Alinskyite hardball at the

presidential level, and Hillary’s campaign organization

would at least appear to be carrying on. If anything, our

community organizers have gotten bolder. Nor is the

media any more interested in scrutinizing the questionable

tactics of the Democrats’ Alinskyite strategists or ground

troops than it’s been for the past eight years. The deeper

problem is the ideology behind all of this, which goes far

beyond the few operatives featured in the videos.

Alinskyite leftists quite simply do not believe in liberal

democracy, which is why they’re so willing to violate its

norms.

In 2007, Robert Creamer published Stand Up Straight!

How Progressives Can Win, a tactical handbook for the

left that he wrote while serving a prison term for tax

evasion and bank fraud.

Creamer’s advice on how to handle conservatives

(pp. 74-6) makes for interesting reading about now:

In general, our strategic goal with people who

have become conservative activists is not to

convert them—that isn’t going to happen. It is to

demoralize them—to ‘deactivate’ them. We need

to deflate their enthusiasm, to make them lose

their ardor and above all their selfconfidence…[A]

way to demoralize conservative

activists is to surround them with the echo

chamber of our positions and assumptions. We

need to make them feel that they are not

mainstream, to make them feel isolated… We

must isolate them ideologically…[and] use the

progressive echo chamber…By defeating them

and isolating them ideologically, we demoralize

conservative activists directly. Then they begin to

quarrel among themselves or blame each other

for defeat in isolation, and that demoralizes them

further.

October, 20, 2016

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

He can be reached at comments.kurtz@nationalreview.com

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441270/

“Rank does not confer

privilege or give power. It

imposes responsibility.”

- Peter Drucker

Basically, I have no place in organized politics.

By coming to the British Parliament I’ve allowed the people

to sacrifice me at the top

and let go the more effective job

I should be doing at the bottom.

- Bernadette Devlin

You Tube Bernadette Devlin on Firing Line

with William F. Buckley Jr. 1972

Devlin is about 24 here – 3 years removed from being the youngest

woman to win a seat in the British Parliament - sitting across from as

staunch and outspoken a conservative voice as has ever existed.

Perhaps best known (now) for his lively debates with his polar opposite

Gore Vidal, Buckley could be off-putting in his arrogance & vicious to

his enemies, but was typically in command of facts and fiercely

protective of his principles.

Look past the ideological differences; Forget that these two very

quickly want to throttle each other – even disregard any unfamiliarity

with “The Troubles” and Devlin’s crusade. Check out the dynamics

here – the level at which this conversation is taking place… Substitute

contemporary advocates and contrast this ideological clash with just

about any similar modern encounter. And the comments are OFF…

R-

Lefticon: A lexicon of the terms, topics and

concepts of the left

by M.L.Wagner

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact : Russ / Take 1 Productions

email: cameravision161@gmail

ISBN: 9781729475645

With varying degrees of success (and inevitable pushback), countless social, historical and

political commentators have catalogued, critiqued, lampooned and harpooned a startling

assortment of new ideologies and buzzwords that have suddenly infiltrated our daily lives.

Missing in this barrage of collective interpretation is a thoughtful, respectful and exhaustive

work that actually ties important historical events and social developments to the movements and

principles that the new lexicon strives so mightily to represent, propagate and defend.

Thankfully, Dr. M.L. Wagner`s compilation fills that void --- Lefticon is long on substance and

short on denigration.

Neither a bland outsider’s commentary nor a sophomoric attempt at ridicule, Dr. Wagner has

assembled a pitch–perfect reference work that simply defines and clarifies the new vernacular

without being overtly disrespectful to it – educating without preaching, chiding without mocking,

explaining without confusing.

Predominately a serious, scholarly work, Lefticon is sprinkled with just the right amount of

subtle irony and underlying absurdity inherent in illustrating the subtle distinctions between

self-appraisal, self-awareness, self-conceptualization, self-confidence, self-criticism ,

self-objectification, and self-understanding.

With entries ranging from `Rentier Capitalism` to `Dictatorship of the Proletariat`, Lefticon is a

studied and definitive collection of `need to know` terminology for politically attuned, culturally

aware and genuinely baffled observers of a new, sometimes alien reality that has expanded and

morphed at light speed in recent years.

The over-used `Must-Read` actually applies here - This is the go-to source for

illuminating….make that unraveling….the oft-times baffling constructs and expressions

permeating our national discourse.

Lefticon will occupy a unique and ultimately safe space on any book self – serving as both a

valuable, enlightening resource and a timeless portrait of an era.

[an old clip and save…not my red markings, or even my opinion, per se – just

doing the “job”, I guess, as currently constituted… Several attempts to insert

and save various unmarked versions for illustrative purposes here crashed my

computer every time... Draw your own conclusions. ]

R-

Dean

SUBSCRIBER

1 hour ago

"... they [Democrats] want a nicer country"

The Democrats call anyone they disagree with a racist,

sexist, xenophobe, homophobe, bigot, or

deplorable. They are the meanest people in the country

and they love not only attacking but destroying anyone

else.

Likethumb_up11

ReplyreplySharelinkReportflag

Chris

SUBSCRIBER

Too many Democrats want a new and deeper

liberalism but not socialism

This is a distinction without a difference

ReplySharelink

EDWARD

SUBSCRIBER

1 hour ago

Love her or despise her writings, I’m always

impressed by the number of comments Ms.

Noonan’s columns get.

Whatever you think of her, you can’t not read

her opinion.

Keep on truckin’ Peggy.

Replyreply

SharelinkReportflag

J

J Y

SUBSCRIBER

19 minutes ago

Many of us spend 30 seconds skimming the

article and then 30 minutes in the comments,

enjoying the well-deserved beat-down she

receives.

ReplyreplySharelinkReportflag

Now he is a statesman, when what he really wants

is to be what most reporters are, adult delinquents.

- Peggy Noonan, without malice, on Dan

Rather’s initial conundrum taking over for

Walter Cronkite

SoWellSoRight • an hour ago

Shhh...... the less you comment the more intelligent you will appear. It's like magic.

see more

Interviewer*: “How do you explain how a sort of

backwoods country like this, with only three million

people, could have produced the three great geniuses

of the eighteenth century—Franklin, Jefferson, and

Hamilton?”

Gore Vidal**: “They had more time to think about

things. They stayed home on the farm in winter. They

read. Wrote letters. They apparently, thought --

something no longer done in public life. And they

didn’t spend all their time raising money.”

Interviewer*: “You know in this job I get to meet

everybody—all these great movers and shakers and

the thing I’m most struck by the lot of them is how

second-rate they are. Then you read all those debates

over the Constitution . . . nothing like that now.

Nothing.”

*(President John

F. Kennedy, 1961)

**(his stepbrother-in-law)

Interviewer: What’s it like being a

Beatle?

George Harrison: I don’t know…

What’s it like not being one?

“The aim of marketing is to

know and understand the

customer so well the product or

service fits him and sells itself.”

- Peter Drucker

Always BeClosing1

Trump was elected because Hillary and the other

scumbags like her weren't worth entrusting the job

to. I believe most saw him as an asshole, but they

said "yep, he's the asshole for the job". I along with

many others actually like him. He's far from perfect,

just like the rest of us "deplorables", but he's no

nonsense and going to drain the swamp of sick-ass

corruption and attempt to save this goddamn

country. The craziest part of it is he's out to do good

for everyone, trying to give ALL a better shot at life,

yet they're consorting together and fighting him tooth

and nail. Don’t believe the fake news hype, 'cause

they are full of shit. And the one thing they hate most

is being called on it.

Show less

11

REPLY

whskyhmmr 89

@Always BeClosing the only people who still like

Trump at this point are suburban boomers,

so nice job out-ing yourself.

REPLY

Always BeClosing1

@whskyhmmer 89 I don't approve of every single

thing Trump says or does, fair to say that's sort of

impossible. Still he has tremendous support, they/we

just sit in the background. Most of us work our jobs,

carry on with our lives, our families, and ignore most

of the biased media circus. You know, same way he

was voted by an ELECTORAL MAJORITY of the

entire country. Most of us show up and do our

talking in the voting booth. When everyone else said

he was hated and it was impossible -- showed how

much they knew.

I'm not a "boomer" as you wish to label someone.

You as well as anyone else have a right to your

political opinion. But you shouldn't be surprised that

there are others that lean the other way. If you

yourself aren't happy with the current administration,

try voting in two years to change it. With any luck

you'll have a bunch of fat-ass angry broads with no

hair on your team, right in line behind you.

They might even be screaming that social

justice shit at the top o' their lungs, in which

case it would possibly be music to your ears.

Lynda

Bless your heart...can’t face the truth huh?

Trump would sell this country straight to Russia

and you’d be too indoctrinated into your trump

cult to realize it. Try loving your country more

than a draft dodging hack.

REPLY

Always BeClosing

@Lynda Well there's no draft-dodging here as

we hail from a law enforcement and military

family widespread. We pride ourselves on

serving our great nation. However, we only

choose to support deadly force if absolutely

necessary.

Whenever peace and cooperative efforts can

instill prosperity among our own AND other

nations, it's known universally as the more

intelligent and nobler strategy. Blood is a

tremendous expense, and we applaud him for

trying to negotiate to get us out of these

constant wars we've found all Americans

tangled up in for decades now. The previous

administration and liberal leftists are pissed not

only from their loss, but want to instigate a

warpath momentum through the media to stoke

the fires and have everyone cheering for WW3,

at each other’s throats, the same way your ass

is coming at me and we don’t even fuckin' know

one another. Yet you'd like to pretend.

Look, I've already stated before that he didn't

win a personality contest. I think most see him

as an asshole, but chose to roll the dice on him

versus the already well-established criminals in

Washington. Let the man do his job, the same

way we had given Obama 8 years, 2 terms, in a

vain attempt that he wasn't a sellout.

Oh yeah, psst... Lynda, just in case you missed

it... the only one who has been actually proven

and caught SELLING anything to Russia was

your bitch-ass hero Hillary! And it was our

fucking uranium! That makes YOU the hack.

Jesus Christ. Fuckin' broad. Three strikes and

yer' outta here.

HarryO W Osborne • 5 hours ago

But who is the enemy? What I mean is, how do you

identify the enemy? They're not wearing uniforms;

they're mostly invisible and clandestine. Many identified

the communist/liberal policies and takeover years ago

while others just yawned and went on their way;

nothing happened because the enemy looks just like

them.

What you gonna do, just go out and shoot anyone who

speaks like a lib? This is not a ground war; this is a war

of intelligence and information and as a few have

noticed the commies have removed the intelligence

from many and turned information into fake news.

Again, many saw this happening decades ago but were

powerless or too lazy to stop it.

Blckmmba IlJuly 8

Times Pick

Donald John Trump is the honest logical embodiment of what America stands

for and represents shorn of the diabolical duplicitous historical hypocrisy.

Trump cannot be blamed on divine royal selection. Nor did Trump come to

power via an armed uniformed military coup. Trump won the votes of 63

million Americans. Including 58 % of the white American majority made up of

62 % of white men and 54 % of white women.

A nation built upon black African enslavement and separate and unequal

African Jim Crow deserves no blessings from any just God. A country that

colonized and conquered aboriginal humans is not a land of the free nor home of

the brave. A state that treats women as lesser human is not a moral paragon.

Trump trolls for the desperate despicable and deplorable white American

majority. A majority that is aging and shrinking with a below replacement

birthrate, A majority with a decreasing life expectancy due to alcoholism, drug

addiction, depression and suicide. Uncle Sam is the supreme troll demonic evil

aspect of our American nature.

476 Recommend

29 Recommend

Patricia commented July 8

Pat

California July 8

More than 200 years before Twitter existed, Alexander Hamilton warned the

new American nation against embracing a leader like the current occupant of

the White House: "When a man, unprincipled in private life, desperate in his

fortune, bold in his temper.... despotic in his ordinary demeanour—known to

have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen

to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to

liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government

& bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the nonsense of

the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw

things into confusion that he may “ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.”

The full text can be read on the National Archives website.

ELEVEN

Sales on ONE,

please

from: The Loyal Opposition November 7, 2016

by Richard A. Epstein via Defining Ideas (Hoover Institution)

…But lest one be too critical of Hillary, there is

Donald Trump, whose personal baggage means

that his election carries the risk of bringing

buffoonery, decadence, and political instability into

the Oval Office, as well as possible investigations into sexual

assault and fraud for his previous behaviors. On policy matters,

he talks as if he is still cutting real estate deals in Atlantic City.

• His erratic behavior leads many to fear his control over our

nuclear arsenal in his position of commander-in-chief and to

doubt his respect of constitutional norms on such key

matters as the rule of law and the separation of powers.

•

• His belligerent insistence on renegotiating international trade

deals could lead to a major trade war that would cause

incalculable damage to the United States and all of its many

trading partners. Trump, it appears, has never heard of the

principle of comparative advantage, and thus looks at

American trade deals exclusively through the lens of the

perceived “losers,” with scant appreciation of the systematic

gains from trade. It is no wonder that most corporate

executives have shunned his candidacy, given his apparent

willingness to freeze out international markets.

•

• Likewise, his shrill immigration policy threatens to make it

more difficult to run the domestic economy and stabilize his

relations with Latin America and Muslim nations.

• On most domestic issues, he is an empty vessel who has no

political experience or intellectual skills to guide the nation

forward.

•

• On social issues, he has the rare capacity to inflame racial

tensions without cause, and to engage in gratuitous sexual

slurs that further outrage public opinion.

•

• On foreign affairs, his oft-expressed disdain for treaties could

usher in pandemonium on the most central military and

economic issues.

** What makes the current situation still more

distressing is the polarizing impact that this campaign

has had on the American electorate. It takes no

sociological wizard to realize the deep antipathy that

ardent Trump supporters have for Clinton, whom they

think represents the bicoastal liberal elites and their

favored minority groups. Clinton supporters return the

favor by denouncing everyone who supports Trump as

racists, homophobes, and kooks.

Harsh talk like this has tended to abate during previous

presidential elections. Traditionally, Democratic

candidates tacked left while Republican candidates tacked

right during the primaries to secure the nomination—only

to both inch back to the middle in the general election in

order to appeal to the median voter, on whom the outcome

of elections was thought to hinge.

Unfortunately, this time around that movement to the center

does not seem to be taking place. Instead, both parties have

assiduously cultivated their respective bases in order to

increase their turnout in the national election. To the extent

that each tries to win over undecided voters, it is not with

appeals to policy, but with denunciations of the character

and temperament of the opposing candidate. And so the

electorate has become more split, guaranteeing that the

supporters of the losing candidate will bitterly resent the new

president. There will be no honeymoon period, no

reconciliation, only massive distrust.

... The job of the political and legal theorist

is to keep steady on the course, and to

demonstrate, time and again, the

necessity for classical liberal positions on

the full range of substantive issues.

That third voice has to be heard, and heard

often, in the impending political struggles

that are likely to engulf the nation in the

months and years ahead.

•

• COMMENTS POLICY

Join the Conversation

I'm more optimistic than Richard about Trump.

Clinton's incompetence and imperialism were far more to be feared

than any flaws—which are mostly aesthetic and overspun by an empty,

nattering press—of his. Trump was smart to focus on bad trade deals.

It symbolizes the point he is making about the incompetence of prior

administrations, both GW Bush's—in such intrusive and costly acts as

NCLB and the prescription drug benefit entitlement program—and

Obama's failures, like ACA and the whole field of foreign policy.

The US does trade deals, not treaties, precisely so the complex

regulatory details of those deals will be renegotiable, not fixed into

stone. Trump is instinctively a free trader. But he is also a good

negotiator who understands and respects his fiduciary duty to the

entity he serves. This is no longer true of America's political

"professionals," like the naive ex-community organizer amateur,

Obama, or the nepotistic, inert Mrs. Grundy, who could not pass the

D.C. bar, and who intervened in Libya at the behest of her pal, Sid

Blumenthal. Government has a severe incompetence problem. That is

because it has a severe agency problem. It also has a dereliction of duty

problem, as Trump noted with respect to Obama's failure to enforce

border control law. This was a brilliant policy moment. It showed that

Trump understands what the chief EXECUTIVE is supposed to do. To

enforce the law. Not promise to make large piles of new ones. Trump is

also correct that the best trade and contract talent in America now works

in the private sector, not in government. I look forward to the infusion

of new talent by a President Trump, and to the necessary shake-up of an

increasingly corrupt and sclerotic, and simply TOO LARGE federal

government, that a Trump victory would bring.

Terence B • 8 days ago

It occurred to me several weeks ago that the big

winner will be the loser. Whoever wins is going to

have to deal with big steaming piles of cr@p

domestically and internationally with no political

capital and the deserved hatred of millions of

Americans. The loser will be able to sit back and say

'I told you so' with every disaster/setback.

The big losers will be us and the rest of the world.

Severn • 8 days ago

What a load of pretentious, self-important

twaddle. I suggest you crack a history book

sometime, where you will discover that the

actual "classical liberals" were committed

mercantilists.

(the above [excerpted] article was published one day before Election Day 2016 -

“richard40” is the author, responding to reader comments)

richard40 to Severn • 7 days ago

Since mercantilism says the goal of any trade should be a

trade surplus, it has an obvious flaw: only one side of any

trading relationship can practice it, basically making

mercantilist trade one sided and parasitic. If both sides are

Mercantilist, there can be no trade at all, harming everybody. A

two-sided free trading relationship is the only relationship where

trade is possible and does not harm one trading partner.

But as long as trade is balanced, comparative advantage works,

and trade benefits both sides (and this has proven to be true even

with differing average wages between nations); not allowing this

is the gross flaw of Mercantilism, and the reason it failed

miserably with Smoot Hawley.

I have to hope that Trump is in fact not the Mercantilist you

guys all hope for, since that will totally ruin worldwide trade

and produce a recession. I have to hope Trump the businessman

is sensible enough to shoot for balanced trade instead.

Micha to Severn • 8 days ago

Counter-example to your claim: Adam Smith.

Severn to Micha_Elyi • 8 days ago

Counter-example to your claim. The American

Founding fathers. And Adam Smith bore zero

resemblance to contemporary "free traders", who

would have seemed incomprehensible to him.

richard40 to Severn • 7 days ago

The founders could be mercantilist only because they found

trading partners who were not, otherwise they would have had

no trade at all. Mercantilist trade is parasitic on the nonmercantilist

partner - not very honest or sustainable. Even as it

is, mercantilism was definitely not good for the agricultural

exporting south, and that harm ended up being one of the causes

of the Civil War. But once we became a great industrial power,

mercantilism was no longer beneficial for our manufacturing

exports, and again it failed totally with Smoot Hawley*, being a

major cause of the great depression.

* 1930 Tariff Act derided by economic historians

- from Eureka: 81 Key Ideas Explained by Michael Macrone

• dnpbuckley

24 Apr 2017 9:43

It is peculiarly American (I think) to imagine that the

corrective to Entrenched Plutocracy is ... grass-roots democracy!

I wish you well, Mr. [Cornell] West, but fear it'll take

something more than brotherhood or sisterhood to save us

from our current predicament ... although you are undoubtedly

right that the Democratic Party is a hollow shell with no voice

and no constituency. Its only message is: "I'm With H-er"

(although she is with Wall Street).

plu·toc·ra·cy

/plo͞ oˈtäkrəsē/

noun

1. government by the wealthy.

"the attack on the Bank of England was a gesture against the very symbol of

plutocracy"

o

o

a country or society governed by the wealthy.

plural noun: plutocracies

"no one can accept public policies which turn a democracy into a plutocracy"

an elite or ruling class of people whose power derives from their wealth.

"officials were drawn from the new plutocracy"

American Plutocracy has a long and illustrious history. Its

tentacles are everywhere; its toxins run deep. There is no

known antidote, despite a long history of populist (and popular)

attempts -- by workers, by farmers -- to wrest control of the

country from the grasping hands of the well-heeled and the

well-connected. The Plutocracy straddles both parties and (like

Pepsi) co-opts all movements.

The current Democratic gerontocracy [govt by elders] is

just as Plutocratic as its Republican counterpart, and

neither is capable of righting the ship. All their eggs are in

the Neoliberal basket. Both Parties have long since

abandoned all pretense of addressing an actual constituency

or dealing with social issues. They have put their trust in

the power of the "free market" and abandoned the notion

that government has any actual role to play, other than

the imperial one of fighting the so-called War on Terror.

There are no free market solutions to America's current

woes, any more than there are for Britain, or France, or any

other country trapped in the globaloney peddled by the

Plutocrats for the last thirty-odd years.

It is an error (to my mind) to deride The Donald as "fascist" while

refraining from such language when describing, say, Pelosi. Her nest is as

finely feathered as his. And what is at issue here is not classic fascism of

the militarized 1930s type. What we are all ensnared by is best described

as Free Market Fascism ~~ i.e. the illusion that "free markets" can solve

all social problems and governments have no real or essential functions.

That is the root cause of our current malaise. Everyone

drank the globalist kool aid because after all "Marx is Dead!"

and (we were loudly told) "there is no alternative". So: now,

we're waking up to find ourselves impoverished, in debt, and

in despair in a bleak, unsustainable landscape and we must

begin again the process of imagining alternatives. But: In

America, as in Europe, the corporatist voice has the

megaphone and the Plutocrats have the political reins.

(angry ideologue or stereo-typed fabrication? I’d sit down w/ both if I could…)

- R

pfb35 to 1Smith1 (…somewhere in 2017)

Don't waste my time with the new Left-wing BS spin... Boo hoo Dem's are

always known to be racist using blacks to get votes they done a real good

job in the cities they have controlled for decades. So go back to Huffington

Post or Snopes for your socialist spin on history... what a joke.. Good Bye

& Good Riddance

missk to pfb35 • 8 days ago

Like I have said before on this forum: yeah, right! It's the Dems

who are denying black people equality, suuuure! Wow, are you

a delusional creep!

pfb35 to missk • 7 days ago

Wow big tough words..... see the fantastic job the dem's have

done in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore etc in helping the black

people... a typical socialist moron who hides in mommy's

basement ,... get a life


Dumb sh!t! I am the mommy! And you are, sadly, the worthless

troll.

The years of conservative, "We are above all others!" and "You

must remember your place!" have finally crashed about your

ears, honey. Wake up! Progressives constantly have to fix the

harms conservatives have wrought.

Can you tell me one piece of legislation the Connies have put

forward in the last two decades that have benefited the nonbusiness

owners in this country? Just one?


Dumb Sh*it guess your an expert at being one.. Like the rest of the

progressive trash you have no problems "Killing Millions of the Unborn".

Duhh weren’t for the business owners their would be no jobs for the Nonbusiness

people would there... Done wastin time with a Leftist troll bye bye


Exactly. You couldn't even come up with one thing the Connies

have done to help you or anyone else that doesn't own a

business.

Your deflection to reproductive choice is noted and laughed at.

Running away? That's the coward’s way out. Figures!


No just not wasting my time with a left-wing buffoon who has been brainwashed

by socialist BS... from Huffington Post, Media Matters and the G.

Soros ran propaganda sites.

What has the Dem-o-craps done but put this Nation 20 Trillion in debt.

What I laugh at is the stupidity of enlightened people who allow murder of

the unborn. Margaret Sanger the hero of the baby killers the beliefs of this

racist women in the 30's " Weed out the Undesirables" that's minorities for

you so-called left-wing brains I laugh at the useful idiots which you are one

of..

So get back to your pathetic life & let people who work for a living

and create jobs handle the important things..


Owned my own successful computer company for 30 years. You

couldn't even begin to keep up.

The Republicans have controlled the purse strings for most of

the last two decades. They also ran our economy into the

ground...do you remember all the way back to 2008 when

Bush's wars and banking buddies robbed our treasury?

Once again, your deflection to the absurdities about Sanger

and abortion are noted and laughed at even harder (you do

know that your facts are wildly off, right?).

I have a happy, success-filled life. And I'm a progressive (gasp!).

How 'bout you? You don't seem happy at all. I'm sorry for your

troubles and your sorrows, and I hope you feel better soon.

Can you give me one piece of conservative governing, just one

piece of legislation, that has helped average Americans who are

not business owners? Please, just one??


Does it matter no matter what I give like POTUS Regan dropping the

capital gain taxes & we had the greatest increase in growth in

decades... Guess you love Jimmy Carter who drove interest rates to

18% (But gee guess the socialist say it was the Republicans right) I'm

very happy & successful still making good 6 fig's so boo-hoo.. And

Sanger was a racist but I see how the new group-speak is rewriting

history... Progressives = Socialist… same immoral background & spend

everyone else’s money except your own (give any big checks to the gov

to share?). And what was your successful computer Co. name? did you

started back with the original Tandy's or Big Blue? Good bye not

wasting time with progressive anti-America socialist rants.. Your deleted!


Thank heavens you've blocked me! Phew! I'm not sure how

much more of your awful grammar and random, detached,

mumbling my educated mind can take. Yes, dear leader loves

the uneducated.

You may claim to be a successful person, but your ramblings

belie your beliefs. I assume by six figures you meant $9,999.99?

I just cannot help but comment thusly: I love how you Connie

trolls come to MMfA to converse, then you get all bruised and

upset when confronted with Actual progressives. You just freak

out. Your brains have been so consumed by Right Wing BS that

you don't even realize how unhinged you sound. 'Tis sad, really.

It's going to take a lot to bring our country back together

thanks to the loony right whiney fringe.


Funny! Your brainless retorts are amusing. Guess your PC company

like you was old & obsolete.. Since your BS is so amusing I'll pass it

on to those who love the ramblings of a socialist moron like

yourself... Bye Bye

danton5 to pfb35 • 2 days ago

Regan? Who is Regan?

Rummy Runner to missk • 3 days ago

I have a feeling you are more concerned with the

non-working than the non-business owner.

Recently they passed legislation that gives 9-11

Families the right to sue Saudi Arabia for their

complicity with 9-11. I personally think that is a

good one, made even better because Obama tried

to veto and lost. Is he more concerned with

protecting the Saudis, his Muslim brothers, than he

is with protecting American families? Only time

will tell.

Conservatives tried to defund Obamacare.

Unfortunately for all Americans, the Dems blocked

the effort and allowed the worst legislation of all

time to continue unchecked.

missk to Rummy Runner • 3 days ago

By the way, as I have learned, the legislation to which you refer

will now make it easier for foreigners to sue Americans, so,

yeah, thanks a lot for that.


1- I am very concerned about *working* people. Under Bush II's

reign, labor laws were changed so that millions lost their right

to overtime pay. Go back and read about those changes. And

listen to younger people when they wonder how long they will

have to give free hours to their bosses, without compensation,

because they are now "salaried" rather than hourly employees.

2- Obama's Muslim brothers? He is black but that does not

make him a Muslim. Your RW talking point is noted and, while I

find it to be a disgusting charge, appropriately laughed off.

3- The ACA is the same program put into place by a Republican

governor. Look it up. But, because the RW media doesn't like

Dems, it's "a terrible plot!" Check again, you'll discover the ACA

has done a great deal of good for millions. Would you agree

that we need to keep pharmaceutical and health insurance

companies in line?

Dems wanted that, Repubs did not. Repubs think profit is more

important than human lives.

Yes, I am also concerned with people who are unable to work.

It's very personal - after owning my own successful business for

30 years, my Multiple Sclerosis advanced to a point where I

could no longer work. I am now on full disability, tho' I'd rather

not be, and stuck with less than $800 a month. That amount is

supposed to cover all of the medical care, food, and shelter one

with MS requires. Yet, my family still wants me to be alive and

around. I still laugh and joke all day long. I still have much to

give - should I just die because I am now a "non-worker?" This

is a very serious question I am asking you here. What do you

say?


Rummy, where is the answer to my question? I'll ask again:

Should I just die because I am now a "non-worker?" This is a

very serious question I am asking you here. What do you say?

Rummy Runner to missk • 2 days ago

Am I such a dumb shit that you believe I would embroil

myself in a bullshit question like that? I have no opinion

on your life. Do not care one way or the other. That is

between you and your maker.


Coward. You start a discussion and refuse to carry it through to

its logical conclusion.

Noted: another conservative refuses to stand behind their

supposed beliefs.

My maker? My parents are both dead, so I guess that will be a

short conversation.

silly1 to missk • 4 days ago

Socialist dem policies have destroyed the black

community. The numbers don't lie. They only pretend to

care every 4 years.

missk to silly1 • 3 days ago

Your user name is an appropriate response to your

nonsense. Do tell, what has any conservative ever done,

just a single thing, to help minorities? Just one thing? I'll

wait........


No. I'm not a conservative. I don't buy into this one-party

system masquerading as two. I think for myself.


I will say this even though I'm not a conservative, but if

you ever travel outside your bubble and visit Chicago,

Los Angeles, San Francisco, Detroit you can see firsthand

the destruction liberal policy have rained down on

minorities. All of these fine examples of progressive

policy lay testament to the hard work they have done to

help people less fortunate.

missk to silly1 • 3 days ago

I travel this country full-time in an RV, visiting those places you

mentioned, as well as thousands of miles of back country

roads.

I have found, in my travels, that

1- People are kind and welcoming, no

matter what part of the country we are in;

and

2- We have spent many hours in the streets

of the cities you claim to be such problems,

even in the middle of the night, and, gee,

they're just not the hellholes you claim.

There's sections of town that are run down,

but guess what? The people who live there

are doing the same thing as you - making

meals, packing the kids off to school in the

mornings, going to work, and just trying to

get by.

Why do you insist the Dems have created

problems there? Is everything that Dems do

bad because that's what you hear on the

shill-news? Why else do you insist on

blaming the wrongs in the world on the

wrong people?


To keep you folks from patting each other on the back all the

time and give you a different perspective. As for these grand

cities you've toured in your RV, I've lived in some of them.

Schools with no funding, swimming in debt, the highest crime

rates. As for blaming the wrongs of the world on the wrong

people, Obama increased every bad policy that you liberals

hated about Bush. It's amazing you can't see it. More war, more

debt, more drone strikes, more spying, more for Wall Street.

The cognitive dissonance you harbor is incredible. Hillary

Clinton is more of a hawk neo con Republican than a

progressive. There's no doubt she will be president and speed

up the decline we've been on. It's a one-party center right

system. Time to recognize that. And as for the election we don't

decide, the electoral college does and they will surely crown

her. The system is rigged. Time to recognize that as well.

GOPvsUSA2 to pfb35 • 10 days ago

Did I mention how much I love this new blocking feature that

allows me to make you gutless hidey-trolls with the hidden

profiles and hidden comment histories instantly irrelevant?

Gib@Gibstra·Replying to @iowahawkblog

If Twitter becomes a subscription platform, only die hard masochists will

stay, the rest of us cheap masochists will seek free humiliation elsewhere.

If you cannot do great things, do small things in a great way.

-Napoleon Hill

14. Feb. 14, 2017:

The New York Times’ Michael S. Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti and Matt Apuzzo

reported about supposed contacts between Trump campaign staff and ‘senior

Russian intelligence officials.’ Comey later testified ‘In the main, [the article]

was not true.’

24. December 2, 2017:

ABC News’ Brian Ross reported that former Trump official Lt. Gen. Michael

Flynn was going to testify that candidate Trump had directed him to contact ‘the

Russians.’ Even though such contact would not be in of itself a violation of law,

the news was treated as an explosive indictment of Trump in the Russia collusion

narrative, and the stock market fell on the news. ABC later corrected the report to

reflect that Trump had already been elected when he reportedly asked Flynn to

contact the Russians about working together to fight ISIS and other issues. Ross

was suspended.

28. Sept. 5, 2017:

CNN’s Chris Cillizza and other news outlets declared Trump ‘lied‘ when he stated

that Trump Tower had been wiretapped, although there’s no way any reporter

independently knew the truth of the matter, only that what intel officials claimed. It

later turned out there were numerous wiretaps involving Trump Tower, including a

meeting of Trump officials with a foreign dignitary. At least two Trump associates

who had offices in or frequented Trump Tower were also reportedly wiretapped.

42. March 13, 2018:

The New York Times’ Adam Goldman, NBC’s Noreen O’Donnell and AP’s Deb

Riechmann reported that Trump’s pick for CIA Director, Gina Haspel, had

waterboarded a particular Islamic extremist terrorist dozens of times at a secret

prison; and that she had mocked his suffering. In fact, Haspel wasn’t assigned to

the prison until after the detainee left. ProPublica originally reported the incorrect

details in Feb. 2017.

TWELVE

I don’t know

anything about

this

Your conduct speaks so loudly,

I can’t hear a word you are saying.

- Vincent Bugliosi

“... It makes Richard Nixon and what he even

thought about doing look like a kindergarten

Halloween party.

This is major, major stuff that's being revealed here, that these

people have engaged in! Just the financial aspects of this alone,

the finagling, the commingling of money, the selling of influence

to Mrs. Clinton as Secretary of State.

Foreign countries, foreign donors, the mechanisms that are

detailed by which Bill Clinton... One of the ways it works is that

they'll go out, they'll seek a donation -- the Clinton Foundation -

- say from Coca-Cola or from the Rockefeller Foundation,

Rockefeller Trust or whatever. I mean, they're hitting on

everybody, the Clintons are, and their aides, their employees at

the foundation. And one of the things that often is included is

say, "In addition to your donation, we would like you to hire Bill

Clinton as a consultant for $3.9 million a year to advise you on

strategic whatever."

They hit up various corporations, and the corporations have

done it - according to these emails. Corporations are paying Bill

Clinton three and a half, $3.9 million a year to "consult," after

also donating to the foundation. What do they think they're

getting for this? I mean, do they really like Bill Clinton so much

that they want to give him $3.9 million after donating another

number of millions to his foundation? For what? This is way

beyond the appearance of impropriety.IIt's just being coveredI

Iup and masked by the Drive-By Media who think it's a biggerI

Istory that somebody took a blowtorch to Trump's star on theI

IHollywood Walk of Fame…”I

_________________________________________________

“There’re days that he’s a buffoon. There’re days he’s a great

president. Say what you will about Donald Trump. His outer voice is

indeed an accurate depiction of his inner voice, warts and all. I don’t

think Hillary Clinton’s inner voice and outer voice have ever even had a

cup of coffee together.”

- Dennis Miller

"Maybe she is an idea, a world-historical

heroine, light itself,"

• Virginia Heffernan, on Hillary Clinton

Nothing this nutty has been said by any of Trump's media

fanboys.

"Hillary is Athena," Heffernan continued, adding that "Hillary did

everything right in this campaign… She cannot be faulted,

criticized, or analyzed for even one more second."

That's a key cry of the Cult of Hillary (as it is among followers of

L. Ron Hubbard or devotees of Christ): our gal is beyond

criticism, beyond the sober and technical analysis of mere

humans.

I understand being upset and angry at your candidate's loss, but

this is something different; this is what happens, not when a

politician does badly, but when your savior, your Athena, "light

itself," is extinguished. The grief is understandable only in the

context of the apocalyptic faith they had put in Hillary. Not since

Princess Diana kicked the bucket can I remember such a strange,

misplaced belief in one woman, and such a weird, post-modern

response to someone's demise (and Clinton isn't even dead! She

just lost!).

It's all incredibly revealing. What it points to is a mainstream,

Democratic left that is so bereft of ideas and so disconnected

from everyday people that it ends up pursuing an utterly

substance-free politics of emotion and feeling and doesn't even

realize it's doing it. They are good, everyone else is bad; they are

light itself, everyone else is darkness; and so no self-awareness can

exist and no self-criticism can be entertained. Not for even one

second, in Heffernan's words. The Cult of Hillary Clinton is the

clearest manifestation yet of the 21st-century problem of life in

the political echo chamber.

Mercifully, some mea culpas are now emerging. Some, though

not enough, realize that Hillaryites behaved rashly and with

unreason. In a brilliant piece titled "The unbearable smugness of

the liberal media," Will Rahn recounts how the media allowed

itself to become the earthly instrument of Clinton's cause,

obsessed with finding out how to make Middle Americans "stop

worshiping their false god and accept our gospel."

Indeed. And the failure to make the gospel of Hillary into the

actual book of America points to the one good thing about

Trump's victory: a willingness among ordinary people to

blaspheme against saints, to reject phony saviors, and to sniff at

the new secular religion of hollow progressiveness. The liberal

political and media establishment offered the little people a

supposedly flawless, Francis-like figure of uncommon goodness,

and the little people called bullshit on it. That is epic and

beautiful, even if nothing else in recent weeks has been.

- Brendan O’Neill

THIRTEEN

you made this

whole thing up

in your head

After all, one knows one’s weak

points so well, it’s rather

bewildering to have the critics

overlook them and invent others.

- Edith Wharton

32. May 10, 2020

NBC's Chuck Todd on Meet the Press used a deceptively edited

comment made by Attorney General William Barr about the case

of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. The network later apologized for the

error.

Kerri Kupec DOJ@KerriKupecDOJ

May 10, 2020

Very disappointed by the deceptive editing/commentary by

@ChuckTodd on @MeetThePress on AG Barr’s CBS interview.

Compare the two transcripts below. Not only did the AG make the

case in the VERY answer Chuck says he didn’t, he also did so multiple

times throughout the interview.

…This second part of Barr’s answer, in which he clearly states that

history should look back well upon his decision, is at complete odds

with Todd’s absurd question to Noonan. And that part of the answer is not

buried somewhere else in the interview. It is the very next thing Barr says.

It is always best, at least at first, in these instances to assume that the error

was the result of incompetence or laziness. Todd or one of his producers

saw the “history written by the winners” line and thought they had found

an angle. But it is hard to conceive of a situation in which whoever pulled

and created that clip did not also see the sentence in which Barr defended

his move to drop the case. It is almost impossible to imagine that those

words were cut for any reason other than to deceive viewers.

The irony of course is that Barr was making a joke when talking about

history being written by the winners. He is laughing as he says it, and the

joke is very much directed at just this kind of media hit job. Barr is basically

saying that the decision is fair and just, but some in the chattering class will

have their own nefarious version of events. Todd and his dishonest

producers could scarcely have done more to prove Barr’s point.

Time and again, “errors” occur regarding not just Barr but the entire Trump

administration. Last year this happened when Barr stated honestly that the

FBI had “spied” on the Trump campaign. Barr made it clear that spying is

often a legitimate part of the FBI’s job, but many in the media turned the

statement into some rant about the deep state, which it obviously was not.

The curious thing about these “mistakes” is that they always seem to

happen in one direction: the one that makes Trump and his administration

look bad. It is frankly not credible to believe this could be the case without

at least an implicit bias at work, and at worst a conscious effort to be

deceptive.

It is very hard to believe that the deceptive editing of this video was just an

honest mistake. Even if it was, the steady drumbeat of mistakes by leftist

media over the years, always to the discredit of the right, shows they have a

problem they are not willing to fix. Members of the mainstream media get

very upset when the president or anyone else calls them fake news. Well,

Sunday on the “Meet the Press,” Chuck Todd fully embodied that

description. David Marcus is the Federalist's New York Correspondent.

Commentary:

by Will Rahn

Last Updated Nov 10, 2016 12:01 PM EST

The mood in the Washington press corps is bleak, and

deservedly so.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that, with a few exceptions, we

were all tacitly or explicitly #WithHer, which has led to a certain

anguish in the face of Donald Trump’s victory. More than that and more

importantly, we also missed the story, after having spent months

mocking the people who had a better sense of what was going on.

This is all symptomatic of modern journalism’s great moral and

intellectual failing: its unbearable smugness. Had Hillary Clinton won,

there’d be a winking “we did it” feeling in the press, a sense that we

were brave and called Trump a liar and saved the republic.

So much for that. The audience for our glib analysis and contempt for

much of the electorate, it turned out, was rather limited. This was

particularly true when it came to voters, the ones who turned out by the

millions to deliver not only a rebuke to the political system but also the

people who cover it. Trump knew what he was doing when he invited

his crowds to jeer and hiss the reporters covering him. They hate us, and

have for some time.

And can you blame them? Journalists love mocking Trump supporters.

We insult their appearances. We dismiss them as racists and sexists. We

emote on Twitter about how this or that comment or policy makes us

feel one way or the other, and yet we reject their feelings as invalid.

It’s a profound failure of empathy in the service of endless posturing.

There’s been some sympathy from the press, sure: the dispatches from

“heroin country” that read like reports from colonial administrators

checking in on the natives. But much of that starts from the assumption

that Trump voters are backward, and that it’s our duty to catalogue and

ultimately reverse that backwardness. What can we do to get these

people to stop worshiping their false god and accept our gospel?

We diagnose them as racists in the way Dark Age clerics confused

medical problems with demonic possession. Journalists, at our worst, see

ourselves as a priestly caste. We believe we not only have access to the

indisputable facts, but also a greater truth, a system of beliefs divined

from an advanced understanding of justice.

You’d think that Trump’s victory – the one we all discounted too far in

advance – would lead to a certain newfound humility in the political

press. But of course, that’s not how it works. To us, speaking broadly,

our diagnosis was still basically correct. The demons were just stronger

than we realized.

This is all a “whitelash,” you see. Trump voters are racist and sexist, so

there must be more racists and sexists than we realized. Tuesday night’s

outcome was not a logic-driven rejection of a deeply flawed candidate

named Clinton; no, it was a primal scream against fairness, equality, and

progress. Let the new tantrums commence!

That’s the fantasy, the idea that if we mock them enough, call them

racist enough, they’ll eventually shut up and get in line. It’s similar to

how media Twitter works, a system where people who dissent from the

proper framing of a story are attacked by mobs of smugly incredulous

pundits. Journalists exist primarily in a world where people can get

shouted down and disappear, which informs our attitudes toward all

disagreement.

Journalists increasingly don’t even believe in the possibility of reasoned

disagreement, and as such ascribe cynical motives to those who think about things

a different way. We see this in the ongoing veneration of “facts,” the ones peddled

by explainer websites and data journalists who believe themselves to be curiously

post-ideological.

That the explainers and data journalists so frequently get things

hilariously wrong never invites the soul-searching you’d think it would.

Instead, it all just somehow leads us to more smugness, more meanness,

more certainty from the reporters and pundits. Faced with defeat, we

retreat further into our bubble, assumptions left unchecked. No, it’s the

voters who are wrong.

As a direct result, we get it wrong with greater frequency. Out on the road, we

forget to ask the right questions. We can’t even imagine the right question. We go

into assignments too certain that what we find will serve to justify our biases. The

public’s estimation of the press declines even further -- fewer than one-in-three

Americans trust the press, per Gallup -- which starts the cycle anew.

There’s a place for opinionated journalism; in fact, it’s vital. But our causal,

profession-wide smugness and protestations of superiority are making us unable to

do it well.

Our theme now should be humility. We must become more impartial, not less so.

We have to abandon our easy culture of tantrums and recrimination. We have to

stop writing these know-it-all, 140-character sermons on social media and admit

that, as a class, journalists have a shamefully limited understanding of the country

we cover.

What’s worse, we don’t make much of an effort to really understand, and with too

few exceptions, treat the economic grievances of Middle America like they’re

some sort of punchline. Sometimes quite literally so, such as when reporters tweet

out a photo of racist-looking Trump supporters and jokingly suggest that they must

be upset about free trade or low wages.

We have to fix this, and the broken reasoning behind it. There’s a fleeting fun to

gang-ups and groupthink. But it’s not worth what we are losing in the process.

November 13, 2016

To our readers,

When the biggest political story of the year reached a

dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our

newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for

nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and

creativity.

After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are

inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer

unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to

underestimate his support among American voters? What

forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and

outcome? Most important, how will a president who

remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he

takes office?

As we reflect on this week’s momentous result, and the

months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to

rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times

journalism. That is to report America and the world

honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to

understand and reflect all political perspectives and life

experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to

hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. We

believe we reported on both candidates fairly during the

presidential campaign. You can rely on The New York Times

to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the

same independence to our coverage of the new president

and his team.

We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for

which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers.

We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times

journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.

Sincerely,

Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., Publisher

Dean Baquet, Executive Editor

TeaPartyReaganConservative • 2 days ago

lol Rededicate itself.. lol The NY Times has been a leftwing democrat

propagandist rag for over a century, and now suddenly it wants to

reassure its readers it will turn over a new leaf and actually do real

objective non-biased reporting-"rededicating the paper to fair reporting".

lol

Please, the NY Times is a brain-washed leftist propaganda rag, and will

always be so.

"There is no such thing as a free press. You know it and I know it.

There is not one of you who would dare to write his honest

opinion. The business of the journalist is to destroy truth, to lie

outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon, and

to sell himself, his country, and his race for his daily bread. We are

tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping

jacks; they pull our strings, we dance; our talents, our possibilities,

and our lives are the property of these men. We are intellectual

prostitutes."

John Swinton (1829-1901) - Head of the editorial staff at the

New York Times

Karlyn Borysenko has run out of effs to give

@DrKarlynB

7h

Five truths about Trump supporters I did not

know as a leftist:

1) They are significantly happier than leftists

2) They are significantly funnier than leftists

3) They vary widely in their opinions

4) They welcome discussions with people they

disagree with

5) They are not racist

FOURTEEN

don’t hold it in…

I don’t want to beat up on Hillary Clinton. She thought

she’d win and she lost, embarrassingly, to a man she

considered deeply unworthy. At the same time, she won

the popular vote by 2.9 million. It would take anyone time to absorb

these things emotionally and psychologically.

But wow. Her public statements since defeat have been malignant

little masterpieces of victimhood-claiming, blame-shifting and

unhelpful accusation. They deserve censure.

Last weekend she was the commencement speaker at her alma mater,

Wellesley, where she insulted the man who beat her. This

Wednesday she was at the 2017 Code Conference, hosted by the

Recode website, where she was interviewed by friendly journalists

Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher. She eagerly offered a

comprehensive list of the reasons she lost the 2016 presidential

election.

She lost because America is a hopelessly reactionary country in

which dark forces fight a constant “rearguard action” to “turn back

the clock.” She lost because Republicans are both technologically

advanced and underhanded. Democrats, for instance, use data and

analytics to target and rouse voters—“better messaging.”

Republicans, on the other hand, use “content farms” and make “an

enormous investment in falsehoods, fake news, call it what you will.”

Democrats “did not engage in false content.” She lost because of

the Russians: “Who were they coordinating with, or colluding with?”

She lost because of “voter suppression” and “unaccountable money

flowing in against me.” She lost because the Democratic National

Committee didn’t help her. “I inherit nothing from the Democratic

Party. I mean it was bankrupt. . . . Its data was mediocre to poor,

nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.”

She lost because FBI Director James Comey told Congress the

investigation regarding her email server had been reopened. “So for

whatever reason . . . and I can’t look inside the guy’s mind, you know,

he dumps that on me on Oct. 28, and I immediately start falling.”

She lost because she was “swimming against a historic tide. It’s very

difficult historically to succeed a two-term president of your own

party.” She lost because she was “the victim of a very broad

assumption that I was going to win.” She lost because the news media

ignored her policy positions.

And then there was sexism. “It sort of bleeds into misogyny. And let’s

just be honest, you know, people who have . . . a set of expectations

about who should be president and what a president looks like, you

know, they’re going to be much more skeptical and critical of

somebody who doesn’t look like and talk like and sound like

everybody else who’s been president. And you know, President

Obama broke that racial barrier, but you know, he’s a very attractive,

good-looking man.”

Oh my goodness, how she thinks.

Oddly, she seemed completely sincere, as if she believes her own

story. It tells you something about our own power to hypnotize

ourselves, to invent reasons that avoid the real reasons. It is a tribute

to the power of human denial. And at first you think: I hope it was

cathartic. Maybe these are just stories she tells herself to feel better.

But none of this, in truth, is without point. It is purposeful. It is not

mere narrative-spinning. It is insisting on alternative facts so that

journalists and historians will have to take them into account. It is a

monotonous repetition of a certain version of events, which will be

amplified, picked up and repeated into the future.

And it’s not true.

The truth is Bernie Sanders destroyed Mrs. Clinton’s chance of

winning by almost knocking her off, and in the process revealing her

party’s base had changed. Her plodding, charmless, insincere style of

campaigning defeated her. Bad decisions in her campaign approach

to the battleground states did it; a long history of personal scandals

did it; fat Wall Street speeches did it; the Clinton Foundation’s

bloat and chicanery did it—and most of all the sense that she

ultimately stands for nothing but Hillary did it.

In the campaign book “Shattered,” journalists Jonathan Allen and

Amie Parnes report they were surprised “when Clintonworld sources

started telling us in 2015 that Hillary was still struggling to articulate

her motivation for seeking the presidency.” Her campaign was “an

unholy mess, fraught with tangled lines of authority . . . distorted

priorities, and no sense of greater purpose.” “Hillary didn’t have a

vision to articulate. And no one else could give one to her.” “Hillary

had been running for president for almost a decade and still didn’t

really have a rationale.”

What is true is that throughout her career Mrs. Clinton has shown

herself to be largely incapable of honest self-reflection, of pointing

the finger, for even a moment, at herself. She is not capable of what in

Middle English was called “agenbite of inwit”—remorse of

conscience, the self-indictment and implicit growth, that come of

taking a serious personal inventory. People are always doing bad

things to her; she never does bad things to them. They operate in bad

faith, she only in good. They lie and exaggerate, she doesn’t. They

are low and partisan, not her. There’s no vast left-wing conspiracy

only a right-wing one.

People can see this. It’s part of why she lost.

It is one thing to say, “I take responsibility,” and follow that up with a

list of things you believe you got wrong. It’s another thing to say, “I

take responsibility,” and then immediately pivot to arguments as to

why other people are to blame. “I take responsibility for everything I

got wrong, but that’s not why I lost,” is literally what she said

Wednesday.

Walt Mossberg asked her about her misjudgments. What about

Goldman Sachs ? You were running for president, he said, why did you

do those high-priced speeches?

“Why do you have Goldman Sachs [at this conference]?” Mrs.

Clinton countered.

Mr. Mossberg: “Because they pay us.”

Mrs. Clinton: “They paid me.”

Mr. Mossberg noted they paid her a lot. Hillary replied she speaks

to many groups, she had been elected in New York, which includes

Wall Street. Then: “Men got paid for the speeches they made. I got

paid for the speeches I made.”

The worst part is that she insulted her own country by both stating

and implying that America is full of knuckle-dragging, deplorable oafs

who are averse to powerful women and would never elect one

president. Has she not learned anything? Does she never think

Britain had Margaret Thatcher in 1979 and Theresa May now, that

Germany has had as its leader Angela Merkel since 2005? Is

America really more backward, narrow and hate-filled toward women

than those countries? Or was Mrs. Clinton simply the wrong woman,

and the wrong candidate?

It would have been helpful if she’d spoken at least of those who’d

voted for her and supported her and donated to her campaign

precisely because she was a woman.

You should never slander a country that rejected you. Maybe it had

its reasons. Maybe her most constructive act now would be to quietly

reflect on what they might be.

__________________________________________________

FIFTEEN

“…book smart; life dumb…”

another

a

A USC Professor is on leave after students were offended that a

Chinese word he used during a lecture on foreign languages sounded

like an English racial slur. The school is now offering "supportive

measures" to students who were hurt by the Professor's language.

Pronouncement

of

experts to

the effect

that

something

cannot be

done has

always

irritated

me.

Leo Szilard, inventor of atomic energy

Who Are Wise, Who Not?

Insight often comes not from an Ivy League degree

but by way of animal cunning, instinct, and hard

work.

“Cleverness is not wisdom.”

— Euripides

At the height of the sophistic age in classical Athens, the

playwright Euripides asked an eternal question in his

masterpiece, the Bacchae:

Or instead was true wisdom a deeper and more modest

appreciation of unchanging human nature throughout

the ages, which reminds us to avoid hubris, tread

carefully, always expect the unlikely, and distrust the

self-acclaimed wise who eventually prove clever fools?

At the end of the play, a savage, merciless nemesis is

unleashed on the hubristic wise of the establishment.

Euripides would have appreciated the ironies of the 2016

election. Millions of Americans, far from the two coasts,

kept largely quiet.

They either did not talk much to pollsters or they politely

declined to reveal their true feelings. They tuned out

talking heads and ignored blue-chip pundits. They did not

listen to the shrill bombast of President Obama on the

campaign trail or pollsters who ad nauseam declared

Hillary Clinton the sure electoral-college winner. They

were not shamed or much bothered by the condescension

they receive from the media and the Washington elite,

who proved wrong or biased or both in their coverage.

They believed that free trade was not worth much if it was

not fair trade, that illegal and politicized immigration was

as subversive as legal and diverse immigration was

valuable, that real racists were those who used race and

ethnicity to encourage others to break the law for their

own political and elite interests, and that it was stupid to

trust their job futures to those who never lost their own

jobs while often losing those of others.

So, to return to Euripides, what really is wisdom in the

21st century? Is it to be judged according to the values of

those who inhabit the Podesta WikiLeaks archive?

Is being smart defined as being on lots of corporate

boards, having an impressive contact list of private cell

phone numbers, name-dropping one’s Ivy League

degrees, referencing weekends in the Hamptons or on

Martha’s Vineyard, or being ranked in the top 100, 1,000,

or 5,000 of some cool magazine’s list of go-getters and

“people to watch”?

Is there not wisdom in being able to drop an 80-foot pine

tree with a chain saw within a foot of the mark, or to take

apart a hydraulic ram in an hour, or to steer a bulldozer on

a narrow uphill road? Can MSNBC news reader Brian

Williams tell the truth any better than the Michigan lathe

operator? Is Lois Lerner, formerly of the IRS and now

enjoying a multimillion-dollar retirement, more likely to

file an honest tax return than the Wyoming rancher, or

would you feel safer knowing that Press Secretary Josh

Earnest was working on a high-voltage wire outside your

front door? Or is wisdom sometimes gained by losing the

polish on one’s hands? Is the wrinkled man’s face as

trustworthy as the thirty-something’s peach fuzz or the

Botox grin of the middle-aged metrosexual on the evening

news or the pollster who assures you that the election has

already been decided before the voting?

In this year of weariness with the elite and their definition

of success and wisdom, lots of such questions are being

asked. Where is John Podesta today — who was a master

of the universe such a short time ago? Is the Podesta name

a stamp of honesty and sobriety? Do obsequious media

still seek the latest gossip from Cheryl Mills or Robbie

Mook, the boy wonder from Columbia who was to

oversee the inevitable landslide victory? Do our demigods

in Silicon Valley ever grasp that even their cosmos is a

fragile and fickle place where yesterday’s wise are

rendered today’s fools? Is doing all the “right” things

often a guarantee of ensuring the absolutely wrong

things?

Will President Trump learn from the wise-fool President

Obama that hubris always incurs nemesis, and that there

is an all-knowing power who waits in ambush for us once

we deem ourselves gods? Is David Brooks still critiquing

the president’s crease in his pants leg, or are our

historians still wedded to the idea that Obama is a ‘god’

and the smartest man to have entered the presidency?

Ramming down Obamacare by lying about its provisions

did what exactly, and for whom? Did untruth ensure that a

simple Affordable Care Act website would work? What

was the wisdom or good of presidential guarantees of

reasonable premiums, deductibles, and choice to the

insured? Did it make Americans feel more secure in their

health care?

Did the sterling résumés of Jonathan Gruber* and

Ezekiel Emanuel prove to us that Obamacare was

both fair and smart?

What good did grifting for all those hundreds of millions

of dollars do for the Clintons in their sunset years? Do

they look healthier and haler for their frenzied pursuit of

lucre? Did they gain greater respect and acclaim, the

richer they became, or are they resting in peace with the

assurance of lives well lived? Are they finally deemed

successful for scamming that last $50 million in their

pay-for-play scheming? Did daily fibbing make Hillary

more virtuous? Can a Yale law graduate make a mockery

of the law in ways a tractor driver from Mendota cannot

— given the greater power to do good or evil that is a

dividend of greater education and status? Did Barack

Obama’s prize-winning Harvard professors teach him

about the constitutional limits of the presidency?

Or, instead, does moral regress sometimes come with

material and intellectual progress?

Size up the 2016 campaign, and our self-acclaimed wise

— defined by their ubiquity in the media, their glib ability

to assert that up is down, and down up, their tony school

brands — often became utterly foolish. A garish Donald

Trump did not need to hire supposedly brilliant politicos

to defeat supposedly brilliant politicos on the other side.

What good did all the Russian experts in his

administration over the last few years do for Barack

Obama? Trump is criticized now that he might be too soft

on Putin. Perhaps. Yet it was not Trump, but the Ivy

League Trinity of Obama, Clinton, and Kerry who “reset”

George W. Bush’s reset sanctions against Putin, who

canceled already-planned missile defense with the Czechs

and the Poles; it was Clinton who pushed a ridiculous

plastic reset button; and Obama who in a hot-mic quip

stealthily promised Dmitry Medvedev that he would be

more reasonable with Vladimir Putin after his reelection,

who invited the Russians into the Middle East after a

40-year hiatus, who mocked Mitt Romney when the latter

suggested that Russia was a threat to America, who loudly

announced faux “step-over” line ultimatums to the

Russians; it was Clinton who in pay-for-play greed

opened up North American uranium resources to the

Russians, and Obama who personally mocked Putin as an

adolescent school cut-up even as he appeased Putin at

every turn.

For now, Donald Trump has proved that the animal

cunning necessary to survive in the jungle of Manhattan

real estate — duplicitous and venal politicians, allpowerful

unions, incompetent and vindictive regulators,

fair-weather bankers and investors, and dozens of specialinterest

crusaders — trumps the definition of traditional

political wisdom: finding a young hip graduate from the

right school with the right résumé to hire the right people

to run the right sort of campaign.

Trump instinctively sensed that to win, Republicans

would have to recapture the Rust Belt states, and to do

that, he would have to campaign on illegal immigration,

jobs, trade, and the economy. He sensed that populism

was a state of mind and speech, not necessarily net worth.

What good did it do for pundits to insist that a billionaire

could not appeal to the horny-handed when the billionaire

in fact talked and connected with the horny-handed? What

good did it do to deplore the loud vulgarity of Trump if

one’s own polish and sobriety could not hide the vulgarity

of the carnival grifter, glib plagiarist, and loquacious

fabulist? Is the local town paper in Wisconsin more or

less fair in its coverage than the New York Times? Did

the fact that well-spoken Fareed Zeke R snickered at the

crudity of Trump suggest that he was not himself a

Harvard-trained plagiarist?

For now, Donald Trump has proved

that the animal cunning necessary to

survive in the jungle of Manhattan real

estate trumps the definition of

traditional political wisdom.

If “Make America Great Again” is not to end up like the

banal “Hope and Change,” if the Republican Congress of

2017 is not to wither away like the Democratic Congress

of 2009, and if the glitzy promises of 2016 are not to

prove as empty as the deceptions of Obamacare, the Iran

Deal, the stimulus, and “balancing the budget,” then

Trump will have to reflect on the nature of true wisdom:

Trust instinct as much as conventional wisdom, never

forget those who you serve, remember that cheap praise is

fickle and transient and those who traffic in it disappear

in extremis, quietly do what is promised to those who

were promised it, ignore the venom of critics, and do not

gloat over successes — and move silently, quickly, and,

above all, modestly.

Do all that, and Trump would prove wiser than the more

erudite who hate him.

*Gruber was a disavowed “architect” of the

Affordable Care Act …

You Tube Rep. Trey Gowdy questions Jonathan Gruber (C-SPAN)

to witness his comeuppance

R--

Gbiota One 1 year ago

Once you know Hanson is a farmer, that is,

a person whose ideas have to produce

results (in a domain of astonishing

complexity)…the rest is pretty much a

forgone conclusion.

55

REPLY

joseph olugbami 11 months ago

I’m listening from Nigeria, Africa. I like VDH.

Cool and deep. The left is waking up the

center right out of their slumber.

241

REPLY

SIXTEEN

Is that bad?

“The world was simply and sheerly divided into 'the

aware', those who had the experience of being

vessels of the divine, and a great mass of 'the

'unaware', 'the unmusical', 'the unattuned'...the aware

were never snobbish toward the unaware, but in fact

most of that great jellyfish blob of straight souls

looked like hopeless cases”

― Tom Wolfe, “The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test”

“The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and

their only reporting experience consists of being

around political campaigns. That’s a sea change.

They literally know nothing.”

- Ben Rhodes,

- Deputy National Security Advisor to Barack Obama

Roger Gorden@dachs_dude

Replying to @greg_price11 and @dbongino

As Scott Adams said: "It used to be that you'd read the news and

then you'd decide what to think about it. Now, you read the news

and you have to decide if it actually happened."

From the weeds to the jungle…

Detour to:

if you wish to skip what may be an uncomfortable

expedition for some.

Open minded, discerning, Adventurers:

Note the date on the article. All of this is occurring long

before Donald Trump has been elected President.

Remember – this is a Washington Post piece. The

comment section is particularly illustrative.

Of what – one cannot be entirely sure, but the contents

of the following pages are a virtual…make that a

classic study –

- if you will…

whataboutism, turnaboutism, idealism, pacifism,

pragmatism, interventionism, heroism, militarism,

revisionism, narcissism, cynicism, alcoholism,

plagiarism………….. and yes, even journalism...

all along for the ride

Obama official says he pushed a ‘narrative’ to

media to sell the Iran nuclear deal

Ben Rhodes speaks to the media during a daily White

House briefing in February. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)

By Paul Farhi

May 6, 2016

One of President Obama’s top national security advisers

led journalists to believe a misleading timeline of U.S.

negotiations with Iran over a nuclear agreement and relied

on inexperienced reporters to create an “echo chamber”

that helped sway public opinion to seal the deal, according

to a lengthy magazine profile.

Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser for

strategic communications, told the New York Times

magazine that he helped promote a “narrative” that the

administration started negotiations with Iran after the

supposedly moderate Hassan Rouhani was elected

president in 2013. In fact, the administration’s

negotiations actually began earlier, with the country’s

powerful Islamic faction, and the framework for an

agreement was hammered out before Rouhani’s election.

The distinction is important because of the perception that

Rouhani was more favorably disposed toward American

interests and more trustworthy than the hardline faction

that holds ultimate power in Iran.

On Friday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest

disputed the notion that there was anything misleading

about the administration’s advocacy of the agreement.

“I haven’t seen anybody produce any evidence that that’s

the case,” he said at his daily briefing. “I recognize there

might be some people who are disappointed that they did

not succeed in killing the Iran deal. Maybe these

unfounded claims are the result of sour grapes. The truth

is, the administration, under the direction of the president,

engaged in an aggressive campaign to make a strong case

to the American people that the international agreement to

prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon enhanced

the national security of the United States.” House responds

to criticism of Iran deal's omotion

Rhodes, 38, said in the article that it was easy to shape a

favorable impression of the proposed agreement because

of the inexperience of many of those covering the issue.

“All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus,” he

said. “Now they don’t. They call us to explain to them

what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the

outlets are reporting on world events from Washington.

The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their

only reporting experience consists of being around

political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally

know nothing.”

Rhodes set up a team of staffers who were focused on

promoting the deal, which apparently included the feeding

of talking points at useful times in the news cycle to

foreign policy experts who were favorably disposed toward

it. “We created an echo chamber,” he told the magazine.

“They [the seemingly independent experts] were saying

things that validated what we had given them to say.”

The manager of the White House’s Twitter feed on Iran,

Tanya Somanader, said one reporter, Laura Rozen of

the Al-Monitor news site, became “my RSS feed. She

would just find everything and retweet it.”

*RSS is a web feed that allows users and applications to access

updates to websites in a standardized, computer-readable format.

Rozen, in an email, said she does not know Somanader

and that David Samuels, the author of the magazine piece,

did not ask her about the staffer’s claim before publishing

his story. “As I read it, [Somanader] says my Twitter feed

was a source of info for her . . . Samuels seems to

mischaracterize that to say the opposite.”

She said she has had a long interest in U.S. policy on Iran

and covered “over 20 rounds of the Iran nuclear deal

negotiations” over four years. “I do retweet lots of info,

from lots of sources” — including, she noted, the Russian

Ministry of Defense, “which I hardly expect most to take at

face value or as an endorsement.” She maintained that her

coverage of the Iran nuclear diplomacy “was certainly not

done as a favor to or in support of any administration.”

Rhodes’s assistant, Ned Price, told the newspaper that the

administration would feed “color” — background details —

to their “compadres” in the press corps, “and the next

thing I know, lots of these guys are in the dot-com

publishing space, and have huge Twitter followings, and

they’ll be putting this message out on their own.”

In the article, Rhodes speaks contemptuously of the

Washington policy and media establishment, including

The Washington Post and the New York Times, referring

to them as “the blob” that was subject to conventional

thinking about foreign policy.

“We had test drives to know who was going to be able to

carry our message effectively, and how to use outside

groups like [the anti-nuclear group] Ploughshares, the

Iran Project and whomever else. So we knew the tactics

that worked,” Rhodes says. Speaking of Republicans and

other opponents, including Israeli Prime Minister

Benjamin Netanyahu, Rhodes adds that he knew “we

drove them crazy.”

In the piece, he also casts doubt on the moderate nature of

Iran’s regime: “I would prefer that it turns out that

Rouhani and [Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad]

Zarif are real reformers who are going to be steering this

country into the direction that I believe it can go in,

because their public is educated and, in some respects,

pro-American. But we are not betting on that.”

Rhodes’s boss, President Obama, has been a strong and

consistent advocate for the agreement with Iran, which

requires the country to curtail its nuclear program —

notably its ability to produce fissile material that could be

used in nuclear bombs — in exchange for the lifting of

economic sanctions. He reinforced the misleading

administration timeline in announcing the agreement last

July. “Today, after two years of negotiations, the United

States, together with our international partners, has

achieved something that decades of animosity has not,” he

said then.

Rhodes’s freewheeling and cynical comments reminded

several White House and national security reporters of an

infamous 2010 story in Rolling Stone magazine in which

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. forces in

Afghanistan, and aides mocked civilian government

officials, including Vice President Biden. McChrystal

apologized for the comments but later tendered his

resignation, which Obama accepted.

The Times article notes that Rhodes is a published shortstory

writer and aspiring novelist who is a skilled

“storyteller.”

“He is adept at constructing overarching plotlines with

heroes and villains, their conflicts supported by flurries of

carefully chosen adjectives, quotations and leaks from

named and unnamed senior officials,” Samuels wrote. “He

is the master shaper and retailer of Obama’s foreign-policy

narratives.”

575

Comments

Bill

5/17/2016 10:21 AM EDT

For whatever reason there's way too many folks, mostly reich wing

morons, who still believe it was a deal between just the United States

and Iran. The deal folks, or The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

(JCPOA) known commonly as the Iran deal, is an international

agreement on the nuclear program of Iran reached in Vienna in July,

2015 between Iran, the five permanent members of the United Nations

Security Council China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States

plus Germany, and the European Union.

It's no secret the reich wing has been against it from BEFORE the

negotiations even started so their latest attack is not surprising. Since

their latest "Congressional Oversight" committee investigation a la Trey

Gowdy is finally winding down after spending more than $20 million

with, again after SEVEN previous tries at the brass ring, zero results it's

simply another tail for them to chase. Watch as they fight for the lead

position - it's guaranteed to be amusing.

KH

5/10/2016 5:09 PM EDT [Edited]

Samuel's did a great job here--not so much in revealing the truth about

the Iran deal: everyone knew that--but in showing what clueless, gullible

and in-the-bag toadies the DC press are. They LOVE Obama and think

he is the greatest....and he returns that love with disgust and derision.

I got to side with Obama on this one.

LikeShare

2

sen drb

5/10/2016 1:35 PM EDT

The Obama narrative was that we could give away the nuclear store to

the Iranians because the moderates in Iran would later come around and

play nice. Iran could join the nuclear club, because moderates would

later run the country. Obama supporters used that line frequently to

justify Obama's bad deal, as did the administration. Turns out Obama

was lying all along, about the moderates, to facilitate nuclear weapons

for the world's greatest supporter of terror, run by hardliners. What is

wrong with this president? He favors Iran's radical Islamic terror regime

over U.S. interests, and has basically schemed so that Iran can be a

nuclear power. Is Obama evil, stupid, or just wildly anti-American and

anti-Israel? Is he drunk on his anti-neo colonialist ideology, or just a

fool? These are the only questions left to ask regarding this man.

K Rttr

5/9/2016 11:50 AM EDT

So now we have admission of the manipulation of useful idiots to further

a horrendous plan. Yet Obama feels the need to scold the press for not

reporting Trump "correctly" in his estimation. Please Mr. President. Tell

us all how you would like the media to characterize Mr. Trump? As a

dangerous narcissist who will stop at nothing to push his agenda? They

never said that about you, why would they say it about Trump?

wonderYrednow

5/9/2016 7:14 PM EDT

This compared to the previous FAILED Administration using the pliant

Press Corps to lie the Nation into TWO UNFUNDED Wars in Error in

the Muddled Waste....

K Rttr

5/10/2016 7:43 AM EDT

Yes, and how does that relate to this story? We hate Bush, We hate

Obama. Obama and Bush both hate Trump. WINNER!!!

Bill

5/17/2016 10:24 AM EDT

LOL, because K, it was not and is not true about Obama. We've not had

any more 9-11 style attacks but under Trumpy we'd more likely be

staring into the face of widespread nuclear proliferation with the spectre

of nuclear holocaust in our futures.

Zbgln

5/8/2016 10:43 PM EDT

The GOP threw down on Obama. Look at them now. The GOP's

strategy of obstructionism backfired. Idiots. Obama's legacy will include

imploding the GOP as a major contribution to National security.

K Rttr

5/9/2016 11:44 AM EDT

Obstruction? Ha! These repubs were nothing more than skid greasers.

What world are you living in?

Bill

5/17/2016 10:26 AM EDT

Unlike you K, we're living in the REAL world rather than the reich wing

world of fantasy and obsessive obstructionism.

Joe

5/8/2016 7:12 PM EDT

Ben Rhodes existence is unassailable proof that liberals are consummate

morons.

mike

5/8/2016 2:17 PM EDT

So what’s new here? Creating and exploiting compliant media echo

chambers has been a staple of politics, government and business for

ever. Bush did it for the Iraq war... Nixon and McCarthy did it...

Wikileaks and Snowden managed to do it and Trump and Fox news are

doing it. AIPAC and Bibi and Rubin do it continuously.

What the significance of Rhodes boasting is or what he hopes to achieve

by it I don't know, but it isn't going to alter the real significance of the

Iran nuclear accomplishment.

LikeShare

2

bloggod

5/8/2016 2:13 PM EDT

“We had test-drives to know who was going to be able to carry our

message effectively, and how to use outside groups "

"seeking team players" is the euphemism normally employed....

bloggod

5/8/2016 2:03 PM EDT

"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting

experience consists of being around political campaigns.

That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”

ThraceThrice

5/8/2016 12:43 PM EDT

Of course the White House lied. Their lips were moving. They lied to a

willing media that repeated it because they wanted to believe, they had

to believe, that they had not sold their souls to a corrupt, unwise, legacyobsessed

president (they still don't want to believe it, by the way.) The

White House is always about spin, always about the latest polls, always

about "the message" on Sunday chat shows, always about appearance

being more important than reality (which is why we don't hear more

about the hundreds of thousands of dead, whose blood is on our hands,

for instance.)

wonderYrednow

5/9/2016 7:18 PM EDT

Obama Derangement Syndrome is a treatable disease.

SnnHckr

5/8/2016 2:22 AM EDT

typical repub drivel. take something completely innocent and turn it into

something evil

cloudshe

5/8/2016 7:13 AM EDT

why do you assume that there's something completely innocent about the

way Rhodes has been manipulating the press? oh I get it, another rightwing

conspiracy, Obama is the best president of our time and Hillary is a

lovely person who would never lie under oath. pls get a brain

mike

5/8/2016 2:33 PM EDT

The press can be too easily manipulated a lot of the time. That, however,

does not equate with being lied to. But if you insist it does, then you

should look into things like the Pentagon Papers, The Iraq War, the

McCarthy Hearings, and the Snowden leaks. And you are right, Obama

has been a good president in very trying times and Clinton has shown

some admirable, “lovely" qualities in difficult circumstances when

attacked by some very unlovely people in a nasty and dishonest manner.

Like

wonderYrednow

5/9/2016 7:19 PM EDT

Umm...perhaps because it has been a method of choice for 228, err....240

years.

Like

FordPrefect17

5/7/2016 10:23 PM EDT

Rhodes might want to wait for some signs of success before he tells

everyone how smart he is. I get why President Obama pushed the deal -

it's all consistent with his world view - however, I'm still curious what

they intend to say when Iran disappoints them, which they obviously

will. At that point, will we learn that President Obama actually wants

Iran to have a nuclear weapon in order to keep the U.S. out of the

Middle East?

MrFns

5/7/2016 6:02 PM EDT

Obama and his ministers of propaganda spin out lies to push his

progressive agenda. This progressive movement is doomed to fail

because it is built upon lies. The Iran deal cannot be good for America if

predicated on lies.

YourWorstNightmar

5/7/2016 7:00 PM EDT

They're only lies because the dimwits opposing the treaty have no clue

on why they oppose it. If Obama did it, then it must be bad. Admit you

know nothing about the treaty.

columbiack

5/7/2016 7:55 PM EDT

Your ability to twist the truth is awe inspiring. Your masters should give

you a raise. Worst nightmare. Guffaw.

YourWorstNightmar

5/7/2016 7:04 PM EDT

Someone tell me why this is any different than when George

Washington's administration was in power. Reporters can't be expected

to know the ins and outs of complex treaties such as the Iran deal. Who

would expect that?

columbiack

5/7/2016 7:51 PM EDT

Well, to begin with, in the late 1700’s we had no Press Corps as we

know it today. The press was even more dishonest and partisan than they

are now. Second, Washington was highly against factionalism and all

that it involves, which includes this sort of shenanigans.

Third, Washington's sense of honor was light years ahead of the morally

unmoored, self-righteous lot we have today. Fourth, there was no mass

communication process as we know it now to support this sort of little

junket. I could go on, but the disingenuousness of your comment bores

me.

Spacer

5/7/2016 5:45 PM EDT

Rhodes may have been doing too much bragging about how he handled

the press, but the main thing that the WaPo and NY Times are outraged

about is that Obama "lied" us into peace. They were much more willing

to be lied into the Iraq war.

larry

5/7/2016 6:51 PM EDT

Nice spin, you epitomize the target audience for the Obama

administration...

Like

Spacer

5/7/2016 6:56 PM EDT

You epitomize Donald Trump's gullible target audience.

cloudshe

5/8/2016 7:20 AM EDT

just like Obama "lied" us into the "won't cost you a dime" Affordable

Care Act?

brupalf

5/7/2016 2:35 PM EDT

Ben Rhodes, the Jonathan Gruber of foreign policy. An administration

relying on cynical liars to accomplish "change". I'm amazed that this

president still has supporters.

INDY67

5/7/2016 2:40 PM EDT

The only thing that Obama's supporters want is "free" everything. The

truth is not important. Typical Chicago-Style politics except that Obama

should be criminally charged on the Iran deal, Obamacare and the rest.

It’s amazing that the media gives him such a free pass... oh, it’s because

they help elect the guy.

Meri

5/7/2016 1:13 PM EDT [Edited]

I'm only half way through, but that NYT piece is fascinating. However,

it's so unlike the summary presented here, I have to wonder what the

heck this writer was thinking.

Here's the section on Rhodes' disdain for the NYT and the Wash Post:

One result of this experience was that when Rhodes joined the Obama

campaign in 2007, he arguably knew more about the Iraq war than the

candidate himself, or any of his advisers. He had also developed a

healthy contempt for the American foreign-policy establishment,

including editors and reporters at The New York Times, The Washington

Post, The New Yorker and elsewhere, who at first applauded the Iraq

war and then sought to pin all the blame on Bush and his merry band of

neocons when it quickly turned sour.

Meri

5/7/2016 1:18 PM EDT [Edited]

The central theme of the piece is that Rhodes is brilliant at conveying

other people's true thoughts more clearly than they could themselves. He

started out as an aspiring fiction writer, but changed course when he saw

one of the World Trade Towers come down on 9/11. He is presented as

having virtually no personal ego.

Apparently, he spends many hours each day talking with Obama and is

thus able to convey exactly what the President thinks on foreign policy.

The notion of him having a "mind-meld" with Obama is used regularly

by other WH staff.

Meri

5/7/2016 1:25 PM EDT [Edited]

Well, wpid, I hate to disappoint, Here is the full paragraph that led to the

article above:

The job he was hired to do, namely to help the president of the United

States communicate with the public, was changing in equally significant

ways, thanks to the impact of digital technologies that people in

Washington were just beginning to wrap their minds around. It is hard

for many to absorb the true magnitude of the change in the news

business — 40 percent of newspaper-industry professionals have lost

their jobs over the past decade — in part because readers can absorb all

the news they want from social-media platforms like Facebook, which

are valued in the tens and hundreds of billions of dollars and pay nothing

for the “content” they provide to their readers. You have to have skin in

the game — to be in the news business, or depend in a life-or-death way

on its products — to understand the radical and qualitative ways in

which words that appear in familiar typefaces have changed. Rhodes

singled out a key example to me one day, laced with the brutal contempt

that is a hallmark of his private utterances. “All these newspapers used

to have foreign bureaus,” he said. “Now they don’t. They call us to

explain to them what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the

outlets are reporting on world events from Washington.

The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting

experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea

change. They literally know nothing.”

Meri

5/7/2016 1:55 PM EDT

It's a great feature article, don't you think? Full of lines like the one you

chose -- some of which give you faith in Obama's WH and others that

suggest these guys delude themselves by thinking they are any different

from any other WH or the foreign policy establishment.

Spacer

5/7/2016 4:48 PM EDT

Sounds like the WaPo just published two articles on this non-story

because the WaPo neocons are resentful about the successful conclusion

of the Iran negotiations. They were SO hoping for a brand new war.

Like

INDY67

5/7/2016 4:55 PM EDT

You need a reality check. The Iran deal is bogus and most know it’s bad

except you and Obamanites.

Spacer

5/7/2016 5:10 PM EDT

You're engaging in revisionist history. The WaPo editorial after the Iran

deal was concluded did a lot of hand-wringing about how risky the deal

was. Their support for the deal was nothing like their eager endorsement

for the Iraq war, which they WERE misled into supporting.

Crickey

5/7/2016 12:56 PM EDT

So, should Roosevelt have done nothing deceitful even if the cost was

Germany defeating Britain?

haunches

5/7/2016 1:05 PM EDT

Deceiving enemies, as in Roosevelt's case and especially with the threat

of Nazism looming, is one thing. Deceiving the American public to

support bad policy is quite something else.

If you really believe false narratives and deception are okay as long as it

helps the politicians you like, you are part of the problem.

Crickey

5/7/2016 12:29 PM EDT

Lincoln's dealings with the Confederate "peace delegation" were a

masterpiece of deception. Every administration in history practices it at

some time or another. Looking at this one, the degree of deception was

objectively puny and the benefits to the US and the world, enormous.

Get over your fake indignation.

ZenMan1

5/7/2016 12:26 PM EDT

All administrations manipulate the press to their own advantage -- look

at Cheney outing Valerie Plame, and the "weapons of mass destruction"

story line in the run up to the Iraq war. Reporters must rely on "sources"

and the sources always have an agenda.

The fact that many reporters are so young and inexperienced accounts

for some of the ridiculous reporting of the 2016 election. It's also a

problem that most "journalists" are what IQ testers used to call "bright

normals." (Google IQs of Professionals) The "bright normal" person is

curious about the world and is a collector or "facts" and tidbits of

"information." However, like "normals" (who are not particularly

curious), they tend to rely on the opinions of their peers for what they

believe -- Truth is the consensus opinion of their friends.

Journalists are the "Huffington Post" of the intelligentsia for the most

part. They aren't smart enough (and are too busy) to really understand

the world they are reporting on, so they rely on reporting "both sides"

even handedly without having the smarts or perseverance to cut through

to what's really going on. So, Trump and Sanders are both "populists,"

and Hillary is a "liar" because a generation of Republican spin doctors

has been smearing her and there must be some truth to what they're

saying, right? "Bright normals" are often cynical but seldom insightful.

ITBFAN

5/7/2016 12:10 PM EDT

Rhodes and Gruber expose, glaringly by their own words, the contempt

of this administration for the truth and the American people. Should I

mention Susan Rice and the infamous video? The media fawn over this

idiot and, in turn, Obama makes them appears as fools...which they are.

wemillerii

5/7/2016 12:08 PM EDT

The irrepressible disingenuous and arrogance of Obama, Rhodes, and

Earnest is apparent to almost everyone except the lapdog press who

cover politics.

beansforbob

5/7/2016 10:57 AM EDT

The interesting thing about Rhodes's approach is the use of the

technology, that employed by comparative neophytes in the news

business, to accomplish injecting the WH's narrative into the

mainstream. Contrast this with the Cheney-Libby approach targeting

well-known and highly respected media figures (Russert, Mitchell,

Miller) into the narrative, a much more personal contact and subterfuge.

Crickey

5/7/2016 10:49 AM EDT

This is a petty personal feud between a jerkish staffer and some jerkish

reporters using their platform at the Post for some payback.

Embarrassing to watch. Grow up, dudes.

diogenes_jr

5/7/2016 10:49 AM EDT

Stenographers do not need the 1st Amendment

Steve401

5/7/2016 10:47 AM EDT

So what Rhodes is essentially admitting, with a sense of glowing pride

no less, is to facilitate the goal of deceiving the American public. The

Obama administration relied heavily on the ignorance of young,

inexperienced journalists. The Gruber model is obviously a valuable tool

for Obama. This lends credence to Rush Limbaugh's oft repeated

assertion "The State-run media." There is a price to pay for this

incompetence, evidenced by dwindling reliance in traditional media for

the truth. People are literally refusing to buy blatantly biased

propaganda. So how will these reporters and the American media as an

institution react to the realization that a glib party apparatchik played

them for a bunch of fools?

Go back and read all of Meri’s posts… This is the danger with “pull

quotes.” There is a cautionary remark about pull quotes and ellipses in the

recesses of my brain somewhere that I could not yank out…The closest

approximation I could find was a random online observation stating that

“ellipses are the sluts of punctuation” (posted by a girl, BTW ). Analyze that

for a bit. I labored over pull quotes – grappled with context, potential

altered meanings - throughout this entire compilation. When I did slice text,

it wasn’t thoughtlessly or inadvertently.

In the big picture, I’m after, well … a big picture. An evocative wide-angle

aerial shot by an alien photographer with an antenna… “How do you folks

disseminate ideas and information; is it fair, is it accurate, is it stacked; how

do the recipients perceive the messages, what’s the damage, where are you

going from here, is humility involved at all? …self-awareness?... and does

any of it actually matter anymore…” It’s a different game here.

So this section isn’t about cheering that “your side” was right, victorious,

vindicated, etc, etc. Go back and look at the layers here. Starting with my

pull quote.

R-

Diplomacy is the art of telling people to go

to hell in such a way that they ask for

directions

- Winston Churchill

“… I have long held that we need to redefine “smart” in

this country. Because there are a lot of stupid people who

do a lot of dangerous and dumb things. And they are considered

the smartest people in the world. Example number one is Hillary

Clinton. Example number two is Barack Hussein Obama.

Let me give you a side-by-side, A-B comparison to give you an

idea what I mean. One president breaks laws to get billions of

dollars flown illegally, pallets of cash into the hands of the people

who run the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, Iran,

and they export it. And this president does everything he can to

get them hundreds of millions of dollars in cash. This same

country to whom we gave this cash is committed to creating a

nuclear arsenal delivered by ICBMs, all of which are known to be

under development because this president enabled them to move

forward on their research.

The other president is working to stop all of this. The other

president is working to unwind this insane deal and do what he

can to prevent this state sponsor of terrorism from getting nuclear

weapons. Now, who’s the smart one and who’s the dumb one? Is

what Barack Hussein Obama did smart? No! It’s stupid! It’s

dangerous, and it’s idiotic. And the people around Obama should

have been petrified when he was doing this. The only problem is

they all think alike. They all act alike, and they all believe alike.

They’re so stupid and shortsighted they think the United States of

America is the problem. It’s unfair that the United States has such

an advantage. It’s only fair that the Iranians get nuclear weapons.

Nobody told us we couldn’t have them. Who are we to say they

can’t? That’s stupid! But the guy trying to prevent that from

happening is now said to be insane and unfit for office.

One president went out there and literally seized

one-sixth of the U.S. economy and lied to the

American people in doing it. He promised the

American people that if we would just entrust our

health care to him, somebody who doesn’t know

anything about it beyond being a theoretician in

the academic lounge. Somebody who’s never run a

hospital, who’s never talked to anybody who’s run a

hospital, who’s never had the slightest interest in

running a hospital took over one-sixth of the U.S.

economy along with the rest of his party, lied to the

American people to do it, claiming that if you like

your doctor, you can keep your doctor, and if you

like your insurance plan, you can keep that.

None of that was true. The American people were lied to 21 times

on this alone. One-sixth of the American economy seized by the

federal government, and the whole thing, Obamacare, led to an

implosion of the American health care system, which was by

design. Because this president wanted it to implode so the

government could take over all of it. The other president is doing

everything he can to unwind that and deregulate as much of the

Obama health care takeover as he can.

Who’s the smart one, who’s the dumb one? Who’s the dangerous

one, who’s the sane one? Who’s the man with whom we are in

better hands here? One president slow-walks and handcuffs the

military with stupid, dangerous rules of engagement preventing

our military from defending themselves or acting aggressively and

firing on bad guys. This allows ISIS to grow and expand while we

sit around and do nothing about it and basically say, “Well, who

are we to say they shouldn’t expand? Who are we to say?

Nobody told us we shouldn’t.”

ISIS, a brutally inhumane, militaristic gang which one president

said, “We’re doing everything we can. There’s not much we can

do. Get used to it. They’re here.” Destabilizing the Middle East,

destabilizing a victory in Iraq, leading to terror attacks around the

world.

The other president has systematically wiped out this

organization in under a year. Who is the smart one and who’s the

stupid one? Who’s the dangerous one and with whom are we in

safer hands?

One president spies on his political opponents. One president

knowingly takes opposition research from the presidential

candidate of his party, knowingly allows it to be used as legitimate

intelligence, when it’s lies and made-up BS, allows his Justice

Department to get a FISA warrant to surveil and spy on the

presidential candidate of the opposite party. The other president,

in the midst of an entire effort by all of

Washington to destroy him with this phony

dossier, exposes this.

Who is it that’s unraveling? Was it the Obama team? Was it the

Hillary team? Was it the Democrat Party? Is it the Washington

establishment unraveling, or is it Donald Trump perhaps getting

rid of the filth and the dirt and giving this country a working

chance again?

One president micromanages the economy into the ground and

tells the American people that our better days are behind us. He

says the great days of America’s past were not really legitimate.

They were built on phony policies, trickle-down economics from

the Reagans. We stole resources from other nations around the

world.

Our superpower status was not deserved. We now must manage

the decline. And I, Barack Hussein Obama, am the smartest guy

in the world to manage the decline of the United States and its

economy.

His replacement liberates the economy, unleashes the United

States economy to the point in under a year it is growing at twice

the rate it ever grew under Barack Obama. And yet we’re told

Obama’s brilliant, he’s so smart, we can’t even stay in the same

room with him. He’s so brilliant, we can’t keep up with the guy.

He’s so brilliant, all we can do is bow at his feet and try not to be

blinded by the light reflecting off him. Donald Trump is silly. He’s

insane. He’s obsessed. His unfit. We need psychiatrists

examining him. We need the

25th Amendment.

Who’s the nutcase, who’s the dangerous one, and who is, in

under a year, unraveling all of the mistakes borne of the either

poor ideology or just blatant stupidity of the previous

administration? We need to redefine smart, ’cause I’m gonna tell

you, it isn’t Barack Obama, and it certainly isn’t Hillary Clinton,

and it isn’t Bill Clinton. But the Washington establishment thinks it

is. The Washington establishment thinks intelligence is defined by

where you come from, what university, what professors you knew,

what degrees you have in common.

They’re incapable of understanding anybody not of

their world. Their arrogance and condescension

means that they make no effort to understand. They

simply rely on the fact that they are better than

everyone else and whoever doesn’t meet up is not

just wrong, but is sick. We have never had a more

spoiled bunch of arrogant snobs claiming to know

everything in such a fit of panic.

Many of the so-called conservative egghead

intellectuals are witnessing things that all they’ve

ever done is talk about. They get together in the

editor’s room, they get together in the faculty lounge,

they get together at the club, they get together on

Twitter — wherever they go — and they theorize

back and forth, and they rip to shreds anybody that

doesn’t get them. But that’s all they do is theorize.

They ask people to donate money so they can continue to

theorize. When it comes to implementing anything, don’t look to

them. They don’t think it’s possible. All good things remain

theoretical, “Because liberalism dominates, and there’s no way

we’re ever gonna beat it back. We just have to find our way in it

and try to live the best we can.” Somebody comes along and

doesn’t like the status quo and starts working overtime to banish,

to repair, to fix — and abject panic sets in!

And then when this new arrival actually begins to succeed, why, real

panic sets in! “This cannot be allowed. We cannot permit what we

theorized to actually happen when we aren’t responsible for it. This

guy’s gotta be stopped. This guy’s… He’s not fit to be implementing

our ideas. This guy’s insane. This guy’s stupid. This guy’s a

moron. This guy’s a child.” This guy is the only guy that’s gotten

anything done in I don’t know how many years you want to count. So

who’s smart, who is that moronic; who’s dangerous, who poses

threats; who’s worth it, and who’s worthless?”

January 2018, commentary in the wake of “Fire & Fury”,

another in an endless string of transparent & ultimately discredited hitjobs…

even MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski, of all people, scoffed at the

veracity of some of the wild allegations, liberally dished across 336 tedious

pages. Over-the-top sensationalism & outright fabrication (from an expert

at both) soon cast doubt on the integrity of this supposed “inside story”,

though not before it was lapped up by the media and “Orange Man Bad”

zealots far and wide. Some speculate that Trump’s ensuing immigration

round-table with key Congressional leaders & policy advocates – in full view

of traditionally excluded press & camera crews - was a counter-punch, as the

calm, confident, reasonable, empathetic conductor of the proceedings was

broadcast farther & wider by a mostly intrigued / astonished MSM

_________________________________________________________ R-

…told anonymous sources that they contained stunning revelations about the Trump

administration which could mark a crucial juncture of a defining event when those

stunning revelations come to light and are revealed to be truly stunning. The New

York Times, a former newspaper, declared “Bombshell’s” stunning revelations to be

a stunning bombshell and denounced Trump in what was either a front page news

story or an editorial on the Op-Ed page depending on which way you're holding the

paper.

The paper declared that this could definitely be the beginning of the end of the

beginning of the end of the beginning.

President Trump could not be reached for comment because he was busy bringing

peace to the Middle East.

“I'm going to be talking about The Middle East Peace Deal

today, which is important not just because of what it might

accomplish over the long run, but because it upends the

conventional wisdom about the region, and reverses the

ideas put forward by Barack Obama, whom as you know, the media

adored. Any honest observer would look at that and learn something.

They'd learn a lot about conventional wisdom, about Barack Obama,

about the media, and about Donald Trump.

A lot of my listeners get annoyed with me when I talk about things I

don't like about Donald Trump -- like his rudeness and his

bludgeoning unkindness in a fight. But I've always said that these are

tragic aspects of his personality, because on the one hand they make it

harder for him to get reelected, but on the other hand, they are

necessary for him to get things done in a Washington, DC that has

gone completely off the founding rails.

In an empire of lies, only a crazy man will tell the truth.

Trump is that man…”

- Andrew Klavan,

September 16, 2020

People criticize what they fail

to understand.

- Jimmy Page

Where do I go to get my reputation back

Like many others, I initially did not take

Donald Trump's candidacy seriously. I

dismissed him as a "carnival barker" in my

Salon column and assumed his entire political operation

was a publicity stunt that he would soon tire of. However,

Trump steadily gained momentum because of the startling

incompetence and mediocrity of his GOP opponents.

What seems forgotten is that everyone, including the

Hillary Clinton campaign, thought that Marco Rubio

would be the Republican nominee. The moment was ideal

for a Latino candidate with national appeal who could

challenge the Democratic hold on Florida.

Thus Rubio's primary-run flame-out was a spectacular

embarrassment. Under TV's unsparing camera eye, he

looked like a shallow, dithery adolescent, utterly

unprepared to be commander-in-chief in an era of

terrorism. Trump's frankly arrogant self-confidence

spooked and crushed Rubio—it was a total fiasco. Ben

Carson, meanwhile, with his professorial deep-think and

spiritualistic eye-closing, often seemed to be beaming

himself to another galaxy. With every debate, Ted Cruz,

despite his avid national following, accumulated more and

more detractors, repelled by his brittle self-dramatizations

and lugubrious megalomania.

There were two genial, moderate Mid-Western governors

who could have wrested the nomination from Trump and

performed strongly versus Hillary in the general—Ohio's

John Kasich and Wisconsin's Scott Walker. But they blew

it because of their personal limitations: On television,

Kasich came across as a clumsy, lumbering blowhard

while Walker shrank into a nervous, timid mouse with a

frozen Pee-wee Herman smile.

The point here is that Donald Trump won the nomination

fair and square against a host of serious, experienced

opponents who simply failed to connect with a majority

of GOP primary voters. However, there were too many

unknowns about Trump, who had never held elective

office and whose randy history in the shadowy

demimonde of casinos and beauty pageants laid him open

to a cascade of feverish accusations and innuendos from

the ever-churning gnomes of the cash-propelled Clinton

propaganda machine. In actuality, the sexism allegations

about Trump were relatively few and minor, compared to

the long list of lurid claims about the predatory Bill

Clinton.

My position continues to be that Hillary, with her

supercilious, Marie Antoinette-style entitlement, was a

disastrously wrong candidate for 2016 and that she

secured the nomination only through overt chicanery by

the Democratic National Committee, assisted by a corrupt

national media who, for over a year, imposed a virtual

blackout on potential primary rivals. Bernie Sanders had

the populist passion, economic message, government

record, and personal warmth to counter Trump. It was

Sanders, for example, who addressed the crisis of

crippling student debt, an issue that other candidates

(including Hillary) then took up. Despite his history of

embarrassing gaffes, the affable, plain-spoken Joe Biden,

in my view, could also have defeated Trump, but he was

blocked from running at literally the last moment by

President Barack Obama, for reasons that the major media

refused to explore.

After Trump's victory (for which there were abundant

signs in the preceding months), both the Democratic party

and the big-city media urgently needed to do a scathingly

honest self-analysis, because the election results plainly

demonstrated that Trump was speaking to vital concerns

(jobs, immigration, and terrorism among them) for which

the Democrats had few concrete solutions.

Indeed, throughout the campaign, too many leading

Democratic politicians were preoccupied with domestic

issues and acted strangely uninterested in international

affairs. Among the electorate, the most fervid Hillary

acolytes (especially young and middle-aged women and

assorted show biz celebs) seemed obtusely indifferent to

her tepid performance as Secretary of State, during which

she doggedly piled up air miles while accomplishing

virtually nothing except the destabilization of North

Africa.

Had Hillary won, everyone would have expected

disappointed Trump voters to show a modicum of respect

for the electoral results as well as for the historic

ceremony of the inauguration, during which former

combatants momentarily unite to pay homage to the

peaceful transition of power in our democracy. But that

was not the reaction of a vast cadre of Democrats

shocked by Trump's win. In an abject failure of leadership

that may be one of the most disgraceful episodes in the

history of the modern Democratic party, Chuck Schumer,

who had risen to become the Senate Democratic leader

after the retirement of Harry Reid, asserted absolutely no

moral authority as the party spun out of control in a

nationwide orgy of rage and spite.

Nor were there statesmanlike words of caution and

restraint from two seasoned politicians whom I have

admired for decades and believe should have run for

president long ago—Senator Dianne Feinstein and

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. How do Democrats

imagine they can ever expand their electoral support if

they go on and on in this self-destructive way, impugning

half the nation as vile racists and homophobes?

All of which brings us to the issue of Trump's

performance to date. The initial conundrum was: could he

shift from being the slashing, caustic ex-reality show star

of the campaign to a more measured, presidential

persona? Perhaps to the dismay of his diehard critics,

Trump did indeed make that transition at the Capitol on

inauguration morning, when he appeared grave and

focused, palpably conveying a sense of the awesome

burdens of the highest office. As for his particular actions

as president, I am no fan of executive orders, which usurp

congressional prerogatives and which I was already

denouncing when Obama was constantly signing them

(with very little protest, one might add, from the

mainstream media).

Trump's "travel ban" executive order in late January was

obviously bungled—issued way too fast and with

woefully insufficient research (pertaining, for example, to

green-card holders, who should have been exempted from

the start). The administration bears full responsibility for

fanning the flames of an already aroused "Resistance."

However, I fail to see the "chaos" in the White House that

the mainstream media (as well as conservative Never

Trumpers) keep harping on—or rather, I see no more

chaos than was abundantly present during the first six

months of both the Clinton and Obama administrations.

Trump seems to be methodically trying to fulfill his

campaign promises, notably regarding the economy and

deregulation—the approaches to which will always be

contested in our two-party system. His progress has thus

far been in stops and starts, partly because of the

passivity, and sometimes petulance, of the mundane GOP

leadership.

There seems to be a huge conceptual gap between

Trump and his most implacable critics on the left.

Many highly educated, upper-middle-class Democrats

regard themselves as exemplars of "compassion"

(which they have elevated into a supreme political

principle) and yet they routinely assail Trump voters

as ignorant, callous hate-mongers. These elite

Democrats occupy an amorphous meta-realm of

subjective emotion, theoretical abstractions, and

refined language. But Trump is by trade a builder who

deals in the tangible, obdurate, objective world of

physical materials, geometry, and construction

projects, where communication often reverts to the

brusque, coarse, high-impact level of pre-modern

working-class life, whose daily locus was the barnyard.

It's no accident that bourgeois Victorians of the industrial

era tried to purge "barnyard language" out of English.

Last week, that conceptual gap was on prominent display,

as the media, consumed with their preposterous Russian

fantasies, were fixated on former FBI director James

Comey's maudlin testimony before the Senate Intelligence

Committee. (Comey is an effete charlatan who should

have been fired within 48 hours of either Hillary or

Trump taking office.) Meanwhile, Trump was going

about his business. The following morning, he made

remarks at the Department of Transportation about

"regulatory relief," excerpts of which I happened to hear

on my car radio that afternoon. His words about iron,

aluminum, and steel seemed to cut like a knife through

the airwaves.

I later found the entire text on the White

House website. Some key passages:

‘ We are here today to focus on solving one of the

biggest obstacles to creating this new and desperately

needed infrastructure, and that is the painfully slow,

costly, and time-consuming process of getting permits

and approvals to build. And I also knew that

from the private sector. It is a long, slow,

unnecessarily burdensome process. My

administration is committed to ending these

terrible delays, once and for all. The

excruciating wait time for permitting has

inflicted enormous financial pain to cities and

states all throughout our nation and has

blocked many important projects from ever

getting off the ground…’

For too long, America has poured trillions and trillions of

dollars into rebuilding foreign countries while allowing

our own country — the country that we love — and its

infrastructure to fall into a state of total disrepair.

We have structurally deficient bridges, clogged

roads, crumbling dams and locks. Our rivers

are in trouble. Our railways are aging. And

chronic traffic that slows commerce and

diminishes our citizens' quality of life.

Other than that, we're doing very well. Instead

of rebuilding our country, Washington has

spent decades building a dense thicket of rules,

regulations and red tape. It took only four

years to build the Golden Gate Bridge and five

years to build the Hoover Dam and less than

one year to build the Empire State Building.

People don't believe that. It took less than one

year. But today, it can take 10 years and far more

than that just to get the approvals and permits

needed to build a major infrastructure project.

These charts beside me are actually a simplified

version of our highway permitting process. It

includes 16 different approvals involving 10

different federal agencies being governed by 26

different statutes.

As one example — and this happened just 30 minutes

ago — I was sitting with a great group of people

responsible for their state's economic development

and roadways. All of you are in the room now.

“One gentleman from Maryland was talking

about an 18-mile road. And he brought with

him some of the approvals that they've

gotten and paid for. They spent $29 million

for an environmental report, weighing 70

pounds and costing $24,000 per page…

I was not elected to continue a

failed system. I was elected to

change it.”

“All of us in government service were elected to

solve the problems that have plagued our nation.

We are here to think big, to act boldly, and to rise

above the petty partisan squabbling of

Washington D.C. We are here to take action. It's

time to start building in our country, with

American workers and with American iron and

aluminum and steel.”

“It's time to put up soaring new infrastructure that

inspires pride in our people and our towns.

No longer can we allow these rules and regulations

to tie down our economy, chain up our prosperity,

and sap our great American spirit. That is why we

will lift these restrictions and unleash the full

potential of the United States of America. We will

get rid of the redundancy and duplication that

wastes your time and your money. Our goal is to

give you one point of contact to deliver one

decision—yes or no—for the entire federal

government, and to deliver that decision quickly,

whether it's a road, whether it's a highway, a

bridge, a dam.”

To do this, we are setting up a new council to help

project managers navigate the bureaucratic maze.

This council will also improve transparency by

creating a new online dashboard allowing everyone

to easily track major projects through every stage of

the approval process. This council will make sure

that every federal agency that is consistently

delaying projects by missing deadlines will face

tough, new penalties…

“Together, we will build projects to inspire our

youth, employ our workers, and create true

prosperity for our people. We will pour new

concrete, lay new brick, and watch new sparks

light our factories as we forge metal from the

furnaces of our Rust Belt and our beloved

heartland—which has been forgotten. It's not

forgotten anymore.

We will put new American steel into the spine

of our country. American workers will

construct gleaming new lanes of commerce

across our landscape. They will build these

monuments from coast to coast, and from city

to city. And with these new roads, bridges,

airports and seaports, we will embark on a

wonderful new journey into a bright and

glorious future.

We will build again. We will grow again. We

will thrive again. And we will make America

great again.”

Of course, this rousing speech (with its can-do World

War Two spirit) got scant coverage in the

mainstream media. Drunk with words, spin, and

snark, middle-class journalists can't be bothered to

notice the complex physical constructions that make

modern civilization possible. The laborers who build

and maintain these marvels are recognized only if

they can be shoehorned into victim status. But if they

dare to think for themselves and vote differently

from their liberal overlords, they are branded as

rubes and pariahs.

In summary: to have any hope of retaking the White

House, Democrats must get off their high horse, lose the

rabid rhetoric, and reorient themselves toward practical

reality and the free country they are damned lucky to live

in.

_______________________________________________________

113. Feb. 26, 2020

Amid the coronavirus outbreak, multiple media

outlets imply or state that President Trump slashed, cut or gutted

the budget for the Centers for Disease Control. In fact, the CDC

budget has increased each year.

SEVENTEEN

I turned it off

before it ruined

my childhood

“the public’s need for this information outweighs the ambiguity of

anonymous sourcing” ... journalistic integrity at its finest

The natural job of a child is to test the parent. This

is how a child learns right from wrong. Good

parents teach appropriate boundaries, which in

turn results in honest, well-adjusted adults.

Parents who fail at this oftentimes create neurotic

grown-ups incapable of happiness. In this respect,

governments and children are similar.

Along with access to enrichment through favors

(pay-to-play), government officials are empowered with

the authority to control others. Therefore, whether it is

a dog catcher or the American President, with their

hands on the levers of power, temptation is limitless.

And so, like children, it is only natural for politicians

and bureaucrats to test the boundaries of right and

wrong. This is where the media is supposed to act as

the parent. When a political media does its job, when

journalists hold government ethically accountable, the

result is an honest, well-adjusted government.

And while I can't speak for every locality, at the

federal level, the media is not doing its job.

Tragically, our national media now sees itself as part

of the government, and as a consequence, the media's

mission to hold institutions accountable has been

dropped entirely in favor of relentless agendapushing.

Even more insidious is the coordination.

Across a vast landscape that includes, but is not

limited to

ABCCBSNBCCNNMSNBCPBSNPRPoliticoWashington

Post LosAngelesTimes

ESPNUnivisionNewYorkTimesBostonGlobe, all the

same stories are covered in the same way (if you

disagree, watch the ABCCNNCBSNBC Sunday shows):

Central government is not suspect, it is good; Democrats

are virtuous, multiculturalism trumps e pluribus unum,

and anyone who disagrees is backwards, selfish, and

racist. The elite media has accomplished this through its

own professional blacklist.

If you are a journalist who does not subscribe to this,

you are Out, and even that is not enough. As a capital "J"

journalist or pundit (this includes most every so-called

conservative employed in the elite media), you must

prove yourself by using the approved language

("undocumented immigrant") and the approved approach

towards those who do not hold the approved opinions

(Christianity=bigotry, border security=racism, refusal to

violate your religious conscience=hate). Moreover, not

covered by this fiercely-policed clique are stories that

contradict the media's over-arching agenda. And by

"covered" I do not mean rote coverage.

One of the most dishonest tactics the media engages in

is pushing back against critics by pointing to page 11 or

a 30-second cable news segment from last Tuesday.

This, when we all know that the only thing that matters

is what the media focuses on -- The Narrative.

And here is the consequence of all this… Americans have

lost faith in something as seemingly inconsequential as a

museum, because, strictly for partisan purposes,

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was snubbed

by the Smithsonian. The taxpayer-funded museum of

our country's history has been politically weaponized.

How is this possible? Because the Smithsonian knows

the media will let them get away with it.

Imagine how much better everything would be if

taxpayer-funded institutions were held to the same

media standard as, say, Fox News or the NRA. Americans

have lost faith in, well, everything because violence

against us is now routine. How is this possible? Because

Democrats know the media will let them get away with it.

Imagine how much better everything would be if political

violence was toxified in the same way as mere words

coming from everyday Trump supporters.

We've lost faith in democracy itself because voter fraud is

now acceptable. Our own [former] president openly

encouraged it. How is this possible? Because Democrats

know the media will let them get away with it. Imagine

how much better democracy would be if every accusation

of voter fraud was treated like every accusation of

racism. The IRS persecutes us. How is this possible?

Because at first the media says it is a good thing and

then they allow Obama to say it never happened, when it

is still happening. Imagine how much better our

government would be if the media treated this behavior

as the McCarthyism we all know it is. We lost faith in the

entire federal government when we lost our insurance.

How is this possible? Because although the Affordable

Care Act clearly outlawed most existing insurance plans,

the media (especially the so-called fact-checkers) joined

in the "keep your insurance" lie to ensure their precious

Obama got a win and their precious central government

assumed more control over us rubes. And then there are

Obama's extra-legal executive actions…

Imagine if Obama was held to the same level of

accountability as George W. Bush. We've lost faith in

the rule of law because, although she set up an illegal

server in her bathroom to avoid Freedom of

Information Act requests, exposed national security

secrets to hackers and to an Internet pervert, and

repeatedly lied about it, Hillary Clinton was not

indicted. How is this possible?

Because the FBI and Department of Justice know the

national media will cover for them. Because the national

political media hates us so, American institutions -- our

own government -- are now allowed, with total impunity,

to lie to us, to cheat us, to commit violence against us, to

disenfranchise and replace us. In other words, these

institutions are now completely broken.

And if we don't sit here and take it, the political media's

cultural supremacists dehumanize us, target us, scream

"Witch!" at us -- and not only at powerful conservatives

and Republicans, but at everyday Americans just

minding their own business. It is not paranoia when

they are really out to get you.

- [Anon.] clipped from a comment section sometime in 2016

__________________________________________

31. Nov. 6, 2017:

CNN edited a video that made it appear as though Trump impatiently dumped a

box of fish food into the water while feeding fish at Japan’s palace. The New York

Daily News, the Guardian and others wrote stories implying Trump was gauche

and impetuous. The full video showed that Trump had simply followed the lead of

Japan’s Prime Minister.

THE ‘RESISTANCE' GOES LIVE-FIRE

June 14, 2017

The explosion of violence against conservatives across

the country is being intentionally ginned up by

Democrats, reporters, TV hosts, late-night comedians

and celebrities, who compete with one another to come

up with the most vile epithets for Trump and his

supporters.

They go right up to the line, trying not to cross it, by,

for example, vamping with a realistic photo of a

decapitated Trump or calling the president a "piece

of s---" while hosting a show on CNN.

The media are orchestrating a bloodless coup, but

they're perfectly content to have their low-IQ shock

troops pursue a bloody coup.

This week, one of the left's foot soldiers gunned

down Republican members of Congress and their

staff while they were playing baseball in Virginia.

Democratic Socialist James Hodgkinson was

prevented from committing a mass murder only by

the happenstance of a member of the Republican

leadership being there, along with his 24-hour

Capitol Police protection.

Remember when it was frightening for the losing

party not to accept the results of an election? During

the third debate, Trump refused to pre-emptively

agree to the election results, saying he'd "look at it at

the time."

The media responded in their usual laid-back style:

A 'HORRIFYING' REPUDIATION OF DEMOCRACY -- The

Washington Post, Oct. 20, 2016

DENIAL OF DEMOCRACY -- Daily News (New York),

Oct. 20, 2016

DANGER TO DEMOCRACY -- The Dallas Morning

News, Oct. 20, 2016

ONE SCARY MOMENT; IT ALL BOILED DOWN TO ...

DEMOCRACY -- Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Oct. 21, 2016

"(Shock) spiked down the nation's spinal column last

night and today when the Republican nominee

threatened that this little election thing you got there,

this little democratic process you've got here, it's nice, it's

fine, but he doesn't necessarily plan on abiding by its

decision when it comes to the presidency." -- Rachel

Maddow, Oct. 20, 2016

"Trump's answer on accepting the outcome of the vote is

the most disgraceful statement by a presidential

candidate in 160 years." -- Bret Stephens, then-deputy

editorial page editor at The Wall Street Journal

"I guess we're all going to have to wait until Nov. 9 to

find out if we still have a country -- if Donald Trump is

in the mood for a peaceful transfer of power. Or if he's

going to wipe his fat ass with the Constitution." -- CBS's

Stephen Colbert, Oct. 19, 2016

"It's unprecedented for a nominee of a major party to

themselves signal that they would not accept -- you

know, respect the results of an election. We've never had

that happen before. ... This really presents a potentially

difficult problem for governing ..." -- MSNBC'S Joy Reid,

Oct. 22, 2016

"This is very dangerous stuff ... would seriously impair

our functioning as a democracy. ... This is about as

serious as it gets in the United States." -- CNN's Peter

Beinart, Oct. 20, 2016

"Obviously, it's despicable for him to pretend that there's

any chance that he would not accept the results of this

election; it would be -- in 240 years you've never had

anybody do it. ..." -- CNN's Van Jones, Oct. 20, 2016

Then Trump won, and these very same hysterics

refused to accept the results of the election.

Recently, Hillary announced her steadfast opposition

to the winning candidate using a military term,

saying she'd joined the "Resistance."

Imagine if Trump lost and then announced that

he'd joined the "RESISTANCE." He'd be accused of

trying to activate right-wing militias. Every

dyspeptic glance at an immigrant would be

reported as fascistic violence.

But the media seem blithely unaware that the

anti-Trump "Resistance" has been accompanied by

nonstop militaristic violence from liberals.

When Trump ripped up our Constitution and jumped

all over it by failing to concede the election three

weeks in advance, CNN ran a segment on a single

tweet from a random Trump supporter that

mentioned the Second Amendment.

Carol Costello: "Still to come in the 'Newsroom,' some

Trump supporters say they will refuse to accept a loss on

Election Day, with one offering a threat of violence.

We'll talk about that next."

In CNN's most fevered dreams about a violent

uprising of Trump supporters, they never could

have conceived of the level of actual violence being

perpetrated by Americans who refuse to accept

Trump's win. (See Hate Map.)

It began with Trump's inauguration, when a leftist

group plotted to pump a debilitating gas into one

Trump inaugural ball, military families were

assaulted upon leaving the Veterans' Inaugural Ball,

and attendees of other balls had water thrown on

them.

Since then, masked, armed liberals around the

country have formed military-style organizations to

beat up conservatives. In liberal towns, the police

are regularly ordered to stand down to allow the

assaults to proceed unimpeded.

The media only declared a crisis when conservatives

fought back, smashing the black-clad beta males.

("Battle for Berkeley!")

There is more media coverage for conservatives'

"microaggressions" toward powerful minorities -–

such as using the wrong pronoun -- than there is for

liberals' physical attacks on conservatives, including

macings, concussions and hospitalizations.

And now some nut Bernie Sanders-supporter

confirms that it's Republicans standing on a baseball

field, before opening fire.

In the media's strategic reporting of the attempted

slaughter, we were quickly told that the mass

shooter was white, male and had used a gun. We

were even told his name. (Because it was not

"Mohammed.")

But the fact that Hodgkinson's Facebook page

featured a banner of Sanders and the words

"Democratic Socialism explained in 3 words: 'We the

People' Since 1776" apparently called for hours of

meticulous fact-checking by our media.

Did reporters think they could keep that information

from us forever?

The fake news insists that Trump's White House is

in "chaos." No, the country is in chaos. But just like

Kathy Griffin and her Trump decapitation

performance art -- the perpetrators turn around in

doe-eyed innocence and blame Trump.

___________________________________________________

alida BlkBarry • 2 hours ago

Not everyone who uses the word

sheeple thinks they are smarter than

everyone else. Even an average

person can understand the danger of

being herded.

It’s 1968 all over again

Bitter political polarization is splitting the nation

Politics

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Almost a half-century ago, in 1968, the United States seemed to

be falling apart.

The Vietnam War, a bitter and close presidential election, antiwar

protests, racial riots, political assassinations, terrorism and a

recession looming on the horizon left the country divided

between a loud radical minority and a silent conservative

majority.

The United States avoided a civil war. But America suffered a collective

psychological depression, civil unrest, defeat in Vietnam and assorted

disasters for the next decade — until the election of a once-polarizing

Ronald Reagan ushered in five consecutive presidential terms of relative

bipartisan calm and prosperity from 1981 to 2001.

It appears as if 2017 might be another 1968. Recent traumatic hurricanes

seem to reflect the country’s human turmoil.

After the polarizing Obama presidency and the contested election of

Donald Trump, the country is once again split in two.

But this time the divide is far deeper, both ideologically and

geographically — with the two liberal coasts pitted against red-state

America in between.

Century-old mute stone statues are torn down in the dead of night,

apparently on the theory that by attacking the Confederate dead, the

lives of the living might improve.

All the old standbys of American life seem to be eroding. The National

Football League is imploding as it devolves into a political circus.

Multimillionaire players refuse to stand for the national anthem, turning

off millions of fans whose former loyalties paid their salaries.

Politics — or rather a progressive hatred of the provocative Donald

Trump — permeates almost every nook and cranny of popular culture.

The new allegiance of the media, late-night television, stand-up comedy,

Hollywood, professional sports and universities is committed to liberal

sermonizing. Politically correct obscenity and vulgarity among

celebrities and entertainers is a substitute for talent, even as Hollywood

is wracked by sexual harassment scandals and other perversities.

The smears “racist,” “fascist,” “white privilege” and “Nazi” — like

“commie” of the 1950s — are so overused as to become meaningless.

There is now less free speech on campus than during the McCarthy era

of the early 1950s.

As was the case in 1968, the world abroad is also falling apart.

The European Union, model of the future, is unraveling. The EU has

been paralyzed by the exit of Great Britain, the divide between Spain

and Catalonia, the bankruptcy of Mediterranean nation members,

insidious terrorist attacks in major European cities and the onslaught of

millions of immigrants — mostly young, male and Muslim — from the

war-torn Middle East. Germany is once again becoming imperious, but

this time insidiously by means other than arms.

The failed state of North Korea claims that it has nuclear-tipped missiles

capable of reaching America’s West Coast — and apparently wants

some sort of bribe not to launch them.

Iran is likely to follow the North Korea nuclear trajectory. In the

meantime, its new Shiite hegemony in the Middle East is feeding on the

carcasses of Syria and Iraq.

__________________________________________________________

Is the chaos of 2017 a catharsis — a

necessary and long-overdue purge of

dangerous and neglected pathologies? Will

the bedlam within the United States descend

into more nihilism, or offer a remedy to the

status quo that had divided and nearly

bankrupted the country?

Is the problem too much democracy, as the volatile and fickle mob runs

roughshod over establishment experts and experienced bureaucrats? Or

is the crisis too little democracy, as populists strive to dethrone a

scandal-plagued, anti-democratic, incompetent and overrated entrenched

elite?

Neither traditional political party has any answers.

Democrats are being overwhelmed by the identity politics and socialism

of progressives. Republicans are torn asunder between upstart populist

nationalists and the calcified establishment status quo.

Yet for all the social instability and media hysteria, life in the United

States quietly seems to be getting better.

The economy is growing. Unemployment and inflation remain low. The

stock market and middle-class incomes are up.

Business and consumer confidence are high. Corporate profits are up.

Energy production has expanded. The border with Mexico is being

enforced.

Is the instability less a symptom that America is falling apart and more a

sign that the loud conventional wisdom of the past — about the benefits

of a globalized economy, the insignificance of national borders and the

importance of identity politics — is drawing to a close, along with the

careers of those who profited from it?

In the past, any crisis that did not destroy the United States ended up

making it stronger. But for now, the fight grows over which is more

toxic — the chronic statist malady that was eating away the country, or

the new populist medicine deemed necessary to cure it.

____________________________________________________________

This intelligence-testing business reminds me of the way

they used to weigh hogs in Texas. They would get a long

plank, put it over a cross-bar and somehow tie the hog on

one end of the plank. They’d search all around till they

found a stone that would balance the weight of the hog and

they’d put that on the other end of the plank. Then they’d

guess the weight of the stone.

-John Dewey

It is easy in the world to live after the world’s opinion.

It is easy in solitude to live after our own; but the

great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps

with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Good humor may be said to be one of the best articles of

dress one can wear in society.

- William Makepeace Thackeray

Facts do not cease to exist because they are

ignored.

- Alduous Huxley

Learning is acquired by reading books, but the much

more necessary learning, the knowledge of the world,

is only to be acquired by reading people, and studying

all the various editions of them.

- Lord Chesterfield

Tradition shouldn’t be the enemy of

innovation.

- Army recruitment poster

The charm of fishing is that it is the pursuit

of what is elusive but attainable, a perpetual

series of occasions for hope.

-John Buchan

Ours is a world where people don’t

know what they want and are

willing to go through anything to

get it.

- Don Marquis

As the [social media] platforms age, their devotees

become more and more distinct from the regular

person. For more than a decade now, many people in

media and technology have been feeding an hour or

two of Twitter into our brains every single day.

Because we’re surrounded by people who live their

lives like this—and, crucially, because so many of the

journalists who write about the internet experience the

internet in this way—it might feel like this is just how

Twitter is, that a representative sample of America is

plugged into the machine in this way.

But it’s not. Twitter is not America. And few people

who work outside the information industries choose

to spend their lives reading tweets, let alone writing

them.

Twitter is a highly individual experience that works

like a collective hallucination, not a community.

It’s probably totally fine that a good chunk of the

nation’s elites spend so much time on it. What could

go wrong?

ALEXIS C. MADRIGAL

@literaryeric

Jun 4

Eric Nelson

How did the two sides of this debate become "let's teargas protestors"

versus

"looting is okay" when practically no one believes either of those

things?

Because we would always rather argue about framing than the issues.

https://forward.com/opinion/446541/are-americans-as-stupid-as-we-seem-ontwitter/

Karol Markowic z @karol

Jun 5

So good. "First, the banner that attracts the most people is

always the dumbest version of your opinion.

It has to lose all nuance to win over the most people."

SaraJessica Snarker

@SaraJessicaSnar

14h

Replying to @MattWalshBlog

Are they hypocrites or just young, stupid millennials parroting what

they have learned from leftists professors in order to prove they are

down with the struggle?

Matt Walsh

@MattWalshBlog

14h

Why not both?

Karol Markowicz

@karol

1h

My black male friend just told me a white lady he barely knows chased

him down, while he was riding his bike in his mostly white Long Island

town, to ask him how he’s doing.

Skwint

@DCWinton

2h

“The soft bigotry of low expectations.” Nicely stated. Thanks. It

describes an entire universe of “polite” but noxious thought and

behavior that gets overlooked in most discussions of racism.

A 10-point font conversation lost amid a 60-point font shout fest.

NO WAY (ZERO!) Egg

@cloudy_yah

Jun 3

"I used to be opposed to murder, but then people I don't like started

opposing murder, so now I’m pro-murder!"

https://twitter.com/DarylBenson16/status/1269108030580326401?s=20

Bo Winegard

@EPoe187

15h

The proportion of people who condone or excuse violent protests

decreases rapidly the further from Twitter you get until reaching

virtually zero in the ordinary world.

Maya "Looting Cheesecakes for Racial Justice" PhD Retweeted

Stevie-i-e-i-o @StevieOakley

May 30

I bet Canada feels like they live in the Apartment above a Meth

Lab right about now.

Laura Marie

@lmegordon

Jun 2

I'm not equipped to handle this much tragedy. I think I shorted

out two tragedies ago.

Jun 3

Replying to

@WorstCassie

2020's the girlfriend you can't take on a date to the bar because

she gets drunk, loud, obnoxious and tries to pick fights for her

boyfriend with some dude twice his size.

Shower Thoughts

@TheWeirdWorld

Jun 2

Just like bacteria aren't aware of our existence, there could be

giants around us that we cannot see cause we are too tiny to

make sense of them.

Rachel Noise @RachelNoise

Jun 2

The country needs a Mom who’s had it up to

fucking here.

Elee Lew

4h

@AxiomCatwalk

Have you heard the joke about getting rid of COVID?? It's a riot!

Kurt Schlichter @KurtSchlichter

GENERAL MATTIS FACTS: 1. He was a great combat leader

2. His Marines revere him even if they disagree with him now

3. His analysis of the political situation is flawed because to get woke to

the reality of the establishment's perfidy would undercut his entire

worldview

Don Kilmer

@donkilmer

May 25 Replying to @MZHemingway

Alternate questions for the #NeverTrumpers. If the #RussiaHoax

had managed to succeed in removing Trump, and if by some

miracle we found out later what we know now, would you still be

happy because a POTUS you don’t like was taken down?

(╯°□°)╯

@lordnazh

May 25

Weird question since they do know 'now' what we know

and they are still trying to get rid of him

Brad @Brad23987239

May 25 Replying to @MZHemingway

How dare you think differently than our beltway betters who work

at the dustbin. Their words might as well be law.

Rita Panahi Retweeted

Ron Milner @RonMilnerBoodle

17h

I would like to thank every liberal, Antifa, democrat, low-info voter,

crooked politician, Karen, professor, and left-wing freak for

showing the world that I made the right decision when I left that

godless diseased corpse of a party.

A Smith @atomic_ballsnot

· Jun 4

Replying to @JohnRWoodJr

There's no recovery from this. It's too far gone. It will only stop

when one side 'wins' and both sides are destroyed.

John Wood, Jr.@JohnRWoodJr

Jun 5

They call that a pyrrhic victory. I'm not inclined to settle for it.

Heather E Heying@HeatherEHeying·

Jun 16

Protect orthodoxy *and* heterodoxy. Society needs both the established

and the heretical. Much of what has come before is still good, and

foundational. Some is deeply flawed. Some of those flaws could not be

known at the time. #BurnItAllDown tragically misunderstands humanity.

LORI HENDRY @Lrihendry

Jun 2

Looking for some clarity here. Is Corona Season over and we are

on to Riot Season?

I just need to know if I need a mask or a rifle.

Moderation in Excess @ModerationInXS

3h Replying to @BrookeSingman@SenRonJohnsonand 7 others

Our country is in turmoil, we are facing multiple domestic

crises, hundreds of thousands dead, millions out of work

and violence on our streets and the Republican Party is

going to spend its time investigating conspiracy theories.

SauerMelon @SauerMelons

3h

Right now our cities are burning, thugs and criminals are looting

& destroying livelihoods on the conspiracy theory of perpetual

systemic racism.....but an actual coup attempt by American

government officials.....on an incoming American

President......well....nothing to see here.

Alice @themodalice

7h Replying to@JesseKellyDC

Just remember, the left is like Scientology. They lull you

into the group, tell you not to look at any other

information but their own, shame you if you question the

narrative, then make your life a living hell if you try to

leave.

Handbaglvr

@UKWildcatgal 18h

I haven't heard anyone say "it could be worse" in a

while.

Alice @themodalice

2h

Replying to @jakecoco

Conspiracy Theorists is a badge of honor and

was weaponized to unhinge free thinkers.

Ava

@avainwordland 17h

We’re like The Jerry Springer Show of the universe.

tweeter dee

@strategicplann7

Jun 2

I’m not adding this year to my age

Alice

@themodalice

Jun 1

Everything went downhill when we stopped roller skating

tsar-lord@BecketAdams

6h

Replying to @BecketAdams

checking the style guide and I am a little confused. are we going

with "the walls closing in” or “tipping point” today?

@poutinesmoothie

May 31

If you don't know the words to a song, just silently mouth

"honeydew cantaloupe" and usually nobody notices.

Catturd

@catturd2

May 31

I’m old enough to remember the Coronavirus.

Buddawiggi

@MarkBuckawicki May

27

don’t worry I’m an influencer

Worst Cass Scenario

@WorstCassie

May 29

This isn't the roaring 20s we wanted.

SkyNews

@SkyNews

· May 29

Coronavirus: Monkeys 'escape with COVID-19 samples'

after attacking lab assistant

http://news.sky.com/story/coronavirusmonkeys-escape-withcovid-19-samples-after-attacking-labassistant-11996752…

Nathan Stolpman

@lifttheveil411

May 29

Now this movie is just getting stupid.

wall y

@LittleJimmy61

Jan 25

Oh, I think I just shivered me timbers.

kєllαlєnα

@topaz_kell

4h

Can't tell if it's my intuition or my anxiety that won't stfu.

Worst Cass Scenario @WorstCassie

May 29

I don't know why Girls Gone Mild never took off.

twitter.com/search?f=tweet…Joined August 2018

7,475 Following

13.8K Followers

Tommy

Go Irish @tcal1961

Jun 3

I can't believe it's riot season already. I still have my Covid

decorations up.

We forgot about the flowers.

- Robbie Benson to Lynn Holly Johnson,

“Ice Castles”

WineMummy @WineMummy

Apr 20, 2019

I come from a long line of assholes so your opinion of me means

shit.

Not Hot. Not Bothered

@hunbothered Jun 4

So many tantrums. Is it really

“bring your kid to Twitter” day

already?

Jarhead @Jarhead44 Jun 28, 2014

I love people that get offended on Twitter. They sort of make it

all worth it.

Serendipity @serendipitydon1

Jun 3

I have lost a lot of respect for some people in the last several

days and have come to like some people less.

People are revealing who they are. Believe them when they show

you.

Pugnado @LuvPug

Jun 3

I knew you were an asshole, but I didn’t realize you were

that kind of asshole


21h

We’re all attention whores here. This isn’t a competition.


Nov 24, 2019

I don't just play a hoe on the internet, I am one in real life too.

Double D @dvel86

May 29

I'm not really a hoe I just play one on Twitter, oh wait yes I am.

WineMummy

@WineMummy

22h

I’m a hoe but I’m also an attention whore coz balance.


23h

It’s hoe, you whore.

WineMummy

@WineMummy

Jan 9

oI’m only here for the free stupid advice.

Wine Mummy @WineMummy

Sep 24, 2019

If you want to be angry and stupid, you've come to

the right place

Sephora : Which of my sisters did you choose?

Moses : I made no choice, Sephora.

Sephora : She was very beautiful, wasn't she? This woman of

Egypt, who left her scar upon your heart. Her skin was white as curd,

her eyes green as the cedars of Lebanon, her lips, tamarisk honey.

Like the breast of a dove, her arms were soft... and the wine of desire

was in her veins.

Moses : Yes. She was beautiful... as a jewel.

Sephora : A jewel has brilliant fire, but it gives no warmth. Our hands

are not so soft, but they can serve. Our bodies not so white, but they

are strong. Our lips are not perfumed, but they speak the truth. Love

is not an art to us. It's life to us. We are not dressed in gold and fine

linen. Strength and honor are our clothing. Our tents are not the

columned halls of Egypt, but our children play happily before them.

We can offer you little... but we offer all we have.

Moses : I have not little, Sephora. I have nothing.

Sephora : Nothing from some... is more than gold from others.

Moses : You would fill the emptiness of my heart?

Sephora : I could never fill all of it, Moses, but I shall not be jealous of

a memory. The queen of Egypt is beautiful, as he told me.

Moses : Does your god live on this mountain?

Sephora : Sinai is His high place, His temple.

Moses : If this god is God, he would live on every mountain, in every

valley. He would not be the god of Ishmael or Israel alone, but of all

men. It is said he created all men in his image. He would dwell in every

heart, every mind, every soul.

Sephora : I do not know about such things, but I do know that the

mountain rumbles when God is there, and the earth trembles, and the

cloud is red with fire.

Moses : At such a time, has any man ever gone to see Him,

face-to-face?

Sephora : No man has ever set foot on the forbidden slopes of

Sinai. Why do you want to see Him, Moses?

Moses : To know that He is. And if He is, to know why He has not

heard the cries of slaves in bondage.

Taylor Day@TABYTCHI

Jun 7

Have we tried turning 2020 off and then back on again?

Nancy Rommelmann@NancyRomm

Jun 10

Replying to@MattWelch

We are now a nation of raccoons, digging through each

other's trash

Mike Hoornstra@Mhoornstra

Jun 5

Replying to @skimminginfo and @DigitalForests

My Granddaughters ages 2, 7 are mixed. They’re beautiful, loving, and brilliant. We live

in a small mostly white town and never had a issue. The 7 yr old was just chosen citizen

of the year. This confuses her because no one told her she’s second class because she

never was.

Farmdaddy

@Farmdaddy1

Jun 3

Take it easy on yourself, it’s OK if you realize what an asshole you

were twenty years ago. That’s normal.

Dwayne Poulton

Wait till the media finds out that the malaria drugs do

increase the chance of survival but the side effects are they

cure Trump derangement syndrome.

Sunita

@_1Sunita_

3h

I'm wetter than a beavers ball bag. Cracking thunderstorm mind

JFK Jr. Faked His Own Death with the Help Of ‘Master Chess Player’

Donald Trump—And He’s Planning His Return Apparently

• by Max Page . CelebMagazine May 24, 2020

Robfire, June 1, 2020 @ 10:11 pm

You missed quiet a few bits out

o

Max Page, June 3, 2020 @ 6:07 pm Reply to Robfire

yeah, well it’s quite a feat to get anybody to read past just a

headline these days so there really is only so much you can

write about in one post.

• QFan, June 2, 2020 @ 2:50 am

Wow, That was Disappointing!

o

Max Page, June 3, 2020 @ 6:00 pm Reply to QFan

Dad, is that you?

•

Margaret, June 2, 2020 @ 3:15 am

and so you felt obliged to use Jesus Name in such a heinous way, WHY? there

IS no good reason…..it’s bad enough you chose to offend people of Faith with

your blasphemy, it’s BEYOND reason that you would do such a thing to

HIM……..your total disregard for the salvation of your soul is telling…..your

ETERNITY stands in the balance……WILL you continue to jeopardize your place

in Heaven by your total rejection of the Holy ?

or will you acknowledge that your choice of words is not working in your favor

and repent ? JFK Jr. was a strong Catholic young man……if he IS alive, I would

believe that he would be the first to correct you. Until he does appear, I’m

doing it for him. You don’t need to apologize to ME, you need to apologize to

GOD, and to His Son, Christ. DO IT…..and on your knees…..you only get ONE

chance in this life. Don’t mess it up. Good luck to you.

o

Max Page, June 3, 2020 @ 5:59 pm Reply to Margaret

I stopped believing in fairytales when I was around 8-years old, so

the salvation of my soul is the least of my worries. And, quite frankly I would

welcome being in what you believe to be in hell with all the sodomites and

thieves and “immoral” women than in your version of your fictitious “heaven”.

I actually studied theology extensively and came to my own conclusions and

my own beliefs. In reality, in my everyday life, I probably act more like your

Jesus character than the vast majority of self-proclaimed and fervent

Christians—I don’t judge, I welcome and love people of all colors,

backgrounds, and beliefs. I treat people as I wish to be treated myself, and I

actively help the poor each and every day, so, yeah, I’m all good on the morality

front, thank you very much. To me organized religion is like a man’s penis, I’m

really happy and glad that they have one, but DO NOT try and ram it down my

throat, unless I ask you to. I don’t need to apologize to “God”, (or anybody

actually) it would be a pointless endeavor anyway as I completely don’t believe

in him. So, I suggest you leave your lecturing and correcting and tone policing

for somebody who actually gives a fuck–because I genuinely give less than

zero.

o

Tommi, June 3, 2020 @ 1:53 am Reply to Margaret

For such arrogance laced with piety, I am amazed that you are not aware

that Christ isn’t Jesus’ name. It is a title such as Jesus the Christ or Christ Jesus. I

can only assume that you did more damage to your own soul with that

judgmental tirade than the author did to his with his one comment. I think

you committed more than one of the Seven Deadly Sins in this post. Worry

about yourself and leave others alone. Shame on you!

•

Joanna, June 3, 2020 @ 4:37 pm Reply to Tommi / Max Page

Frankly, I felt the same way as the person you were addressing above - so

tired of seeing my Lord’s name dragged through the mud - can I politely

ask what did He ever do to the article’s writer that he would talk about

Him that way? I notice no one uses Buddha’s or Krishna’s name or other

religious “icons” in such a despicable way. Just Jesus’ name. That’s

okay….in the end, He wins…King of Kings and Lord of Lords…

•

Max Page, June 3, 2020 @ 6:17 pm Reply to joanna

…I’m a big fan of using Allah and Jah and My Little

Pony too….. and if you think it’s despicable, you

need to get out there in the big real world my

friend and see the truly despicable things that are happening each

and every day. You’ve got no focus….. a fictional book that was

written centuries ago isn’t the key to life and to be followed to the

word (unless you are unable to think for yourself of course). People

are being murdered and tortured and bombed, all in the name of

religion, that’s where you should really focus and care–it’s certainly

what your Jesus dude would have done. Enough already.

o

Max Page, June 3, 2020 @ 6:09 pm Reply to Margaret

I suspect you REALLY wouldn’t approve of what I’m usually doing

when I’m down on my knees lady.

•

sue, June 2, 2020 @ 3:23 am

When the media of today tries to discredit something, you know it’s

true. We’re already way beyond “Is Q coming from the Trump

administration.” The drops about Antifa May 30th and 31st are

proof that Q knew the president’s declaration of Antifa as a terror

org was coming. So yes, Q is real and JFK Jr is probably alive. But

media trying to make it all seem “crazy.”

Wine Mummy

@Wi neMummy

Jun 2

Don’t forget to be a disrespectful piece of shit on the

internet today

Jake Vig

@Jake_Vig

May 6

I’ve gone down so many bizarre rabbit holes on the

internet during the quarantine that even Google is like,

“You don’t want to search that. Go watch tv or

something.”

John Hayward@Doc_0

Replying to@Doc_0

Do you really think the party that turned the streets over to mob rule, the

party that talks every day about using the power of government to

permanently suppress its "evil" opponents, is going to start listening to its

NeverTrump "moderate" friends after it wins?

The Getaway Girl @The_GetawayGirl

6h

i don’t even drink and i’m like a day away from being an

alcoholic.

Crow Magnom

@distracted_monk

14h

At least no one’s keeping up with the Kardashians anymore...

@contradiction70

Jun 4

49 ♕ ☠

My Brain is my fucking cleavage

Teighler Westley von Smith

@TeighlerS

Jun

4

I DO NOT HAVE WHITE PRIVILEGE like once I was shooting seagulls

with my dad’s gun and this cop was like “can you stop that” and I

was like “no, fuck you pig” and he was like

“that was rude I’m telling your dad at our next poker game” and I

was grounded for a whole week so stfu

Lisabug BBQJonze

@Lisabug74

Aug 16, 2014

My favorite sexual position is still the Heimlich maneuver.

Shellz

@HeyoShellz May 31

Let them have the streets. the rest of us can fight on the internet

Luke E Mia

@LukeEMiaPI

Jun 4

I never thought about how humor could be called the sixth sense.

Some people have it. Others don't.

Stewart Carl Bova @StewartCBova

Jun 2

Replying to @ShireenQudosi

We have an entire generation that worries about optics, clout, and

a fear of being socially ostracized for missing a trend.

We need to show the virtues of deeper values than likes on a

page.

Joe on the Go

Jun 1

The

“take me

back

pose”

hahahahahaha

SWARM

@SexWorkHive

·Jun 1

In the years before 1975, sex workers in Lyon had

tried to hold other protests in the city to speak out

about policing and working conditions and were

laughed at - media articles at the time mocked them

for speaking out about their "little miseries".

SWARM

@SexWorkHive

For International Whores' Day we call for the full

decriminalization of sex work, an end to the hostile environment,

funding for sex worker specific services, affordable housing, the

immediate release of those held in detention, and the defunding

of the metropolitan police.

9:38 AM · Jun 1, 2020·Twitter Web App

Elean

or

May 3

@garbagegman

My hypothesis is that social media has created human

behavior that seeks to replicate the chaos of a sim on fully

autonomous gameplay mode.

Pams

Myth

3h

@mrsauntiepam

One time my dad hung a tire from a tree

in our yard and that was our whole

summer. A tire.

Your Name Here @notittryagain

May 27

Nothing scares a dishonest person more than someone

who knows the truth.

Serotonin's Gone @SerotoninsGone

Jun 4 In reply to

@DisrnNews

and @ComfortablySmug

"Ya know, I

was like

totally

racist and

unaware of

the

injustices of

institutional

racism until

I saw some

sloppy

graffiti” –

literally no

one ever

hunnet

baby@JustinKirkland

Jun

4

It’s funny

you guys

will say a

few bad

protesters

taints the

whole

movement

but a few

bad cops

don’t

represent

all of

police

@rising_serpent

5hReplying to

@AOC and

@PressSec

The sign of true stupidity is the inability to be

embarrassed by your own stupidity.

Greg Steinbrecher

@gregsteinbreche

· 20h

"We feel this need to plant fear into each other's lives because if I

can give you my level of fear then I don’t have to have a greater

level of courage.” Keep coming back to this line from Sunday's

sermon. Sneakily profound, methinks.

Chloé S. Valdary

@cvaldary

· Jun 13

If a person believes that America is irredeemable, by definition, they

believe that healing & reforming America is impossible. Be careful with who

you choose to follow. There are race peddlers out here chanting “justice,

justice,” when what they really want is power.

Rafique Tucker

@RiffRaf979

· Jun 13

Replying to @JohnRWoodJr

I think one of the mistakes certain people make is that they

assume those who are fighting to fix long-standing issues of

justice believe America is irredeemable. Most of us want to make

the country better. There are always hustlers in every cause,

however.


Jun 11

Race, racism and the relationship between the black community

and law enforcement are more complicated than the mainstream

conversation allows. Which is itself tragic.


Jun 16

Technology? Absence of meaning? Declining faith in liberalism?

Many things have led us to this radical moment. But if we can

re-weave the fabric of moral understanding I say we can rebuild.

Wilt'sAlarmClock

@JQxxxJQ

· Jun 11

Replying to @TessaMakesLove @BridgetPhetasy and @JohnRWoodJr

Eloquent and valuable words. Unfortunately, John Woods

identifies as a Black Republican, which means - sadly - his opinion

is worthless, and his life could be in danger. Should be read by all.


Jun 11

Thanks!...I think...

Seth Mandel

@SethAMandel

Best thing about Biden’s candidacy continues to be the complete

lack of fanatical supporters or personality cults. It’s like politics

before this country lost its collective mind.

m cole

@giantsfanmc4

·Mar 16

Replying to

@SethAMandel

It works so good. Dems and left create mass hysteria and chaos, then

people beg for “normalcy”. Trump fights back yes, but anyone paying any

bit of attention should recognize that nearly all chaos was a MSM and Dem

creation. Wars were being ended, jobs coming back, no race riots.

june

@shoe0nhead

Apr 14

honestly curious about the direction progressive twitter/media will take in

the general. like what the fuck are we going to do when trump repeats the

same things about biden we've been saying for months? lmfao we can't say

SHIT.

Amber Athey

@amber_athey

Apr 5

Whenever I teach journalism seminars to college students the first

thing I tell them is that no one cares about your opinions and to learn how

to actually report something first!

“Never have lives less lived been more chronicled." – Dennis Miller

“ In retirement, he didn’t have Secret Service protection

until early 1964 - after JFK was assassinated - so the first 10

years of his retirement, he was on his own… The Secret

Service gave him the key to the gate - the five-foot steel

fence around the house - and said, Good Luck, we’re gonna

go work for President Eisenhower now. So one day a man’s car broke

down in front of the house and the guy didn’t know where he was – it

didn’t have a sign on it like it does today - so he walked through the front

gate and up the front steps and he rang the doorbell. And my

grandfather answered the door in his shirtsleeves and the guy said, “My

car broke down; do you have a phone?” and Grandpa said, “Sure, come

on in.” The guy used the phone in the front hall and the garage folks told

him it’s going to be 10-15 minutes before we can get over there and the

man said “That’s alright.” And he told my grandfather, “I’m going to wait

by the car for these guys” and Grandpa said, “No, don’t do that” and they

sat down in the living room and talked for 10 or 15 minutes – apparently

got along just great. Finally Grandpa looked out the window and said,

“I think the garage guy’s here” and the man got up and shook Grandpa’s

hand and he said, “Thank you for the phone, for the hospitality, for the

help” and Grandpa said, “You’re welcome, nice talking to you, I hope it

doesn’t cost too much”

And the man walked out the front door -- he got halfway down

the front steps and he STOPPED…

And he turned, and he looked back at my grandfather, and he said, “You

know something … and please don’t take offense… but you look a hell of

a lot like that son of a bitch Harry Truman.”

And my grandfather smiled at him and said no offense at all. I am that

son of a bitch.

..- Clifton Truman Daniel..

51. June 1, 2018

In a story about Trump tariffs, AP reported the dollar value of Virginia’s

farm and forestry exports to Canada and Mexico was $800. It’s

$800 million.

54. June 28, 2018

After a newsroom shooting, a newspaper reporter falsely tweeted that

the shooter “dropped his MAGA hat on newsroom floor before opening

fire.”

81. July 21, 2019

An MSNBC contributor and law professor falsely tweets that Fox is not

going to show upcoming Congressional testimony by former Special

Counsel Robert Mueller on the Trump-Russia investigation. When the

error is pointed out, the contributor says she was just kidding and deletes

her tweet–but not before it has been “liked” and “retweeted” thousands

of times.

87. Sept. 16, 2019

The New York Times publishes an editor’s note about its

recent story recounting a newly-reported accusation about an incident

decades ago involving Trump-nominated Supreme Court Justice Brett

Kavanaugh.

The editor’s note discloses for the first time that the Times never spoke

to the alleged victim, and that the alleged victim had told friends she had

no recollection of any such event. The Times reporters explained that

that information had mistakenly been edited out of the story.

Throughout the course of the 2016

election, the conventional groupthink

was that the renegade Donald Trump

had irrevocably torn apart the Republican

Party. His base populism supposedly

sandbagged more experienced and electable

Republican candidates, who were bewildered

that a “conservative” would dare to pander to

hoi polloi by promising deportations of illegal

aliens, renegotiation of trade agreements that

“ripped off” working people, and a messy

attack on the reigning political correctness.

It was also a common complaint that Trump had neither

political nor military experience. He trash-talked his way

into the nomination, critics said, which led to defections

among the outraged Republican elite. By August, a

#NeverTrump movement had taken root among many

conservatives, including some at National Review, The

Weekly Standard, and the Wall Street Journal. Many

neoconservatives who formerly supported President

George W. Bush flipped parties, openly supporting the

Clinton candidacy.

Trump’s Republican critics variously disparaged

him as, at best, a Huey Long or Ross Perot,

whose populist message was antithetical to

conservative principles of unrestricted trade,

open-border immigration, and proper personal

comportment. At worse, a few Republican elites

wrote Trump off as a dangerous fascist akin to

Mussolini, Stalin, or Hitler.

For his part, Trump often sounded bombastic and vulgar.

By October, after the Access Hollywood video went viral,

many in the party were openly calling for him to step

down. Former primary rivals like Jeb Bush and John

Kasich reneged on their past oaths to support the eventual

Republican nominee and turned on Trump with a

vengeance.

By the end of the third debate, it seemed as if Trump had

carjacked the Republican limousine and driven it off a

cliff. His campaign seemed indifferent to the usual stuff

of an election run—high-paid handlers, a ground game,

polling, oppositional research, fundraising, social media,

establishment endorsements, and celebrity guest

appearances at campaign rallies. Pundits ridiculed his

supposedly “shallow bench” of advisors, a liability that

would necessitate him crawling back to the Republican

elite for guidance at some point.

What was forgotten in all this hysteria was that Trump

had brought to the race unique advantages, some of his

own making, some from finessing naturally occurring

phenomena. His advocacy for fair rather than free trade,

his insistence on enforcement of federal immigration law,

and promises to bring back jobs to the United States

brought back formerly disaffected Reagan Democrats,

white working-class union members, and blue-dog

Democrats—the “missing Romney voters”—into the

party. Because of that, the formidable wall of rich

electoral blue states like Pennsylvania, Michigan,

Wisconsin, Ohio, and North Carolina crumbled.

Beyond that, even Trump’s admitted crudity was seen by

many as evidence of a street-fighting spirit sorely lacking

in Republican candidates that had lost too magnanimously

in 1992, 2008, and 2016 to vicious Democratic hit

machines. Whatever Trump was, he would not lose nobly,

but perhaps pull down the rotten walls of the Philistines

with him. That Hillary Clinton never got beyond her

email scandals, the pay-for-play Clinton Foundation

wrongdoing, and the Wikileaks and Guccifer hackings

reminded the electorate that whatever Trump was or had

done, he at least had not brazenly broken federal law as a

public servant, or colluded with the media and the

Republican National Committee to undermine the

integrity of the primaries and sabotage his Republican

rivals.

Finally, the more Clinton Inc. talked about the Latino

vote, the black vote, the gay vote, the woman vote,

the more Americans tired of the same old identity

politics pandering.

What if minority bloc voters who had turned out for

Obama might not be as sympathetic to a middle-aged,

multimillionaire white woman? And what if the working

white classes might flock to the politically incorrect

populist Trump in a way that they would not to a leftist

elitist like Hillary Clinton? In other words, the more

Clinton played the identity politics card, the more she

earned fewer returns for herself and more voters for

Trump.

As a result, Republican voters, along with working class

Democrats and Independents voted into power a

Republican President, Republican Congress, and, in

essence, a Republican judiciary.

Trump’s cunning and energy, and his unique appeal to

the disaffected white working class, did not destroy the

Republican down ballot, but more likely saved it.

Senators and Representatives followed in Trump’s wake,

as did state legislatures and executive officers. Any

Republican senatorial candidate who voted for him won

election; any who did not, lost. Trump got a greater

percentage of Latinos, blacks, and non-minority women

than did Romney, and proved to be medicine rather than

poison for Republican candidates. With hindsight, it is

hard to fathom how any other Republican candidate might

have defeated Clinton Inc.—or how, again with hindsight,

the Party could be in a stronger, more unified position.

In contrast, the Democratic Party is torn and rent. Barack

Obama entered office in 2009 with both houses of

Congress, two likely Supreme Court picks, and the good

will of the nation. By 2010 he had lost the House; by

2012, the Senate. And by 2016, Obama had ensured that

his would-be successor could not win by running on his

platform.

A failed health care law, non-existent economic growth,

serial zero interest rates, near record labor nonparticipation

rates, $20 trillion in national debt, a Middle

East in ruins, failed reset and redlines, and the Iran deal

were albatrosses around the Democratic Party’s neck.

Obama divided the country with the apology tour, the

Cairo Speech, the beer summit, the rhetoric of

disparagement (“you didn’t build that,” “punish our

enemies,” etc.), the encouragement of the Black Lives

Matter movement, and a series of anti-Constitutional

executive orders.

In other words, even as Obama left the Democrats

with ideological and political detritus, he also

had established an electoral calculus built on his

own transformative identity that neither had

coattails nor was transferrable to other

candidates. Indeed, his hard-left positions on

redistribution, social issues, sanctuary cities,

amnesty, foreign policy, and spending would

likely doom candidates other than himself who

embraced them.

The Bernie Sanders candidacy was the natural response,

on the left, to Obama’s ideological presidency. But the

cranky socialist septuagenarian mesmerized primary

voters on platitudes that would have proven disastrous in

a general election—before meekly whining about Clinton

sabotage and then endorsing the ticket. What then has the

Democratic Party become other than a hard left and elite

progressive force, which without Obama’s personal

appeal to bloc-voting minorities, resonates with only

about 40 percent of the country?

The Democratic Party is now neither a centrist nor a

coalition party. Instead, it finds itself at a dead-end: had

Hillary Clinton emulated her husband’s pragmatic politics

of the 1990s, she would have never won the nomination—

even though she would have had a far better chance of

winning the general election.

_____________________________________

Wikileaks reminded us that the party is run

by rich, snobbish, and often ethically

bankrupt grandees. In John Podesta’s world,

it’s normal and acceptable for Democratic

apparatchiks to talk about their stock

portfolios and name-drop the Hamptons,

while making cruel asides about “needy”

Latinos, medieval Catholics, and African-

Americans with silly names—who are

nonetheless expected to keep them in power.

Such paradoxes are not sustainable. Nor is

the liberal nexus of colluding journalists,

compromised lobbyists, narcissistic Silicon

Valley entrepreneurs, family dynasties, and

Clintonian get-rich ethics.

The old blue-collar middle class was bewildered by the

leftwing social agenda in which gay marriage, women in

combat units, and transgendered restrooms went from

possible to mandatory party positions in an eye blink. In a

party in which “white privilege” was pro forma

disparagement, those who were both white and without it

grew furious that the elites with such privilege massaged

the allegation to provide cover for their own entitlement.

In the aftermath of defeat, where goes the Democratic

Party?

It is now a municipal party. It has no real power over the

federal government or state houses. Its once feared cudgel

of race/class/gender invective has become a false wolf

call heard one too many times. The Sanders-Warren

branch of the party, along with the now discredited

Clinton strays, will hover over the party’s carcass.

Meanwhile, President Obama will likely ride off into the

sunset to a lucrative globe-trotting ex-presidency. His

executive orders will systematically be dismantled by

Donald Trump, leaving as his legacy a polarizing

electoral formula that had a shelf life of just two terms.

November 11, 2016

EIGHTEEN

What Now?

Jimi_in_Mich

1 week ago

For some it is simple loss of power, but for quite a few others it

appears to be the joy of being a radical -- that euphoria of

religious zealotry, regardless of odds or reason. There is a

definite component of self-image and identity in a political

position. Dialogue and discussion are only for a minority trying to

make sense of things; the others are having fun.

Respect1

Replyreply

petty

1 week ago

Mr. Hanson, you are one of my favorite pundits, but your selfsophistry

(which I don't think you, in your heart of hearts, believe)

concerning the noble Trump rising above the Republican rabble

that opposed him detracts from your argument. Every Republican

could have accomplished the list you laid out - a few might have

paid lip service to the Paris Accord in order to accomplish more

important goals, a few might have postponed moving the

embassy until Israel gave the Palestinians a fig leaf of autonomy -

but all would be light years ahead of where we are now on

immigration with mandatory E-Verify (a subject Trump refuses to

mention) with TPP helping constrain Chinese trade

transgressions and tariff reductions generally, with reform of our

racial grievance industrial complex.

I understand you think Trump was the only candidate that could

win. I disagree, but understand that as a viable argument. But

there is no reason to go from that to pure sycophancy about his

staggeringly unfit leadership or management style

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

ScribblerG

6 days ago

You are delusional. The Bushies went along with climate change

and "free trade" (meaning unilateral disarmament). And the other

candidates didn't win, so we have some data here. Petty is a

good name for you. And oh yeah, accusing VDH of sophistry is

truly laughable, like it means you are a fool...

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

Corkscrewed

1 week ago

The left was sure they had it all; Obama had primed the pump

and Hillary was to turn it on. A liberal SCOTUS would authorize a

flood of immigrants to vote in a permanent democrat majority. The

new media would be shut down, the Second Amendment would

be declared to apply only to the National Guard, the populace

would be disarmed, and liberals would reign unchallenged.

But Trump won. And by reversing liberal policy he's making things

better for the average person. White, Black, Hispanic, Asian ...

a rising tide does lift all boats.

The left cannot handle it.

They're snapping.

Really.

Respect1

Replyreply

Reportflag

Pope1944

1 week ago

The left is getting more radical by the day. For the head of the

DNC to claim that the socialist elected in New York is the future of

the party should scare the breath out of Americans.

Respect1

Replyreply

Reportflag

kurt p

1 week ago

I think they need to eat some more crow before they can realize

America does not want to be a Socialist nation run by Coastal

elite.

Respect1

Replyreply

Reportflag

rwhwindstreamnet

1 week ago

The left better worry that they could be making acting out anger

over a loss of power an acceptable behavior that they won't solely

own.

Respect1

Replyreply

Reportflag

Pedsurg

1 week ago

And like Groundhog Day, Hillary repeatedly LOSES !!!!

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

bloodredinabluestate

1 week ago

If the Left's answer to Trump is to double down on its Leftness,

rather than build consensus with the people it lost in 2016, the

Right will happily watch it commit political suicide.

But even a big Trump booster like VDH should know that his

statements about Trump doing "what no other Republican

President would have dared" is ridiculous. With the possible

exception of moving the embassy, President Cruz and a lot of the

other 2016 candidates would have done these things, and less

chaotically. And "seeking" to denuclearize North Korea" is as

much of an accomplishment as my "seeking" to win the lottery.

Respect5

Replyreply

Reportflag

JayWither

1 week ago

BULLSEYE.

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

DutchVandal

1 week ago

It makes everything so simple when you can classify an entire

political group's opinions to be based off of anger and insecurity.

I guess the progressives learned to do it by watching you?

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

doublehoo

1 week ago

Oooh, we better rush him to the burn unit! :-)

ElQueso

1 week ago

How did Republicans respond to loss of power in an

overwhelming fashion when Obama came into office and had

his super majority? Sure, they didn't like it, but I don't

remember seeing years of idiocy and marches and accosting

people in public places. And if that had happened, I'm very

certain that the very Left-leaning media would have happily

reported what ogres the Republicans were being.

No, they used political methods and speech to combat what they

didn't like. And that is how Republicans were ogres, by using the

means at hand - such as filibustering in Congress - which the Left,

under Harry Reid, did away with because they wanted to exercise

their power fully.

And now they are regretting such intemperate actions. The Left is

going nuts on a daily basis. You tell me where they actually

learned this from - do you think maybe from the "elders" of the

60s?

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

DutchVandal

1 week ago

While the current actions of the left are undoubtedly more

extreme; you have a shockingly rosy remembrance of the actions

of the right during the Obama years.

Evans_KY

1 week ago

If you view this in terms of war, then yes, the progressives are

down. Unfortunately, that misses the cyclical nature of our

existence. Long term, how sustainable is this chaos? Americans

are happy to go along with the status quo until the very last

minute. Until something so abhorrent pushes them in one

direction or another. Think game theory, my dear.

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

ElQueso

1 week ago

Republicans, it seems to me, are much happier to talk and

compromise. It's how we ended up with things like the extra

Medicare benefits under Bush and two giant spending bills under

Bush and Trump, among other things. The Democrats take that

and then refuse to compromise on anything else and meantime

people like Maxine Waters push to harass administration officials

in public because they don't agree with their policies. That is

going beyond any kind of "family squabble".

While they may be allowed to do such things legally, they

certainly aren't following

principles that

encourage peaceful

resolution of serious

issues, and in fact are

making issues worse -

while proposing idiocies

that we can't possibly

afford, like medical care

for all nation-wide.

I see one of three possibilities: The Right lets the Left win and

there will be peace and tyranny. The Right wins and pushes the

left so far back that that they are no longer a threat to American

principles (and I'm drawing a line between neo-liberals on the left

of the spectrum and the Left, who are neo-Marxist

revolutionaries), or the country separates into three or four

different countries and we let the idiots who can't see reality fail

on their own.

Ghandi did well against the British, who even though they could

be quite brutal at times were not led by people who would willynilly

murder innocents (except for a few bad apples who did their

side more harm than good when they committed massacres).

Imagine what would have happened with Ghandi against

someone like Hitler or Mao or Stalin. I don't think he would even

be a known martyr by now. Do we even remember the name of

the kid who stood in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square in

1989? That was nowhere near as long ago as Gandhi.

Game theory requires finesse as well as brute strength at times.

Politically, I don't mean strength as violence, but I do mean that

people on both sides of center need to put the Left to bed for

good in this country or separate from them before it tears the

entire country apart or places it under tyranny.

Respect

Replyreply

Reportflag

____________________________________________________________________________

Ever try to get into MSNBC to do an interview? They practically

strip search you… photocopy your license… the works. But photo

ID’s to vote is a bad idea.

- Mark Simone

- from Eureka: 81 Key Ideas Explained by Michael Macrone

18. May 27, 2017:

The BBC’s James Landale, The Guardian and others reported that Trump wasn’t bothering to

listen to the translation during a speech in Italian by Italy’s Prime Minister. They drew that

conclusion without asking the White House and based on a video that showed other political

leaders wearing large headphones. The Guardian even claimed Trump was fake listening

(smiling and nodding). After the reports circulated, the White House stated that, as

always, Trump was wearing an earpiece in his right ear.

“He only is beaten

who admits it”

Orison Swett Marden,

“Selling Things”

1916

'I'll fight them to the death': Judge Judy warns Bernie Bros that they

don't have a chance at the presidency because she's ready to battle

to get Mike Bloomberg in the White House

➔ Judge Judy, even jokingly, shouldn’t challenge the Bernie Bros. They

are essentially A N T I F A and have already demonstrated that they

have no problem violently attacking defenseless elderly people. Stay

safe Judge Judy.

Kirk B 4 days ago

"Life is now more secure than it was in the preceding age; but for this very

reason it is more dull. Like human anesthetists a Caesar and an Arsaces

and a Kanishka have taken the sting out of those once burning economic

and political questions that, in a now already half-forgotten past, were the

salt of as well as the bane of human life. The benevolent action of efficient

authoritarian governments has undesignedly created a spiritual vacuum in

human souls. How is this spiritual vacuum going to be filled? That is the

grand question in the Graeco-Roman world in the second century after

Christ; but the sophisticated civil servants and philosophers are still

unaware that any such question is on the agenda." ARNOLD

TOYNBEE (p.95; "The World and The West"; TOYNBEE; Oxford

University Press, Inc.; New York; 1953)

Show less

5

REPLY

103. Dec. 9, 2019

It would be difficult if not impossible from a practical standpoint to list the

thousands of the media reports, from the New York Times to CNN, that have now

been proven false by information documented in Justice Department Inspector

General Michael Horowitz’s report on the FBI’s misbehavior in investigating the

Trump campaign.

Here, they will all be grouped together as one media mistake, but include nearly

every major national media outlet that falsely reported, as if fact, that the

discredited Democrat-funded “dossier” — submitted by the FBI to get a wiretap to

spy on Trump associate Carter Page — was only a “small part” of the wiretap

application. Also, the reports that Page was a Russian spy and the conduit between

Trump and Putin. Also, the many insistences that Trump was a “Putin stooge” and

coordinating with Putin or Russia, when the FBI’s own evidence now shows they

never found anything remotely close to that. In fact, they appeared to disprove it.

106. Dec. 16, 2019

The news media widely misreport that the report by Dept. of Justice Inspector

General Horowitz found “no political bias” in the Russia probe. As Horowitz made

clear in his Congressional testimony, that is false.

Instead, Horowitz gave a limited, qualified opinion about a narrow part of the

opening of the investigation, stating he could not find documentary or testimonial

evidence that the serious political bias of various FBI officials impacted the

original decision to open the probe into Trump campaign-related Americans.

Horowitz explicitly acknowledged that various FBI officials involved in the probe,

including Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had political bias against Trump.

He also stated, in Congressional testimony, that Christopher Steele, the political

opposition researcher hired by the Clinton campaign to provide the anti-Trump

“dossier” to the FBI, had political bias.

And he stated that it’s possible political bias was behind other inexplicable and

egregious errors the FBI made during the probe, which he did not say was free of

bias. Those matters, Horowitz testified, have been referred to the criminal probe

and to the FBI to handle.

NINETEEN

We can’t all

be masters,

but we can all

be composers

Truths are illusions whose origin everybody has forgotten Nietzsche

-Edith Wharton

no man has the right to arrogate to himself one

particle of superiority or consideration because he

has had a college education, but it makes it doubly

incumbent upon him to do well and nobly in his life.

- Teddy Roosevelt

- Giovanni Ruffini

Donald Trump is 'afraid of strong women' claims Alexandria

Ocasio-Cortez as she says she would worry if he agreed with

her

-> Strong people don’t constantly play the victim card based on race,

gender, religion or sexual orientation. That is what weak shallow

people use to gain a moral advantage because they are incapable of

presenting a strong argument based on logic and facts.

Over the last 72 hours, students have taken over a small liberal arts

college in Washington state, and only one adult has tried to stop them.

Students at Evergreen State College in Olympia, who filmed their

exploits and posted the videos on social media, have occupied and

barricaded the library, shouting down anyone who disagrees with them

or shows insufficient passion for racial justice.

Biology professor Bret Weinstein was berated by dozens of students

outside of his classroom Tuesday morning for refusing to participate in

an event in which white people were invited to leave campus for a day.

Now he says police have told him to hold his classes off campus due to

safety concerns.

Things are “out of control at Evergreen,” he said.

Mr. Weinstein was confronted outside of his classroom Tuesday morning

by dozens of students who demanded he apologize or resign for writing

an allegedly racist email.

His email took issue with a “Day of Absence & Day of Presence”

demonstration, for which white students, faculty and staff were asked

to leave campus for one day.

He wrote: “On a college campus, one’s right to speak — or to be —

should never be based on skin color.”

A video of the confrontation, captured by Mr. Vincent, shows Mr.

Weinstein attempting to reason with dozens of students who routinely

shout him down, curse at him and demand his resignation.

When the professor tells the students he will listen to them if they

listen to him, one student responds, “We don’t care what terms you

want to speak on. This is not about you. We are not speaking on terms —

on terms of white privilege. This is not a discussion. You have lost that

one.”

After shouting at Mr. Weinstein for several minutes, according to Mr.

Vincent’s recollection of events, the protesters marched out of the

building and were met by campus police shortly thereafter.

“The students, fearful for their lives, began retreating towards the

library and ultimately ended up in the Trans & Queer Center/Unity

Lounge, trying to stay safe,” Mr. Vincent said in a Facebook post

Tuesday. “The white students were then delegated to spread out

throughout the library floor and watch for police potentially

surrounding the building.”

In order to keep the police out, the

students barricaded the entrances of the

library and seamlessly turned the retreat

into a political occupation. Demands

followed.

At a meeting between the administration and students later that day,

university President George S. Bridges said no students would be

punished for their involvement in the demonstrations, even before an

investigation into the matter.

“First and foremost, I want to state that there will be, as far as I

know, no charges filed against any students involved in actions that

occurred this morning,” Mr. Bridges said. “We will be conducting a major

review, an investigation of all that occurred and will be reporting back

to you, the campus community, about exactly what happened, why it

happened and what we intend to do about the incident —

not the incident, excuse me, the actions that were taken, both

students, staff and faculty involved.”

On Wednesday, students crashed a faculty meeting that was planned to,

among other things, honor professors nominated for emeritus status.

Families of the honorees were in attendance.

A member of the faculty interrupted the proceedings shortly after

they began and invited the students to the front of the room to share

their stories.

“I’m sorry, but I really appreciate you faculty, but students are here

right now,” the professor said. “Why do we need to — I mean, I

appreciate celebrating our accolades and how much we’ve done for the

college, but they’re here. Like, we need to listen to their voice. They are

out there, their bodies are on the line, right?”

When they got to the front of the room, the students condemned the

faculty for eating cake rather than supporting the library occupiers.

“Didn’t you educate us on how to do shit like this?” one student said. “It

was you that taught us that in class. Right, though? You taught us to go

and change the world. Ain’t that what you all sell on that state college

page? To when shit is wrong that we should try to change it? So why you

all in here eating cake and chewing?”

- Bradford Richardson

life is the only real counselor –

wisdom unfiltered through personal experience

does not become a part of the moral tissue

moral tissue

- Edith

Wharton

Some of us have great stories, pretty stories - that take

place at lakes, with boats, and friends, and noodle salad.

Just no one in this car. But, a lot of people, that’s their

story -- good times, noodle salad. What makes it so hard is

not that you had it bad, but that you’re that pissed that so

many others had it good.

- Jack Nicholson,

“As Good As It Gets”

El Facho Conservador 1 year ago

3:39 “The thing that most struck me about those students in the street in

1968 was the sentimentality of their anger; it was all about themselves -

it wasn't about anything objective. Here they were, the spoiled middleclass

baby boomers who never had any real difficulty to cope with,

shouting their heads off in the street… burning the cars belonging to

ordinary proletarians who they pretended to be defending against some

imaginary oppressive structures erected by the bourgeoisie. The whole

thing was a complete fiction based on the antiquated ideas of Karl Marx

-- ideas which were already redundant in the mid nineteenth century.

They were enacting out, if you like, a self-scripted drama in which the

central character was themselves."

True in 1968, still true in 2018.

Art Curious 2 years ago

One of the great tragedies of modern American politics since Lyndon

Johnson declared war on poverty is that the Democratic Party has

viewed the black community as a voting bloc, more than as human

beings who want individual liberty and the right to participate in a free

market society like everyone else. For decades, we have seen the leftist

or progressivist social and economic worldview being imposed on the

culture, and during the Obama years, finally upon the government itself.

What I try to tell people who are compassionate and caring - who want

to solve social problems and find solutions to alleviate society’s

ills - is to start a charitable foundation, join a church, or run for a local

political office, where the people can hold you accountable for your

actions.

Sir Roger Scruton helps articulate an important counter point in

this interview by recognizing that not only can the State be

dangerous, but so can the free market being applied to areas it is

not designed to perform well in - like culture and heritage. There

is a place for government, and a place for the free market, and a

place for collective social action. The mistake the Left makes is

that they want the State to do too much. The mistake the Right

makes sometimes is that they want the free market to assume too

much responsibility. Everyone is forgetting the importance of

culture, community, and family and their unique expressions in

each part of the world and region where we live. There’s more

to life than political power and consumerism. Part of Scruton’s

genius is that he has been able to explain this so well.

Interviewer: "The indigenous working class has no

right to be upset about these liberal conceptions of sex

and marriage because they are the ones who have

embraced them."

Scruton: "This is the biggest area of temptation, and a

culture of resistance is needed for the protection of the

working class and children who need a father at home

who have lost that. Liberal propaganda has made it

impossible to say these things, unless you don't care

what people say about you. The truth has been made

unsayable by liberal censorship."

• James 3 minutes ago

Self-loathing liberals are proof human evolution is

teetering on remission. The nitwits expect the world to

take their flawed attempt at explaining a way to fix or

alter the most complex ball of math and physics

imaginable yet they can't balance a check book.

The planet has been through a lot worse

than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate

tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots,

magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles …

…hundreds of thousands of years

of bombardment by comets and

asteroids and meteors, worldwide

floods, tidal waves, worldwide

fires, erosion, cosmic rays,

recurring ice ages …

… And we think some

plastic bags and some

aluminum cans are going

to make a difference?

The planet isn’t going

anywhere. WE are!

We’re going away. Pack your shit,

folks. We’re going away. And we

won’t leave much of a trace,

either.

Maybe a little Styrofoam … The

planet’ll be here and we’ll be long

gone. Just another failed

mutation. Just another closed-end

biological mistake. An

evolutionary

cul-de-sac. The planet’ll shake us

off like a bad case of fleas.

The planet will be here for a long, long,

LONG time after we’re gone, and it will

heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s

what it does. It’s a self-correcting system.

The air and the water will recover, the

earth will be renewed. And if it’s true that

plastic is not degradable, well, the planet

will simply incorporate plastic into a new

paradigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth

doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic.

Plastic came out of the earth. The earth

probably sees plastic as just another one of

its children.

Could be the only reason

the earth allowed us to be

spawned from it in the first

place. It wanted plastic for itself.

it.

Didn’t know how to make

Needed us. Could be the answer

to our age-old

egocentric philosophical question,

“Why are we here?”

"Plastic… asshole.”

- George Carlin

indianplysgtr 3 days ago

responding to Bill: trump supporters are fucking idiots.

These inbreds who make up as plumbers and carpenters

don't have the rudimentary skills to understand climate

change. How about they leave complex issues to the

experts. If we need our toilet unclogged we know who to

call. Fucking uneducated morons....

Bill 3 days ago

Responding to indianplysgtr: U prob dont know shit about

climate change either "Muh scientists agree". Rand Paul is

laying out a Good case for why the paris agreement is bad

and how it promotes russian and chinese growth but not

american

Bill 3 days ago

Responding to indianplysgtr: The hate that the left displays

for the regular working man these days is pretty shocking.


responding to Bill: noticed when Jake Tapper asked this bimbo

where he is getting his talking points from and he said the energy

sector? He reads talking points from lobbyists and spouts them as

truth and the rubes in the Republican Party enthusiastically clap

like a seal with a bucket of chum. Some fuck mook from Podunk

Arkansas or Ohio eats this shit right up. Matter of fact, corporate

America overwhelmingly supports this accord. Why?

Because there is overwhelming, convulsive, evidence that trumps

golf course in Florida is going to be underwater. There isn't a

single conservative party in the world that believes climate

change is fake. It's just these inbreds, in this country, who think

they know better than the experts. These anti-intellectual

buffoons are so much smarter than the rest of us...

traderjack 3 days ago

responding to Zeke R: I guess we all live in echo chambers.

They say the exact same thing about us, that we have no

brains,etc. Let's face it, they are right on this one, the 0.2 degree

is documented and the Paris deal is a bad deal. Let's also face it,

it was colder 100 years ago. If we want to be totally honest ,

Rand Paul is also right about the most dramatic climate

changes was before we were here. I think we need to be more

intellectually honest instead of calling names, because they are

on top of the argument, and unfortunately we seem to be on

top of the propaganda and improper behavior. The title of this

clip was misleading, I was hoping for a take-down of Paul, all I

got was he was right.


responding to Bill: nah they don't work any harder than anyone

else. I refuse to massage their ego because they just happen to

live in rural America. When plumbers act like they know more

than the experts on complex domestic and foreign policy, then I

call bullshit. Look at any other conservative party in the world. It's

filled with people who are open minded and facts rule the day.

The Brits have May and Cameron to look up to our inbreds

emulate Steve Doocy.

Bill 3 days ago

Responding to traderjack: Haha you are so right man. I

watched this exact same video on Rands own channel and in

the comments everyone was saying how rand was OWNING

and killing it and here it is the absolute opposite.

Bill 3 days ago

Responding to indianplysgtr: "experts" The same experts

who gave arms to isis? The same "experts" who said

Hussein had wmds? The same "experts" who invaded

lybia? The same "experts" who got rid of mubarrak a

secular US ally. I could go on for days Obama

completely fucked the middle east and supplied arms

both indirectly and directly to jihadists so I am sorry if

I like to make up my own mind and dont trust the

people u call "experts"


responding to Bill: you seem to have gotten amnesia because

your outrage seems to have started in 2008 when the rest of us

knows a dumb fuck of epic proportions named dubya ran his ass

to Iraq because Hussein was a meanie to his fucking father.

When that fuck mook disbanded the Baathists what did he think

they were going to do? Sit home and watch cartoons? They ran

straight into the arms of no other than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Guess who are the disciples of that killer? It rhymes with lices.

You morons spent a billion dollars for an embassy and have

nothing but a squat to show for it. The violence melted

over to Syria and lo and behold everyone else needs to

clean up your fuck ups. How about you guys stop creating

wars for democrats to fix? You think you can try that?? Like

I said if I need my toilet unclogged I will call a republican.

If I need my tires fixed I will call a republican. You morons

will be the absolute last for anything else.

Muhree 3 days ago

All the rednecks in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and

Michigan?

Richard 3 days ago

Responding to Zeke R: can't believe you dumb chinks are so gullible

zbitdot 3 days ago

I would give you though, the tone and tenor

of Trump and Republicans is off. With the

American First justification. It should be

‘America Leads World into new debate and

paradigm from the Climate Agreement short

on common sense’ (following with ‘It will not

change the Climate - full with platitudes and

negative on humanity progression, 3rd world

esp.’) and use America First indirectly

jim 3 days ago

responding to Zeke R: This is a comment thread based on

your original comment in which you mock the impoverished

and label 30 out of fifty states in the American Union,

"rednecks". AND then you cry @ Mike N. for "taking shots on

people because offending is easier then discussing." Serious

question here. How fucking stupid and hypocritical are you?

jim 3 days ago

responding to indianplysgtr: Firstly, you have the grammatical

literacy of a fourth grader and the intellectual tolerance of an S.S.

officer. People like yourself limited, with small minds, and thus

an incapacity for basic critical thinking, or generic empathy for

their fellow human beings, were the beasts of the twentieth

century. Today, you are just a bile spewing, uneducated primate

who discredits himself with his own moronic display of a lack of

control over clear sentences. So... you can fuck off and keep

watching Jake Tapper while strutting around like you are well

informed. It's highly amusing to those of us who actually are, you

knuckle dragging, saliva drooling, moron.


responding to jim: isn't this cute. A subhuman mongrel of a

republican trying to front. First off you little twat, go and bleach

that putrid pussy of yours. I can smell your rotting fallopian tubes

from here. How the fuck you haven't killed old people and young

children with that foul stench is a mystery. Splash some poison

into it, it might soothe the verbal rape I just gave you.

Now go back to polishing the nuts on your truck, don't forget to

wear your camo pajamas and rummage around the forest barking

how the government is after your Medicare. Tell your mountain

sister/mother I said hi fuck mook!

jim 3 days ago

responding to indianplysgtr: You do realize your capacity to

vomit up incoherent attempts at insults, actually isn't

impressive, right? In retrospect it places several exclamation

points on my calling you a knuckle dragging, uneducated,

moron. Which clearly, you definitely are. Run along now boy

with your hateful, ignorant, indian persona and your small

stale mind and your fourth grade level grammar so you can

continue failing at learning how to play an instrument

created by white as snow Europeans. Irony is truly a beautiful

thing. I'm done here son. You're completely boring me.


responding to jim: do I look like I give two shits what you think?

You actually thought we were put in this world to massage your

fucking ego? Go back to waddling down the buffet line while

gorging on the trans fat. Republicans are a good test case study

on why you shouldn't be weaned off the breast so early. Being fed

a corn fed diet on a continuous basis turns your brain into mush.

The good news is half of you stale fucks are literally dying the

other half is riding rascal scooters in their cute xxxl size

bedazzled American flag t shirts barking how Obama's black army

was going to indoctrinate your hillbilly children to Leninism.

Amazing isn't it?

People don't respect conservatives one bit, get use to it,

you people deserve all the scorn coming your way.

jim 3 days ago

responding to indianplysgtr: You know the Avett Brothers

are literally a band for twelve year old girls who enjoy

watching feminine males sing in an extraordinarily

high pitch. I'm sensing very little masculinity in your

genetic computation. Or taste in music for that matter.

What is your heritage again? ...Oh. that's right.

Causality located.

Yourself 3 days ago

Snowflake alert.

Show less

Reply 3 4

Bill 3 days ago

Responding to indianplysgtr: I said why u would trust

experts from the government who has done all of this

things. Democrats started lybia. Democrats sponsored

jihadists they had know idea were those weapons are

going. "Stop starting wars for democrats to fix". If u

really think thats true then ure delusional

Show less

Reply 1

pgm 3 days ago

responding to Indianplysgtr: this shit is hilarious. Although I

would advise that too much vitriol towards the middle class

isn't great. It is the perhaps intolerance thereof... or at least

disconnectedness with them that causes so many of them

to foolishly vote against their own best interest and self

preservation. Well, that along with the intolerances so many

of them possess.

Show less

pgm 3 days ago

responding to jim: you do realize that your writing also

contains numerous grammatical errors and that you, too,

are resorting to "vomit[ing] up incoherent attempts at

insults" don't you? Ie, exactly the two primary complaints

you have about indianplysgtr. And then you had to drag

race/nationality/descent into this. WTF does that?

Show less

Frank 3 days ago

Liberals have to be the stupidest things on earth. Let me lay the

fact out for you, you uneducated, simple cuck. Climate

scientists agreed in the 70s that a "coming ice age was

imminent." What happened to that? And what happened to

Gore's ice caps being melted by 2104? They've grown. The

climate is too complex for accurate future predication. Hell,

the science of meteorology can't even consistently predict the

weather a week in advance, and we're going to fully invest in

scientist predicting events 50 to 100 years out?

You've got to be a huge moron to blindly believe in global

warming, err I mean coming ice age, Oh, I'm sorry, climate

change.

pgm 3 days ago

responding to Bill: The answer to those questions of those is

a resounding "No". Highly educated biologists,

climatologists, environmental scientists... etc from nearly

every country in the world are not the same "experts" who

invaded Libya. Is that really not clear to you? No, seriously,

isn't it? Because some experts in one field of study from

one administration are wrong about a topic doesn't mean

that every expert on any topic from now until forever will

be wrong. But, please, tell us how Obama completely

fucked the middle east starting in 2008.

Sandstone 3 days ago

Really? After doing my research. The Liberal Left mind set is the

doctrine of Demons. It is a rebellion and rejection of God. LGBT

marriage are you kidding me, this is the ultimate death oath that

sends both to hell. All of you lefties look in the mirror of truth, you

are headed to in the wrong direction. Obama was the closest thing we

have seen to the antichrist, he took America to the front gates of Hell.

He was Lawless, Unrighteous and a Liar. He also changed God's

perfect law on marriage. Hillary would have sealed the deal. Climate

Change is of Satan, it is NWO propaganda being used to put in place

along with Agenda 2030, which is the end times beast system. You

really want to pay a tax to Satan and the future antichhrist?

As told in the book of revelations. But no you people don't believe in

God, or if you do you have changed the glory of the uncorruptible God

into an image made like to corruptible man. You are serving after the

creation or creature rather than the Creator. You think you are saving

the planet with climate change, you are going to kill it, and things will

get so bad it will lead to the battle of armageddon. Your Global Citizen

program wants this complete in 13 years. Hopefully it fails and we get

some more time, if not the sun and moon get darkened the stars fall

from Heaven. Than it is game over, the lights go out for good, unless you

switch sides and go up in the rapture.

Alex 3 days ago

Sandstone, you gotta keep your psychedelic

literature intake in check, dude. ))

pgm 3 days ago

Sandstone, i hope you don't have access to any children

Climate change could kill thousands of Americans each year

with a rise in global temperatures of just 3 degrees

'triggering a surge in deaths by drowning, assault and

suicide'

➔ Did these geniuses also consider the fact that people being

active outdoors is healthier than being sedentary indoors?

Maybe the temperature rise will save more lives than their

ridiculous study predicts will be lost.

The authors miss the fundamental issue underlying the

enviro-rads hysteria about the apocalypse we face because of

global warming. This has nothing to do with science. Rational

debate is off the table because the deniers (read: Holocaust

deniers) are right wing nut jobs. The enviro-rads' and their largely

left-wing Dem sycophants' objective is not saving the life as we

know from imminent destruction. It is instead government control of

the energy industry, energy intensive manufacturing and ultimately

of the entire economy. In a word, the alarmists' objective is

totalitarianism.

see more

Phineas W → dao1 • 6 days ago

The [opposing] argument makes the common error of making

the case on pragmatism rather than going to the very

fundamental of the issue, the moral issue. Lord knows the

enviro-crazies go straight to the moral argument.

We as advocates of liberty and freer markets must do the

same, make our case on the moral level first. Then go to the

pragmatic arguments.

Phineas W • 9 days ago

There is no science that can justify total regulatory control of the

economy, what we used to call fascism.

Climate scientists and climate activists seem to

have all but forgotten that the science of human

nature fundamentally requires liberty.

Or have they?

It wouldn't be the first time that genius minds tried

to diminish liberty under the guise of science.

o Reply Share ›

David A → Phineas W • 4 days ago

With renewable energy sources you'll still plug your

toaster into the same outlet.

So how exactly does that diminish your "liberty?"

Reply

• •

Phineas W → DavidA • 4 days ago

Renewable energy, promoted by our government

with subsidies for over four decades now, still only

accounts for a very small percentage of overall

energy consumption, maybe 1-2%. That is not the

free market at work. That is government promoting a

grossly inefficient alternative.

The government has at its disposal only one method

to achieve its ends, force. So to answer your q,

liberty is diminished when the government uses force

against law abiding people to take away what they

earned so that it may be given unearned to someone

else. Subsidies to non-profitable green energy

companies are examples of diminished liberty and of

legal theft.

That to some of us is a perversion of proper law

that can only be called injustice.

Everything in moderation… including moderation.

- Julia Child

Dinesh D'Souza@DineshDSouza

“A terribly sad story. A young man gets wrapped up in the white

supremacy movement. In a moment of madness he drives a car into a pedestrian in

Charlottesville. Now he faces life in prison.” THAT’s a headline we’ll never see. I offer it

only to show how political propaganda works

Richard Spoor@Richard_Spoor

A terribly sad story. Two young and idealistic lawyers, get wrapped up in

the BLM protest movement. In a moment of madness they throw a

Molotov cocktail into an abandoned police car and burn it. Now they face a

minimum 35 years in a federal prison. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/lawyers-arrested-molotov-cocktail-nycprotest.htm

I reclaim my time@gruffmadness

Replying to @Richard_Spoor

A moment of madness?! Which moment? Emptying the bottle? Finding the funnel,

finding a container of gas? Filling the bottle? Stuffing a rag in the bottle? Driving and

looking for a target... With the bottles? There's a whole lot of premeditation there for a

damn moment of madness

Jacko Mills@JohnnoMills


There's a simple way to avoid going to jail for bombing police cars. I use

this one simple trick every day & I do not go to jail for bombing police cars.

That simple trick: Do not bomb police cars. It's so simple. Handily, this trick

is very easy to get used to.

pipermcq@pipermcq

Aug 5


I would imagine the dragging you took for this one was

legendary, so I will only add a bit more to it. A “moment of

madness?” Seriously? They tried to explode a police car with

officers inside. Some bells you can’t unring. They deserve every

minute of that 35 years to life.

Jim Jatras@JimJatras

Aug 6


They deserve 35 years just for being young idealistic lawyers.

Brock

@BrockTheFree

I hate when weapons that take time to prepare just materialize out of thin

air at the exact time I'm experiencing a moment of madness.

So inconvenient! It's bound to get anyone into trouble!

Tony H@Sabrewulfe

Aug 6


Funny how you fail to mention what else they had in the car when the cops

caught them.....you know, in this `moment of madness`

Mark Dice@MarkDice

Aug 6


Who hasn’t made a Molotov cocktail and thrown it at a police car

in a momentary lapse of judgement at one point in their career?

whatsthatbook.com@whatsthatbook

Aug 6


Not a "moment of madness." For cryin' out loud, this young woman did a

TV interview announcing her strategy. "The only way they hear us is

through violence."

Mr. Sunset Terra Cotta Kano's_Razor • 4 years ago • edited

Nothing like hanging back for a little R&R at the rear a few

days after the main wave of commenters. I wonder how

things are going up on the front lines.

"Removing guns from the culture wouldn't

curb homicide/murder any more than

removing cell phones from the culture would

eliminate phone calls."

I can't help but unpack this a little. Noting that "curb" and

"eliminate" are two different things, I submit that

"removing guns" would arguably curb homicide by a great

deal. The problem is that "removing guns" is an

impossibility. If [Jeffery] Wells could clap his hands three

times and make every firearm disappear, we'd see the

homicide rate drop by quite a bit and double-digit

casualties even more. And I think a lot of the homicides are

less "hot-blooded" crimes of passion than they are nihilistic

expressions of sociopathy. Those impulses would still be

there, but they'd be a lot less empowered.

My take on Kurt Russell's "point" (or as you put it,

"the spirit of his perspective") is, as I suggested elsewhere,

that it's probably largely driven by the context provided by

Wells. To paraphrase, "So there was this terrorist attack

and you're in a violent Tarantino movie, don't you think

people will shun it because we all know guns are for

dumbfuck racist white guys with small dicks and this was

all their fault?"

When confronted with this perspective, it seems more

reasonable to argue that it is not a productive analysis of

what caused - or could have prevented - this incident. It's

like wanting to argue over speed limits after a drunk driver

just killed a family of four going 90 the wrong way. (Cue

analogy haters.) Just because someone says "No speed limit

is going to stop that from happening" in response to

someone who only wants to talk about slower speed limits,

it doesn't mean they think we shouldn't even have any. The

context helps dictate the rhetoric.

I'm probably not entirely on Russell's side myself, but I

think the amount of light this exchange shines upon his

views is limited. And while I don't know about your

"equidistant" theory, I do believe that there's no stance so

right that it can't exist in a stupider and more dogmatic

form. In fact, often the righter the stance the more likely

this is to happen.

20

Jackson Henry 7 years ago

"Gun control is like OSHA

for burglars." Well said Mr.

Sowell!

stephenf@emncaity ·Jul 7 2020

I'd prefer that people wouldn't comment on the internal mental states of

other people, but Carlson's point, in the context of the entire segment, is

that Duckworth is one of many people whose actions mark them as being

bent on radically distorting ...

... the reality of what this nation is, comically overstating the flaws and

ignoring the good, etc. -- and that going to the "I was a soldier and I was

disabled, so I'm immune from criticism" well one more time is getting more

than a little old. ...

stephenf@emncaity Jul 7

While people are getting all heated up about Tucker's statement, hardly anybody at the

major media orgs seems to think it's any kind of big deal at all that Duckworth either

lied, or was stupendously ignorant, about Trump's speech on July 4th, in which she said

…

... he praised Confederate leaders but in fact he did no such thing. (You can check the

transcript for yourself.) She was widely applauded among the usual woke crowd, but it

was blatantly and provably false. But, you know, she was in the service, so...

stephenf@emncaity Jul 7

I come from a family of soldiers going back to before the Civil

War on one side and even before the Revolution on the other

side. (Also, John Adams and J.Q. Adams were my great-great-etc.-

grandfathers.) An uncle was at Ardennes (the Battle of the Bulge).

A cousin ...

... was shot in Vietnam -- twice -- and survived. Dad was in

the Navy, at the first Pacific atomic bomb test. Mom was in

the Coast Guard during the war. On and on. I remember a

time when no soldier would use his service ...

1:58 PM · Jul 7, 2020·Twitter Web App

stephenf@emncaity

·Jul 7

Replying to @emncaity

... as a way of proving he was right about some arguable substantive point

and to suppress whatever somebody else was saying about it. Soldiers then

knew that there were people in the service who were there for the right

reasons, some who were there for wrong reasons, ...

stephenf@emncaity

·Jul 7

... some who were heroes, some who were real scumbags, some who had

good intentions and some who didn't, some patriotic and some not. I don't

know how we got into the state we're in about it now. It's ridiculous. ...

stephenf@emncaity

·Jul 7

Also, Duckworth and her advocates don't seem to apply this standard

universally. They'll rip on a Trump-supporting veteran as a toothless,

backward, unevolved Trumptard just as soon as they will any other Trump

supporter. So yeah, it's getting tiresome.

9:23 PM · Aug 7, 2019·Twitter Web App

I hardly ever do this, mainly because I have friends and know good people

on both sides of the aisle. But it's just too much right now. If you're one of

those people for whom the primary or sole meaning of a mass shooting is

that it gives you another opportunity to pump out some more anti-Trump

and "hate toothless backward white-supremacist Trump voters" vitriol, you

really need to figure out what's wrong with you. Seriously.

Take a few days and think about what you've become.

Obviously, we have a problem. But facts matter: Twenty-six of the 27

shooters in the biggest mass-shooting events in modern American history

were fatherless. You want to look for a cause, there's one place to start. The

U.S. is about 94th among nations of the world in murder rate. We do not

have the highest rate of mass killings or victims of mass killings. Are you

getting that from mass media? Or a different story? Mass shootings

continue at about the same rate they've been at for the past several

decades, through presidents and Congresses of both parties, while gunownership

rates go up but the overall murder rate has actually gone down.

That is a very specific problem that doesn't bend well to memes and

platitudes and partisan blasting. Also, the "Australian miracle" is a myth. I

wish it were true, and I wish it were that easy. But it isn't. Sorry to the

kneejerk xenophiles here. No serious proposal to ban all firearms is being

made by anybody in Congress. Even if you could do it without a widespread

uprising, there would still be somewhere around 300 million firearms out

there in circulation. What do you think is going to happen to those? Guns

are durable goods. The ones made last week will be firing bullets a hundred

years from now, if they're taken care of reasonably well. You'd better

change the mind and heart that has access to the gun, because you're not

going to make guns actually unavailable. They're going to be available, and

they'll be available for a long time. Longer than your lifetime. Longer than

your children's lifetimes. You're going to need a better plan than "scream

until all guns are gone." You're going to need to think in clearer terms than

"If we pass this law against guns, that guy who was planning to massmurder

a ton of people at the mall won't be able to get a weapon, so he'll

just give up that plan." If all guns were made illegal tomorrow, getting one

would be no more than a speed bump for a criminal intent on doing harm.

It's the intent to do harm that matters. You're either interested in actual

facts or you just want to keep picking up and amplifying the monocultural

narrative and its memes. If that's all you're going to do, you're not helping,

and in fact you're probably making things worse by continuing to add to

the weight of public opinion that's rolling its way down a blind alley, away

from any real solutions. The fact is that we do mental health really badly in

this country. Even aside from diagnosable mental illness, even for more

ordinary people, there is a sickness in this culture, an isolation and

objectification and casual hatred, an inability or refusal to have normal

human empathy for other people, along with the obsessive need for fame

by any means, that people are marinating in every day. In a population of

320 million, with that going on all the time, it's pretty much a given that a

few of those people are sick enough to see actual human beings as nothing

but meaningless targets, ciphers, just characters in their own personal

dramas. You want to make a difference here? Find out why that happened

and what to do about it. Hate to break it to you, but it's been seen in

violent offenders, particularly young ones, for at least 30 years or more

now. It's not even close to a Trump thing. You need to stop this adolescent

nonsense of acting like everything really bad or really good in the world

started just when you started paying attention to it. This is maybe the best

brief thing I've heard since this awful weekend, from J.H. Kunstler: "This is

exactly what you get in a culture where anything goes and nothing matters.

"Extract the meaning and purpose from being here on Earth, erase as many

boundaries as you can from custom and behavior, and watch what

happens, especially among young men." But if your whole shtick is about

figuring out what can be seen today as more evidence that Trump is Satan,

how many more things can be posed as never happening before Trump

came along, how to justify showing up at a senator's house and actually

making death threats in your protest against violence, etc., …. ... I guess

you're going to continue to make actual human tragedy just a cipher, just a

part of your own personal drama, your own running narrative. Maybe in five

years you'll see the problem here. Circle back sometime.

If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people to collect wood

and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long

for the endless immensity of the sea.

– Antoine deSaint-Exupery

Chainyanker - So first off, a couple of points: The U.S. isn't like

other countries, so saying "U.S. is the LAST developed country

in the world to have universal health coverage" is a fallacious

position. Government run healthcare is marginal at best (Make friends

with some folks from the U.K. and ask them how much they like it.)

Also, it's easy to say "all these European countries have free healthcare

and free college" but the truth is, they have the option for those

"luxuries" because they aren't picking up the really high dollar items like

global defense.

Anyway, on to your question: How is it bad? Let's just look at some

highlights:

1) The number of people who now have healthcare isn't 9 out of 10. I

have no idea where you got that number. The ACA website doesn't even

have that number. The number that have SIGNED UP is 17 million.

Signing up is different than actually having coverage. More on that in a

minute.

2) About 2 million of those people who signed up already had insurance,

but lost coverage when their employers dropped their insurance because

of the costs the ACA imposed.

3) Cost - Rates of coverage vary widely. Some plans are so expensive

that people simply can't afford it and choose to pay the fine. Others buy

it, but the deductibles are so high (Like $6000 ) that it’s like having no

insurance at all. (Really, it's just catastrophic insurance at that point) and

they still have to pay out of pocket, so they are getting almost nothing

for their money.

4) Efficiency - The government is notoriously bad at everything it does.

Some things, like national defense and interstate commerce have to be

done at the federal level, even if it is horribly mismanaged. Healthcare is

not someplace you want the government involved. (just look how badly

the VA healthcare system and Medicare/Medicaid have been run.)

5) Budget Projections - In 1987, Congress projected that Medicaid - the

joint federal-state health care program for the poor - would make special

relief payments to hospitals of less than $1 billion in 1992. Actual cost:

$17 billion.

In 1967, long-run forecasts estimated that Medicare would cost about

$12 billion by 1990. In reality, it cost more than $98 billion that year.

Today it costs $500 billion.

These aren't rounding errors; these are order of magnitude errors created

because the government can't possibly run like a business. It is a terrible

mechanism for running business. There simply is no accountability. No

one got in trouble for grossly underestimating the cost of Medicare,

because the government isn't going to punish itself. It just keeps growing

and growing. .(from an ACA thread circa 2017).

Nearly 100% of US women who got abortions say it was the

'right decision' five years after undergoing the procedure,

study finds

Of course they are going to say that they don’t regret their decision. By

regretting it, they would be acknowledging that they killed their unborn child

rather than just disposed of some useless mass of cells. They should poll

the women who decided not to abort. The women who I have spoken to

that considered abortion but decided to keep their baby consider it the best

decision of their life because they love their child and can’t imagine life

without them

“I think the reason the

abortion issue is such a hot

issue and the reason that so

many people do that split - go

all the way to one side or all

the way to the other…

because it does, in fact leave

you without… there's no

middle ground here… and so

you have to pick one… And if

both sides of the argument

make sense to you - because

they do - then you have to

decide which one has the

greater weight. And I don't

have the religious belief that

some people do, that drives

them to be very, very

passionate about this -- and

nor do I have the complete

lack of religious belief that

drives other people to be in the other position. This one is a tough one.

The reason I come down on the pro-life side is essentially pretty simple.

People say “This is my body - I should be able to control my own

body.” And I one hundred percent agree with that. But it's not your

body if this is an entirely different chromosomal pattern. You could

take a sample from the mother and a sample from the infant and you

would get two completely different people.

So frankly… look, the abortion issue is very simple and could get

resolved in one sentence. It won't be resolved in one sentence, but it

could be if you put all the advertising terms away… pro-life…prochoice…

put all that stuff away. What it comes down to is: “Is it a

person - yes or no - from conception to birth?

Is it a person?

If it's not a person, then who the hell are you to tell me what to do with

my bodily functions. If it is a person, then it has protections that

supersede somebody else's opinion about it -- and that's where the

entire heart of the issue is. Is it a person or not… and the reason this

thing is so bloody hard is because from conception to birth, there is no

single day or event that happens; there's no switch; there's no milemarker

that gets passed. It is a perfect spectrum of absolute uniformity

between a cell that splits in half and a little baby that comes crying into

the world. And this is why this issue is such a bear.

It’s a tragic conversation. There's nobody in this discussion who's

happy about this - no one's going “woo-hoo”. I had an interesting

thought about the abortion issue, because it got to me the question of

the whole “person” issue -- and maybe this will help people who are

on the pro-choice side understand the pro-life position. At least

understand it, if not agree with it. I certainly don’t expect them to

agree with it. At least understand it. And my position -- my thought

experiment was this: “Whose side were you on in the Civil War?”

Most people would say the North. Now the South claims that the North

launched this war of aggression, because they wanted to secede – state

rights, and all that. The reason the South left the Union was they

wanted the state’s rights - and the state right was the state right to have

slaves. So let's just call it what it is. They left before Lincoln was even

inaugurated. If you're a southerner, your position was: “This is my

property and they're going to launch a war and come all the way down

to my house and take my property - then of course it's aggression - of

course I'm going to fight it”. The North's position is the same position,

actually, as the pro-life crowd, which is: “That is a living person there,

and you do not own them, and you do not have a right to determine

their destiny.” Therefore, we have a right to go down and free the

slaves. We have not only a right, we have an obligation - and so now

what you find out is that the motivation of the Civil War comes down

to a very simple issue: “Are slaves people - yes or no - because if slaves

are not people… if blacks from Africa are not people - they're not

humans… then they're property -- like horses, and cattle, and so on…

The North is absolutely wrong, the war’s completely unjust, and so

on.”

But if they are people, then the North has the moral right and the

obligation to have the government step in on that person's individual

choice and protect that individual. That's the fundamentals of the

pro-life position: it has its own unique genetic code; it cannot defend

itself; it is no longer subject to your choice. It's a person and we're

going to protect it.

Is it a person or isn’t it? How do I know? We

know conception; we know birth -- and that's

all. And because the spectrum is

uninterrupted, we find ourselves in this

horrible conundrum which pits me against

my desire to protect innocent lives that can't

defend themselves and against the disgusting,

repulsive idea that any institution - including

the government - can tell you what to do and

when to do it.

Everybody automatically demonizes the other side - automatically

assumes they're evil. I suppose I've been guilty of that to some degree. I

try to focus that kind of vitriol on people who I am convinced are

aware of what they're doing. You know, not just people… most… all…

virtually all liberals… well, I think many liberal policies I consider to

be very poor, and some of them I consider to be downright evil. But I

will certainly grant that the huge majority of people who support

these policies do so for fundamentally good reasons. They think it's the

best way to help people. They think it's the kind thing to do; they think

it's the nice thing to do. I don't question their motives, but the people

who are enforcing these policies know what the consequences are in

the real world, and those people have a problem…

- Bill Whittle

Henry Smith3 years ago

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the

consent of the Owner. Solider=fetus / House=uterus. Better than the

slavery analogy.

Anthony 3 years ago

Everybody wants fewer abortions; I think we can all agree on this.

So, more contraceptives, Sex Ed, and proper education about how

to have good relationships would help. The irony is that the

religious pro-lifers are often against these measures... Also,

clapping and cheering on politicians who proclaim pro-choice at

rallies is a bad idea... you know the other side thinks you're

cheering on baby killing...not a good image...

Avdcmp 3 years ago

On the later point. Bill says it comes down to one question: "is it a person

...or not"? This is out of context. They are both entities. Both human

entities. But what of actual development and potential development? How

much of a person is a human cell at the point it has split into two? Not

much of a "person", but definitely a potential person. Why afford the same

rights to a two-cell entity that are given to a multicell, conscious being who

is able to sustain its own independent life? At the end, Bill makes the

comparison to slaves. A slave is an actual person, whereas a fetus is a

potential person. This is a not comparing apples with apples.

Tentacle 3 years ago

I consider the unborn baby a person. I also consider that person to

be an aggressive person in active attack against the mother. That

unborn person is sucking nutrients from the mother, causing the

mother pain and discomfort. Risking the mother's life during the

birth process. So yes that unborn child is a person, but the mother

has the right to self defense against that person.

Charles 3 years ago

In the same sense, the mother is potentially trying to abort the baby. So, by

your logic, the baby has the right to defend itself against the mother. And it was

the mother who caused the baby to start becoming a person in the first place.

So technically the mother made the first move. Now the child grows in order to

become self-sufficient, but it must feed off the mother for a short time. And

once born, raised to advocate for other mothers to be able to abort babies

because it knows what it puts its Mom thru. But it is so glad it wasn't aborted,

so that it could make sure other mothers have the ability to abort babies just

like it. See the hypocrisy? The day an aborted baby advocates for abortion will

be the day I am silenced. Need more evidence for how abortion is legalized

murder? Talk to any of the 23 people in the world who have survived an

abortion, they might enlighten you.

Alan 1 year ago

Mostly good, but he has fallen for the Lincoln myth. As far as the war being

fought over slavery: it was because of racist northerners who did not want

black people in the newly acquired territories. Several northern states

prohibited blacks from residing in those states, and Lincoln's plan to deport the

black population was only thwarted because the man he hired for the job

absconded with the money. Of course, the war was really more about the clash

between uncompetitive northern industrialists who relied on a combination of

protectionist tariffs and federal subsidies paid for from revenues that came

overwhelmingly from the southern states (around 90% of federal revenue at

the time came from the southern states). Lincoln even supported the proposed

Corwin Amendment which would have sealed slavery in U.S. law forever, and

it was the southern states that rejected it.

In a famous 1862 letter to Horace Greeley, Lincoln explained the reasons for

his action and his long-held feelings on enslavement and equality:

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to

save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I

would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I

could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to

save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would

help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing

hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will

help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall

adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

“I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official

duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal

wish that all men everywhere could be free.”

watsyurdeal3 years ago

My problem with the abortion debate: I constantly hear about the abortion itself, but

not its symptoms. You can't reduce or stop abortions without attacking the reasons why

they happen at all. If a Republican candidate came on stage and talked about how we

should be improving sex education, offering more birth control and preventive

measures, offered programs for single mothers to help with the financials, and

drastically improved the adoption process and how we manage orphans and children

offered up for adoption at birth, I would be much more inclined to vote for him or her.

Josh 3 years ago

I am pro-life from a religious perspective, but it raises many issues. A young

mother could receive intense social backlash (such as if she is in high school)

and possibly be forced to drop out and go to work. A poor mother may be

unable to be healthy enough for pregnancy -- let alone care for a baby. Or

be unable to afford a $10,000+ hospital bill. Children who are neglected are

more likely to become criminals as well. My point is: pro-life people have a

responsibility to provide child care services and subsidies for birth (while

avoiding exploitable benefits) if they wish to push that as an option - just as

pro-choice advocates wish to provide access to clean and medically safe

abortion.

Flg Flm Pro 3 years ago

I understand the abortion/slavery analogy, as far as giving

personhood to an unborn child, but it falls short in my opinion.

Hear me out.... A slave owner after abolition could basically say, "Ok,

you are not my property. My mistake. You're free. Have a good life.

Good luck." There's no inherent physical risk to the slave owner to

let their slaves free. If anything, it would make the slave owner

safer, because they wouldn't have these people around all the time,

who hate them for treating them as less than a person. Right?

Whereas, a pregnant woman takes on physical risk by seeing a

pregnancy to term. It changes her body in ways they probably

otherwise wouldn't choose - in most cases – forever. She most likely

will have to take time off from work, and even risk death... It would

maybe be a fairer analogy if, when the slaves were freed, that slave

owners were forced by the government to take care of ex-slaves for

9 months (feed them, give them shelter, and medical treatment)

without the requirement that the person work. The slave owner

must then gain 40 pounds within that same time period, plus not do

any physical labor for the last, say 3 months... Then, after all that, a

small percentage of the slave owners would be executed arbitrarily...

ablnch 3 years ago

Even if a fetus is considered human at any point in gestation, the problem exists

that one person cannot be held accountable for another person’s life. Take a simple

thought experiment to remove the 'baby blinders' from the equation. You pass out

in a bar and wake up in the hospital. Apparently, someone crashed their car outside

the bar and you were the only person nearby compatible with their blood type. So

now you're some “living life support”, and have some random person attached to

you at the forearm. The doctors assure you that you can sue everyone in sight for

what they did to you against your will.

But now you have a choice: let this random person leech off you for 9 months

while they regrow all their internal organs, or cut him off and go back to your free

life, leaving them to die like they would have - had you not been there. Would a

law forcing someone to lose their freedom for 9 months be a good law? Where

would a law like that end? Would doctors be required by law to save every

possible person because they're the only ones who can? A baby is a person just like

any other. They have rights. But the moment you start forcing babies to infringe on

the rights of other people, we have a problem. This isn't a solution, but I think

starting from this point is a whole lot clearer than trying to decide how many cells

equal a person.

TheOlzi 3 years ago

I believe a parent is accountable for their baby. Let's say the child was sick and

dying after birth, does the parent have the right to decide the fate of the baby?

REPLY

ablnch 3 years ago

True, but the point is the parent does not want to be responsible for the child at

all. Parents can give up their child even before they are born.

REPLY

Star Dreamer 3 years ago

Not sure if you're arguing against welfare and social programs...

REPLY

ablnch 3 years ago

I’m not arguing any points. I’m just trying to give people a new perspective on a

topic that is very convoluted. All I care about is freedom for every individual.

REPLY

TheOlzi 3 years ago

how do you know the parent is not trying to be responsible for the baby? Maybe

bringing a child into that person’s current lifestyle would be awful for the baby,

thus the most responsible thing to do is not have it.

REPLY

ablnch 3 years ago

People are only responsible for others by choice. If your child is sick and you

want to keep them, you are obligated to get them medical attention. If your child

is sick and you do not want them, you can give them up to the state and not be

responsible for any medical procedures. The topic is abortion and how much

influence the state should have in the decisions people make.

Show less

REPLY

stontmple p 3 years ago

But do you really think the perception and beliefs of a minority

should take away someone else's rights? Clearly, a person who is

pro-life would never HAVE an abortion themselves, but if we

make abortion illegal under any circumstances, we just

endanger women because regardless of what laws are in place,

they are going to get one. Birth, is not an easy task. It's actually

pretty traumatic and to force women to have these babies is

inhumane. Yes, more inhumane than an actual abortion.

All people have a line, and I think that if at three months you don't

know you are pregnant, you should be responsible for the baby. You

should have dealt with it.

Yes, abortion is dirty, and nobody likes it. But what would be your

line? Can someone not have an abortion at 2 months?

How about 1 month? If you really are pro-life, you put the life of the

woman before that of a potential life, not the other way around.

That just makes you “pro birth.” And as far as abortions go, we

should really fund planned parenthood, shouldn't we? If you want

less abortions, then you should be for funding. Look at Texas --

Abortions went way up after they cut funding.

Jay 3 years ago

From the top?

'But do you really think the perception and beliefs of a minority should

take away someone else's rights?'

- Rights are rights, not a consensus of the majority. Counting noses isn't

the best way to arrive at a plan of action. Democratically, two wolves

and a sheep arguing over dinner doesn't make it right for the sheep.

'if we make abortion illegal under any circumstances, we just endanger

women because regardless of what laws are in place, they are going to

get one.'

- I'm going to start with the callous 'And?', then move into the rest of it.

If the woman wants to kill the child that badly, I'm not sure that I'm

going to be all fired, concerned for her safety. Y'all might disagree with

me when I say that it's a baby, and that aborting it for anything other

than the life of the mother is murder, but there it is. The rest of it is that

the numbers would go waaayyy down, and that would always be a good

thing to me.

'Birth, is not an easy task.It's actually pretty traumatic and to force

women to have these babies is inhumane.'

- Did someone force her to have sex? Was that inhumane? Is someone

forcibly crushing her skull and ending her life with a vacuum? Is that

inhumane? Your grasp on and focus on 'inhumanity' would be a little

more relevant to me if it were a bit more consistent. 'Forcing' her to bear

the child for a year seems inhumane to you, but chopping up a baby does

not?

'Yes, more inhumane than an actual abortion. '

- Bull. You want proof? Show the results of an abortion in a theatre in public. You

can - and people actually have - shown birth in media, including the aftermath and

even breastfeeding. Have you ever seen the (even scrubbed clean) tissues after an

abortion?

'Yes, abortion is dirty, and nobody likes it'

- Most sane people, I would agree with. Lena Dunham who wishes she could've

had an abortion? Really? Good try at building a bridge there, though.

'But what would be your line? Can someone not have an abortion at 2

months? how about 1 month?'

- When the child has its own heartbeat, sometime after five weeks. I would rather

the answer be NEVER, but I can compromise.

'If you really are pro-life, you put the life of the woman before that of a

potential life, not the other way around. That just makes you pro birth.'

- Another good try at forcing your definitions on people. It's not a 'potential life', it

is a life. It is not putting the baby's life ahead of the mother's, it is putting the

baby's life ahead of the mother's convenience. There is an actual difference.

'And as far as abortions go, we should really fund planned parenthood,

shouldn't we?'

- No. We absolutely should not.

'If you want less abortions then you should be for funding. Look at Texas,

Abortions went way up after they cut funding.'

- Is this seriously the best argument you have for this? After all the videos

exposing Planned Parenthood, you think they need more funding? Not permissible

in a court run by the left is not nearly the same as 'never happened'. Cutting the

abortion rate down from 1,000,000 or so a year to under 10,000, or even 100,000

would be a very good thing to me. Some of those mothers getting hurt in the

process doesn't matter to me all that much, either.

Basically "fuck women" is your stance. I mean if that's your view, I can't

really convince you from there.

REPLY

Sam 3 years ago

What about the thousands of women aborted every day, do you

not care about them?

stontmple p 3 years ago

Sam oh please. You’re really going to put month-old fetuses on

the same pedestal as a grown woman, with memories, feelings,

loved ones, sentience, and dreams?

REPLY

Bearistotle 3 years ago

Women have a .00018% chance of dying from child birth. Not exactly a

high risk my dude. Whereas the person has a 100% risk of us going in and

making sure they are never born, after they have already been conceived

and, when left to their natural devices, would be born.

Bearistotle 3 years ago

Also, more oversimplification there, bud. I am not pro-life because the idea of an

abortion makes me "uncomfortable". I am pro-life because I believe every person

deserves a chance at life.

REPLY

Sam 3 years ago

Don't try to conflate pro-life views with sexism; do you realize that the

majority of pro-life individuals are women?

12

REPLY

Samuel Underwood3 years ago

Do you really think that the millions of men and women in the pro-life

movement are motivated by an intense burning hatred of women? Of

course you don't. What you are trying to do is to win an argument, not by

using actual logic, reasoning, and facts, but instead by throwing out ad

hominem attacks at anyone who disagrees with your stance. Look, it is fine

to be pro-choice, but if your only way of supporting your stance is by

throwing out insults, you shouldn't be a part of this discussion.

Read more

14

REPLY

Lara 3 years ago

"Progressive" and "liberal' - never mind. You just dealt with it. I do argue

that we know nothing between conception and birth. I don't advocate

abortion as birth control. I am even okay with early limits at 12 weeks with

an opportunity for judicial intervention if necessary. But the primary reason

women reluctantly choose abortion is because they do not have the means

to support a child and the woman ends up with the pregnancy 100% of the

time. We cannot provide adequate oversight and protection for the children

already in foster care - and we certainly cannot support an additional one

million children. DNA [reasoning] means two individuals have less access

to furthering their careers or education -- less chance to put more in and

take less out. There is a balance and it can be done, but we have to get the

emotional and religious filter off, if we're going to make rational legislation

on this issue. I am also a classical liberal, as well; I had never heard a prolife

position not cloaked in religiosity. I thoroughly enjoy this series.

Show less

REPLY

Human Speaking 1 year ago

The abortion issue for me is: If a female has to give up her own life, she

must do it willingly. If men demand she gives birth, and if she dies in

childbirth, the man who forced her to have the child should be killed as well,

since he just forced her to die. As a female, I would rather focus on why

abortions are needed - not that they are needed.

Prevention of a tragedy that is 99.9% preventable is far more

productive. Our society needs to stop acting like random sex with each

other does not have serious consequences. I view it the same way you

explained how you care more about Black Lives Matter than the people in

Black Lives Matter. If men actually give a rat’s ass about abortion, why do

so many of them have sex with females they are not married to and are not

knowingly trying to have a family with?

Show less

REPLY

rick4652 years ago

Mr. Whittle, the reason for the prosecution of the Civil War on

the part of the North was NOT the ending of slavery. Some from

the North believed that was the motivating factor, MOST did

not. MOST in the South did not agree with the ownership of

humans. Slavery was not even illegal in several Northern states

when the North forced the attack on Ft. Sumter. The cause of

the war was the federal government's failure to follow the

Constitution. It was the belief in the Constitution that caused

the southern states to say, 'That's enough. We're out'. It was an

issue of 'freedom fighters' or 'insurgents' – VS -- 'preservationists'

or 'tyrants'. Your abortion argument was spot on (and I

STRONGLY applaud Dave Rubin’s platform to allow discussion

about it rather than vitriol and argument), but the comparison

of the Civil War is misguided.

Show less

REPLY

Richard 2 years ago

On the abortion part of this conversation ... it is a thorny issue, but

once I thought through it, (after pushing for one abortion in my

youth and fighting against one later), it is simple. After sperm meets

egg, leave things alone for 9 months, out comes a human being ... no

question. With modern health care and modern prophylactic

choices, there is no reason to get pregnant carelessly ... abortion is

murder. If you kill a pregnant woman, you will be charged with

double homicide. Enough said ... my logic is unassailable.

R. S.3 years ago

All this back and forth just proves Whittle's point....

Whether you see that unborn life as a "living person"

(endowed with unalienable rights) or not is the point of

contention. Here's another question to consider.... If one

day medical science does establish a point at which that

unborn life becomes a "person" and you find your

assumptions were wrong, would you be ashamed about

your previous stance?

without them.

success is a

journey, not a

destination

Success is a journey, not a destination

trying to be happy by accumulating possessions is like trying to satisfy

hunger by taping sandwiches all over your body. – George Carlin

in making a living today,

many no longer leave room for life

-Joseph Sizoo

Darth 19702 years ago

Leftists have always seen the working class as a mere means to an

end, and nothing more. Once progressives have gained power, their

true colors show through, and the workers are cast aside, as they are

no longer of use.

REPLY

AK 1 year ago

We haven't cast aside the working class. We have done and

continue to do our best to get the working class to cast aside the

traditions, prejudices and indoctrination, including excessive

patriotism and ethnic false consciousness, which keep members

of the working class obedient to and exploited by the

illegitimately wealthy, illegitimately ruling elites and respectful

of that elite.

Show less

REPLY

aussieboy087 1 year ago

What you said there is exactly consistent with the original

message. Casting aside all the traditions, systems, hierarchies,

and patriotism is YOUR goal, based on your personal morals.

What you ignore is how that has never actually benefited the

working class in history. Your goal scratches your own itch for

moral superiority, to be seen as a defender of the weak, while

having almost no reflection on the actual results for the workers.

That is exactly as said -- you are deceptively stating that you are

representing the workers, while only using them as the means

for your own ends of toppling authority. Never in world history

have so many been raised out of poverty than in the postcommunism,

post-Marxist eras, when countries adopted the

capitalist and free market system. Capitalism incentivizes people

to create value for others in society, by providing goods and

services that they VOLUNTARILY pay for. That is an amazing

thing to incentivize. You get wealthy yourself, by providing

other people in society with what they want.

Show less

REPLY

William 1 year ago

Leftists, like their Soviet counterparts, view working people as

"useful idiots." Useful idiots are the first to be sacrificed when

leftists gain power.

REPLY

David 1 year ago

regressives

REPLY

David 1 year ago

@Stephen socialism is theft

jaybone 1 year ago

Of course, there are no leftists -- not a single one, (not even

Bernie Sanders, really) -- serving in American government at the

national level. American Democrats are not leftists.

REPLY

chbrules 1 year ago

Stalin killed the "successful" farmers.

REPLY

Gallowglass 1 year ago

Progressives are not leftists, they're regular liberals. I don't

blame you for being annoyed by progressives, anyway, because

their goal is to pass small reforms that please some of the

masses, but don't accomplish any real change - leaving their elite

patrons to comfortably line their pockets.

REPLY

Frederick the Great 1 year ago

@AK You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth. How

can you claim to champion the interests of the working class,

while simultaneously seeking to subvert the working man's

beliefs and desires? Your political philosophy is transparently

self-serving.

Flwlss Strtgy 1 year ago

How are successful capitalists "illegitimately wealthy"? Liberals

always imagine that rich people and corporations stole money

from their customers. No, people willingly give them the money

for things they imagine they must have: $1,000 phones; $300

shoes, etc. No one stole the money. If you're talking about tax

breaks and other incentives... well, that's just what they are,

incentives. Without these incentives, capitalists will head for

greener pastures, and you will lose the benefit of having them in

your neighborhood, including the jobs they provide. (To this, the

liberals scoff: "Who needs them anyhow!") If some other

country actually had better incentives, the capitalists could all

leave tomorrow, and the US would become just another 3rd

world shithole, with everyone jobless, poor, hungry, destitute,

etc. Capitalism comes with some necessary “evils”. However, it

is not immoral – rather, it is amoral. Libs/leftists/socialists are

so myopic. The biggest problem is, you want what the rich have,

but do not want to actually go out and get it; you want it given to

you with no effort on your part, but I have news for you…

spoiler alert! The rich aren't going to hand over their wealth just

because you throw a temper tantrum.

grizzlygrizzle1 year ago

For the left, they have always been "useful idiots."

Unfortunately for the left, the working class isn't willing to

accept that role.

Geronimo 2 years ago

"I've never in my life been hopeful. I take the view that

pessimism is the wise position to adopt, because you are

always agreeably surprised." - Sir Roger Scruton (43:45)

I just love the way that this guy thinks.

Rob 1 year ago

My philosophy is, we are that we

"might have joy". Don't understand pessimists.

Jared 2 years ago

It's a very stoic approach to life

Patrick 1 year ago

Stoicism is not pessimistic. Stoicism says to see the world in an

understanding and accepting way. At most, Stoicism is

skepticism that suspends judgement.

murkartik1 year ago

That's funny, because George Bernard Shaw originally said this

80 years ago, and he was no conservative.

Shaw was a blunt, flippant, perceptive rascal – his gems run long for this space… here’s one to

chew on: “Written over the gate here are the words 'Leave every hope behind, ye who

enter.' Only think what a relief that is! For what is hope? A form of moral responsibility.

Here there is no hope, and consequently no duty, no work, nothing to be gained by

praying, nothing to be lost by doing what you like. “Hell”, in short, is a place where you

have nothing to do but amuse yourself.” R-

America is not a safe space

Print Email

By Syndicated columns

Follow on Twitter

on November 15, 2016 at 6:30 AM, updated

November 15, 2016 at 6:31 AM

Pity the anti-Trump protesters thronging

the streets of American cities.

Apparently, no one ever told them that

they live in a geographically,

economically and ideologically varied

nation, and that about half of its

inhabitants might support a Republican

candidate for president. They mistook

the country for the campus of Oberlin

College.

The news that it actually isn't arrived with the force

of a thunderclap on Nov. 8. The shock of Donald

Trump's election has occasioned tears, rending of

garments and days of protests showcasing the rank

infantilism of the American left.

Prior to the election, liberal commentators

obsessed over Trump's rumblings about not

accepting the outcome and worried about his

supporters lashing out. Trump shouldn't have preemptively

declared the election rigged, but the

specter of Republican mayhem was always farfetched.

When was the last time that GOP protesters

ran out of control and burned down local business

establishments? Tea-party rallies were famous for

their orderliness -- participants in a massive rally on

the Mall in Washington, D.C., even picked up their

own trash.

It is left-wing protests that invariably devolve into

lawbreaking, and so it was that the same kids who

think Donald Trump is too divisive were soon

smashing windows and throwing projectiles at

police in behalf of their supposedly more openminded

vision of America.

(The left's street protesters act as if there is no

social or political problem that can't be addressed

by hurling things at cops.)

The same media that would have denounced

pro-Trump protests as a threat to democracy has

treated the anti-Trump protests as a natural

symptom of a divided country. Erupting in rage at

the result of an election went from a grave offense

against our system to the latest front in the battle

for social justice right around the time that the

Upper Midwest was called for Trump.

The same kids who think Donald Trump is too

divisive were soon smashing windows and throwing

projectiles at police.

The level of self-awareness of the protesters isn't

high. Some hold signs reading "This is what

democracy looks like." It is true that the right to

peaceful assembly is a key aspect of any liberal

democracy (even if some protesters need to work

on the "peaceful" part), but as an illustrative

exercise in democracy, you can't beat the national

election last Tuesday that has so outraged

anti-Trump protesters.

They have now adopted the slogan "Not my

president," a phrase that the day before yesterday

the left considered a racist slur when hurled at

President Barack Obama.

The post-election mayhem could be written off as

the work of an unruly fringe, if it weren't that the

Democratic Party is so beholden to the sensibilities

of its cosseted youth, whom it mistakes for the

shock troops of the future. A party that considers it

forbidden to say "all lives matter" because it will

offend the enforcers of political correctness is a

party that is going to have trouble appealing to

Middle America.

One anti-Trump protester was seen the

other day holding a sign reading "Your vote

was a hate crime." It's hard to imagine a

better distillation of the coercive smallmindedness

that prevails on college

campuses. This attitude ensures a state of

perpetual shock and outrage at the lived

reality of a continental nation of more than

300 million free men and women.

The anti-Trump protests will in all likelihood

continue. They aim to associate the president-elect

with chaos and delegitimize him from the outset.

But it is fully in Trump's power, so long as he

doesn't show irritation or anger, to see that they

backfire. One petulant tweet aside, he has struck a

unifying tone, while it is his adversaries who are

unhinged.

Trump's critics are certain that he is the champion

of a blinkered worldview. But the election and its

aftermath show that it is the self-styled citizens of

the world who need to get out more.

#gal 2 hours ago

If Hillary had won, the protesters would be

considerably older than the "kids" Lowry ridicules.

And they would be protesting while exercising

their 2nd amendment rights. No bottles, bricks

or broken windows needed.

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

oldvanport

2 hours ago

@ #gal: One problem there, ma'am: They

wouldn't be protesting.

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

letsgetrational 4 hours ago

An excellent article much needed at this point. I

don't always agree with Mr. Lowry.

What we should be attempting to excise from

our discourse is hypocrisy. The double standard

that many expect cannot and should not be

tolerated in an enlightened society. This article

illuminates many instances of that. Hypocrisy is

always hiding political power posturing, but is

excused by the practitioners because they always

see themselves as right.

1 LikeReply

sxsw 6 hours ago

As the Dems circle the firing squad, one can hope they

realize they're losing (lost?) the working class of this

country, the people they once claimed to represent. The

Dems become an ideological breeder-reactor focused on

racial identity and class grievances....attempting to split us

into sub-groups that they cater to with insane edicts from

DC. And tearing us apart in the process, far worse and

much more deeply than Trump ever tried, if he was

indeed trying.

Pragmatist 6 hours ago

Spot on! What these protesters don't understand is that

these actions drive people against them, not for them.

I did not support Trump, but I want him to succeed,

partially to spite the far left.

deminn 10 hours ago

Awesome headline, great op ed. I'm surprised it was

printed here.

FlagShareShare

Realitytrumps 10 hours ago

There were no protests from the conservatives

when Obama was elected! And they detested his

policies! That is not the issue.

We leftists in Portland understand we must

scream loudly, demonize our opponents, and

claim they are so bad they earned our irrational

disdain. No need to think, just act out in open

anger, defiance, and disruption of normal life.

Our goal is to force our leftist ideology on the

nation as we have in our great and intolerant

City of Portland OR!!!

FlagShareShare

brewhaha 10 hours ago

You're over-complicating it. Young people like

Obama but hate Trump. That's why there are

protests now but not then.

FlagShareShareLikeReply


@brewhaha :

I know you are correct regarding Oregon. We

have purposely foisted upon our educational

system hard leftist thinking. Those students who

are not hard left are relegated to a lessor status

in the eyes of the teachers. Hopefully this is true

across the nation.

We need to raise up single minded leftist youth.

We stand in Portland as a monolithic community

against the open-minded free thinkers who

elected Trump!!!

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

sscamaro 9 hours ago

brewy:

Bill Ayers, Obama confident (sic) [confidante]

and political contributor during a 2006 speech

in Venezuela celebrating Chavez's Bolivarian

Revolution: "........We share the belief that

education is the motor-force of revolution,.....".

Seems Mr Ayers' success in Portlandia has been

fruitful.

FlagShareShare

2 LikeReply

Riptide 10 hours ago

I hope the light sentences will provide a precedent

for future Conservative rioters.

Or in case I just want to bash windows out of a car

dealership, I shouldn't actually be punished.

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply

tek 11 hours ago

Trump flamed the passions of hate and anger

during his campaign, and now the chickens are

coming home to roost. The people who are in the

streets feel they're under attack from Trump, and

they're striking back. He basically called them out

himself. He didn't have to do that, and actions

and words have consequences.

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply

OnceAgain9 10 hours ago

@tek: Protesters paid by the DNC fanned the

flames of hate during the campaign, and it's

the same ilk that are fanning the flames now....

The progressives are being exposed by this

violence for what they really are, and it will

not help them win future elections.....

FlagShareShare

6 LikeReply

tek 10 hours ago

@OnceAgain9 @tek: Trumps presidency will

implode, and the GOP will go down in flames

with it. The politics of hate anger and fear

can only end one way, and we won't like it.

FlagShareShare

LikeReply


tek, you're hyperventilating. Take a deep breath

into a brown paper bag.

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply


@tek @OnceAgain9: Just like you predicted a

Clinton victory?

Tek, you've been exposed, and I bet your real is

freezing....

FlagShareShare

thesaurusrex 7 hours ago

@tek @OnceAgain9:

I'm fearful, at times, that you are

correct. It will take vigilance and work

from true conservatives to keep things on

an even keel.

FlagShareShare

tek 7 hours ago

@thesaurusrex @tek @OnceAgain9: I couldn't

agree more. I'm not sure what a true conservative

is anymore, but I know that Trump isn't

one. He'll have a tough task unifying his own

party, and actually working across the aisle when

necessary. He needs to bring the country

together. It will take both parties working

together to actually solve the mess we've created,

and so far, that's looking like it's not going to

happen. At least Trump has actually spoken

about some of the issues that need addressing,

which hasn't made him very popular with

everyone.

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

thesaurusrex 4 hours ago

@tek @thesaurusrex @OnceAgain9:

I think we have to wait and see...


@tek:

Your post is awesome. We must keep blaming

our opponents for what is clearly our leftist

community’s fault!! In Portland we welcome

your dishonest and irrational words. Demonize

our non-leftist opposition!!!

We will win the day and intimidate the openminded

free thinkers who elected Trump!

4

tek 10 hours ago

@Realitytrumps @tek: That's the Trump way,

intimidate them into silence. The leftist

community? What's that, everyone who Trump

threatened and vilified? There's lots of angry

people in the US. Some of them blow up abortion

clinics and bomb mosques too.


@tek @Realitytrumps: Once again, you are

confused, tek.

It's the left that tries to silence....

Who did trump vilify? Who did he threaten?

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply

tek 6 hours ago

@OnceAgain9 @tek @Realitytrumps: He

threatened 11 million illegals with deportation,

and called them rapists and murderers. They're

not happy with him for that. He also vilified the

muslim community, and denigrated jews as

well. You should actually go back and read up on

the things he said. He's a very angry petty person,

and a lot of people are very offended by the things

he's said.

Jen 5 hours ago

@tek @OnceAgain9 @Realitytrumps:

...you kids need to stop parroting shill talking

points, and get educated about the Clintons -

because you seem to think that there was some

great choice in Presidents or that Hillary is some

kind of saint or the Clintons were fun and

games. Offensiveness?... look up Hillary's super

predators bit to see the kind of person you think

is admirable…

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

sscamaro

9 hours ago

tek, not all of these protests are "homegrown". Many

of them are well funded by outside organizations.


@sscamaro : ....And bused in...

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

tek 6 hours ago

@OnceAgain9 @sscamaro : Right, kind of

like the people they bus in here to Coos Bay

whenever they have a meeting on Jordan

Cove.

FlagShareShare

LikeReply


tek, like the 5 block long line of buses in

Chicago with Wisconsin license plates. Yea,

those too.

NJAO 11 hours ago

"One anti-Trump protester was seen the other day

holding a sign reading "Your vote was a hate crime."

It's hard to imagine a better distillation of the

coercive small-mindedness that prevails on college

campuses. This attitude ensures a state of perpetual

shock and outrage at the lived reality of a continental

nation of more than 300 million free men and

women."

BINGO

FlagShareShare

8 Likply

WLoodtkey 11 hours ago

Public policy forged on Satan’s anvil does spark

public fury. As Donald Trump stretches his leather

wings, he grips an iron hammer ready to

reshape molten democracy into despair, a

blackened vision of the alt-right.

FlagShareShare LikeReply

Enzo 11 hours ago

@WLoodtkey : ????????????????????

FlagShareShare

LikeReply

Riptide 5ptsFeatured

10 hours ago

WL : zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply

sxsw 8 hours ago

@WLoodtkey :

FlagShareShare

1LikeReply

tsaurusrex 7 hours ago

@WLoodtkey : Please go back on the meds....

FlagShareShare

1 LikeReply

Spanky 3 hours ago

@tsaurusrex @WLoodtkey : ....And double the dose.

FlagShareShare

7. Jan. 20, 2017:

Zeke Miller of TIME reported that President Trump had removed the

bust statue of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. from the Oval

Office. The news went viral. It was false.

107. Aug. 5, 2019 (Out of chronological order because it just came to my attention.)

MSNBC’s Nicole Wallace falsely claims that President Trump had

talked about “exterminating Latinos.” She apologized the next day

stating, on Twitter, “I misspoke about Trump calling’s for an

extermination of Latinos. My mistake was unintentional and I’m sorry.”

"It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who

are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance"

~Thomas Sowell

Rice Krispies say “Snap! Crackle! Pop!”

only in English-speaking countries.

In Sweden, the cereal says “Piff! Paff! Puff!”

In South Africa, it’s “Knap! Knaetter! Knak!”

And in Germany, “Knisper! Knasper! Knusper!”

WASHINGTON – An assistant professor at the University of Iowa who pledged to

expose her students to “their own white ignorance” in a “peer-reviewed academic

journal” was stunned and appalled that she was, well, criticized for it.

Jodi Linley, a white education instructor, wrote that her goal was

to make her “mostly white” graduate students keenly aware of

their “white privilege” and use her classroom to “deconstruct

whiteness.” If she did otherwise, she explained, it would make her

“complicit” in perpetrating white supremacy.

“For white students,” she wrote, “talking about race with an all-white group of

peers … [reveals] their own white ignorance.”

Linley said her commitment to designing classes that fight white privilege began as

soon as she became a professor in 2014, at which point she resolved to “develop

courses that both unveiled and rejected” the notion that “neutrality and objectivity

are realistic and attainable.”

“As a white assistant professor of mostly white graduate students who will become

higher education leaders, I work to dismantle whiteness in my curriculum,

assignments and pedagogy,” Linley explained, noting that in addition to her “white

identity,” she also draws on her “identities as a queer, able-bodied, cisgender

woman” with a working-class background to construct her “teaching paradigm.”

She offered up five strategies other professors can

use to deconstruct white privilege in their own

classes, such as making sure students know that

their views on race will be challenged, “interrupting

oppression” that occurs in classroom settings, and

segregating students by race so they can have more

productive dialogues about privilege.

“For white students, talking about race with an all-white group of peers facilitates

their realization that they are raced beings, thus revealing their own white

ignorance,” Linley asserted as justification for segregating students during some

discussions.

Perhaps Linley and her university thought the paper would be a groundbreaking

work that would be met with universal praise. However, it was widely criticized on

social media, and she received some negative email.

She and her university described that reaction as being “targeted, harassed and

threatened.”

Daniel Clay, dean of the College of Education, expressed horror over the criticism,

issuing this statement:

“Recently, one of our faculty members was singled out for publishing a peerreview

article on race issues in higher education. This faculty member was

targeted, harassed, and threatened by many people from around the country

through email, phone calls, and social media.

“As the dean of our University of Iowa College of Education, I want to affirm that

we welcome all students, faculty, and staff of all races and backgrounds. We work

hard to create an inclusive environment that cultivates respect and appreciation for

everyone. The University of Iowa is also strongly committed to freedom of

expression and the First Amendment, and that extends to students, faculty and

staff.”

Apparently, however, the commitment to freedom of expression and the First

Amendment does not apply to dissenting opinions expressed in emails and on

social media.

As college students begin returning to campus this week, they can expect similar

coursework all across America.

Last year, Portland Community College devoted an entire month to “whiteness”

shaming.

This summer, an assistant professor at Georgia State University published an

academic journal article lamenting the “insidiousness of silence and whiteness” on

college campuses.

And last spring, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee called for

complete “abolition of whiteness,” saying only then will America see an end to

racism. The professors had one thing in common. They are all white.

Douglass Murray: We’re at the beginning of this aren’t

we… there’s a long way for this to run – a long way for censorship

to run. You can’t help thinking, among other things, that the

people trying to make the rules at the moment have no idea of the

fact that these debates have happened before – they seem to think

that history started with them. And I wish that, among other

things with social media, people realize we have been through this

several times before and the lessons are pretty clear. They are not

that you can limit speech in order to attain political Nirvana, for

instance. Nor are they that you can simply use - for short-term

gain - accusations you know to be wrong, in order to further a

short-term political goal. We know all this; we’ve been through it.

The printing press – we went through it with John Stuart Mill; we

went through it with Milton. I just wish these people had any idea

of the fact that history started before their parents conceived them.

Joe Rogan: The whole culture of tech today is such a

progressive thought bubble – it’s an echo chamber. It’s

better that they’re really progressive and open minded

and left-wing than radical right wing. I think it’s better.

Douglass Murray: I agree, if by radical right-wing you mean neo-

Nazi racists. Of course. Although these people [on the left] have all

the ability to create those people and empower them, which is

something you don’t want: actual racists and Nazis to have

legitimate grievance claims. You don’t want them to be able to

disguise themselves as something they’re not. We’re not far away

from that place where I say what you say is hate speech, you say

what I say is hate speech – let’s call the whole thing off. We’re not

very far away from that, actually.

joe v 2 months ago

The far left is like Stalin, tell me again how it’s better than

the far right

REPLY

D R 2 months ago

It’s like saying Stalin and Mussolini are far better than

Hitler; they are all terrible, but of course Joe has to start

the conversation with a wink and a nod to the left.

REPLY

Rev 1 month ago

@D R Stalin and Moose-a-lini ARE better (eg: less

successful) than Hitler. Facts are facts. Nod to lefties or

not.

Rev 1 month ago

DEfinately. A socialist is WAY better than a fascist

REPLY

S Berry 1 month ago

➔ @RevD

“A socialist is WAY better than a fascist”

Socialism is simply a family friendly term for Communism. And

Communism and Fascism are just different sides of the same coin.

They are both equally terrible, just for slightly different reasons. The

slightly different reasons being that Communism is a con that will kill

you, whereas Fascism is honest and will kill you.

Rev 1 month ago

➔ @SBerry

you have a child’s understanding of these political

concepts. And you really had to stretch to reach that

childish point. All you did was straw man a democratic free

market concept (socialism) as if it were authoritarian

communism. Tfoh

REPLY

SBerry 1 month ago

➔ @”Rev –

"you have a child’s understanding of these political

concepts."

Communism IS childish. You can fluff it up with all the big words and

phrases you want, but that won’t change the fact that

Communism is basically just a bunch of adults demanding that people

give them stuff for free, knowing full well that it’s not “free” - as the

people they are stealing from will have to pay for it.

"All you did was straw man a democratic free market

concept (socialism) as if it were authoritarian

communism."

Yeah, because if 51% of people agree that theft from certain people is

okay, it’s not really theft anymore. Sounds authoritarian to me. Just

because you can vote in an idea doesn’t make it right. And

rationalizing it makes you no better than any other tyrant in history

that rationalized their own terrible deeds. Every villain is the hero of

their own story.

Rev 1 month ago

@SBerry wow. So your stance is: democracy is authoritarian

tyranny? Hot take, smart guy. Hilariously, your adversarial

foolishness made you double down on the straw man

fallacy. Maybe stfu while you're behind.

Show less

Ben B 2 weeks ago

@joe v Stalin actually killed and imprisoned more than

Hitler. But he’s better because... science.

B S 2 months ago

because the far right are violent, divisive, bigoted man-children

who can't tell the difference between being asked to be civilized

and losing their "free speech"?

Beardfist TheGolden1 1 month ago

@B S The government can't tell you to be polite. Civilized

discussion is a wonderful thing, but as soon as laws compel a

certain type of speech, it has gone too far. Free speech is good

because you want people who believe actual racist and

bigoted ideologies to out themselves.

Roger 1 month ago

@B S Using violence and government intervention isn't

them "being asked to be civilized." BTW ANTIFA is just as

violent if not more so.

B S 1 month ago

@Roger That's nice, but nobody here is supporting anti-fa.

You're trying to provide a strawman, but that's not what we're

here for. Go talk to yourself if you don't want to be part of the

current topic. The alt-right are shitheads. That's the topic.

Roger 1 month ago

@B S Actually, the topic is Joe Rogan stating that it is better that

the far-left control social media than the far-right. The OP

disagreed, thus the discussion is ‘who’ is correct. Antifa are far-left

pansies who wear masks because they don't believe in

consequences. The fact of the matter is: that weak, far left group is

far more violent and that has been repeatedly proven.

Your cowardly diversion from my point only proves my point; the

left are a bunch of cowards who are afraid to allow the other side

to have a voice because you know you aren't smart enough to

stand up to debate.

B S 1 month ago

@Roger Oh, so you think that the far right and the far left are

the same as the alt right and antifa? Also, this is a sub thread.

The topic here in this sub thread is "The far left is like Stalin, tell

me again how it’s better than the far right".

Roger 1 month ago

@B S You're not too bright, are you? Joe used the alt right

as the baseline for the far right. That is the basis of the OP.

Since antifa are commies, they are the far-left, as that is

what far-left means. You're out of your depth.

B S 1 month ago

@Roger I know people in antifa and they are all anarchists and

democratic socialists, not commies. Let me guess, you don't

know the difference between socialism and communism either?

You are a literal idiot.

Roger 3 weeks ago

@B S Anarchists are the complete opposite of democratic

socialists. Anarchists don't want any laws while socialists want

more laws. Some ANTIFA members may call themselves anarchists

but I highly doubt they actually are, based on the diatribe they

espouse. Why is it that you never hear about ANTIFA protesting

and shutting down left wing events in spite of the fact the left

wing is more authoritarian and more fascist? Their behavior has

more to do with wanting to shut down any ideas they don't like.

B S 3 weeks ago

@Roger ok I’m not reading what you said because “anarchists

are the opposite of democratic socialists” is already stupid. Go

look at all the different forms of anarchy.

Roger 3 weeks ago

@B S You do realize that anarchy means no government, right? It

doesn't really matter what your personal beliefs are because no

government is no government. It is astounding that you could be

this stupid.

B S 1 month ago

@Roger Also, it IS better for the far left to control social media

because conservatives consistently tend to be idiots when it

comes to understanding newer tech.

Roger 1 month ago

@Justin Criticizing people isn't the same as using the government

or violence to stop people from talking. That is the crux of the

"free speech" issue liberals can't seem to wrap their heads around.

Rev 1 month ago

@Roger make up your mind. Is antifa fearful

teenagers, weak, laissez faire, pansies? Or are they

violent militants who kill and maim in the name of

intersectional pronouns? Why u scared by them?

--3 months ago

@lastDAN Progressivism just means constant flux

and cultural destruction.

REPLY

RaneboGhunt 3 weeks ago

Incorrect. False Equivalency=Logical Fallacy

Thanks for playing

Patricia 1 week ago

In 1961 my mother said to me: never put anything in

writing anywhere, that you aren't willing to have put

on the front page of the world’s biggest newspaper.

henry 4 days ago

@Rev Vladimir Lenin was originally a democratic socialist, How

did that turn out. Hugo Chavez from Venezuela was a democratic

socialist, how did that work out.

Rev 4 days ago

@henry okay. Hitler was a painter. How did that turn out? Satan

was an angel how did that turn out? Reagan was an actor. Blah

blah blah. Nobody here is defending communism, no matter how

hard these snowflakes want to conflate it with socialist democracy

and beat the straw man instead of becoming educated and

ethically driven. This conversation was never about democratic

socialism as it is understood in the USA. Here in America what we

think of as 'democratic socialism' is actually 'socialist democracy.'

Please try to stay on track and use comparable examples, like

from this century.

REPLY

henry 4 days ago

@Rev Hugo Chavez was a democratic socialist who ruled this

century. He did many of the things progressives support. Even The

Young Turks praised Hugo Chavez before Venezuela collapsed.

Bernie is not a European social democrat. His healthcare plan

goes further than any of the Nordic countries. No countries in

Europe offer a jobs guarantee. Jobs guarantee is not social

democracy - that is direct socialism. Many European countries

have low corporate taxes, like Estonia and Ireland. No European

country has a 15-dollar minimum wage and some European

countries that are considered progressive do not even have a

minimum wage. Most European social democracies have a high

Value Added Tax and are getting rid of - or phasing out - wealth

taxes because they didn't work. Bernie has more in common with

Latin American socialist than European social democrats.

Bernie does not identify as a social democrat - he identifies as a

democratic socialist. The leaders of those countries in Scandinavia

have disputed Bernie’s claims that they are socialist. Social

democracy is declining in many parts of Europe as well. Bernie

literally had a wedding in Moscow and praised Fidel Castro. Stop

lying and saying that communism is vastly different than

democratic socialism. AOC is literally part of the Democratic

Socialists of America and in the DSA they want workers to own

the means of production. Communist and socialist countries have

said the same thing. Tell me a country were socialism works better

than the United States. Scandinavian countries have a large

welfare state, but a capitalist economic system. The Green New

Deal that provides a jobs guarantee proves he is a real socialist.

Communism never even existed - they were socialist transitioning

to communism. Communist societies have the workers owning the

means of production and no government. No countries have

established that they merely attempted to and failed. Socialism -

where the government owns the means of production - has never

worked.

REPLY

Rev 4 days ago

@henry okay...... I don’t know why you are going on about Bernie

Sanders and it doesn’t matter how he identifies; definitions are

the definitions. If you would link where The Young Turks sing the

praises of Hugo Chavez, I’d be much obliged. As I’m inclined to

say, your full of elephant propaganda. What "Jobs Guarantee" has

any politician made that every other politician has not made?

That's fake news. Those places don't have Minimum Wage

because people get more than $15 per hour.

Socialist policy does NOT include government or the workers

having ownership of means of production. That’s an ignorant

understanding that you are conflating with communism. I would

be hard pressed to find a country where socialism works better

than socialism has worked in the United States. I don’t know why

you would point that out though. I figured you for one to deny the

socialism inherent in the USA policy, infrastructure and

procedure. You are swimming in socialist governance already.

Every state that has low taxes operates at a loss. Don't be obtuse.

You need to learn about this stuff from somebody other than your

angry McCarthyite uncle.

Show less

REPLY

henry 4 days ago

@Rev read the Green New Deal. Everyone would be entitled to a

government job making 15 dollars an hour. You have done no

research. Socialism is not when the government does stuff.

Socialism is government or communal ownership of the means of

production. If you do not believe that, go look up the definition of

socialism in the dictionary. And no not everyone in Scandinavian

countries makes 15 or more dollars per hour. Many non-skilled

workers make less. Just like in the United States. No engineers or

teachers or doctors make less than 15 dollars an hour. If you work

at a job that requires no skill, then it is common to make less than

15 dollars an hour. No European country guarantees that all

people will make 15 dollars an hour. The highest is around less

than 12 dollars an hour

Show less

REPLY

henry 4 days ago

@Rev Socialism - 2a: a system of society or group living

in which there is no private property b: a system or

condition of society in which the means of production are

owned and controlled by the state

Show less

REPLY

Machete Yo 2 months ago

Let me diminish the experience of something

I've never experienced....

OddityDK 2 months ago

People who write in all caps amuse me. Their complete

ignorance of how reading works, produces the exact opposite

result of what they are trying to accomplish. We don’t read

all letters in a word, like in so many other things, reading is

mainly pattern recognition.

W ic is w y an on c n re d th s.

All caps removes the contours of the letters, so the reader has

to read every letter individually and it makes people not want

to bother and just skip it.

Murall D 1 month ago

People adapt to all the compelled perspectives being

pushed by platforms. Take Dave Chapelle's sticks and

stones. Most people only watched it when the crazy

activist feminazi journalists came after him. People adapt

by changing their filtering criteria. What is pushed as far

right, people know is the actual center and they take these

information guardians with a pinch of salt, as it is.

REPLY

J. C. 2 months ago

Anyone who disagrees with you can be called anything

you want. Propaganda is not new... it’s just getting

"rediscovered" by people who need to redefine words in

order to maintain their "status" or "power" or whatever,

because they don’t have any of it in reality, or actual

fact. Since they can’t be REAL, they have to be FAKE.

And then they will attempt to convince you that their

FAKENESS is actually REALNESS - so that you will agree

with their bullshit little delusions and play their bullshit

little game by their bullshit little rules.

Show less

D B 2 weeks ago

➔ @Tman another dumbass that can't tell fascism

from socialism. What a stupid shit.

Tman 2 weeks ago

@D B well since every history class I've ever taken called Hitler a

fascist even though he was a member of the socialist party....

doesn’t seem to be much of a difference. The fact that socialist

Hitler was allied to fascist Mussolini also shows how close the two

ideologies are. But you keep believing what your socialist

professors tell you instead of looking at history and seeing the

truth for yourself.

Show less

REPLY

C C 1 week ago

REPLY

➔ @Tman you're spouting pure Faux News drivel. Saying

Sanders is a Nazi because "the Nazis were National

Socialists" is like saying Republicans are Communists

because "the R in U.S.S.R. stood for Republicans"

C C 1 week ago

@Tman Wow.. are you seriously arguing the Nazis were

NOT RIGHT-WING??? . Your ignorance is

ASTOUNDING! Faux News is literally making you DUMBER

EVERY DAY!

REPLY

C C 1 week ago

@nang q your ignorance is SPECTACULAR! You think the far-right

would never do ALL THOSE THINGS? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT

THEY ARE NOTORIOUS FOR... FROM MCCARTHYISM TO THE

KKK TO WHITE NATIONALISM TO CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM

TO THE AMERICAN NAZI PARTY, THE AMERICAN GERMAN

BUND, ANY OF THE HUNDREDS OF FAR RIGHT "CHRISTIAN

IDENTITY" CONSPIRACY-THEORY-LADEN, WHITE-

SEPARATIST, ANTI-GOVERNMENT, ANTI-MUSLIM, ANTI-

IMMIGRANT, ANTI-ABORTION, ANTI-SEMITIC, ANTI-GAY,

ANTI-FEMINIST, VIOLENT, MILITIA-FORMING NUTJOBS THAT

HAVE KILLED MORE AMERICANS SINCE 9/11 THAN ANY

OTHER FORM OF EXTREMISM... WHY EVERYBODY HATES

THEM. https://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremistsmilitants-bigger-threat-america-isis-jihadists-422743.html

REPLY

C C 1 week ago

Anyone who thinks the far-right is not a dangerous

deranged group of NUTJOBS, and pose the greatest threat

to America, read this (call it fake news but it's reality):

https://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremistsmilitants-bigger-threat-america-isis-jihadists-422743.html

Justin _2 months ago

I'm not the least bit happy about identity politics

or a lot of these odd dogmas on the left; but to

say the right doesn't have its own very radical,

paranoid elements is to be willfully blind, or so

far in them you don't realize it. There's plenty of

hypocrisy to go around.

Truth Addict 1 year ago

"Hate Speech" is just free speech that you

don't like.

4d's 3 months ago

Intelligently, humorously and

entertainingly argues us into extinction.

Your enemy always tries to be the reasonable one in

the room.

Tony 2 months ago

That’s an interesting concept: that the left’s hate

speech inquisition is used to Trojan horse actual bad

ideas back into society.

Sean 1 month ago

@Justin _ come on, groupthink is like a diminishing

returns kind of situation where it doesn't just stop at

zero but folds back in on itself into negatives...

______________________________________________

I wasn’t the fly on the wall at many gatherings - I was a hungry

wasp. People looked at me with a kind of hostility they couldn’t do

anything about. Why I found this enjoyable I can’t tell you.

______________________________________________________________Tom

Wolfe

TWENTY

what would

be his

motivation?

“The decay and disintegration of this culture is

astonishingly amusing if you are emotionally detached from

it. I have always viewed it from a safe distance, knowing I

don't belong; it doesn't include me, and it never has. No

matter how you care to define it, I do not identify with the

local group. Planet, species, race, nation, state, religion,

party, union, club, association, neighborhood improvement

committee; I have no interest in any of it. I love and

treasure individuals as I meet them, I loathe and despise

the groups they identify with and belong to.”

-George Carlin

opinion: (noun) a belief stronger than impression and less

strong than positive knowledge

bps The_Irredeemable_Toxic_Avenger

• 2 days ago

the comments are like the toy in the

cereal box - everybody wants to get

their hands in there and unearth

something awesome - the story, much

like the cereal, is sugar-coated cr@p

A clear and innocent conscience fears nothing

- Elizabeth the First

I have long maintained that I have no “rooting interest” in any of this, other

than an ongoing optimism that we somehow eventually get better at…this.

I left out known sources in some places: “who” says something can be

prejudicial - frequently obscuring an otherwise well-made point or valid

position.

Almost half of these clippings were simply home-grown responses from what

appears to be an increasingly engaged populace – authors were not always

divulged or apparent

R ---

(*…love Chris Moore…one of the best…hope all “get him”…)

Amazon Reviewer, Doug Anderson

David Bahnsen

Conrad Black

Matthew Continetti

Ann Coulter

Michael Doran

Victor Davis Hanson

Brit Hume

Paul Krugman

Mark Leibovich

Rush Limbaugh

Rich Lowry

Peggy Noonan

Camille Paglia

…The contestation of politics, the struggle over power and

ideas, over the Constitution and the law and who we are as a

political community, never ends. It's always possible for a

settlement or consensus at one moment of history to be

rethought, overturned, or reversed. Rights granted can later

be rescinded — and there's no way to prevent that from

happening beyond continuing the fight, day after day.

History isn't an arc slowly bending toward justice. It's a

battlefield on which a skirmish line shifts back and forth

in an unending contest between ideological combatants.

The agonistic character of politics becomes

concealed during eras defined by consensus, when

the skirmish line stays in much the same place,

shifting only slightly or fairly slowly from year to

year and decade to decade. But such eras are the

exception in history — or at least never more than a

temporary interlude between periods of more rapid

or intense struggle…

- Damon Linker

- from “The Hero In History” (1945)

by Sidney Hook

To gain what is worth having, it may be necessary

to lose everything else.

- Bernadette Devlin

“We have

nothing to fear

but fear itself.”

- Franklin Delano

Roosevelt

It is really a strange thing that there

should not be room enough in the world

for men to live without cutting one

another’s throats

- George Washington

In January 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address

after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn

Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we

must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or

unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise

of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the

decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War

mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected

faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and

already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic

Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been

denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively

reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And

Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss, as well

as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from

reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer

any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry, and

damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest.

There is a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combating those

threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges

to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those

strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis

or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S.

election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped

and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most

shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of

the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly

venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to

propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human

rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as

traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire

on those doing it.

Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for him than

attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media

outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual Trump corruption and

criminality, who is going to believe the people and institutions who have

demonstrated they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how factually

baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no matter how unreliable and removed

from basic means of ensuring accuracy?

All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep State

unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting

credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a completely unvetted

and unverified document, compiled by a paid, anonymous operative while he

was working for both GOP and Democratic opponents of Trump, accusing

Trump of a wide range of crimes, corrupt acts, and salacious private conduct.

The reaction to all of this illustrates that while the Trump presidency poses

grave dangers, so, too, do those who are increasingly unhinged in their

flailing, slapdash, and destructive attempts to undermine it.

For months, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly threw its weight behind

Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to defeat Donald Trump. In August, former

acting CIA Director Michael Morell announced his endorsement of Clinton in the

New York Times and claimed that “Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an

unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.” The CIA and NSA director under

George W. Bush, Gen. Michael Hayden, also endorsed Clinton and went to the

Washington Post to warn, in the week before the election, that “Donald Trump

really does sound a lot like Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the useful fool,

some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind

support is happily accepted and exploited.”

It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton over Trump. Clinton

was critical of Obama for restraining the CIA’s proxy war in Syria and was eager

to expand that war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton clearly wanted a harder line

than Obama took against the CIA’s long-standing foes in Moscow, while Trump

wanted improved relations and greater cooperation. In general, Clinton defended

and intended to extend the decades long international military order on which the

CIA and Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while Trump — through a stilluncertain

mix of instability and extremist conviction — posed a threat to it.

Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the democratic

framework — the presidential election, the confirmation process,

congressional leaders, judicial proceedings, citizen activism and

protest, civil disobedience — that should determine how they are

resolved. All of those policy disputes were debated out in the

open; the public heard them; and Trump won.

Nobody should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.

Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent Democratic operatives and

media figures are doing. Any doubt about that is now dispelled. Just last week,

Chuck Schumer issued a warning to Trump, telling Rachel Maddow that Trump

was being “really dumb” by challenging the unelected intelligence community

because of all the ways they possess to destroy those who dare to stand up to them:

And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and celebrated what was, so

plainly, an attempt by the Deep State to sabotage an elected official who had defied

it: ironically, its own form of blackmail.

Back in October, a political operative and former employee of the British

intelligence agency MI6 was being paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump

(before that, he was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). He tried to convince

countless media outlets to publish a long memo he had written filled with

explosive accusations about Trump’s treason, business corruption, and sexual

escapades, with the overarching theme that Trump was in servitude to Moscow

because they were blackmailing and bribing him.

Despite how many had it, no media outlets published it. That was because these

were anonymous claims unaccompanied by any evidence at all, and even in this

more permissive new media environment, nobody was willing to be journalistically

associated with it. As the New York Times’ Executive Editor Dean Baquet put it

last night, he would not publish these “totally unsubstantiated” allegations because

“we, like others, investigated the allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and

we felt we’re not in the business of publishing things we can’t stand by.”

The closest this operative got to success was convincing Mother Jones’s David

Corn to publish an October 31 article reporting that “a former senior intelligence

officer for a Western country” claims that “he provided the [FBI] with memos,

based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian

government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump.”

But because this was just an anonymous claim unaccompanied by any evidence or

any specifics (which Corn withheld), it made very little impact. All of that changed

yesterday. Why?

What changed was the intelligence community’s resolution to cause this all to

become public and to be viewed as credible. In December, John McCain provided

a copy of this report to the FBI and demanded they take it seriously.

At some point last week, the chiefs of the intelligence agencies decided to declare

that this ex-British intelligence operative was “credible” enough that his

allegations warranted briefing both Trump and Obama about them, thus

stamping some sort of vague, indirect, and deniable official approval on these

accusations. Someone — by all appearances, numerous officials — then went to

CNN to tell the network they had done this, causing CNN to go on air and, in the

gravest of tones, announce the “Breaking News” that “the nation’s top intelligence

officials” briefed Obama and Trump that Russia had compiled information that

“compromised President-elect Trump.”

CNN refused to specify what these allegations were on the ground

that it could not “verify” them. But with this document in the hands

of multiple media outlets, it was only a matter of time — a small

amount of time — before someone would step up and publish the

whole thing. BuzzFeed quickly obliged, airing all of the unvetted,

anonymous claims about Trump.

Its editor-in-chief, Ben Smith, published a memo explaining that decision, saying

that — although there was “serious reason to doubt the allegations” — BuzzFeed

in general “errs on the side of publication” and “Americans can make up their own

minds about the allegations.” Publishing this document predictably produced

massive traffic (and thus profit) for the site, with millions of people viewing the

article and presumably reading the “dossier.”

One can certainly object to BuzzFeed’s decision and, as the New York

Times noted this morning, many journalists are doing so. It’s almost

impossible to imagine a scenario where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to

publish a totally anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with

scurrilous and inflammatory allegations about which its own editor-inchief

says there “is serious reason to doubt the allegations,” on the ground

that they want to leave it to the public to decide whether to believe it.

But even if one believes there is no such case where that is justified, yesterday’s

circumstances presented the most compelling scenario possible for doing this.

Once CNN strongly hinted at these allegations, it left it to the public imagination to

conjure up the dirt Russia allegedly had to blackmail and control Trump. By

publishing these accusations, BuzzFeed ended that speculation. More importantly,

it allowed everyone to see how dubious this document is, one the CIA and CNN

had elevated into some sort of grave national security threat.

Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical nature of the

“dossier” manifested. Not only was its author anonymous, but he was paid by

Democrats (and, before that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt on

Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind but instead relied on a

string of other anonymous people in Russia he claims told him these things. Worse

still, the document was filled with amateur errors.

While many of the claims are inherently unverified, some can be confirmed. One

such claim — that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen secretly traveled to Prague in

August to meet with Russian officials — was strongly denied by Cohen, who

insisted he had never been to Prague in his life (Prague is the same place that

foreign intelligence officials claimed, in 2001, was the site of a nonexistent

meeting between Iraqi officials and 9/11 hijackers, which contributed to 70 percent

of Americans believing, as late as the fall of 2003, that Saddam personally planned

the 9/11 attack). This morning, the Wall Street Journal reported that “the FBI has

found no evidence that [Cohen] traveled to the Czech Republic.”

None of this stopped Democratic operatives and prominent media figures from

treating these totally unverified and unvetted allegations as grave revelations. From

Vox’s Zack Beauchamp:

BuzzFeed’s Borzou Daragahi posted a long series of tweets discussing the

profound consequences of these revelations, only occasionally remembering to

insert the rather important journalistic caveat “if true” in his meditations:

Meanwhile, liberal commentator Rebecca Solnit declared this to be a “smoking

gun” that proves Trump’s “treason,” while Daily Kos’s Markos Moulitsas sounded

the same theme:

While some Democrats sounded notes of caution — party loyalist Josh Marshall

commendably urged: “I would say in reviewing raw, extremely raw ‘intel,’ people

should retain their skepticism even if they rightly think Trump is the worst” — the

overwhelming reaction was the same as all the other instances where the CIA and

its allies released unverified claims about Trump and Russia: instant embrace of

the evidence-free assertions as Truth, combined with proclamations that

they demonstrated Trump’s status as a traitor (with anyone expressing skepticism

designated a Kremlin agent or stooge).

There is a real danger here that this maneuver could harshly

backfire, to the great benefit of Trump and to the great detriment

of those who want to oppose him. If any of the significant

claims in this “dossier” turn out to be provably false — such as

Cohen’s trip to Prague — many people will conclude, with

Trump’s encouragement, that large media outlets (CNN and

BuzzFeed) and anti-Trump factions inside the government (CIA)

are deploying “Fake News” to destroy him. In the eyes of many

people, that will forever discredit — render impotent — future

journalistic expose s that are based on actual, corroborated

wrongdoing.

Beyond that, the threat posed by submitting ourselves to the CIA and empowering

it to reign supreme outside of the democratic process is — as Eisenhower warned

— an even more severe danger. The threat of being ruled by unaccountable and

unelected entities is self-evident and grave. That’s especially true when the entity

behind which so many are rallying is one with a long and deliberate history of

lying, propaganda, war crimes, torture, and the worst atrocities imaginable.

All of the claims about Russia’s interference in U.S. elections and ties to Trump

should be fully investigated by a credible body, and the evidence publicly

disclosed to the fullest extent possible. As my colleague Sam Biddle argued last

week after disclosure of the farcical intelligence community report on Russian

hacking — one that even Putin’s foes mocked as a bad joke — the utter lack of

evidence for these allegations means “we need an independent, resolute inquiry.”

But until then, assertions that are unaccompanied by evidence and disseminated

anonymously should be treated with the utmost skepticism — not lavished with

convenience-driven gullibility.

Most important of all, the legitimate and effective tactics for opposing

Trump are being utterly drowned by these irrational, desperate, ad hoc

crusades that have no cogent strategy and make his opponents appear

increasingly devoid of reason and gravity. Right now, Trump’s

opponents are behaving as media critic Adam Johnson described: as

ideological jellyfish, floating around aimlessly and lost, desperately

latching on to whatever barge randomly passes by.

There are solutions to Trump. They involve reasoned

strategizing and patient focus on issues people actually care

about. Whatever those solutions are, venerating the

intelligence community, begging for its intervention, and

equating its dark and dirty assertions as Truth are most

certainly not among them. Doing that cannot possibly

achieve any good and is already doing much harm. - Glenn Greenwald, The

Intercept

IThis article was published on January 11, 2017 - nine days before President Trump was

inaugurated and seven days after a secretive perjury trap was set up against his

National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn. Mr. Greenwald, no great fan of The President,

could not have been more accurate with his assessments and his predictions. R-

TWENTY ONE

How long is he

staying here

marc a 1 week ago

A nation of sheep produces a government of wolves

65

REPLY

“Never let a good crisis go to waste”

NegdoshaManido 1 week ago

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will

never be needed until they try to take it away"

- Thomas Jefferson

Molon Labe.

[come and take them]

disqus_zLY0jsDmax Duezy • 14 days ago

Maybe you can enlighten all us gullibles about

which of these campaign promises, already

fulfilled, is a lie:

Washington Examiner

OPINION: WASHINGTON SECRETS

Exclusive: Trump list shows 319

'results' and promises kept in three

years

by Paul Bedard

December 31, 2019 02:48 PM

Print this article

Sign up for Washington Secrets

SUBMIT

One month shy of completing three years in office, President Trump has

fulfilled or is making significant progress on most of his 2016 campaign

promises, which aides said give him a strong reelection argument to

counter his impeachment by a bitterly partisan House last week.

As the president and his team ready for the 2020 campaign at his

Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, officials said it would be built on the

administration's achievements list of 15 categories and 319 “results.”…

…The list provided to Secrets is the latest update of initiatives, executive orders,

accomplishments, results, and brags with a focus on the improved economy, trade,

energy independence, job creation, cuts to illegal immigration, the president’s

America First foreign policy, help for veterans, cutting eight regulations for every

new one, packing courts with conservatives, and Trump's record of becoming the

nation’s most anti-abortion chief executive.

It also charted Trump's successes in killing more than a dozen major Obama-era

initiatives.

Officials said the list would be longer if key agency initiatives were also included,

such as the Department of Transportation’s move to boost rural infrastructure and

the Interior Department’s expansion of areas open for hikers, hunters, and anglers.

Critics of the president have claimed that his achievements are overshadowed by

multiple court setbacks, tussles with foreign leaders, an exploding deficit, and the

Democrat’s investigations. But his supporters point to just the last few weeks

when, as he was being impeached, he won some of his biggest policy victories,

such as agreement on the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and creation of

the Space Force.

Presidential historian Doug Wead said: "Historians of the future will come racing

back to this Trump era with amazement. The list of presidents on either side will

be a boring blur by comparison. Of course, the economic numbers from the Trump

time will be telling. They don't lie. And they point to a great presidency."…

PROMOTING ECONOMIC PROSPERITY FOR ALL:

President Trump’s pro-growth policies have led to an economic boom

that is lifting up Americans of all backgrounds.

More than 7 million jobs have been added to the economy.

For the first time on record there are more job openings than unemployed

Americans.

There are more than 7 million job openings, outnumbering job seekers by

more than 1 million.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans rate

now as a good time to find a quality

job, empowering more Americans

with rewarding careers.

This year, the unemployment rate

reached its lowest level in half a

century.

The unemployment rate has

remained at or below 4 percent for

the past 21 months.

The unemployment rate for women

reached its lowest rate in 65 years.

Jobless claims hit their lowest level

in half a century.

The number of people claiming unemployment insurance as a share of the

population is the lowest on record.

The unemployment rates for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian

Americans, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and those without a high

school diploma have all reached record lows.

Wages are growing at their fastest rate in a decade, with year-over-year

wage gains exceeding 3 percent for the first time since 2009.

November 2019 marked the 16th consecutive month that wages rose at an

annual rate of at or over 3 percent.

Median household income surpassed $63,000 in 2018 – the highest level

on record.

President Trump’s policies are helping forgotten Americans across the

country prosper, driving down income inequality.

Wages are rising fastest for low-income workers.

Middle-class and low-income workers are enjoying faster wage growth than

high-earners.

When measured as the share of income earned by the top 20 percent,

income inequality fell in 2018 by the largest amount in over a decade.

Americans are being lifted out of poverty as a result of today’s

booming economy.

Over 2.4 million Americans have been lifted out of poverty.

Poverty rates for African Americans and Hispanic Americans have reached

record lows.

Nearly 7 million Americans have been lifted off of food stamps.

The prime age labor force has grown by 2.1 million.

In the third quarter of 2019, 73.7 percent of workers entering employment

came from out of the labor force rather than from unemployment, the

highest share since the series began in 1990.

Small business optimism broke a 35-year old record in 2018 and remains

historically high.

The DOW, S&P 500, and NASDAQ have all repeatedly notched record

highs.

President Trump is following through on his promise to revitalize American

manufacturing, with more than a half million manufacturing jobs added

since the election.

President Trump has

prioritized workforce

development to ensure

American workers are

prepared to fill high quality

jobs.

The President has

worked to expand

apprenticeship

programs, helping

Americans gain

hands-on training and

experience with no

student debt.

Over 660,000

apprentices have been

hired across the country.

Established the National

Council for the American

Worker, tasked with

developing a workforce

strategy for the jobs of

the future.

Over 370 companies

have signed the President’s “Pledge to America’s Workers, “pledging to

provide more than 14.4 million employment and training opportunities.

Signed an Executive Order prioritizing Cyber Workforce Development to

ensure that we have the most skilled cyber workforce of the 21st

century.

Signed the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act in 2017 – the largest tax reform package in

history.

More than 6 million American workers received wage increases, bonuses,

and increased benefits thanks to the tax cuts.

$1 trillion has poured back into the country from overseas since the

President’s tax cuts.

President Trump is revitalizing distressed communities through Opportunity

Zones, which encourage investment and growth in underserved

communities.

More than 8,760 communities in all 50 States, the District of

Columbia, and 5 Territories have been designated as Opportunity

Zones.

The White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council has

taken more than 175 actions to encourage investment and

promote growth within Opportunity Zones.

The White House Opportunity and

Revitalization Council is engaging

all levels of government to identify

best practices and assist leaders,

investors, and entrepreneurs in

using the Opportunity Zone

incentive to revitalize low-income

communities.

The President is ensuring that

America is prepared to lead the

world in the industries of the future,

by promoting American leadership

in emerging technologies like 5G

and AI.

The Administration named artificial intelligence, quantum

information science, and 5G, among other emerging technologies,

as national research and development priorities.

Launched the American AI Initiative to invest in AI research,

unleash innovation, and build the American workforce of the

future.

Signed an Executive Order that established a new advisory

committee of industry and academic leaders to advise the

government on its quantum activities.

President Trump has made supporting working families a priority of

his Administration.

Signed legislation securing historic levels of funding for the Child Care and

Development Block Grant, helping low-income family’s access child care.

During his Joint Address to

Congress and each State of

the Union Address, the

President called on Congress

to pass a nationwide paid

family leave plan.

The President signed into law

12-weeks of paid parental

leave for federal workers.

President Trump’s tax reforms

provided a new tax credit to incentivize businesses to offer paid family

leave to their employees.

The President’s historic tax reforms doubled the child tax credit, benefitting

nearly 40 million American families with an average of over $2,200 dollars

in 2019.

LIFTING THE BURDEN OF OVERREGULATION:

President Trump’s historic deregulation efforts are driving economic

growth, cutting unnecessary costs, and increasing transparency.

President Trump has delivered on, and far exceeded, his promise to slash

two existing regulations for every new regulation.

Since taking office, President Trump has rolled back nearly 8 regulations

for every new significant one.

The Trump Administration’s deregulatory efforts have slashed regulatory

costs by more than $50 billion.

In the coming years, the average American household is projected to see

an income gain of $3,100 per year thanks to President Trump’s historic

regulatory reform.

Once fully in effect, 20 major deregulatory actions undertaken by the

Administration are expected to save American consumers and businesses

over $220 billion per year.

Signed 16 pieces of deregulatory legislation that are expected to result in a

$40 billion increase in annual real incomes.

Established the

Governors Initiative on

Regulatory Innovation.

This initiative is working

to reduce outdated

regulations at the State,

local, and tribal levels,

advance occupational

licensing reform, and

align Federal and State

regulation.

Signed legislation eliminating regulatory barriers that made offering

retirement benefits difficult for small businesses.

Took action to increase transparency in Federal agencies and

protect Americans from administrative abuse.

Signed two Executive Orders to guard against secretive or unlawful

interpretations of rules and prevent Americans from being hit with unfair

and unexpected penalties.

President Trump has followed through on his promise to repeal the Obamaera

Waters of the United States Rule, lifting a burden off American farmers.

Ended the previous Administration’s war on coal.

Signed legislation repealing the harmful Obama-era Stream Protection

Rule.

Replaced the overreaching Obama-era Clean Power Plan with

the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, which respects States’ rights and

promotes economic growth while

lowering power-sector CO2

emissions.

In 2017, the President announced

the United States’ withdrawal from

the Paris Climate Agreement, which

would have killed millions of

American jobs.

The Administration has worked to

undo the Obama-era fuel economy

regulations by proposing the SAFE Vehicles Rule to lower the cost of new

and safer cars.

President Trump helped community banks by signing legislation that rolled

back costly provisions of Dodd-Frank.

Established the White House Council on Reducing Regulatory Barriers

to Affordable Housing Development to bring down the costs of housing

across the country.

The President’s deregulatory actions are removing government barriers to

personal freedom and consumer choice in healthcare.

In 2017, President Trump corrected Obama Administration overreach by

right-sizing Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante

National Monument.

FIGHTING FOR FAIRER TRADE: President Trump is negotiating better

trade deals for the American people after years of our country being

taken advantage of.

President Trump negotiated the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement (USMCA)

to replace the outdated North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

USMCA includes tremendous wins for American workers, farmers, and

manufacturers, generating over $68 billion in economic activity and creating

176,000 new jobs.

Negotiated two tremendous deals with Japan to boost America’s

agricultural and digital trade

with the world’s third largest

economy.

Thanks to President Trump’s

efforts, Japan will open its

market to approximately $7

billion in American agricultural

exports.

The President’s negotiations

will boost the already

approximately $40 billion worth of digital trade between our two countries.

President Trump fulfilled his promise to renegotiate the United States-

Korea Free Trade Agreement, providing a boost to American auto exports.

These efforts doubled the number of

American autos that can be exported

to South Korea using United States

safety standards.

Reached a historic phase one

trade agreement with China that

will begin rebalancing our two

countries’ trade relationship.

China has agreed to structural reforms in areas of

intellectual property, technology transfer, agriculture,

financial services, and currency and foreign exchange.

China will be making substantial purchases of

American agricultural products, marking a monumental

win for American farmers.

President Trump fulfilled his promise to withdraw from the disastrous

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

President Trump achieved a mutual agreement with the European Union to

work together towards zero tariffs, non-tariff barriers, and subsidies on

certain goods.

President Trump has worked to prepare for post-Brexit trade and made

Congress aware of his intent to negotiate a free trade agreement with the

United Kingdom (UK).

Imposed tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum to protect our vital industries

and support our national security.

Imposed tariffs to protect American-made washing machines and solar

products that were hurt by import surges.

The United States scored an historic victory by overhauling the Universal

Postal Union (UPU), whose outdated policies were undermining American

interests and workers.

President Trump has

expanded markets for

American farmers to

export their goods

worldwide, for example:

The European Union

has opened up to more

American beef and

increased imports

of American soybeans.

China lifted its ban on American poultry and opened up to American beef.

South Korea lifted its ban on American poultry and eggs and agreed to

provide market access for the greatest, guaranteed volume of American

rice.

The Trump Administration has authorized a total of $28 billion in aid for

farmers who have been subjected to unfair trade practices.

SECURING THE BORDER: President Trump has taken

historic steps to confront the crisis on our Nation’s borders

and protect American communities.

President Trump is following

through on his promise to build

a wall on our southern border.

The Administration expects to

have approximately 450 miles

of new border wall by the end

of 2020.

The President struck new

agreements with Mexico,

El Salvador, Guatemala, and

Honduras to help stop the flood

of illegal immigration.

The President worked with

Mexico to ensure they would improve their border security.

The United States is working with Mexico and others in the region

to dismantle the human smuggling networks that profit from

human misery and fuel the border crisis by exploiting vulnerable

populations.

The Administration negotiated agreements with El Salvador,

Guatemala, and Honduras to stem the surge of aliens arriving at

our border.

President Trump negotiated the Migrant Protection Protocols,

requiring certain migrants to wait in Mexico during their

immigration proceedings instead of allowing them to disappear

into our country.

Border apprehensions fell by more than 70 percent from May –

the peak of the crisis – to November.

The Trump Administration

is stopping deadly drugs

and violent criminals from

flowing across our borders

and into our communities.

Customs and Border

Protection (CBP) seized

more than 163,000 pounds

of cocaine, heroin,

methamphetamine, and

fentanyl at the southern

border in FY 2019.

The United States Coast Guard seized more than 458,000 pounds of

cocaine at sea in FY 2019 and referred nearly 400 suspected drug

smugglers for prosecution.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security

Investigations (HSI) seized over 1.4 million pounds of narcotics and made

more than 12,000 narcotic-related arrests in FY 2019.

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized over 50,000 kilograms of

methamphetamine and over 2,700 kilograms of fentanyl in FY 2019.

CBP apprehended 976 alien gang members in FY 2019, including 464

aliens affiliated with MS-13.

ICE HSI made over 4,000 arrests of gang members in FY 2019, including

over 450 arrests of MS-13 members.

RESTORING THE RULE OF LAW:

President Trump is upholding the rule of law, restoring integrity to our

asylum system, and promoting immigrant self-sufficiency.

President Trump released an immigration plan to fully secure our border,

modernize our laws, and promote an immigration system based on merit.

President Trump is working to combat the abuse of our asylum system that

drives illegal immigration.

The Administration took

action to close the

Flores Settlement

Agreement loophole and

ensure alien families can

be kept together through

their proceedings.

The President released an

order that makes aliens

ineligible for asylum if they

passed through another

country in transit to our

border and did not apply for

asylum in that country first.

Since taking office, President Trump has stepped up enforcement to

ensure there are consequences for breaking our laws. In FY 2019, the

Department of Justice prosecuted a record-breaking number of immigration

related crimes. ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) arrested

143,099 aliens in FY 2019, 86 percent of whom had criminal records.

ICE ERO removed more than 267,000 illegal aliens from the United States

in FY 2019.

The Trump Administration is cracking down on sanctuary cities and

increasing cooperation at the local level on immigration enforcement.

The Administration has more than doubled the number of jurisdictions

participating in the 287(g) program, enhancing local cooperation on

immigration enforcement.

The Administration took action to protect taxpayers by ensuring that aliens

wishing to enter or remain in our country are able to support themselves

and not rely on public benefits.

Issued a proclamation to ensure immigrants admitted to America do not

burden our healthcare system.

The President has taken action to reduce nonimmigrant visa overstays, a

problem that undermines the rule of law, impacts public safety, and strains

resources needed for the border.

President Trump made our country safer by ordering the enhanced vetting

of individuals attempting to come to America from countries that do not

meet our security standards.

The President is taking a responsible approach to refugee admissions,

prioritizing refugee resettlement in jurisdictions where both State and local

governments consent to receive them.

This order is designed to ensure that refugees are placed in an

environment where they will have the best opportunity to succeed in their

new homes.

CREATING SAFER COMMUNITIES:

President Trump’s policies are supporting our brave law enforcement

officers and making America’s communities safer.

Violent crime fell in 2017 and 2018, after rising during each of the two years

prior to President Trump taking office.

Since 2016, the violent crime rate in America has fallen nearly 5 percent

and the murder rate has decreased by over 7 percent.

President Trump signed

the First Step Act into

law, making our criminal

justice system fairer for

all while making our

communities safer.

Promoted secondchance

hiring to give

former inmates the

opportunity to live crimefree

lives and find

meaningful employment,

all while making our

communities safer.

The Department of Education is expanding an initiative that allows

individuals in Federal and State prisons to receive Pell Grants to better

prepare themselves for the workforce.

The Department of Justice and Bureau of Prisons launched a new “Ready

to Work “Initiative to help connect employers directly with former prisoners.

The Department of Labor awarded $2.2 million to states to expand the use

of fidelity bonds, which underwrite companies that hire former prisoners.

Revitalized Project Safe Neighborhoods, bringing together Federal, State,

local, and tribal law enforcement officials to develop solutions to violent

crime.

The President is standing up for our Nation’s law enforcement officers,

ensuring they have the support they need to keep our communities safe.

Established a new commission to evaluate best practices for recruiting,

training, and supporting law enforcement officers.

The Administration has made available hundreds of millions of dollars’

worth of surplus military equipment to local law enforcement.

Signed an Executive Order to help prevent violence against law

enforcement officers.

Signed legislation permanently funding the 9/11 Victim Compensation

Fund, aiding our Nation’s brave first responders.

The President has taken action to combat the scourge of hate crimes and

anti-Semitism rising in America.

President Trump signed an Executive Order making it clear that Title VI of

the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to discrimination rooted in anti-

Semitism.

The Administration

launched a centralized

website to educate the

public about hate crimes

and encourage

reporting.

Since January 2017, the

Civil Rights division at

the DOJ has obtained 14

convictions in cases

involving attacks or

threats against places of

worship.

The President signed the Fix NICS Act to keep guns out of the hands of

dangerous criminals.

Signed the STOP School Violence Act and created a Commission on

School Safety to examine ways to make our schools safer.

The Trump Administration is fighting to end the egregious crime of human

trafficking.

In FY 2019, ICE HSI arrested 2,197 criminals associated with human

trafficking and identified 428 victims.

Signed the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, which

tightened criteria for whether countries are meeting standards for

eliminating trafficking.

Established a task force to help combat the tragedy of missing or murdered

Native American women and girls.

ADVANCING AMERICA’S INTERESTS

ABROAD:

President Trump is putting America first

and advancing our interests across the

world.

President Trump’s maximum pressure

campaign is countering Iran’s influence

and pressuring the corrupt regime to

abandon its malign activities.

Removed the United States from the Iran

nuclear deal and re-imposed all sanctions

that were lifted by the deal.

In response to Iran’s aggression and gross human rights violations, the

President authorized crippling sanctions on the regime’s leadership,

including the Supreme Leader.

President Trump is working to vigorously enforce all sanctions to bring

Iran’s oil exports to zero and deny the regime its principal source of

revenue.

President Trump has held two historic summits with North Korea and

earlier this year became the first President to cross the DMZ into North

Korea.

The Administration has maintained tough sanctions on North Korea while

negotiations have taken place.

Since taking office, President Trump has taken historic steps to

support and defend our cherished ally Israel.

This year, President Trump acknowledged Israel’s sovereignty over the

Golan Heights and declared Israeli settlements in the West Bank are not

inconsistent with international law.

The President made good on his promise to recognize Jerusalem as the

true capital of Israel and move the United States Embassy there.

The President removed the United States from the United Nations (U.N.)

Human Rights Council due to the group’s blatant anti-Israel bias.

President Trump has

successfully urged North Atlantic

Treaty Organization (NATO)

members to increase their

defense spending and to focus

on modern priorities.

NATO Allies will increase

defense spending by $130 billion

by the end of next year.

The Administration has worked

to reform and streamline the

U.N., cutting spending and

making the organization more

efficient.

Took action to protect our Second Amendment rights by announcing the

United States will not join the misguided Arms Trade Treaty.

President Trump has promoted democracy throughout the Western

Hemisphere and imposed heavy sanctions on the regimes in Venezuela,

Cuba, and Nicaragua.

The President reversed the

previous Administration’s

disastrous Cuba policy.

Enacted a new policy aimed

at stopping any revenues

from reaching the Cuban

military or intelligence

services, imposed stricter

travel restrictions, and

reaffirmed the focus ensuring

the Cuban regime does not

profit from U.S. dollars.

Put a cap on remittances to

Cuba.

President Trump is enabling

Americans to file lawsuits

against persons and entities

that traffic in property

confiscated by the Cuban regime, the first time that these kinds of claims

have been available for Americans under the Helms-Burton Act.

President Trump has stood with the democratically elected National

Assembly and the Venezuelan people and worked to cut off the financial

resources of the Maduro regime.

President Trump recognized Juan Guaido as the Interim President of

Venezuela and rallied an international coalition of 58 countries to support

him.

Blocked all property of the Venezuelan Government in the jurisdiction of the

United States.

Sanctioned key sectors of the Venezuelan economy exploited by the

regime, including the oil and gold sectors.

The Administration sanctioned Maduro’s key financial lifelines, including the

Venezuelan Central Bank, the Venezuelan Development Bank, and

Petroleos de Venezuela.

Secured the release of Americans unjustly imprisoned abroad, including

Kevin King, Xiyue Wang, Danny Burch, and more.

The President and his Administration have worked to advance a free and

open Indo-Pacific region, promoting new investments and expanding

American partnerships.

Negotiated the return from Finland of

approximately 600 tribal ancestral remains

and other sacred objects for the American

Indian and Pueblo communities from which

they came.

Released an economic plan to empower

the Palestinian people and enhance Palestinian governance through

private investment.

Created the first-ever whole-of-government approach to women’s

economic empowerment through his Women’s Global

Development and Prosperity Initiative.

In June of 2019, the President

released the U.S. Strategy on

Women, Peace, and Security,

which focuses on increasing

women’s participation to prevent

and resolve conflicts.

REBUILDING OUR NATION’S DEFENSE:

President Trump is investing in our military and ensuring our forces

are able to defend against any and all threats.

Signed the National Defense

Authorization Act (NDAA) for

fiscal year (FY)2020,

authorizing a historic $738

billion in defense spending.

Continued to invest in

rebuilding our military, after

signing legislation to provide

for $700 billion in defense

spending in FY18 and $716

billion in FY19.

Signed a 3.1% pay raise for our troops, the largest increase in a decade.

Signed legislation establishing the Space Force as a new branch of the

Armed Forces, the first new branch since 1947.

The United States Space Command was relaunched in August 2019.

The President is modernizing and recapitalizing our nuclear forces and

missile defenses to ensure they continue to serve as a strong deterrent.

Upgraded our cyber defenses by elevating the Cyber Command into a

major warfighting command and reducing burdensome procedural

restrictions on cyber operations.

President Trump is protecting America’s defense-industrial base, directing

the first whole-of-government assessment of our manufacturing and

defense supply chains since the 1950s.

Under the President’s leadership, the United States is taking the fight to

terrorists all around the globe.

ISIS’ territorial caliphate has been defeated and all territory recaptured in

Iraq and Syria.

The United States has brought Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the founder of ISIS,

to justice.

The President has taken decisive military action to punish the

Assad regime in Syria for the barbaric use of chemical weapons on

its own people.

Authorized sanctions against those tied to Syria’s chemical

weapons program.

HONORING OUR VETERANS:

President Trump is standing up for

America’s veterans by ensuring they

receive the proper care and support they

deserve.

Signed the VA MISSION Act, revolutionizing

the VA system, increasing choice, and

providing quality care for our veterans.

This legislation reformed and expanded

many of the existing programs to give

veterans improved access to healthcare

providers and offered entirely new options

such as allowing veterans to get urgent care

in their local communities.

The VA MISSION Act put veterans at the center of their healthcare

decisions, not bureaucracy.

Expanded veterans’ ability to access telehealth services, including through

the “Anywhere to Anywhere” VA health care initiative.

President Trump has brought accountability to the VA, as promised.

Signed the Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection

Act to ensure VA employees are held responsible for poor performance.

Over 8,000 VA employees have been relieved of their duties at the VA

since the beginning of the Administration.

Veterans are seeing an improvement in quality of care.

In the last year, the VA saw its highest patient experience ratings in history.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars found in its annual survey that more than 90

percent of respondents would recommend VA care to other veterans.

Signed the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017

to expedite the veteran appeals process.

The Administration is working to seamlessly align the VA’s and DoD’s

electronic health records.

This new electronic health record system is on pace to launch next year in

select areas.

The VA launched a new tool that provides veterans with online access to

average wait times and quality-of-care data.

Opened up a 24/7 White House

VA Hotline to provide veterans

access to help at all times.

President Trump has committed

his Administration to addressing

the horrible tragedy of veteran

suicide.

Signed the PREVENTS Initiative,

which created a task force to

develop revolutionary roadmap to

tackle the problem of veteran

suicide.

Signed an executive order to improve access to suicide prevention

resources for veterans.

President Trump is expanding educational resources, promoting economic

opportunity, and making sure our veterans have the support they need

when they return home.

This year, the veteran unemployment rate reached its

lowest level since 2000.

Signed an executive order that paves the way for

veterans to more easily join the Merchant Marine,

providing quality job opportunities.

Signed the Forever GI Bill, allowing veterans to use

their educational benefits at any point in their lives.

Expedited the process of discharging Federal student

loan debt for our Nation’s totally and permanently

disabled veterans.

Signed the HAVEN Act to ensure that veterans who’ve declared bankruptcy

don’t lose their disability payments.

Signed legislation providing a pathway for Alaska Natives who served in

Vietnam to receive the land allotments to which they are legally entitled.

COMBATING THE OPIOID CRISIS:

President Trump has made battling the opioid crisis a top

priority for his Administration, and the results couldn’t be

clearer.

President Trump brought attention to the opioid crisis by declaring it a

nationwide public health emergency.

To address the many factors fueling the drug crisis, President Trump

launched an Initiative to Stop Opioid Abuse and Reduce Drug Supply and

Demand.

Thanks to the President’s efforts, landmark new Federal funding

and resources have been

dedicated to help end the

opioid crisis.

Signed the SUPPORT for

Patients and Communities

Act, the largest and most

comprehensive piece of

legislation to combat the

opioid crisis in history.

The Department of Health

and Human Services (HHS)

has awarded nearly $9 billion

over 2016 to 2019 in grants to

address the opioid crisis and

improve access to prevention, treatment, and recovery services in

partnership with State and local officials.

Nearly $1 billion in grants were recently awarded for the HEAL Initiative to

support development of scientific solutions to help prevent and treat

addiction.

Announced a Safer Prescriber Plan that seeks to decrease the amount of

opioids prescription fills by one third within three years.

From January 2017 to September 2019, the total amount of opioids

prescriptions filled in America dropped by 31%.

Launched FindTreatment.gov, a newly designed website that makes it

easier to find substance abuse treatment locations.

The President implemented new efforts to educate Americans about the

dangers of opioid misuse.

These efforts include an ad campaign on youth opioid abuse that reached

58 percent of young adults in America.

President Trump and his Administration aggressively worked to cut off the

flow of deadly drugs into our communities.

In FY 2019, ICE HSI seized 12,466 pounds of opioids including 3,688

pounds of fentanyl, an increase of 35% from FY 2018.

The Administration shut down the country’s

biggest Darknet distributer of drugs,

seizing enough fentanyl to kill 105,000

Americans in the process.

A DOJ strike force charged more than 65

defendants collectively responsible for

distributing over 45 million opioid pills.

The Administration has brought kingpin

designations against traffickers operating

in China, India, Mexico and more who have played a role in the epidemic in

America.

The Administration secured the first-ever indictments against Chinese

fentanyl traffickers.

This year, President Trump convinced China to enact strict regulations to

control the production and sale of

all types of fentanyl.

Evidence suggests that

President Trump’s efforts are

making a real difference across

the Nation.

Preliminary data shows overdose deaths fell nationwide in 2018 for the first

time in decades.

Many of the hardest hit states – including Ohio, Kentucky, and West

Virginia – saw drug overdose deaths drop in 2018.

Since 2016, there has been a nearly 40 percent increase in the number of

Americans receiving medication-assisted treatment.

PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST: President Trump is working hard to give

Americans better quality care at a lower cost.

The Administration is delivering quality

healthcare and promoting innovative

treatment options for American patients.

Earlier this year, President Trump signed

an order to protect and improve Medicare

for our seniors, encouraging even more

competition and promoting innovative

benefits.

Signed and implemented the Right to Try

Act, which has expanded treatment

options for terminally ill patients.

The President has taken action to combat childhood cancer, initiating an

effort to provide $500 million over the next decade to improve pediatric

cancer research.

The President signed legislation providing an additional $1 billion in

Alzheimer’s disease research funding.

The Administration launched a plan to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic in

America in the next decade.

President Trump took action to increase the availability of organs for

patients in need of transplants and provide more treatment options and

improve care for patients suffering from kidney disease.

Signed an order to modernize the influenza vaccine.

The Administration is making healthcare more affordable and transparent.

The Administration is requiring hospitals to make their prices negotiated

with insurers publicly and easily available online.

The

Administration

expanded the

use of Health

Reimbursement

Arrangements

(HRAs). Now,

HRAs allow

employers to

help their

employees pay for the cost of insurance

that they select in the individual market.

The Administration has successfully

worked to reduce Medicare Advantage

and Part D Premiums to their lowest in

years.

The President is working to expand Association

Health Plans, which would make it easier for

employers to join together and offer more

affordable health coverage to their employees.

Extended access to short-term, limited-duration

health plans, giving Americans more flexibility to

choose plans that suit their needs.

The Administration has improved access to health savings accounts for

individuals with chronic conditions.

The President has worked to reduce the burden felt by Americans due to

Obamacare and eliminated Obamacare’s individual mandate penalty.

Released legislative principles to end surprise medical billing and is

working with Congress to give patients the control they deserve.

President Trump is following through on his pledge to combat

high drug prices.

Released a blueprint to reduce drug

prices and expand affordability

for American patients.

The Administration’s efforts to

lower drug prices led to the largest

year-over-year decrease in drug prices

ever recorded.

The President has advanced efforts to import prescription drugs

from Canada in partnership with several states, including Florida

and Colorado.

Launched an initiative to stop global freeloading in the drug

market, proposing a new way for Medicare to pay for certain

drugs based on prices other developed nations pay.

Signed legislation to end pharmacy gag clauses, which prevented

pharmacists from letting patients know when it would be cheaper

to buy drugs without their insurance.

SAFEGUARDING LIFE AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY:

President Trump has made it a priority of his

Administration to uphold the sanctity of life and

safeguard religious liberty for all.

President Trump is unequivocally committed to protecting the sanctity of

every human life.

The Administration issued a

rule preventing Title X family

planning funds from

supporting the abortion

industry.

President Trump has called

on Congress to end late-term

abortions.

The Trump Administration cut

all funding to the U.N.

population fund, due to the

fund’s support for coercive

abortion and forced

sterilization.

HHS rescinded an Obamaera

guidance that prevented

states from taking certain

actions against abortion

providers.

President Trump reinstated

and expanded the Mexico City Policy in 2017, ensuring that taxpayer

money is not used to fund abortion globally.

The President has taken action to end federal research using fetal tissue

from abortions.

President Trump is protecting healthcare entities and individuals’

conscience rights—ensuring that no medical professional is forced to

participate in an abortion in violation of their beliefs.

The Administration provided relief to American employers like Little Sisters

of the Poor, protecting them from being forced to provide coverage that

violate their conscience.

President Trump has taken unprecedented action to support the

fundamental right to religious freedom.

Signed an Executive Order establishing the White House Faith and

Opportunity Initiative.

Signed an Executive Order upholding religious liberty and the right to

engage in religious speech.

The Department of Justice created a Religious Liberty Task Force in 2018.

The Trump Administration

continues to vigorously defend

religious liberty in the courts at

every opportunity.

Reversed the Obama-era policy

that prevented the government

from providing disaster relief to

religious organizations.

The Administration is preserving a

space for faith-based adoption

and foster care providers to

continue to serve their

communities consistent with their

beliefs.

The Administration reduced

burdensome barriers to Native

Americans being able to keep

spiritually and culturally significant

eagle feathers found on their tribal

lands.

The Administration has allowed

greater flexibility for Federal

employees to take time off work for religious reasons.

The Trump Administration has stood up for religious liberty around the

world.

The Administration has partnered with local and faith-based organizations

to provide assistance to religious minorities persecuted in Iraq.

President Trump hosted the Global Call to Protect Religious Freedom at

the 2019 U.N. General Assembly, calling on global and business leaders to

bring an end to religious persecution and stop crimes against people of

faith.

The Administration dedicated $25 million to protect religious freedom,

religious sites and relics.

The State Department has hosted two Religious Freedom Ministerials, with

the 2019 Ministerial becoming the largest religious freedom event of its kind

in the world.

Imposed restrictions on certain Chinese officials, internal security units, and

companies for their complicity in the persecution of Uighur Muslims and

other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang.

TRANSFORMING THE COURTS:

President Trump is transforming the Federal judiciary

by appointing a historic number of Federal judges

who will interpret the Constitution as written.

Working with the Senate, President Trump has now had 187

judicial nominees confirmed to the Federal bench.

President Trump’s remaking of the judiciary is only accelerating with 103

Federal judges confirmed in 2019, more than 2017 and 2018 combined.

The President named Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch to the

Supreme Court, fulfilling his promise to appoint justices who will uphold the

constitution as written.

President

Trump has

appointed 50

Circuit Court

judges – more

than any other

President at this

point in their

Administration

More than a quarter of all active Circuit Court judges were appointed by

President Trump.

The average age of Trump-appointed circuit judges is less than 50 years

old, ensuring that these qualified jurists will continue to have an impact for

decades to come.

President Trump has flipped the Second, Third, and Eleventh Circuits from

Democrat-appointed majorities to Republican-appointed majorities.

USHERING IN AN ERA OF ENERGY DOMINANCE:

President Trump’s policies are ushering in a new era of American

energy dominance.

President Trump has rolled back the

burdensome regulations of the past

Administration and implemented

policies that are unleashing

American energy.

The United States is the largest oil and natural gas producer in the world.

American oil production reached its highest level in history in 2019.

The United States became a net exporter of crude oil and petroleum

products in September2019, the first time this has occurred since records

began in 1973.

Natural gas production is projected to set a record high in 2019, marking

the third consecutive year of record production.

President Trump is opening up more access to our country’s abundant

natural resources in order to promote energy independence.

Department of the Interior energy revenues soared in fiscal year FY 2019,

nearly doubling since FY 2016 to $12 billion.

Applications to drill on public lands have increased by 300 percent since FY

2016, and the time it takes to complete these permits has dropped by half.

Signed legislation to open up Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to

energy exploration.

President Trump is promoting energy infrastructure to ensure American

energy producers can deliver their products to the market.

Signed two Executive Orders to streamline processes holding back the

construction of new energy infrastructure, like pipelines.

Took action to approve the

Dakota Access pipeline and the

Keystone XL pipeline.

Issued permits for the New

Burgos Pipeline that will export

American petroleum products to

Mexico.

The Administration has

streamlined Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal permitting.

In 2019, the Department of Energy granted 11 new long-term LNG export

approvals.

American energy exports have reached historic highs.

LNG exports have increased by 247% since 2017, hitting record highs in

2019 and are projected to continue increasing next year.

In 2017, the United States became a net natural gas exporter for the first

time in 60 years.

The United States has exported LNG to five continents and 37 countries,

marking 19 additional countries from the beginning of the Trump

Administration.

President Trump strengthened America’s domestic energy production and

supported our Nation’s farmers by approving year-round E-15.

Worked to ensure greater transparency and certainty in the Renewable

Fuel Standard (RFS).

Promoted domestic energy production and economic growth while working

to ensure Americans have access to safe drinking water and a clean

environment.

The United States environmental record is one of the strongest in

the world and America continues to make environmental progress

in clean air and clean water.

The EPA took action to protect vulnerable Americans from lead

exposure by proposing changes to the Lead and Copper rule.

In FY 2019 the EPA completed cleanup on the most superfund

sites on the National Priority List in 18 years.

Emissions of all criteria pollutants dropped between 2016 and

2018.

PROMOTING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY:

President Trump is working to ensure all Americans have access to

quality education.

President Trump signed into law a modernization of

our country’s career and technical education system

to ensure more Americans have access to

high-quality vocational

education.

This year, the Administration proposed Education

Freedom Scholarships to expand education

options for students of all economic

backgrounds.

This plan will invest up to $5 billion in students

through a tax credit for donations for state-based,

locally-controlled scholarships.

President Trump is expanding education and training opportunities for

incarcerated individuals to learn how to make a living before their release.

Signed legislation reauthorizing the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program.

Thanks to President Trump’s historic tax reform, parents can now withdraw

up to $10,000 tax-free per year from 529 education savings plans to cover

K-12 tuition costs.

President Trump has made supporting Historically Black Colleges and

Universities (HBCUs) a priority of his Administration.

Signed the Farm Bill that included more than $100 million dollars for

scholarships, research, and centers of excellence at HBCU land-grant

institutions.

The Administration has enabled faith-based HBCUs to enjoy equal access

to Federal support. Signed legislation providing $255 million dollars of

permanent annual funding for HBCUs and other Minority Serving

Institutions.

I suggest you join the #WalkAwayCampaign and get

your life back.

see more

27

•

Reply

•

Share ›

Twitter

Facebook

max w 1 year ago When you watch this, you can see that the

Democrats never understood America or Donald Trump

ArJuna 1 year ago

Oh they understood America alright. The problem was they have

strived to take America out of the fight so their twisted evil cabal

could thoroughly enslave the world. Living in Washington most of

my life, I realized more than 35 years ago just how evil these

international organizations were. I watched helplessly as they

infiltrated our highest offices and led a silent coup, which went

unnoticed by all but a very few Americans. When Donald Trump

won the election, my heart was lighter than it had been since I

was a kid. Now, as I watch the great awakening of America, I

truly believe that we have a shot at taking down this evil which

has dominated the world for millennia. Everyone MUST get out

and vote this November, so President Trump and the patriots

working with him can expose and arrest the many thousands of

traitors who I know exist and deserve nothing less than death for

what they have done to the world. And when the world discovers

the truth about what depravity they are guilty of, and how much

unbelievable human suffering they have perpetrated, no one will

disagree with my condemnation of them and my assessment of

their deserved punishment.

They also understood Donald Trump perfectly well. They knew what it

meant to suddenly have the highest office in the land turned over to

someone that was not one of them and who could expose them and make

them pay for their crimes. This is why they so desperately fought him

from day one and why they have been frothing at the mouth when

speaking about him since he won the election. They never expected their

cabal to lose power. They never expected that any of their high crimes

would ever face the light of day. Now they are in a full-blown panic as

they realize they have no way to take him down. And it's not just

President Trump vs. them BTW. President Trump has had a massive and

powerful team of military and intelligence people behind him from long

before he announced his run for office. These were patriots in high places

that understood the country was desperately in trouble and were not

going to sit by idly as the likes of the Clintons , Bush’s, Obama, et al

ripped the country to shreds. We are at WAR and Americans need to

realize the enormity of the threat.

Do your best to educate and wake up your neighbors who've been

asleep too long - as most of you were for far too long. This is

basically our last shot at reclaiming our country, not only for

ourselves, but for the entire world, because #WWG1WGA. #MAGA

Religion and Politics 4 months ago

At times I've felt depressed in life. But when life has got me down, I

don't use drugs or alcohol, they wouldn't help. My new prescription

for mental health is watching Thug Life videos of Trump.....and all of

a sudden.....life gets better! Great vids!

Jack 5 months ago

Impeachment? We don’t need no stinking impeachment!

ILLINOIS MEXICANS FOR TRUMP 2020

Pnchck 1 month ago

I can tell by the quote that you’re one of those whitewashed boomer

Mexicans who hate their own kind and used racial slurs. Fucking loser

Jack 1 month ago

@Pnchck. WRONG! ASSHOLE. First, “Mexican” is NOT a race;

Second, “AMERICA” is a continent NOT a country. As for “hate”. I

hate those who destroyed the Mexican Constitution which

happens to be modeled after the US Constitution. GOD , family,

pursuit of happiness. Love of country and its values, principles,

justice, security and RESPECT for laws. The Mexican Constitution

of 1824 Prohibited SLAVERY .... something the 1776 US

Constitution didn’t have then. Therefore, you know nothing about

me! When, then “Candidate Trump“ came to Mexico, he passed

out MAKE MEXICO GREAT, TOO hats. Loved it! As for

“impeachment “. I knew the LeftyCRATS had nothing on him. Now

I’m in Illinois and there is a huge Mexican movement that

supports President Trump. Lastly, have you ever heard of DUAL

CITIZENSHIP? So, go fuck yourself. After the LeftyCRATS

butchered up Spanish during the debates, even the illegals are

voting for President Trump. HAHAHAHAHA ILLINOIS MEXICANS

FOR TRUMP 2020

Thomas L. Friedman@tomfriedman

Aug 13

A Geopolitical Earthquake Just Hit the Mideast

“The U.A.E. and Israel and the U.S. on Thursday

showed — at least for one brief shining moment

— that the past does not always have to bury the

future, that the haters and dividers don’t always

have to win.“ ~ Thomas Friedman

@nytimes

shane pacey@PaceyShane

Aug 16

Ooh a peace deal between the rich non threatening Arab countries and

Isreal...that must have been hard.

Sheriff Buford* T. Dawg@t_sherrif

Aug 14

Trump got Little Rocket Man to meet with South Korean Leader... Trump DESTROYED

Isis Trump Gets Taliban to agree to cease fire (Withdraws Troops) Trump gets U A E and

Israel to normalize relations with peace deal... COMMON SENSE PEACE PRIZE WINNER

(Screw the Nobel Peace Prize)

Jason B@Jason071978

Aug 18

It's not a Middle East peace deal. It's a step in the right direction

by one country that was already on very good relations with

Isreal. The left want to ignore it and the right want it to be a huge

deal. It deserves neither.

LetFreedomRing@snowsnickers

Aug 13

Epic FAIL today Joe and Kamala trying to act all presidential jabbing the President with,

“that’s what leadership looks like” statement over masks. Evil lost today. PEACE won.

Trump just owned leadership today making history with the Isreal/UA peace deal.

Trump 2020

STRIKE WON@STRIKEWON

Aug 17

Only leader EVER that has not budged on his stance which everyone ABSOLUTELY

LOVED him for the past 25 yrs until he ran. Which is very odd, don't you think? Media

manipulation much? He has kept all promises. Tell me any politician to ever do that?

Sean Davis@seanmdav

Aug 13

If historic peace deals between Israelis and Arabs make you mad, there's a

good chance you're a Jew-hating anti-Semite who's upset that the Iranians

haven't yet used the nukes you gave them to wipe Israel off the map.

Ben Rhodes

@brhodes

· Aug 13

This agreement enshrines what has been the emerging status quo in the

region for a long time (including the total exclusion of Palestinians).

Dressed up as an election eve achievement from two leaders who want

Trump to win. twitter.com/atrupar/status…

Danielle Allen Special to The Washington Post

Like any number of us raised in the late 20th century,

I have spent my life perplexed about exactly how Hitler

could have come to power in Germany. Watching Donald Trump's rise,

I now understand. Leave aside whether a direct comparison of Trump to

Hitler is accurate. That is not my point. My point rather is about how a

demagogic opportunist can exploit a divided country.

To understand the rise of Hitler and the spread of Nazism, I have

generally relied on the German-Jewish émigré philosopher Hannah

Arendt and her arguments about the banality of evil. Somehow people

can understand themselves as "just doing their job," yet act as cogs in

the wheel of a murderous machine. Arendt also offered a second answer

in a small but powerful book called "Men in Dark Times." In this book,

she described all those who thought that Hitler's rise was a terrible thing

but chose "internal exile," or staying invisible and out of the way as their

strategy for coping with the situation. They knew evil was evil, but they

too facilitated it, by departing from the battlefield out of a sense of

hopelessness.

One can see both of these phenomena unfolding now. The first shows

itself, for instance, when journalists cover every crude and cruel thing

that comes out of Trump's mouth and thereby help acculturate all of us

to what we are hearing. Are they not just doing their jobs, they will ask,

in covering the Republican front-runner? Have we not already been

acculturated by 30 years of popular culture to offensive and inciting

comments? Yes, both of these things are true. But that doesn't mean

journalists ought to be Trump's megaphone. Perhaps we should just shut

the lights out on offensiveness; turn off the mic when someone tries to

shout down others; re-establish standards for what counts as a

worthwhile contribution to the public debate. That will seem counter to

journalistic norms, yes, but why not let Trump pay for his own ads when

he wants to broadcast foul and incendiary ideas? He'll still have plenty

of access to freedom of expression. It is time to draw a bright line.

One spots the second experience in any number of water-cooler

conversations or dinner-party dialogues. "Yes, yes, it is terrible. Can you

believe it? Have you seen anything like it? Has America come to this?"

"Agreed, agreed." But when someone asks what is to be done, silence

falls. Very many of us, too many of us, are starting to contemplate

accepting internal exile. Or we joke about moving to Canada more

seriously than usually.

But over the course of the past few months, I've learned something else

that goes beyond Arendt's ideas about the banality of evil and feelings of

impotence in the face of danger.

Trump is rising by taking advantage of a divided country. The truth is

that the vast majority of voting Americans think that Trump is

unacceptable as a presidential candidate, but we are split by strong

partisan ideologies and cannot coordinate a solution to stop him.

Similarly, a significant part of voting Republicans think that Trump is

unacceptable, but they too, thus far, have been unable to coordinate a

solution. Trump is exploiting the fact that we cannot unite across our

ideological divides.

The only way to stop him, then, is to achieve just that kind of

coordination across party lines and across divisions within parties. We

have reached that moment of truth.

Republicans, you cannot count on the Democrats to stop Trump. I

believe that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination, and I

intend to vote for her, but it is also the case that she is a candidate with

significant weaknesses, as your party knows quite well. The result of a

head-to-head contest between Clinton and Trump would be

unpredictable. Trump has to be blocked in your primary.

Jeb Bush has done the right thing by dropping out, just as he did the

right thing by being the first, alongside Rand Paul, to challenge Trump.

The time has come, John Kasich and Ben Carson, to leave the race as

well. You both express a powerful commitment to the good of your

country and to its founding ideals. If you care about the future of this

republic, it is time to endorse Marco Rubio. Kasich, there's a little wind

in your sails, but it's not enough. Your country is calling you. Do the

right thing.

Ted Cruz is, I believe, pulling votes away from Trump, and for that

reason is useful in the race. But, Mr. Cruz, you are drawing too close to

Trump's politics. You too should change course.

Democrats, your leading candidate is too weak to count on as a firewall.

She might be able to pull off a general election victory against Trump,

but then again she might not. Too much is uncertain this year. You, too,

need to help the Republicans beat Trump; this is no moment for standing

by passively. If your deadline for changing your party affiliation has not

yet come, re-register and vote for Rubio, even if, like me, you cannot

stomach his opposition to marriage equality. I, too, would prefer Kasich

as the Republican nominee, but pursuing that goal will only make it

more likely that Trump takes the nomination. The republic cannot afford

that.

Finally, to all of you Republicans who have already dropped out, one

more, great act of public service awaits you. As candidates, you pledged

to support whomever the Republican party nominated. It's time to

revoke your pledge. Be bold, stand up and shout that you will not

support Trump if he is your party's nominee. Do it together. Hold one

big mother of a news conference. Endorse Rubio, together. It is time to

draw a bright line, and you are the ones on whom this burden falls. No

one else can do it.

Marco Rubio, this is also your moment to draw a bright line. You, too,

ought to rescind your pledge to support the party's nominee if it is

Trump.

Donald Trump has no respect for the basic rights that are the foundation

of constitutional democracy, nor for the requirements of decency

necessary to sustain democratic citizenship. Nor can any democracy

survive without an expectation that the people require reasonable

arguments that bring the truth to light, and Trump has nothing but

contempt for our intelligence.

We, the people, need to find somewhere, buried in the recesses of our

fading memories, the capacity to make common cause against this

formidable threat to our equally shared liberties. The time is now.

Danielle Allen is a political theorist at Harvard University and a

contributing columnist for The Post.

Copyright © 2016, Chicago Tribune

READER COMMENTS

According to this “intellectual” we should throw out the Bill of

Rights and recant on our promises in order to save the country

from destruction.

Danielle Allen is proclaiming that she is wiser than the Founding

Fathers who wrote the Constitution. They actually foresaw that

not every President would be worthy of the job. In fact, they

knew quite a bit about demagoguery. They did not trust Presidents

who might want to act like kings. They also did not trust a fickle,

uneducated public. So they wrote the Constitution which we have

today.

A demagogue could get elected, but he still has to deal with

Congress, the Supreme Court, and the laws he inherits and swears

to uphold when he takes the oath as President. He can swear and

bluster as much as he likes, but he has no power to pass a single

law or fund a single program.

I have more faith in the Constitution than I do in Donald Trump

or Danielle Allen.« less

• 2 hours ago

You lost all credibility in that first paragraph when you

compared him to Hitler. I'm sorry, but you are simply

disgusting for doing so. I don't want to waste anymore of my

time on you and I find it

embarrassing that the Tribune

printed it. And no, I'm not a Trump

supporter.

• 1 hour ago

• bklm

• Rank 1056

That's right, make sure the press

only reports what YOU approve.

Thank God, there is still the

First Amendment in this country - I think. No, You

are the proto fascist if you think altering the First is

the way out of this mess. I love how the "intellectual

elite" love a "free press' but only when the press

reports what they approve. What a meat puppet.

• gdolejei Rank 867

You don’t like Trump so no one should like him. Typical

liberal, school yard argument.

• 2 hours ago

You made your article ridiculous in the first paragraph, when

you compared our primary process to the rise of fascism in

Germany. You have never lived in conditions of hyperinflation

and despair. How can you claim to understand the conditions

in which a dictator can seize power?

Try again, this time without the hyperbole and melodrama.

• 2 hours ago

•

• tbird

• Rank 53

About a month ago, Slate had an article discussing the reasons

why Trump was NOT like Hitler. Pretty easy to find but I will post

a link if I have time.

• 2 hours ago

• concerned citizen

• Rank 1366

This article could have been written about Obama, Bush 43,

Clinton, Reagan, JFK, FDR, Wilson, TR, McKinley, Cleveland,

Grant, Lincoln, Jackson, Monroe, Madison, Jefferson, Adams

and even Washington.

There's a big difference here, and this campaign isn't a fantasy

created by Sinclair Lewis and "It Can't Happen Here."

One can argue that Obama has done significant damage to the

USA through the ACA and other actions. One could argue that

Bush 43 and the Congress's passage of the Patriot Act has done

incredible damage to our rights. Reagan was even out of

bounds.« less

Flag

• dhm59923

• Rank 2

@concerned citizen2013

Indeed so - ever since the time of George Washington the

talking heads, in particular those who proclaim to possess a

high degree of learning, have predicted that if so-and-so wins

America will cease to exist.

I think that while we may not all agree on which were the best

and worst, the nation has managed to survive all of them.

Classic Liberal

Rank 325

• 2 hours ago

Now she is afraid of a presidential candidate who loves to

hear himself speak. One who rouses fear and resentment

and makes a lot of promises he can't possible keep?

Where was

this article in

2008?

…But if you thought that you held the keys to the kingdom,

and if you thought the serfs in the kingdom looked at you

with wild-eyed admiration and respect for brilliance and

culture, levels of success that you could never dream of

obtaining yourself, if you have that attitude, and all of a

sudden you realize the serfs don't see you that way and

maybe even begin to think, my God, why do we need these

people anyway? I don't need to send 'em any more money.

They feel abandoned. They feel like you are not believing

them. They feel like you are spoiled children; you are not

appreciative of the genius in your midst. And so if hell

descends upon you, you deserve it.

- Rush Limbaugh

• The rich who are buying media outlets these days, are

mostly guys looking to get government favors by not

investigating the corrupt politicians who return the favor

for their other bigger businesses. They expect their

media losses will be far smaller than the favors they get

for their other businesses.

In the meantime, they can survive on

political/government advertising, and the advantage of

having access to their favored politicians, while other

legitimate media are refused access and ignored.

see more

• 14

• •

• Reply

• •

• Share ›

…The saving grace of the right used to be that it was too stupid to rule.

Politically defeated liberals secretly believed that in a moment of crisis,

the country would have to be turned over to people who didn’t

think hurricanes were punishment for gay sex and weren’t frightened to

enter a room with a topless statue…

…Unfortunately, a growing quantity of opposite-number lunacies – from

a chess site temporarily shut down by YouTube because of its “white

against black” rhetoric, to an art gallery director forced to resign for

saying he would still “collect white artists” – is mostly off-limits. If we

can’t laugh at time is a white supremacist construct,

what can we laugh at?

Republicans were once despised because they were anti-intellectuals and

hopeless neurotics. Trained to disbelieve in peaceful coexistence with

the liberal enemy, the average Rush Limbaugh fan couldn’t make it

through a dinner without interrogating you about your political

inclinations.

If you tried to laugh it off, that didn’t work; if you tried to engage, what

came back was a list of talking points. When all else failed and you

offered what you thought would be an olive branch of blunt truth, i.e.

“Honestly, I just don’t give that much of a shit,” that was the worst

insult of all, because they thought you were being condescending. (You

were, but that’s beside the point). The defining quality of this personality

was the inability to let things go. Families broke apart over these

situations. It was a serious and tragic thing.

Now that same inconsolable paranoiac comes at you with left politics,

and isn’t content with ruining the odd holiday dinner, blind date, or

shared cab. He or she does this infuriating interrogating at the office, in

school, and in government agencies, in places where you can’t fake a

headache and quietly leave the table…

- Matt Taibbi

beatriz arturo Retweeted

John Hayward

@Doc_0

·

14h

It was bad enough when Democrats looked at America and saw

nothing but children who needed to be cared for by maternal

government. Now they look at America and see nothing but

hostages to be taken for their political ends.

Neil Walsh 1 day ago

There's an 'auto da-fe' [public penance] aspect about the

whole thing - as I said in a comment elsewhere on the net,

Robin DiAngelo's* speeches wouldn't be out of place in a

Mark Twain novella: America, in particular, has a long

tradition of charismatic salespeople and that's what I

believe this phenomenon is. We might be better

addressing the fact 4 people hold more wealth than the

bottom half of the country combined.

1

REPLY

[* author, “White Fragility”]

…Handcuff the cops, tear down the statues, rewrite the textbooks,

make America the world’s bad guy — that’s what today’s Times is

selling.

Anyone with such an activist agenda had better be purer than

Caesar’s wife. The Times clearly fails that test and owes its staff,

stockholders and readers a full account of the slave holders and

Confederates in its past...

- Michael Goodwin

Kelly McCubbin 1 day ago

Alexis De Toqueville had America’s number in the late 1930’s

when he wrote Democracy in America. “In America the majority

draws a formidable circle around thought. Inside those limits, the

writer is free; but unhappiness awaits him if he dares to leave

them. It is not that he has to fear an auto-da-fé, but he is the butt

of mortifications of all kinds and of persecutions every day. A

political career is closed to him: he has offended the only power

that has the capacity to open it up. Everything is refused him,

even glory. Before publishing his opinions, he believed he had

partisans; it seems to him that he no longer has any now that he

has uncovered himself to all; for those who blame him express

themselves openly, and those who think like him, without having

his courage, keep silent and move away. He yields, he finally

bends under the effort of each day and returns to silence as if he

felt remorse for having spoken the truth.”

Not much has changed in almost 200 years it seems.....

Show less

REPLY

“It was as if the press in America, for all its vaunted

independence, were a great colonial animal, an

animal made up of countless clustered organisms

responding to a central nervous system. In the late

1950's (as in the late 1970's) the animal seemed

determined that in all matters of national importance

the proper emotion, the seemly sentiment, the fitting

moral tone, should be established and should

prevail; and all information that muddied the tone

and weakened the feeling should simply be thrown

down the memory hole. In a later period, this

impulse of the animal would take the form of blazing

indignation about corruption, abuses of power, and

even minor ethical lapses…”

“Loneliness wasn't just a state of mind, was it? It was

tactile. She could feel it. It was a sixth sense, not in

some fanciful play of words, but physically. It hurt... it

hurt like phagocytes devouring the white matter of her

brain. It wasn't merely that she had no friends. She

didn't even have a sanctuary in which she could simply

be alone.”

- Tom Wolfe

“People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it”

- Simon Sinek

Spring. 2020.

If. One. More. Fucking. Person. Hurls. An. Impassioned.

Missive. Into. The. Ether. With. Periods. After. Every.

Word.

Andy McCarthy

@AndrewCMcCarthy

·

Governments are created to secure our fundamental rights.

If the Constitution still means anything, it is not your burden

to prove your job is ‘essential.’ It is the government’s burden

to prove your job can’t be operated safely.

Leon Storie

@lstorie1971

·

Apr 18

Nobody is protesting because they can't go to Fuddruckers. They're

protesting because they are scared that in very short order they will be

financially ruined and left to deal with all that entails. Pretending it's as

simple as wanting a fucking burger is disingenuous and stupid.

Candace Owens

@RealCandaceO

Apr 28

Possibly the greatest trade deal ever inked was between the flu virus and

#coronavirus. So glad nobody is dying of the flu anymore, and therefore

the CDC has abruptly decided to stop calculating flu deaths altogether.

Agreements between viruses are the way of the future!

James Woods

@RealJamesWoods

·

Apr 22

News used to be perceived as either good or bad. In today’s

clickbait environment, it has just become shades of bad. This is

because Democrats need misery to exist, hope as the distant

light in a never-ending tunnel, and their lackeys in the press to

sell the whole phony scenario

The reason I have been so

comfortable with the eccentric presidency

of Donald Trump is because he has

succeeded in ways that are important to

me, and where he can be said to have failed, it is in matters to

which I’m largely indifferent.

Trump has a far more realistic sense of the world than most

elites and experts. He was right about globalism,

nationalism, borders, regulations, China, and taxes. He is

good at fixing things and making things work and making

decisions. He is not, like Obama and his professorial ilk, an

incompetent man snakebit by a false academic sense of the world.

What Trump has not done is he has not accepted the moral duties of a

president as generally understood. Even though he has been far

tougher on the world’s tyrants than Obama was, he talks about them

as if they were great guys. He “fell in love” with Kim Jong Un,

a murderous psychopath. He has repeatedly praised Vladimir Putin,

a gangster. He believes in the power of his relationships, and gives

no care to the moral message these careless statements send.

I think this is a legitimate criticism of him. I don’t dismiss it.

I just personally don’t care very much about it. I don’t take my

moral cues from politicians. I think most of them are moral

buffoons. Trump does the right thing most of the time, no matter

what he says.

Which brings me to the Chinese Flu. I think Trump has done a

good job. He has done pretty much what he had to do. I think he

has kept the federal government in check during a crisis. He has

created no new agencies and has not tried to seize power from the

states. This, in my personal book of concerns, is an act of near

greatness.

I have trusted him in his decisions – not because I think he was

sent by God to save our nation (though he might have been. You’d

have to check with God). I have trusted him because his interests

are aligned with mine. He is not some right-wing ideologue

willing to watch millions die to make an obscure point about

liberty. He is not some left-wing idiot willing to let the economy

crash to “save even one life.”

It is in his interest to keep the death toll as low as possible and to open up

the economy as soon as possible, and he seems to be trying to do that

while allowing each state to make its own way according to their situation.

Nice going, President the Donald!

Should he have shut down the economy at all? Well, look at it this way.

There were two op-eds in Friday’s Wall Street Journal. One, by

Joseph C. Sternberg, makes the case we shouldn’t have locked down:

herd immunity, no change in the ultimate death toll, the brutal cost of

depression. The other, by Lee Siegel, reminds us what we thought of the

corrupt mayor in “Jaws,” who refuses to harm the city’s economy and

thereby sentences the locals to death.

Every single leader in the civilized world ultimately made

the same decision Trump made. The differences and many

of the outcomes were largely dependent on how culturally

homogenous their nations were. In Sweden, where

everyone looks exactly the same and is named Sven, leaders can

just ask people to act responsibly and they will. In countries

where no one understands or trusts one another, like ours, you

don’t have that luxury.

So if everyone listening to the best experts with the most information shut

down, the chance is that Angry Twitter Guy who read three articles

confirming his already-formed opinion would also have shut down if he

had been in their position. In other words, even if the decision was wrong,

it’s the one virtually everyone would have made. We know this, because

virtually everyone did. Which means Angry Twitter Guy, who thinks it’s

“outrageous” and “insane,” only thinks that because he’s Angry Twitter

Guy, and not the president of anything.

There’s a lot of Outrage Noise out there. Some of it is justified.

But beyond the noise, what has actually happened – the shutdown,

the move to restart with proper precautions – these are the sad but

probably inevitable results of a tragic occurrence.

Fortitude in the face of them is a virtue.

Andrew Klavan

TWENTY TWO

nobody misses

him

Cernovich@Cernovich

The leftie media bro twitter accounts I follow are just

silent. They don't have anything to say, no answers, they'll

await their talking points.

10:06 PM · Aug 27, 2020·Twitter Web App

Aaron

18h

Replying to @Cernovich

Greatest convention ever. I'm as shocked as anyone.

Grateful Dad


Dark and dangerous

clark

17h


It's disappointing that we live in a time when journalists

feel compelled to read the room before they decide if/how

they will report the news.

Latina for #Trump2020


This is all they’ve got?

Quote Tweet

Chris Cillizza@CillizzaCNN

· 18h

Serious Q: Why the emphasis on Trump's middle

name/initial? Is there a "Donald L. Trump" running for

president I don't know about?

Conrad


That’s why they’re journos and not consultants lol. Essentially you only get

into journalism to get a Democratic comms gig and have lib billionaires

funnel you money to oppo dump on your former colleagues

Bard Plimpson


It's easy to guess. Just try to imagine what a snarky 25 year-old

douche would say if he was trying to impress a woman. That

seems to be the only driving force behind media bro ideology.

Nee Nee

Replying to@Cernovich

Imagine the optics of attacking Kayla Mueller's family. To harass Alice

Johnson for being a victim of Biden's prison "reform" that sent her away for

life. To attack a widow of a Black police officer killed by BLMers. Tonight

was carefully curated.

Afroloops@afrosheenix

17h

Replying to@Cernovich

They're downloading firmware updates.

Updating Approved Opinions.xml

Reza Aslan@rezaaslan

If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire

fucking thing down.

8:01 PM · Sep 18, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

M3thods

Sep 18

Replying to@rezaaslan

I'd tell you to use your brain but you probably ate it.

James

Be a real man. Burn down your own house first. Put it on TikTok.

Eric

You’re not gonna do shit. But some pussy-ass liberal arts major

with a skateboard and some firecrackers is going to pick a fight in

the wrong neighborhood. You guys are poking the bear.

Kenny

"Every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been

altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute.

History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the

Party is always right.”- '1984,' George Orwell

Lydia

Thank God I was only reading your tweet of an excerpt from that sci-fi

book, “1984,” written by that man who lived back in the 1930’s and ‘40’s.

Don’t scare me like that ever again.

Indigo Waterglow

Makes sense. “If we can’t have it, NO ONE CAN!”

Eric Carmen@RealEricCarmen

Go back through history and show me when America elected a President

from the party threatening to burn down the country. Yeah, that would

be.."Never."

Sue

As a Democrat, I find this sort of comment unproductive.

LemonCake

or counter-productive

Jonathan T Gilliam@JGilliam_SEAL

Pipe down discount jihadist. RBG is dead. She isn’t getting replaced, her

position gets filled by another judge. And FYI you human brain eating

dumb ass, calling for the overthrow of our government is a dangerous

game that could get you cancelled this time, not just your show.

T.

You, thinking you’re in control, it’s cute!

Little Larry

Reza’s the most fierce keyboard warrior around.

Mark

You can officially excuse yourself from the adult table with this tweet.

There is zero constitutional argument here, and even if there were "burn

the entire fucking thing down" is not the answer. This is incitement, and

should land you in jail.

Thomas

And peace be with you...

Stash

Cool story bro

KaReN #SaveOurchildren

Who is Reza

are they important?

Vicki

Heck no! Never liked them!

NJ Rambo

Lmao

don’t get mad if we start to hit back

Sachin

You mean when you can't do anything good..you must destroy everything.

SP

What's your plan?

AmPatriot

That explains EVERYTHING!

James

"We shall loot from the cannabis shops, from the liquor stores. We shall

never surrender."

Funny Kawwa kaw kaw

This is also a kind of terrorism instigating people to create law and order

problem while himself sitting in comfort of house.

LovemyMarley

And the benefit of that would be?...

Gregg

While dodging gunfire! What a man!

archipelago

You should get a flip phone mate. There’s a whole world out there to enjoy!

Rat Madness

I can make you a great deal on some cigarette lighters I have about 15 in

the original cases. I can't mail them. Make me an offer!

beatriz arturo@beatrizarturo2

6h

“For decades, playing “fairly” resulted in conservatives losing

every single frontier of culture due to their pretended neutrality.

Neutrality historically cannot oppose a crusading ideology

such as liberalism.”

• SCOTUS

There’s No Downside To Trump

Nominating Amy Coney Barrett

This election was always going to be about culture. Treat the election as a

referendum on cultural issues and lean in, Mr. President.

By Sumantra Maitra

SEPTEMBER 22, 2020

It is said that when Napoleon was presented with the

credentials of a general, he asked, “I know that he is good,

but is he lucky?” The phrase might be apocryphal

[mythical], but it is by no means wrong. One need not

believe in the concept of fortune to be fortunate.

On that note, President Donald Trump might be considered

fortunate, presented with another opportunity to shape the future

with his third nomination to the Supreme Court. With the new

vacancy, Trump has also provided social scientists an opportunity to

test several academic theories about future political alignments.

For starters, there’s nothing Democrats can gain from this scenario.

If a caustic confirmation ensues, it would be a rehash of the Brett

Kavanaugh episode, which would galvanize Republicans. If there’s a

nomination but no confirmation and then a lame-duck session, it

would spur Republicans to vote for Trump for a future confirmation.

If riots break out, they would most definitely stir Republicans to

vote.

The talks of a political crisis are just that — talks. They’re a fantasy

narrative created by those who have a monopoly over media, similar

to the line that Trump would not give up power even if Joe Biden

wins the election.

The constitutional process is clear: The president nominates, and

the Senate proceeds to either confirm or deny. The party in power in

the Senate decides whether a confirmation process goes forward.

Democrats did that with Robert Bork, and Republicans paid back in

kind during the nomination of Merrick Garland.

Those in power decide the process. That is true for both parties. Any

other narrative is balderdash.

Draw the Battle Lines

Another objection from the left is that an efficient confirmation process

will break norms, which is ridiculous coming from the ideological side

that understands nothing but how to use raw power for political gain. It

was a power play when Kavanaugh was nominated, an episode that

stiffened the spine and broke the starry-eyed spell of a lot of formerly

centrist Republicans. It is a power play when ideological pseudo-history

such as the 1619 Project wins a Pulitzer Prize and is taught in more than

3,000 schools.

It is a power play when Democrats stop budget relief that would have

aided thousands of working-class people. It is a power play when jobs

and livelihoods are held hostage by protests and riots. Barricading a

Supreme Court nomination is most definitely a power play coming from

a side that wants to give statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico, pack the

courts, and abolish the Electoral College. The talk of constitutional

norms, therefore, is absurd, as those who win elections decide the

norms, according to the established rules.

This election was always going to be about culture. Trump, for good or

for bad, understands that. Rhetoric aside, in the last week, his

Department of Education called the bluff of Princeton University’s

performative self-flagellating shtick, and fired a full broadside on the

insidious and subversive critical race theory. That is more ammunition

on the cultural front than any other Republican president fired off in the

last couple of decades.

It also has ensured the battle lines are clearly drawn. For decades,

playing “fairly” resulted in conservatives losing every single frontier of

culture due to their pretended neutrality. Neutrality historically cannot

oppose a crusading ideology such as liberalism.

Trump’s full-throttle, open-armed embrace of the cultural battle

lines has for good or for bad clarified who’s on which side. It also

surprisingly brought in support from those who were otherwise

inclined to be neutral and at least theoretically liberal.

Amy Coney Barrett Is a Clear Choice

The nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett would advance those

cultural battle lines. If one needs to be genuinely democratic, he or

she should be clear about convictions and proudly put forward the

alternative to the dilettante technocratic centrism that has been in

practice. The public loves clear choices, and the public prefers

leaders who act, instead of managers who hedge bets.

The left always talks a big game about direct democracy, but they

seem to forget that if every issue were treated as an individual

referendum, the chances of them losing major positions are

extremely high. Americans do not support Black Lives Matter

anarchism. The majority are patriotic and oppose taxpayer-funded

anti-American education. The majority of black Americans are far

more religious on average than the public overall, and the majority

of Americans oppose transgender activism. The majority of

Americans oppose abortion after the first trimester and want fewer

foreign wars. Ask yourself, which side stands for the majority?

Coney Barrett is tough on crime, is against campus kangaroo courts,

and is an originalist who would follow the letter of the law to the

last word. According to her own words, she would not be deterred

from making tough decisions. Her nomination should give the public

a clear choice, even if the confirmation does not proceed prior to the

election.

Vanessa Grigoriadis@vanessagrigor

Co-founder @campsidemedia.

Contributing Writer @NYTmagand @vanityfair. Author, Blurred Lines:

Rethinking Sex, Power and Consent on Campus (HMH).

campsidemedia.com Joined February 2009

2,542 Following 9,032 Followers


I guess one of the things I don't understand about Amy Comey

Barrett is how a potential Supreme Court justice can also be a

loving, present mom to seven kids? Is this like the Kardashians

stuffing nannies in the closet and pretending they've drawn their

own baths for their kids

9:32 AM · Sep 26, 2020·Twitter Web App


And if there aren't enough hours in the day for her to work and mother those kids,

when she portrays herself as a home-centered Catholic who puts family over career, isn't

she telling a lie?

Replying to@vanessagrigor

"I'm pro-choice, except when women make choices I wouldn't make"

The Dank Knight

“A woman’s place is in the kitchen” -Dems suddenly

Matt

Just so I have this right... you’re questioning how a woman manages to

raise her seven children while having a successful career?

Thomas

Excellent point, Vanessa, and such insight! Women should remain home and take care of

their motherly duties and ensure the house is clean for their man, before he gets home. And

let's not forget a well-cooked meal waiting for him too! I love your progressive thinking.

Rona

Remember - she needs to make sure her hair and makeup are done as she’s preparing

to hand him his freshly prepared drink as he walks in the door after a long day, too.

Thanks, Vanessa!

Presilove005

Are you serious with this take? Remind me...how many kids is the correct

number to have? And are women “allowed” to work outside the home or

nah?

7144251112

Some women are just born with bionic energy. Not me but I have friends that do.

The Sassiest Semite

Christ, this take doesn’t help us at all. A million things you could say about

her, justifiably, and it’s this that you go with?

Mo

Oy! Looks like we’ve got a lot of remedial education assignments to hand

out here.

stacia

Exactly! A woman’s place is in the home. Barefoot and pregnant. In the kitchen serving

her man. If she’s a decent woman she’ll have a ribbon in her hair, his slippers and a

drink waiting when he walks in the door after his hard day at the office.

It's ironic that the same people who are claiming that this nomination

would lead to a Handmaid's Tale society are also saying that mothers are

incapable of simultaneously having successful careers.

weimadorable

This is what 1st and 2nd wave feminism fought against...they fought against Vanessas.

Ari

Stan

Jealousy is not becoming of you

Paul

This may be the most pointless train of thought in the history of

@Twitter- a treasure trove of pointless trains of thought. Congrats.

Gremlin X

Sounds like someone has an insecurity complex...

Tom

So much for supporting women...

Tony

learn to code honey.

Catherine

Ummm. Can her husband do some of that or does that make her a bad mom.

Kristen

It’s none of your business actually. So much for women lifting women up. You’d never ask a

man such an asinine question. Go Amy Go! Fierce and smart women scare the left

Nierendil

1970's Feminist: "Women can be both mothers and career women."

2020's Feminist: "Women can't be both mothers and career women."

Jennifer

Correction: they can’t only if they are conservative

I'm wondering if being a contributor to Vanity Fair and NYTmag leaves a person enough

time and compassion to be a decent human being? It would appear that is not the case.

@vanessagrigor

If you can't do it. Doesn't mean someone can't do it

Mrs. Freeman

Your tweet is exactly why I am not one of these new age feminists...all you want to do is

tear other women down. We old schoolers build each other up, encouraging women to be

better, stronger, and ok with who we are.

Steff

Now you’re attacking her for not staying in the kitchen making

sammiches? I love it. Keep going.

Norm D'Plume

That's very liberated of you. Here I was thinking women were capable of great things.

Aldous Huxley's Ghost

"Strong women can do anything!"

"Not that!"

Zen Jordan

This is definitely not the hot take you think it is.

manzgringa

And if she does, in fact, eat babies...is this the kind of woman we want on the Supreme

Court?

Kevin

My wife is an adamant feminist who works tirelessly to equalize the status of women to

men’s.... she has a doctorate, read your tweets and responded...”sometimes you just need to

smack a hoe....”

Johnny

I thought women could have it all?

And don't forget you also hate women who are stay at home moms due to the

superiority of the husband. In other words, you are never happy about anything.

MoJo15

Now women can’t have it all? Feminists should be consistent or you’ll keep looking

foolish and hypocritical.

Dewey

You’re a Democrat all right. You always get ahead of everyone else by a step or two and

start complaining about something that may or may not ever happen.

Red In America

So mother’s can’t work? How is it that the left is both tyrannically feminist and tyrannically

misogynistic?

Pita

So, because you are not capable, no one else is. Riiiight...

AdamInHTownTX (Fiery but Mostly Peaceful)

I'm having trouble keeping up with the moving goalposts. So now the left

finds it problematic that a woman has a successful career, a healthy

marriage, and a big family?

Cali Girl

I can't remember the last time this question was posted to a male nominee.. Either you're

extremely jealous she's able to maintain a home/work balance or you're insecure af...

Who's Gonna Be Lucky Indicted #2? - Brian Cates

How about you come right out and say any successful woman in her field that has 7

kids must be a horrible mother instead of just tip-toeing around the awful point you are

trying to make? This says a lot more about you than ACB.

Stupid, Lying, Dog-Faced,

Pony-Soldier, Bastard

I suspect there are A LOT

of things you don't

understand. Don't sell

yourself short.


OK, let me clarify. I meant to point out the irony that Barrett,

mom of seven, achieved professional heights only with the help of

child care, yet she wants to snatch away pro-choice rights, which

are part of the way young women achieve professional heights.

Seattle Independent

Replying to @vanessagrigor

Nice save! But let's do even better. Congratulate Judge Barrett on her

professional success and her loving family and praise her as an inspiration

to all Americans. And remind the American public that the Supreme Court

doesn't have those powers and they should look to Congress.

Melody

Who needs Babylon Bee when we have Vanessa

CaliRebe

Too late you wrecked yourself.

Nanci

Maybe take a Twitter break before it breaks you.

Josh

That was one of the more impressively lopsided ratios I’ve seen in quite some time.

Well done! It takes mad skill to say something that insanely ridiculous.

@IDues

You’re doing great!

Braden

Haha. Seriously, seek help. You just got owned. Badly.

CJ

Nice try on an attempt to cover your blatant misogyny. Too late you've already vomited

your contempt for successful women.

byrns

So, while we are clarifying, ACB cannot make abortion illegal. She can strike down a

SCOTUS decision that's roundly considered to be bad law on both left & right. Then states

can decide what is legal or illegal. And if those laws are challenged, she’ll rule if they are

constitutional

Wolfpack Member Tim

You need to stop tweeting, seriously. Take the weekend off and have some drinks, or

whatever you like to do. Just don't tweet.

Crazy as a Bed Bug Jen

Don't get pregnant (many, many ways to prevent this), take care of your own kids, and

Obamacare sucks anyway.

Liz

You really don’t have to keep tweeting every thought you have.

Replying to

@vanessagrigor

done digging the hole finally?

Steff

Trying to figure out how to dress as Amy Coney Barrett AS a handmaid for Halloween.

Pastor Publican

She won’t make abortion illegal. You’ll always have the opportunity to kill your unborn

babies. Just not on taxpayers dollars. Ok lady. Amy is a good honest hard working career

woman and family woman all in one

Patricia

Obviously IGNORANT of our Legislative and Judicial System. Kudos for being a TOKEN

PARODY of LEFTISM!!!

I Outraged

How long before this account goes private?

Curtis

T-minus 3 hours

anneliesdd

Figures you give her handmaiden no credit!

Andrew

I'm sure you had high hopes for this tweet to be ratio-proof

#BlackCopsLivesMatter

You are confused about Roe v Wade

Proud PegUSA

Wow, you really blew it on Twitter today!

LRHB

Keep deleting and reposting garbage takes. You'll never be half the woman ACB is.

Curtis Spicoli

You are not done being an asshole on Twitter today?

na na na na na na na na DRAFTMAN!

Abortion is not birth control.

Sonjaflies

Gotta kill those babies!


46m

When she's trotted out as an icon of motherhood, which she will

be now, often, let's remember that she may make young women

have kids they didn't want and aren't ready for--and when they

do, they're on their own. She's certainly not going to advocate for

subsidized child care.

AnonymousAda

Replying to

@vanessagrigor

And you continue... Now child care is different from abortion. Glad you

clarified, moron.

Mom

She’s a judge, not a legislator or an activist. She’s not going to “advocate”

for anything. She is going to hear cases & uphold the Constitution of the

United States to the best of her ability.

Jon

You really don’t have any idea what you’re talking about do you?? She can’t make

abortion illegal. Even if Roe is overturned it goes back to the states to decide for

themselves as it should be. And we shouldn’t pay for everyone’s childcare

anyway....where the hell did that come from?

SkootersMom

Try birth control....condoms work well.

Maybe young women should understand the consequences of having sex

and how to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies.

Lucinda

Wow, do you really hate your life this much? Pathetic for one mom to attack another.

FreedomNinja

Keep going you joyless crone. You're doing terrific.

Patrick

She’s not a legislator you idiot. She’s not advocating for anything.

Official Lane Train Ticket Puncher

Don't want babies? Don't have sex until you want babies. Problem solved

this is serious

surprisingly easy not to get knocked up.

Kip

Good God, do you even hear yourself?

Brian

@vanessagrigor

Mentally ill liberals like Vanessa disparaging a working mom is a dream

come true for Trump.

Seattle Independent

So what are you saying? Are you saying that after decades of left-wing brainwashing

that young women are so incredibly empty-headed that the mere presence of Amy on

the court is going to make them go out and irresponsibly have children? You think

women are that impulsive?

TweetsByBritt

She can't force someone to get pregnant. The bigger issue here is that

young women who aren't ready for kids don't have to be ready to have

kids, but they also shouldn't kill them if they do create them.

Danny

It is not the supreme court’s job to advocate for subsidized health care. Are

you okay?

Branch Covidian

Wow if only there was a legislative body that could pass laws!

Margot

As a Justice of the Supreme Court her role is not to advocate. That would

be the legislative branch. Google it.


8h

Anyway, more power to ACB and her ability to raise 7 kids. My

only problem with her is that I believe she’ll make abortion illegal,

destroy any chance for national childcare, and gut healthcare. But

besides that she is an inspiration and a girl boss.

Kim

Someone doesn’t know how the Supreme Court works if you think SHE will

make abortion illegal.

Mike a.k.a. Proof

ACB doesn't have an agenda. She is a textualist. If any law is

struck down as "un-Constitutional", there is a remedy in the

Congress, or even a Constitutional amendment. What most

liberals mourn, is the loss of a super legislature, writing new law

without ever having been elected.

Hon. Hey April

She has said she considers Roe v Wade “settled law” and you’re a

conspiracy theorist for believing a woman with a special needs child is

going to cut our healthcare. But thanks for acknowledging that she’s “an

inspiration and a girl boss”. Now apologize and delete your account.

The_Metrologist

Lol. At least you toned it down this time. I am curious how she is going to

make abortion illegal. Even if SCOTUS revokes Roe, all that would do is

leave it up to the states. Unless you think all states would ban it, but that

still wouldn’t be ACB’s fault.

HardAttack

Blurting crap out and then walking it back, but then claiming ACB is a legislative

authoritarian. You ok?

This post right here is literally the reason some people wonder if women

can handle the real world on their own Stop being emotional, and be

factual and logical. Stop making things harder on women.

#supportallwomen

Laura B politics writer / words in

@GQmagazine@washingtonpost@rollingstone@cosmopolitan

etc. / @huffpostalum / co-founder @savethenews

If McConnell jams someone through, which

he will, there will be riots.

Laura B

*more, bigger riots

Lisa

That ship sailed. Enjoy that overplayed hand.

Squiggy

Oh No! Not that! Lol

RightOfMiddle

And? If Melania blinks too fast there will be riots...

Stephanie

Which will clearly belong to the Dems and the left. Game on.

ReFounderParty

U r walking into it.

Nathania

There will be riots no matter what Trump does. Deal with it.

Problem Solver 101

The people they are threatening have been prepping for this for some

time. While they pursued Critical Race Theory some pursued Critical Reality

Theory.

Elizabeth

Of course you will! I’ll get my popcorn ready!

Nikki

I hope at your house.

Veritas Aequitas

One side is armed to the teeth, the other can’t figure out which

bathroom to use.

JB

Gun at my house. Don't get near us in NC

ExpectingRain

As opposed to, well, the last 100 days? Hahaha

6% GoodTrumpEvil

She’s cofounder of “savethenews” this is what is wrong with MSM

Eric

Riot away, have fun

free thought@free thought

We will get a full display of the entire Dem play book!

Zanne

same stuff everyday. find a friend and cry a little.

Danny

Good, let’s start this shit so we can get it over with

TickledDog

Since we don't have #LivePD I had time to look up what

the heck "ratio" means on Twitter.

Catturd

·Replying to@Laura B

I’m just here for the humongous ratio.

Contrary Canary

Biggest ratio ever?

double standard

*more, bigger ratio

#thefoodguy Michael

I want to be part of the biggest ratio ever so here I am.

magni +++

Replying to@Laura B

Hi Laura, This is why Americans will show up in droves to re-elect

President

@realDonaldTrump

You people are too stupid to realize that you're your own worst

enemies!

Enjoy Nov 3!

James Woods@RealJamesWoods

Sep 22

Bravo. Thank you @SenJohnThune

for fulfilling your Constitutional obligation. #FillTheSeat

Quote Tweet

Senator John Thune@SenJohnThune

Sep 21

Many GOP senators – myself included – decided to run for office for this

very reason: to be in a position to restore the court to its original

constitutional purpose as a judicial body, not a legislative one. We ran for

this. We were elected for this. Now, we will follow through.

Peter Robinson, The Hoover Institution: Democrats will attack Barrett for her

Catholic beliefs. We've already had a taste of that in the hearings in 2017. Senator

Dianne Feinstein of California, then as now, the ranking Democrat on the Senate

Judiciary Committee:

“Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling

that, you know, dogma and law are two different things, and I think whatever a

religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different and I think in your

case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that

the dogma lives loudly within you. And that's of concern when you come to big

issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country”.

Senator Feinstein has been attacked - got attacked at the time - for asking that

question, and it's all been replayed…I just replayed it myself for you… but when it

comes to it, didn't she actually lay out a perfectly fair point? That there may be

areas in which one religion or another… she was talking about all religions, of

course… Judge Barrett is Catholic, but there's a difference between religious

belief and The Law. I’ll put this crudely, but the liberal social revolution which has

taken place largely by way of the courts - all three of us might argue that it

should never have taken place by way of the courts, but it has. And Dianne

Feinstein says, you know, there are a lot of people who have a lot invested in that

social revolution, and along comes a devout Catholic nominee and I want to know

‘Are you going to rule on the law’? And what she really is getting at is ‘Are you

going to permit to stand, decisions that have enabled and in some cases quite

directly advanced the revolution and mores… the social revolution… or are you

going to rule as a Catholic?’

And my first question is: “Isn't that a fair question…

Richard Epstein: I think it's a fair question, but I think it's already been asked and

answered. The whole point is that she understood that and recognized the

cleavage and she would go the opposite way. So to give you another illustration –

both Nino Scalia and William Brennan were Catholics, and it isn't as though they

came out the same way on Roe v Wade. Mister Brennan found that his religion

was a slight nuisance in some sense to what he wanted to do politically. He did

exactly what he wanted and it goes in the opposite direction. Sonia Sotomayor is

a Catholic and she's also on the pro-abortion side of these things. I think it's just

very, very dangerous to take some sort of general hypothetical concern and treat

that as a reality with respect to the person who's in front of you.

I'm Jewish - I mean, I have no idea whether this does or does not influence the

way I think on property rights and so forth, and I think generally speaking, the

correct answer is “innocent until proven guilty”. So asking a question creates an

innuendo, but it's not the same thing as making an argument. I think it's a general

point to be taken into account in the abstract, but it's a little bit of, shall we say,

improper behavior when it's done in a direct confrontation in a hearing where it is

well known that Senator Feinstein opposes Judge Barrett for what she believes on

a wide range of issues, many of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the

Roman Catholic faith.

Peter Robinson: A number of Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have

already declared they're going to vote against her. Why even hold the hearings?

Why shouldn't Mitch McConnell just move this straight to the floor and vote her

up or down?

Richard Epstein: Well, I have the following view about this … I think that no

nominee should ever be asked to go before a hearing…

PR: So you do oppose hearings in principle?

RE: No, not principle. I'm going to have people testify about her, but I don't want

to put her on the stand, because what they're going to do is play the same kind of

game: ‘Here's a sentence that you say - explain it away.’ Our friends could do that

quite well, and then what they're going to try to do is to get her to pre-commit on

future cases, which nobody ought to do. So the correct way to do this thing is to

have a battle about her, but not to put her in the middle of it, which was standard

practice, I believe I'm not mistaken, until Felix Frankfurter took to the floor in

order to explain himself [in 1938]. Louis Brandeis did not appear at his own

hearing… and by the way, [in a] controversial hearing where the Jewish issue was

very much on the mind of everybody. I think it took five days to complete. So I

think, in effect, that what happens is: you put the nominee up there, you're

guaranteeing a circus in the worst possible way it could go. I don't think this will

happen here.

John Yoo: I actually was really repulsed by Senator Feinstein's question -- and it's

not a question - she's making an accusation. I'm not Catholic, but I'm sitting there

thinking, ‘Well what's good enough for JFK is not good enough for ACB’ which is

this idea that if you're a Catholic, you'll be singled out and accused of allegedly

believing a certain set of things just because of your religion.

Could you imagine if senators had asked Justice Ginsburg the exact same

question, except about her Jewish faith or that senators ask the exact same

question to a Protestant because of their faith. “Oh, I see you're a religious

person; you're a very devout person; does your Jewish dogma live loudly…” It's

such a bizarre way of putting it, in fact, but I think it shows to me that what the

Democrats are going to do here… I really wish they didn't… I hope they would

take it on the merits, but instead they're going to use the fact that she's a devout

Catholic, that she went to Notre Dame, that she's a professor at Notre Dame, that

she has a large family, has had a good upstanding moral life - They're going to try

to use that against her and say “Oh, being Catholic to me is a stand-in or a proxy

for a certain view about Roe versus Wade or gay marriage. As Richard just said,

Catholic justices vote on both sides of all of those issues. I think something is

terribly, terribly unfair - it almost verges on the constitutional prohibition of

having a religious test for public office.

“The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious

encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without

understanding.”

“Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect

liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent.”

“Most of the things worth doing in the world had been

declared impossible before they were done.”

“If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be

so much easier for you.”

― Justice Louis D. Brandeis

"The constitutional vision of human dignity rejects the possibility of political

orthodoxy imposed from above; it respects the right of each individual to form

and to express political judgments, however far they may deviate from the

mainstream and however unsettling they might be to the powerful or the elite."

"We current Justices read the Constitution in the only way that we can: as

twentieth century Americans. We look to the history of the time of framing and

to the intervening history of interpretation. But the ultimate question must be,

what do the words of the text mean in our time. For the genius of the

Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that

is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with

current problems and current needs."

"Successive generations of Americans have continued to respect these

fundamental choices and adopt them as their own guide to evaluating quite

different historical practices. Each generation has the choice to overrule or add

to the fundamental principles enunciated by the Framers; the Constitution can

be amended or it can be ignored."

"Sex, a great and mysterious motive force in human life, has indisputably been a

subject of absorbing interest to mankind through the ages." Roth v. United

States (1957).

"I cannot accept the notion that lawyers are one of the punishments a person

receives merely for being accused of a crime." Jones v. Barnes (1983)

"Those whom we would banish from society or from the human community itself

often speak in too faint a voice to be heard above society's demand for

punishment. It is the particular role of courts to hear these voices, for the

Constitution declares that the majoritarian chorus may not alone dictate the

conditions of social life." McCleskey v. Kemp

"If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married

or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so

fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a

child." Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972).

-- Justice William J. Brennan

Susan

Does Susan Rice still think everything was done "by the

book"?

Sep 25, 2020·Twitter Web App

Ernesto

She is scouring Youtube for a video to blame it on

ScoggyD

Well that depends on what book. The Constitution, no. Mao's little red

book, probably.

Rich in Dallas ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Absolutely by the book, she said so herself in an email to herself! I know,

because I saw it on youtube.

Yossi

Considering that @petestrzok @Comey @JohnBrennan @SallyQYates

and @AmbassadorRice did everything “by the book” as ordered by

Obama, I am not sure why @RepAdamSchiff and @JerryNadler

fear a report by Durham. To the contrary, it will affirm that they did

everything perfect. No?

Mark Sep 24

Chief of Staff Mark Meadows says the WH “is prepared for a peaceful

transfer,” but he calls the use of unsolicited mail-in ballots “a perversion of

the electoral process.” On @FoxNews, he says “it’s about making sure that

every vote counts,” but only 1 vote per person.

Dave Sep 24

Will it be done ‘by the book’? Can you ask Susan Rice?

Quote Tweet

Barack Obama · Sep 18

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought to the end, through her cancer, with

unwavering faith in our democracy and its ideals. That’s how we remember

her. But she also left instructions for how she wanted her legacy to be

honored.

David

Oh she left instructions, did she?

Anjy

She said, "Lets do this by the book." Multiple Times.

Susan Rice documented it next month.

Josh Sep 24

For the record, I have a lot more concern about Democrats accepting the

results of a Trump reelection than Trump accepting results of a loss.

Dave Sep 24

They did it ‘by the book’ Josh. Just ask Susan Rice. She has emails to herself to back it up

Lay Off Rafael,

He’s a

Respectful

Employee

Much of the social history of the Western

world, over the past three decades, has

been a history of replacing what worked

with what sounded good.

Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people

who want to feel important. They don't mean to do

harm -- but the harm does not interest them. Or they do

not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed

in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.

-- T. S. Eliot

Some ideas are so foolish that only an intellectual

could believe them

- George Orwell

Contents

I - Hatchet Santa

II - Two Bugs And A Roach

III - Spank The Butterfly

IV - Corridors Of The Heart

V - Rose Colored Glasses

VI - Tres Nachos

VII - The Embalmers

VIII - When This Blows Over

IX - Not If I Was Dying of Hunger

X - Stop Calling Me Counselor

XI - Your Ego’s Loud

XII - I Can Go to My Parents

XIII - Jungle Jive Revue

XIV - Kiss for Hitler

XV - The New Grief Deal

XVI - Soft Pecker Quartet

XVII - Her Majesty Requests

XVIII - Dirty Hat Trick

XIX - Slap Me Silly

XX - Def Mutes

XXI - Like Goin’ On Your Mule

XXII - Lone Wolf

XXIII - Greenlight Red

XXIV - A Night at The Opera

XXV - Curtains of Gloom

XXVI - Cauldron

XXVII - Control and Power

XXVIII - Build Yourself A Beggar

XXIX - We’re All Out of Dog Houses

XXX - Or You Go Home

XXXI – I Said This What 5 Years Ago

XXXII - Stay Home

XXXIII - Ripshank Radio

XXXIV - Graffiti Gang

(“It” isn’t here)

XXXV - Mangina

XXXVI - Atrocious Box

XXXVII – She Doesn’t Get It

XXXVIII - Cold Sun Warming

XXXIX - Meet the New Boss

XXX - Deface the News

XXXXI - Circumstantial Greeting

XXXXII - Empty My Pockets

XXXXIII – Bitter Fruit

XXXXIV - Karma Suits You

t four A.M., in a part of the globe that scarcely

registers a blip on any Western handheld device or

permanently mounted exhibition screen, a monstrous

scud missile pierces the night air and finds its mark,

demolishing dozens of civilian homes and creating the

sort of havoc, bloodshed and misery that typically

accompanies a ruthless stealth strike on a sleeping city

with a decidedly unfortunate location. The devastation

wrought by this unprovoked attack can hardly be

exaggerated. Upheaval and ruin are a couple of words

on a page, until you’ve actually lived them…breathed

them in your lungs…felt them in your joints.

The malicious act is viewed as indefensible by anyone with

even an ounce of intelligence, a single gram of common

sense, or a trace amount of reasonableness lurking anywhere

in his or her body.

The wise are wary of that most unpredictable of all entities:

the lightning bolt streak across a dark sky that is man… full

of such promise, but also so full of it - in shockingly random

proportions that crisscross the entire range of credulity…

featuring all manner of wonder, astonishment and potential,

packed into one big steaming pile of erratic ego-based

dynamite. Considering the habits of this wily beast - the only

species that kills for sport - the ensuing counter-move is all

but pre-ordained. It became policy … became resounding

principle … on the very first playground, against the very

first bad guys, in the very first round of the wildly haphazard

human game.

This particular gutless transgression – this punk-ass breach of

unspoken protocol -- this repulsive violation of simple laws

of simple decency is so far out of bounds, so reprehensible,

that the thumped and badly damaged nerve reacts

seismically…. involuntarily…There is no choice involved.

Expressions like ‘Deadly insult’… ‘Explosive

development’… ‘Unforgiveable betrayal’ ? Quaint and cute

by comparison. Gang movie dialogue. Cable news copy.

Reality show drama for dating contestants and housewives in

trendy cities. This is some nasty, real world, permanent

implications, game changing, you’re-dead-to-me treachery.

Accordingly, and quite justifiably, the retaliatory strike is

swift, powerful and unequivocal. There is collateral damage,

unintended bloodshed and general turmoil on the receiving

end of this obligatory response.

People with nothing at all to do with the original assault …

Innocent bystanders simply going about their business …

noncombatants just living their lives… blissful, benighted

souls who truly don’t give a shit about the politics, objectives

and motives of a perpetually pissed three-point-range chucker

who drew first blood … One and all are caught in the

crossfire.

And sadly, thanks to a repressed, neurotic, humorless,

devious, power-crazed coward with serious Daddy issues, the

war is on.

∞

Seven time zones to the left - some five thousand

eight hundred and thirty four miles away – comfortably

cocooned in a tiny climate-controlled office overlooking

absolutely nothing resembling the real world, lifting nothing

all day much heavier than a telephone and operating nothing

more involved than a copy machine and a Facebook toolbar,

a quite righteous fool is piercing the air with the

unmistakable shriek of a tightly wound moral avenger just

dying to personally get a hold of the outrage of the moment.

Today’s reprehensible atrocity that needs attention…

…demands adjudicating: Not the initial, surreptitious,

uncalled for, unconscionable, gutless lob of a lethal surprise

into the night.

No, the old fool is incensed at the return volley. The push

back on the initial, surreptitious, uncalled for,

unconscionable, gutless lob of a lethal surprise into the night.

Bloody images give way to hysteria on cue … doubled…

redoubled…then echoed through a vast array of well-placed

chambers…carefully scripted and choreographed channels…

unison mouthpieces contorting, intoning, piping and

projecting - non-stop - to a confounding, compliant, oblivious

and pliable legion of believers. All of it obscures the original

unprovoked attack.

This particular screeching shrew is no ordinary fool.

Featuring (and frantically trying to erase and re-invent) a

long and seriously checkered history, including, but not

limited to: knockdown, drag out cat fights with girls who

possessed people and things she couldn’t have … legal

career failure in an era when it was pretty tough to blow it

in that arena … thoroughly embarrassing appearances on

laughable, low budget squawk shows … all manner of

denigration and cruelty inflicted on individuals incapable or

prevented from fighting back … and elimination of anyone

who could actually testify to it all.

This modern-day scorned avenger currently has pulled off

the nearly impossible feat of being respected by few and

loathed by almost all. In contrast, the secure, successful,

strong leader of people – the substantial motivator - the

genuine article – often checks off one negative column and

wins the other. Losing on both scores requires a special

kind of stupid…

Now wielding a little bit of power in the world, but with no

other applicable talents or skills specific to the little fiefdom

she has manipulated and stumbled into controlling, this

raging tornado can nonetheless artfully … …skillfully…

make a tiny group of generally well-meaning serfs walk

around in perpetual angst… on a daily carpet of egg

shells… forced to perform their designated tasks in a semibeleaguered

state that alternates between interminable

gloom and stupefying boredom.

Happiness is not permitted!!!

Not for this bright bulb, the casual, harmless, brief and

typically uplifting banter that makes a work day move along

at a quicker pace or brightens the mood… and with the

additional benefit of a capable (check!), experienced (check!)

responsible (check!) team (!), actually boosts morale and

increases productivity.

No, the priorities for an all-knowing, worldclass

world-changer include completely

upending the entire chessboard. A cordial,

communal and comfortable working

environment – once a veteran collection of

money makers and specialists aligned toward a

common center, facing one and other in semiunified

purpose -- now, brilliantly re-arranged

to replicate the stultifying, stifling classroom

of an embittered schoolmarm, no longer

familiar with her material … relegated to

eavesdropping, hovering over her subjects, and

fervently pouncing on such unforgivable sins

as soliciting advice from a co-worker, making

a new hire’s work easier or (gasp!) sharing

memories with the genuinely affable and

courageous old soul who actually built the

place.

And why stop there? Why not get rid of about a

hundred years of employee experience, including

siblings with combined knowledge in their finger tips

that exceeds the sum total of the business acumen

residing in this genius’ entire sagging hide.

The final piece in a disastrously assembled petty and

paranoid puzzle: A big, fat, gaping, unblinking,

intrusive, accusatory eye-in-the-sky glaring down on

the whole sullen herd… (With remote viewing!) Get

that leering looking glass up and spying! … After

all, these children -- most with decades of work

experience (actual work experience!), who know

every inch of their business and consistently deliver

on a deadline -- they surely can’t be trusted to

monitor and pace themselves …

Sieg heil!!!

The adjoining warehouse - a vital operational engine reduced

to running on sheer tractor trailer fumes - features off-the-graph

climate change that hockey sticks between “chattering” and

“sweltering” depending on the calendar position and the funds

allotted to provide tolerable working conditions for the people

who do ‘that kind of work’. Despite an even more comical

absence of knowledge and experience in the logistics and

machinations that govern such an environment, this bordering

institution is not spared the meddling crosshairs of revolution –

enduring a circus-like infusion and overhaul of bodies and

procedures completely alien and detrimental to its former

military-like precision and comradery. A vast moldering

dungeon of dust, dirt and noxious gases that has aggravated the

breathing function of all who spend significant time encased in

its walls, the employee calamity / defection rate in this once

stable and smoothly run ant colony would startle even the most

lenient analyst of actuary tables. One casualty of its oppressive

and toxic ambience – hospitalized with a collapsed lung – is

actually terminated via email while recovering.

This grimy, stark, cold and depressing enclave - completely

stripped of all humanity, humor and fun -- is in many ways the

perfect atmosphere … a dead-on metaphor… for the slippery

machinations of a bumbling spawn of Satan … The despicable,

dysfunctional birthplace of one of the worst examples of

administrative malpractice, dishonest brokering and outright

meanness one can witness – and I had a front row seat.

Yes, kids, I got to see (way) up close and (way, way) personal what

happens when a hardcore, delusional, impractical, clueless (but

compassionate!) agenda-driven, logic-challenged, social injustice

avenging, queen of victimology is suddenly given the keys to the

kingdom. In the very words of the great Lion himself, King George,

builder and true ruler of the roost, `Some people are not cut out to

manage’. At the time of our casual conversation, he is unaware of the

wisdom and prescience of his observation, which foreshadows the

disaster that is about to befall his empire.

Once upon a time, this hub of activity, this engine of purposeful,

highly efficient productivity, had as its manager, a 17-year veteran of

the trenches – a one-time road warrior, bumped up the ladder before

the arrival of the queen, he is slowly and steadily settling into his new

role as back-end caretaker of the machine that propels the locomotive

…A decent individual with a wife, a little girl, and a reprieve from the

rigors of thrashing about non-stop in the tangled, chaotic jungle of

Tristate area thoroughfares, he makes the unforgivable misstep of

alerting Her Majesty* to a serious mistake she is about to make…

of questioning her omniscient rule…

* so dubbed by Rafael

-- from Lay Off Rafael,

He’s a Respectful Employee

© 2019 Take 1 Productions / Russ

cameravision161@gmail.com

match the quotes to the

…They just have become so comfortable with being a

victim, because society has allowed it. It's incredibly

immature. You've allowed the toddler to throw the

tantrum so many times that they think this is the method to get

what they want. It's easy. Being a victim is remarkably easy.

That's the easy path in life. Life is hard…

…I find it to be a fundamentally racist concept -- that attack by

white people who come to me and say, “You don't understand what

it's like to be Black in America.” I've done it my entire life. I've

never taken one day off on being Black, never… not even an hour

off. I've done it my entire life, and yet they feel they have the

authority… White guilt has given them the authority to help me

understand what it's like to be Black. Imagine that… I'm saying to

them, I view myself as your equal and that bothers them.

I want nothing to do with it. We have to start changing it. We

have to start changing the conversation. It starts

with White Americans getting out of the

conversation.

“…Government does not exist to end your

suffering; it exists in order to create the proper

structure, based on equality and justice, so that you may

pursue your own happiness…”

“…The number of decibels your voice hits as you

scream about how right you are is not necessarily

an indicator of how much sense you are making.”

“When I walk around my neighborhood, the grocery store, or

the farmers’ market, I don't see Democrats or Republicans,

Progressives or Conservatives. I see my brothers and sisters -

living, breathing human beings with diverse and complicated

stories, views, and desires that can't be packaged neatly in a box…”

“…We need to end our country's counterproductive regime change war

policies that have undermined our national security,

destroyed so many countries, and taken so many lives.

We must instead focus on investing in and rebuilding our

communities right here at home.”

“On one side of town you have those dying daily due to

the living conditions, on the other side of town you have

many profiting from the living conditions. Oftentimes, they never

meet one another. I’m fighting for those who are dying…”

“…My favorite part about getting his endorsement is reading the

comments claiming he only did it because I am Black... as if we

didn’t spend 3 weeks watching a modern-day overseer

play Duck Duck Goose with three Black women to make

a pick solely based on complexion.”

1 Candace Owens, 31

2 Dan Crenshaw, 36

3 Tulsi Gabbard, 39

4 Kim Klacik,38 (endorsed by Donald Trump)

t

Last Words…

“I only wish I had drunk more champagne.”

― John Maynard Keynes

“I go to seek a Great Perhaps”

― François Rabelais

“Plaudite, amici, comedia finita est.”

(Applaud, my friends, the comedy is over.)

[Said on his deathbed]

― Ludwig van Beethoven

“This wallpaper is dreadful; one of us

will have to go.”

― Oscar Wilde

“Kiss someone like it's the last one you give.”

― Mattéo Bonnet

“Every damn fool thing you do in this life

you pay for.”

- Édith Piaf

“He felt weighted down by guilt

and regret for what might have been

his last words to all of them.”

― Karen Ann Wirtz, A Game of Truths

“The rest is silence.”

― William Shakespeare

“No one has ever properly understood

me, I have never fully understood anyone;

and no one understands anyone else”

― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

“Look...at...me...”

― Severus Snape

I saw a man pursuing the horizon.

Round and round they sped.

I was disturbed at this;

I accosted the man.

“It is futile,” I said –

“You can never…”

- Author Unknown

“You lie, “he cried,

And ran on.

“Really, now you ask me,” said Alice, very

much confused, “I don’t think…“

“Then you shouldn’t talk,” said the Hatter.

- Louis Carroll

…"I did not read the article because

this isn’t news but I’m pretty sure this

guy can eat shit."

…”I read the article but I'm with you from the

get-go. I pretty much reject any information

that purports to BLOW IT WIDE OPEN or

CHANGE EVERYTHING cause those are bullshit

100% of the time.

The whole premise that some information

point is suddenly gonna make evil disappear

is counting on somebody else (gubment?) to

follow through/ make life better for you and

that ain't their job.

Read again: nobody is getting paid to help you.

No matter how much they are getting paid.”

…”move along everyone....MSM is frantically on full tilt this

week trying to PROVE that Mr. Trump had sex with a hot

chick....well, back when she was hot....and back when he wasn't

President. Apparently, lasciviousness is now OUT of style

again. I get all confused about when I am supposed to care or

not care about someone else's lust.

Thank GOD the MSM has now decided to be the policeman and

enforcer of Christian beliefs...whew...I feel safer already”…

“Yet here we are typing meaningless words to a

screen.”

“Many in the media have been skirting with

"aiding and abetting" in the commission of

crimes.”

“Damn skippy. But I would call it Conspiracy, and they're

not skirting. They hide behind the First Amendment to

shield themselves from prosecution.”

“The First Amendment is not a shield protecting them from

sedition and treason charges, knowingly aiding and abetting. CNN

fake news and the rest will all hang - and they know it. Note the

continuing rise in the level of their abject panic. Digging through

Russian trash... mummified porn stars. You get the picture”

“Then give me a sign that something is happening

because it sure looks like stagnation”

“Nothing is going to happen because Americans

just like sitting around "knowing." Kind of like the

way Snowden, and Assange got no place at all

with their whistle blowing, because Americans

just like sitting around 'Knowing.' And now you

"Know" the rest of the story. So now you can get

super duper {Active} and click the dislike button.

Thou is going to lord the dislike button over me.

Haha technology is making people so stupid.”

“Put Neidermeyer on it! He's a sneaky

little shit, just like you, right?”

- Dean Wormer

…”Every member of congress could be arrested

on multiple felonies today. It's just a question of

who they decide to go after and that would be

the guy rocking the boat and threatening the

status quo., a Mr. Donald J. Trump. Let me ask

you a serious question. All of these guys Mueller

has subpoenaed, interrogated, charged or given

immunity deals to - how many of them would

have ever had to deal with any of this had

Donald Trump NOT been elected President?

You know the answer and it should tell you what

this is all about.”

“The dems are roaring like lions as they make

political hay out of the real sleaze (albeit nonimpeachable

sleaze) that has been uncovered.

But, they've not the stomach for an all-out

exposure that an impeachment trial would

result in. They roar like lions ... but are truly

gutless. This too shall pass.”

see more

• 11

• Reply

Tsc Admin BriStep, redeemed • 2 days ago

One option for Trump is to come out as bi. I'd let

him bang me, if it helps.

see more

Oakhill hit a home run with his post.

see more

you are all so utterly clueless. You're like a dude at a baseball

game yelling "touchdown".

•

I'll drink to that!!!

The American People have your back,

Mister President and if they mean to have

a war let it begin here!

…

You might want to re-calculate the number of Americans professing to

having Trump's "back". Any action regarding force will not constitute "a war",

big mouthed tough guy, it will merely amount to a small "police action”..., an

action designed to neutralize the still ignorant "tough guys" remaining in the

"Trump Cult". There will be Kool Aid refreshments available at the "Cult"

debriefing tent upon completion of that mere "police action".

Then we can truly commence to MAGA !

Don't kid yourself. Mueller is just getting started. He will never stop

until he is escorted out by security. He will haul before a grand jury

every person Trump has ever associated with or known and threaten

them in any way, he has to get their cooperation. He is going to charge

Trump on obstruction, conspiracy, and campaign finance. He is going to

indict Trump. He will transfer cases to state prosecutors. He will fight to

the Supreme Court to compel Trump's testimony. He will bankrupt

and/or imprison every person who ever was in a position to have

information that would harm the President. There is no further pretense

that this is about Russia. This is an exercise in raw power to use the

power of a general warrant to undo the results of an election. It will not

stop. Not ever. It will still be going on at the end of Trump's second term

if something is not done and Jeff Sessions will still be sitting there like a

potted plant. Trump is going to have to fire these people and stick

someone in there with the stones to appoint a NEW special counsel to go

after the deep state. This last gasp stuff is really wishful thinking.

• So you're saying that because Donald Trump is

associated with an inexhaustible list of criminals; our

Justice Department should therefore stop prosecuting

these criminals because it makes the President look

bad?

There are 5000 federal criminal laws and about

300,000 federal regulations that can be enforced

criminally. The average American commits three

felonies before lunch. If the government is turned

loose on somebody with a general warrant, no

limits on scope, no time limit, and unlimited budget

they can get anybody. Show me the man and I will

show you the crime. The tax code alone can put

any billionaire in prison.

I don't believe that at all.

You disagree but I believe that a man can be honest and

successful.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Lee Smith

@LeeSmithDC

21h

As I note in @AmThoughtLeader interview w

@JanJekielek

premiering tonight, it’ll be 2 generations before

most Americans see ‘Collusion‘ was an operation

joining press & spies to deceive US public & destroy

Trump.

Daily Caller

@DailyCaller

· May 1

A majority of Americans say the Steele dossier’s allegations of

collusion between Donald Trump and Russia are accurate, even

though two government reports have poured cold water on the

salacious Democrat-funded document

https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/01/christopher-steele-dossier-true-false/

Dan Bongino

@dbongino

16h

Watching blue check-mark media & legal twitter throw any sliver

of dignity they had out the window, while going all-in on support

for brutal police-state targeting of their political opponents has

been edifying. #ExonerateFlynn

Sebastian Gorka DrG

@SebGorka

This speech by @dbongino still remains as one of the most

comprehensive summaries of the #Obamagate scandal.

#FlynnExonerated #FlynnEntrapment

SPYGATE - Presented by Dan Bongino at David Horowitz Freedom Center...

Dan Bongino on Obama Mueller and the Biggest Scam in American History

- The Attempted Sabotage of Donald J. Trump

https://bongino.com/spygate/https://www.dn...

youtube.com

• It’s propaganda, mike. To keep

you angry

Laughing lions must come … Voltaire came and

annihilated with laughter

- Friedrich Nietzsche

My trade is to say what I

think…

In the early 1700’s,

his later educators,

the Jesuits, gave him

the very instrument

of skepticism by

teaching him dialectic

– the art of proving

anything and

therefore at last the

habit of believing

nothing.

If Nature had not made us a little frivolous,

we would be most retched… Woe to

philosophers who cannot laugh away their

wrinkles. I look upon solemnity as a disease.

When This Blows Over

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?