Our choices this election are authoritarian versus totalitarian, and both sides are happy to proudly proclaim, "but the totalitarian is REALLY dangerous".
He gets, and says, what few people with any media voice are willing to address.
Reboot America: Step Back From The Brink Before It’s Too Latehttp://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/07/11/reboot-america-step-back-from-the-brink-before-its-too-late-n2190509
"Obama and the progressive elite were not satisfied merely with exonerating the clearly guilty Hillary Clinton of charges that would have sent any mere mortal to the slammer. They had to shove it in our faces. The AG met with Bill Clinton. Then the FBI director laid out a devastating case, followed by an “and…nope.” Then President Faily McWorsethancarter swept her away in Air Force One – at our expense – to campaign with her and even placed her at a podium with the presidential seal while the liberal media thrilled and quivered. This is beyond mere corruption. This is them gloating over what they see as their unassailable power. This is them laughing at us."
" Leftists don’t want unity and they don’t want peace. Community organizers succeed when they divide; they need discord and hate to survive. Understand that all this discord and hate is not a bug. To them, it is a feature."
"Your media lackeys keep attributing phenomena like Trump and even Sanders to “anger.” Well, yeah. Right now, they are expressing that anger through legitimate means, at the ballot box. But what happens when you decide you’re going to step outside the law once again to ensure that their lawful expression of that anger is silenced?"
"Oh, this is crazy talk! Hey, another right winger threatening rebellion! You know, the elite’s tactics [It isn't just the elite. The legion of serfs do it, too.] of attacking strawmen and deliberately lying about political opponents pioneered by Obama and the Jon Stewart clones makes reasoned discussion almost impossible, and the malicious dishonesty underlying these ploys only ratchets up the anger. Eliminate the legitimate modes of opposition and you’ll leave only illegitimate modes of opposition."
"Drop the divisive initiatives designed to humiliate and bring normals to heel – the gun grabs, the bathroom edicts, the Christian cake baker pogroms.
But if you can’t do that, if you can’t give up the money and the power, if the joy of inflicting petty oppressions and humiliations upon the people you look down on is just too satisfying to pass up, then ask yourself: What is your endgame?"
I'm sick and tired of non-leftists saying "Obama doesn't get" or "Democrats don't understand". They absolutely do get it. They understand just fine. They just don't care. They want you to know that they don't care and that there is nothing you can do about it.
They do have an endgame, though.
Part of that is why they are desperate to nationalize the police. Failing that they want a loyal DOJ zampolit in every department effectively running it through bureaucracy and fear.
The other part is what he touched on. "the bathroom edicts" Declare refusong to have little girls forced to share bathrooms and showers as hate. Then any child who objects must have parents teaching them "hate". That's abuse. Pick them off one by one, labelled and told to end the Ungood thinking. Too far fetched? Ten years ago free range parenting was called childhood, and there was no risk of authorities being called. Ten years ago if you had a religious objection to something government didn't tell you that you had to quit your job or be sued into destruction. Examples abound of how far we've "progressed" so fast.
I'm very interested to see the breaking point.
None of the media reporting was accurate. The "hate" motivated AR shooter was a gay Muslim who didn't use an AR, pledging to Jihad.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/06/14/oh-the-orlando-killer-didnt-use-an-ar15-rifle-n2177835
Everything the left says is a lie, and about agenda.
"The USDA just admitted as much, with a new report on food deserts published in its magazine, Amber Waves. Highlights from the article note that proximity to supermarkets "has a limited impact on food choices" and "household and neighborhood resources, education, and taste preferences may be more important determinants of food choice than store proximity."
While limited early research "found a positive correlation between access to a supermarket (or other stores selling a wide variety of healthful food) and diet quality," these studies generally only measured food purchases for a short time period and often failed to "consider the fact that most households have access to a vehicle and are able to travel beyond the local food environment to shop for groceries." More recent and robust data "show that the effect of food store access on dietary quality may be limited." https://reason.com/blog/2016/06/13/500-million-later-usda-on-food-deserts
"The Sotomayor principle, an identity politics principle, is just a rephrasing of the blind theory that biology is fate, and geography, birthplace, is its handmaiden. It is a regressive principle, one that places unpassable frontiers on human understanding and empathy.
This is the kind of sterile, vapid, chauvinistic alley identity politics draws you into. If we start claiming special and exclusive intellectual and moral capacities because of one’s race or sex, offering those capacities as intrinsic to race and sex, then have we not merely put a happy face on the repulsive and core ideas of racism and sexism?
Allied with this understanding is an added one — that sex and background “bestow” or “endow” these special advantages, and that they exist and are available only to those within the sacred circles of sex and race. For example, the numerous assertions from feminists that woman (and only woman) can understand women’s circumstances, that certain experiences are intellectually and empathetically “closed” to all males. In this sense, identity is a prison, a zone impenetrable to those outside its walls, an unshareable, unbridgeable chasm between sets of human beings.
All this forgets two obvious considerations. One, that we are all human, and two, that we — at least most of us — try to educate ourselves
Under identity politics, people can never reach into an understanding of those who are different from them, which is, rather explosively, the absolute undermining of diversity philosophy: that diversity broadens and enriches and expands our moral and political boundaries by the blend and interaction of all our different selves."
Orwell's warnings as instruction manual.http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/rex-murphy-the-sterile-vapid-chauvinistic-alley-of-identity-politics
A terrorist traitor (Muslim anchor baby who'd completed two background checks) murdered my fellow Americans in Orlando.
Immediately and all day my fellow American Democrats have blamed other of my fellow Americans over guns and "hate".
Apparently many have forgotten the Boston Bombing where no guns were used. Those same fellow Americans have precisely zero interest in the fact he was a Muslim who supported terrorists. Their interest is in the "hate" shown by "the right", usually specifically Christians.
The only agenda to the left is oppression of their fellow Americans. Using dozens of gay corpses is just fine to them.
If I were a terrorist it would only make sense to target gays using guns. I am then guaranteed that half the populace of my target country are my allies in attacking and undermining Americans.
I would ask the "LGBT community" (Leftist gays) if they realize that (and the risk with it) but I'm sure that's "hate speech".
The President came out against guns and "hate".
Hillary did the same.
Trump openly congratulated himself on his genius of calling it like it is with Muslims, then demanded a ban on Muslims (I think his third or fourth flip on that by now).
I mourn the loss of my fellow Americans.
Given the left in this country, and our choices of leaders, we're well and truly fucked.
"I'm not very interested in the first question. I'm a sort-of small-l libertarian, not a large-L Libertarian. And I'm deeply uncomfortable about labeling myself as even a small-l libertarian. I've explained why before: I think that embracing political labels leads to bad behavior. I ought to support something because I have thought it through and think it's right, not because members of my tribe support it and insecurity and cognitive dissonance will set in if I disagree with them.
That makes it awfully difficult to explain what libertarianism is when people ask because they're wondering if there's some sort of alternative to the horror show the major parties have served up this year. Nobody wants to sit through my discourse on what I think on a long series of issues, and then stick around while people bicker over whether that's libertarian or not. Yet I believe there are values underlying "libertarianism" that are worth promoting, and that the label might be a useful shorthand for defending them. So what to do? Accept a label with the baggage and thought distortions and compromises that it brings, or abandon concise and effective advocacy?
Maybe there's another way.
I'd like to propose presenting libertarianism as a series of questions rather than a series of answers or policy positions. Even if I don't agree with people's answers to these questions, getting them to ask the questions and confront the issues reflected in the questions would promote the values that I care about."
Libertarianism as Ten Questions Rather Than Ten Answershttps://popehat.com/2016/06/02/libertarianism-as-ten-questions-rather-than-ten-answers/
GOPe company man or did tRump's oppo team find a gay orgy video?
"Marco Rubio – along with Rick Perry and Bobby Jindal – did not just oppose Donald Trump on the campaign trail. He called him a con man. He called him unfit for the office. He said there was no difference between him and Hillary Clinton. He strongly implied that Trump was mentally unbalanced. He attacked him as being totally ignorant on basic policy questions and said he was a bigger narcissist than even Barack Obama.
Now look, not everyone who opposed Trump said these things about him. But Marco Rubio did. And anyone who actually believed these things about another person would not find it either morally acceptable or responsible to lend their voice and influence towards trying to get that person elected to the office of President of the most powerful nation on earth.[...]
There are going to be a lot of people who opposed Trump in the primary who are going to be able to get away with supporting him in the general with a straight face. Marco Rubio is not one of them."
Marco Rubio Proves that Trump was Right About Himhttp://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/05/26/marco-rubio-proves-trump-right/
This is how fascism comes to Americahttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-is-how-fascism-comes-to-america/2016/05/17/c4e32c58-1c47-11e6-8c7b-6931e66333e7_story.html
Where critics get wrong is claiming that the grievances and rage aren't legitimate. They are. My concern is where they lead with the wrong person.
"Conservatives have been warning for decades about government suffocating liberty. But here is the other threat to liberty that Alexis de Tocqueville and the ancient philosophers warned about: that the people in a democracy, excited, angry and unconstrained, might run roughshod over even the institutions created to preserve their freedoms. As Alexander Hamilton watched the French Revolution unfold, he feared in America what he saw play out in France — that the unleashing of popular passions would lead not to greater democracy but to the arrival of a tyrant, riding to power on the shoulders of the people.
This phenomenon has arisen in other democratic and quasi-democratic countries over the past century, and it has generally been called “fascism.” Fascist movements, too, had no coherent ideology, no clear set of prescriptions for what ailed society. “National socialism” was a bundle of contradictions, united chiefly by what, and who, it opposed; fascism in Italy was anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Marxist, anti-capitalist and anti-clerical. Successful fascism was not about policies but about the strongman, the leader (Il Duce, Der Führer), in whom could be entrusted the fate of the nation. Whatever the problem, he could fix it. Whatever the threat, internal or external, he could vanquish it, and it was unnecessary for him to explain how. Today, there is Putinism, which also has nothing to do with belief or policy but is about the tough man who single-handedly defends his people against all threats, foreign and domestic."
"In such an environment, every political figure confronts a stark choice: Get right with the leader and his mass following or get run over. [Note: That is the actual terminology of the Trump cult]
The human race in such circumstances breaks down into predictable categories — and democratic politicians are the most predictable. There are those whose ambition leads them to jump on the bandwagon. They praise the leader’s incoherent speeches as the beginning of wisdom, hoping he will reward them with a plum post in the new order. There are those who merely hope to survive [...] A great number will simply kid themselves, refusing to admit that something very different from the usual politics is afoot. Let the storm pass, they insist, and then we can pick up the pieces, rebuild and get back to normal. Meanwhile, don’t alienate the leader’s mass following. After all, they are voters and will need to be brought back into the fold. As for Trump himself, let’s shape him, advise him, steer him in the right direction and, not incidentally, save our political skins.What these people do not or will not see is that, once in power, Trump will owe them and their party nothing. He will have ridden to power despite the party, catapulted into the White House by a mass following devoted only to him. [...]
In addition to all that comes from being the leader of a mass following, he would also have the immense powers of the American presidency at his command: the Justice Department, the FBI, the intelligence services, the military. Who would dare to oppose him then? Certainly not a Republican Party that lay down before him even when he was comparatively weak. And is a man like Trump, with infinitely greater power in his hands, likely to become more humble, more judicious, more generous, less vengeful than he is today, than he has been his whole life? Does vast power un-corrupt?"
There is no legitimate evidence to believe Trump is going to break it to fix it for conservatism and the Republic. None. Too many are gambling on the faith that he'll for some reason do the right thing because he chants a slogan about America being great. None of them seem to notice he never explains what makes it great
His interest is power - profit and ego.
"But Hillary?" Trump is Hillary with popularity.
Over the last few years - coincidentally since Republicans won them elections that got them control of redistricting - Democrats have been squawking about the evils of gerrymandering. Half the reason they suddenly care is because now Republicans can do it. The other half is this...
The Federal Courts Screw Over Conservatives Againhttps://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/the-federal-courts-screw-over-conservatives-again
"Now let’s juxtapose this to the Virginia redistricting case (Wittman v. Personhuballah). As I’ve noted before, while both parties engage in unfair gerrymandering, the problem needs to be remedied by the people in the respective states, not the courts. By granting the federal courts full authority over a state issue, the courts are engaging in even worse gerrymandering, using specious disparate impact theories, and doing so in a one-sided way. That is why so many GOP election maps have been overturned, yet in my home state of Maryland, which has the worst Democratic gerrymander in the country, the new map is still standing.
The federal courts redrew the maps of Virginia and North Carolina in middle of the election, disenfranchising a number of voters and candidates in an even worse fashion than the state legislatures. As is the case with everything decided in the judiciary, under the guise of taking race out of redistricting, the courts redraw maps based solely on race, albeit in a way that always benefits Democrats."
After eight years of Obama 40% of federal courts are now Democrat. Democrats care nothing for the rule of law. They care about agenda.
They'll keep screaming about the evils of gerrymandering while making certain it always goes in their favor.
The Transgender Bathroom Debate and the Looming Title IX Crisishttp://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/public-bathroom-regulations-could-create-a-title-ix-crisis
This is the chaos the Orwellian left creates.
I'll add one more to the list: Any man about to be the victim of the college rape lynch mob going on these days should immediately declare he identified as a woman at the time of the rape. You might dismiss that but what stops them? Once the almighty, unquestionable progressive precedent
is set anything goes.
"Continuing to have segregated bathrooms could also put schools in a bind on Title IX compliance. According to the federal government, a transgender girl who is told to use the boys’ locker room, or even a separate and private stall, instead of the girls’ facility, has a claim that the school is violating Title IX. A non-transgender girl who’s told she must share a locker room with boys may also have a claim that the school is violating Title IX. But would she not have a similar claim about having to share with students who identify as girls but are biologically male? Well, not if her discomfort and “emotional strain” should be disregarded. But this week, in a letter, dozens of members of Congress asked the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education to explain why they should be disregarded. The federal government is putting schools in a position where they may be sued whichever route they choose"
"But having, in the past several years, directed the public toward heightened anxiety about campus sexual assault, the federal government now says that to carry that discomfort into bathrooms is illegitimate because it is discrimination. "
I'm not sure about that title.
The author also apparently suffers from contempt for those concerned about illegal invasion and the complete failure of our politicians and law enforcement to commit to the rule of law. That chafes more than a little. But there are some painful truths in here.
"With the Supreme Court up for grabs, a Senate now about to tilt back to the Democrats, and a state legislature majority not seen in 75 years, the GOP base simply threw it all away. And now they are about to get everything they’ve claimed they were mad as hell about over the past four years. Why? Because they were mad, or rather told to be mad. They’re mad about “comprehensive immigration reform” that never passed, they’re mad at budgets that will be vetoed by an uncompromising president in Barack Obama. They’re mad about the national debt, whatever the hell they think that actually is. They’re mad about trade, again, whatever that means to them. [...]
Donald Trump is the perfect Fox News Nominee; a nonsensical congeries of every clichéd talking point the political Left has poked conservatives with for the past decade. He seemingly has formed his ideology from Greta polls and Breitbart comment sections. He’s your grandfather sitting in his favorite Archie Bunker rip-off chair screaming about how This Country Is Goin’ To Hell, but with about a billion extra dollars to burn and enough spray tan to lacquer an entire Real Housewives cast three times over. He’s the perfect soundbite candidate, and 40 million dollars’ worth of free soundbites is what carried him to the nomination.
Trump clinched a major party nomination based almost strictly on the short attention spans of his audience. Remember that unsubstantiated National Enquirer blockbuster exclusive about Ted Cruz’s purported five mistresses? Trick question: neither do Trump’s supporters. Trump is dependent on conspiracy theories, internet pontifications and outright trolls to maintain his flight of sensationalism. With Trump, the explicit strategy is to say the most outrageous thing he can about whoever opposes him and then make them prove the negative. This is the inevitable result of what happens when a mainstream media once tasked with finding truth is now more interested in finding narratives and clicks.
This was how Trump became the first official social media nominee in history, a viral maven proving that high-profile celebrity and a high profile Twitter account can carry you to the Presidential nomination of a major party on the cheap."
"This is the lifeblood of Trump’s batshit army of chainmail conspiracy enthusiasts, screaming into the Twitter tubes that they are mad as hell because no one listens to them anymore.
Here’s the thing: we stopped listening after their fourth forwarded meme from cryingeaglepatriot.tumblr about Frank Marshall Davis being Barack Obama’s real father or the CIA plot to assassinate Bristol Palin. These are our fathers, mothers, our uncles, our grandparents and our co-workers, and we let them get away with spreading such nonsense into the bloodlines of conservatism because we just didn’t want to deal with the drama of telling them how absolutely insane they were. We simply added their e-mail address to our spam folder and went about our day.
Well now the drama has found us and it has to be dealt with."
Here's where he goes off the rails into GOPe land, conflating conservative objections and extremism.
"We have no interest in winning you over anymore.(1) You don’t want serious policy solutions or explanations of why Paul Ryan allowed the Ominbus to pass.(2) It’s much easier to tune out while Sean Hannity screams “Traitor!” into his microphone. You don’t want a physics lesson on how, barring the acquisition of a Kryptonian terraforming space machine, Trump’s big beautiful wall will remain a myth.(3) You want to scream with outrage that lowbrow, quasi-thinkpieces like this one do nothing but “insult the base.”(4)
Well guess what? You’re right. Because a base that chooses a Cheeto-dusted con-man hellbent on proving every lazy Salon.com cliché the Left has ever spouted about the “Tea Party” is a base that not only deserves to be insulted, but outright ignored and shunned going forward."(4)
1) You were never interested.
2) I'd love one, but what we've always gotten was this GOPe elitist condescension. That's part of what got us Trump.
3) Actually, Trump will get a wall built... just as a monument to himself. No law enforcement will take place. Giant neon Ts every 100 yards and revolving doors every 50. With gold trim, of course.
4) Mostly true."The nomination of Trump is a signal that the RNC, Reince Priebus and primary voters have zero interest in the future of cultural conservatism. What they want is a celebrity endorphin. They want their own guy on ESPN & the Ellen Show"
Obviously the above isn't all Trump supporters. But it's far too many.
On the Bright Side: Conservatives have a Future. The Trump GOP Does Not.http://thewilderness.me/on-the-bright-side/
Connecting the dots: Why housing finance is riggedhttps://www.aei.org/publication/connecting-the-dots-why-housing-finance-is-rigged/
According to S&P/Case-Shiller, house prices are now over 30% higher than four years ago.
Who else benefits from higher prices? Realtors. That is why the NAR, whose sole mission is to “help its members become more profitable and successful,” keeps pushing for even more demand against a constrained supply, which will ultimately drive prices even higher and make commission checks even fatter.
Who benefits from more demand? The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) — which is in the business of providing loans to primarily lower-income borrowers — was able to overcome its chronic funding shortfall by expanding demand through a mortgage premium cut that not only drew in new borrowers by providing them with more leverage, but also poached from other agencies.
This symbiotic relationship between the NAR and FHA, all cloaked in concerns about affordability, works however to the detriment of the little guy. By applying even more leverage, home prices rise faster than incomes
If this exchange with Sasse isn't a problem for you, I do not know what to say. At the very least, Trump cult needs to stop calling themselves progressive.
"To remind you, when he was asked on Twitter by Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska: "Will you commit to rolling back Exec power & undoing Obama unilateral habit? These r sincere questions & I sincerely hope u answer rather than insult," Trump replied, "@BenSasse looks more like a gym rat than a U.S. Senator. How the hell did he ever get elected?"
"So you want Hillary, then?" For the last time, this isn't about Hillary. It's about defending the republic from a candidate who is hostile to its foundational values."http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-real-reason-donald-trump-is-unfit-to-be-president/article/2591147#.VzsRQcs3fGB.twitter
"In an ordinary political season, perhaps Trump would be under fire for his habitual untruths, like the one that Ted Cruz’s father might have been involved with Lee Harvey Oswald. This time around, though, neither the media nor the public — least of all his supporters — seem to care. Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that these days, as far as our political discourse goes, truth, logic, reason and consistency don’t seem to count for very much.
There is, however, another and even more terrifying explanation as to why the truth doesn’t seem to matter. It has less to do with Trump or our own proclivities to reshape reality than it has to do with infotainment — with the idea that a lot of information isn’t primarily about education or elevation, where truth matters, but entertainment, where it doesn’t. "https://www.salon.com/2016/05/15/donald_trump_is_a_serial_liar_more_upsetting_is_that_no_one_seems_to_care_partner/
An interesting read on Wikipedia.
"In 2012, Kohs helped start an opposing website called, "Wikipediocracy," to expose what he calls Wikipedia's "misinformation, defamation and general nonsense."
Sharyl: So Wikipedia does censor users?
Kohs: Absolutely. In a given day, Wikipedia administrators typically are blocking about 1,000 different IP addresses.
Sharyl: 1,000 a day?
Kohs: 1,000 a day. Yes.
When Kohs ran afoul of Wikipedia, he was drawn into an unseen cyberworld. One where he says volunteer editors dole out punishment and retaliation, privacy is violated and special interests control information."
"Sharyl: Wikipedia editors that you didn't know at the time were tracking your movements, speculating that you went home for Thanksgiving?
Kohs: That's absolutely correct.
He only discovered that he was being tracked because somebody leaked internal Wikipedia discussions about him."
"Wood: He says, 'We received an email and a phone call from the Wikimedia Foundation, telling us that you are using our servers to edit Wikipedia.' He said, 'Wikipedia,' meaning the Wikimedia Foundation, 'put a hard block on our servers, so now no one is allowed to access Wikipedia from our job site.'
That was enough to get Wood fired."
Dark Side of Wikipediahttp://fullmeasure.news/news/politics/dark-side-of-wikipedia
An excellent piece on the bathroom bill, trans, gaystapo, Orwellian BS of totalitarian progressives.
Montel is a progressive Republican. In addition to that failing, his continued relevance partly hinges on being in this controversy. He's as likely to stop or turn to honest tactics and debate as is Al Sharpton or Nancy Pelosi. But the article is well worth the read.
A RESPONSE TO MONTEL WILLIAMS ON BATHROOM AND LOCKER ROOM PRIVACYhttp://barbwire.com/2016/05/12/response-montel-williams-bathroom-locker-room-privacy/#
Facebook "News" is a form of Pravda (as are all things touched by the always deceitful left).
Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
"“Depending on who was on shift, things would be blacklisted or trending,” said the former curator. This individual asked to remain anonymous, citing fear of retribution from the company. The former curator is politically conservative, one of a very small handful of curators with such views on the trending team. 'I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.'
The former curator was so troubled by the omissions that they kept a running log of them at the time; this individual provided the notes to Gizmodo. Among the deep-sixed or suppressed topics on the list: former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; popular conservative news aggregator the Drudge Report; Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in 2013; and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder. 'I believe it had a chilling effect on conservative news,' the former curator said."
"LOL I might be screwing my daughter LOL"
There is no scenario or interpretation where this is acceptable or healthy.
And here's the thing... Given his insane narcissism, given that he won't allow people around him who won't call him "Mr. Trump," given the plethora of comments he's made about women, given his comment that he will have nothing to do with the raising of his children... what is already off-the-charts creepy is entirely plausible.
:20 video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYuSNE41sX0
"But President Donald Trump would be the standard-bearer for American capitalism, despite the fact his ideas are exactly opposed.
Because he is in business, Trump’s progressive taxes, threats to CEOs and tariffs against consumers will be legitimized as capitalist, as moral, as just. They’re not.
And when Trump’s policies fail, as they will, American capitalism will unquestionably get blamed."
Why Hillary Has My Votehttp://capitalistpig.com/news-media/nevertrump/
Obviously I'm not voting Hillary. Support for evil is a step too far. Trumpites have been clear throughout the primary that they don't need or want my vote. They don't need it for the general either.
When Cruz had this exchange with a Trump supporter I didn't understand it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWve5GXquqk&feature=youtu.be&t=54
Now I do.
Cruz had already decided that if he did poorly in Indiana - and it was looking as if he was going to - that he would drop out of the race. So Cruz attempted a public exchange. This is not his first. He's done it multiple times, most of the previous times with leftists. This time it was with Trump supporters. On previous occasions it ended amicably, and he often turned people to his view via persuasive argument. In this case the mini mob shouted slogans in response. Cruz attempted discussion, stating a known fact about Trump NYT interview
, and got the chant of "Lyin Ted" back at him.
Cruz was illustrating that there was no way for these groups to reconcile. Had Cruz won Indiana and gone to contested primary the would-be Blackshirts Trump fanatics are becoming would, possibly literally, burn down the convention.
Meanwhile Trump, knowing that Indiana was a near certain win, still chose to openly spread yet another National Enquirer story (Trump's personal friend Pecker runs NE), this time implicating Cruz' father in killing JFK. Let's be clear. Not only is that despicable, it's insane
. Fox didn't question it (losing the last of its credibility). In fact, none of the Trump supporters questioned it or wavered for even a moment. Knowing he'd win, Trump chose to go for one more taunting, irrational smear.
During this campaign we got:
Cruz stole IA
System is rigged
His father killed JFK
With Cruz dropping out and Trump the winner after the scorched earth campaign, Trumpites are now either demanding obedience or calling for reconciliation under the hashtag #Unity. To those people I have the following message...https://youtu.be/WA4iX5D9Z64?t=43s
"A top Obama appointee in the Department of Education personally assured a group of LGBT activists that the White House is 'aggressively engaged' in the fight to allow transgender students use whichever bathroom they please at school."http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/25/obama-appointee-to-activists-white-house-aggressively-engaged-in-transgender-fight/
The left hijacked the LGBT movement some time ago, and this is why.
Again, the goal is to make sure that every kid in every school must suffer denying a fundamental truth of science and reality, to have their privacy and dignity violated, or risk being ostracized and labeled for "hate". Once they and their parents must endure that in silence then we've taught them and every generation after to just bow down to government whim or the ravings of the loudest voice that can claim "minority" and cry victim.
An interesting read. Trump is going to get eaten alive come the general election. He's put all the pieces in place.
Inside Trump’s Press Penhttp://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/2016-media-issue-donald-trump-press-pen-campaign-reporters-campaign-lewandowski-schreckinger-213824?o=0
"Here’s what I learned. A candidate who puts reporters in pens, who talked as much about me as about the Islamic State at a big rally, who thinks it’s a good idea to revisit the First Amendment, isn’t really winning—or he wouldn’t be doing those things."
"Which is why if there’s one consistent theme to what I’ve experienced covering Trump, it’s the unpredictability. The handshakes sometimes come after the hardest slaps, and the doghouse is a short elevator ride away from the penthouse."
This is not the first I've heard of this behavior from Trump. This is how he runs his business. That's why he is surrounded by such loyal people. They are the only ones who can tolerate him.
"She passed him the phone. The first words out of his mouth were, 'I respect your writing abilities, Ben. They’re good.' (I relate this not to boast: A week later, he would go on the radio and say I write 'so badly and so incorrectly.')"
"The campaign responded to the stress in characteristic fashion. They cracked down on us. Just after Super Tuesday, I showed up at a Trump rally in New Orleans and found that the press cage had sprouted new bars. Rather than opening directly onto the floor of the airport hangar where Trump was set to speak, metal barriers now formed a narrow corridor leading out of the hangar, so members of the press would have to essentially exit the venue to get out of the press pen. Affixed to the barriers were placards that read, 'Police Line—Do Not Cross.'"
"Reporters have grown personally aggrieved by his abuse and his threats of 'opening up the libel laws,' which feel less amusing and more menacing each day he creeps closer to the Republican nomination."
“'I have a great relationship with these people,' [Lewandowski] insisted. He meant us, the press corps. And like so many things about Donald Trump’s presidential campaign this year, it wasn’t true."
"This must be such a relief for the TV executives managing a business in decline, suffering from a thousand cuts from social media and other new platforms. Trump arrived on the scene as a kind of manna from hell. "
"In fact, Trump’s exposure has been three times greater than that of Cruz and Kasich combined. He received 50 percent of the exposure when there were more than a dozen candidates—a percentage that has only grown. Of course, by now, you’ve all also read the figure of close to $2 billion worth of free media the New York Times cited for Trump’s TV bonanza. And that story was back in March. No campaign’s advertising budget can compete.
So yes, I believe Trump’s candidacy is largely a creation of a TV media that wants him, or needs him, to be the central character in this year’s political drama. And it’s not just the network and cable executives driving it. The TV anchors and senior executives who don’t deliver are mercilessly ousted. The ones who do deliver are lavishly rewarded. I know from personal experience that it is common practice for TV anchors to have substantial bonuses written into their contracts if they hit ratings marks. With this 2016 presidential soap opera, they are almost surely hitting those marks. So, we get all Trump, all the time.
It is not just the wall-to-wall coverage of Trump. It’s the openness with which some are reveling in his attention."
Why I Blame TV for Trumphttp://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/2016-donald-trump-blame-tv-cable-news-media-campbell-brown-campaign-cnn-fox-msnbc-213839
This only covers half of it, of course. What party do you think most of these "journalists", producers, and media heads are members of? They are Democrats, "NY Values" Democrats.
Imagine the bounty handed to them with Trump.
* Personal profit in many cases.
* And a candidate that is almost certain to lose to the Democrat. Trump is Nolan's/Ledger's Joker. "Do I really look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am? I’m a dog chasing cars. I wouldn’t know what to do with one if I caught it! You know, I just... do.. things."
Trump longs to be President because he can then make
the power people of the world who won't take him seriously let him into their club. The only thing Trump cares about is Trump. Other than that he's a mainly clueless overgrown child and nut, as just about any media interview ever illustrates. (Reminder: Trump spent a decade pretending to be his own spokesman, John Barron.)
The Democrat media is going to have a ratings bonanza field day tearing him down off the monument they've erected to him, all to put Hillary, Bernie, or Biden in the White House. Worse, Trump, a NY liberal, will probably love it.
If only we weren't such an idiocracy that so many fall for it.
"Either they’ve been lying all along, they’re lying now, or they never had any idea what conservatism is about.
Trade wars, government intervention in the economy, ordering businesses around about how to operate, health care mandates, whining about rules, etc., etc., … Republicans have espoused all of them in the past. But that doesn’t make them conservative.
Truth can’t be situational. Principle is not dependent upon circumstance. Yet these “leaders” swept aside reality in Colorado, which held a caucus on May 1, and embraced the “voterless victory” lie. To do anything else would risk their access to Trump, who won’t return to interviewers who ask real questions and call him out on his non-answers.
Did they fall for a bumper sticker? Is it all that simple? Are they that open to suggestions written on hats? [...]
These pundits and hosts have become unwatchable. They’ve betrayed all they’ve done to this point. So much so, you have to wonder if they were this awful all along. Did they pull the greatest hoax in history?
Like the 'GOP establishment' they decry, they’ve been selling one thing but became something else when the chips were down. After years of demanding accountability from squishy Republicans in Congress, they’ve become John Boehner."
Did They Ever Believe?http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2016/04/21/did-they-ever-believe-n2151476
Short. A must read.
One of the most simple yet important paragraphs I've read in some time:
"But if they can make you lie, then they are on the way to breaking you.
They want to break us, to make us love Big Brother. As the socialists knew (the real socialists, not the Fairness Gnomes and Equality Elves of the collective imagination of the Bernie Boobs), one of the most powerful means of control and domination is to humiliate and demoralize your opponents by forcing them to deny the truth. Hence the left’s fixation on enforcing political correctness and its use as a tool to force us to bend to the libs’ collectivist collective will by making us repeat obvious untruths."
And this is why I'm concerned the real target is the schools. (Evidence already exists) If the gaystapo can teach our children from kindergarten (and the left is working on pre-K to have even more government control of our lives) that we must deny obvious truths like boys are boys and girls are girls; that we don't dare
speak aloud dissent from what we know is true; that we will suffer ostracism, punishment, and risk permanent lifetime branding for the sin of "hate"; then our children will learn to be obedient slaves to any leftist dogma.
Oh, and by the way, on that agenda they scoffed at? We told you so. The left hijacked LGBT some time ago and turned the movement into the gaystapo, a never ending source of "victims" they can use to bludgeon everyone into obedience. To the left Orwell isn't a warning, as he intended, but an instruction manual.
"There. Those are objective truths, but objective truth is irrelevant to the left. They need you to lie because when you lie you hand them power. And if you refuse to lie, if you try and rely on the fact that the facts support a different conclusion, then you will be hounded and persecuted. But if they can make you lie, then they have broken you."
Liberals Want To Break You By Forcing You To Liehttp://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/04/25/liberals-want-to-break-you-by-forcing-you-to-lie-n2152933
A good read.
No, Being against Trump Does Not Mean You Hate the White Working Classhttp://www.nationalreview.com/article/434455/donald-trump-white-working-class-what-trumps-defenders-get-wrong
On the language of the leftist elite:
"THE PURPOSIVE INTENTIONALITY OF REJECTING HETERONORMATIVE EXPECTATIONS OF TRADITIONALLY ‘CLEAR’ WRITING IN FAVOR OF LEXICOLOGICAL EXPRESSION WITH THE OPAQUENESS OF PARTICULATE SOIL ON A COLLOIDAL SUSPENSION (A.K.A. WRITING AS CLEAR AS MUD ON PURPOSE)
[...] There is a slice of the Left that really needs very bad writing. Horrid, opaque, impenetrable prose and jargon plays a dual role. First, it makes very dumb or simple ideas sound vastly more sophisticated than they are. Second, it lends an air of authority to very dumb and bad ideas that could not be earned via plain speaking."
"But that’s not true of so many of the armchair social-justice warriors who write nonsensically because the last thing they want is for anyone to make sense of what they’re trying to say. It’s an act, a secret language, a pretense to gnostic status: I can’t understand what they’re saying! They must be geniuses!
I remember when I wrote that 'Orwell’s Orphan’s' G-File, I got deluged with e-mail from angry lefties. (Yes, e-mail. My e-mail box used to be a combination of Twitter, a comments section, a chatroom, and fire-hose enema.) They said that that such writing was necessary for truly complex ideas and if I couldn’t follow along, it was because I lacked the mental sophistication to deal with the Really Big Ideas."
A common tactic of the left. They have been trained to genuinely believe that anyone who disagrees with them can only do so because the person is stupid or evil.
"I’m tempted to say my own response to the charge that my opposition to Trump is motivated by hatred of the white working class is “f*** you.” But I’ll go more highbrow. First, it’s untrue. Second, there’s exactly zero evidence that I have written or said anything of the sort. Third, the notion that my dislike of a politician should be taken as hatred for his supporters, is more than a little cultish and creepy. If Donald Trump is the avatar of your identity and if you mistake him for some kind of secular savior, that’s on you. The misplacement of your self-esteem ain’t my baggage.
No, my objection to Donald Trump is . . . Donald Trump. I think he’s a vain ignoramus and bully who mocks the disabled with a long history of exploiting and abusing the little guy. His instincts are nationalistic and authoritarian, not patriotic and liberty-loving."
"You know what it means when defenders of Donald Trump refuse to defend the actual man Donald Trump? It means he’s indefensible."
"Hugh had a theory about what’s really driving the opposition to Trump. He doesn’t believe that rank-and-file conservatives and Republicans have abandoned conservative principles (and I hope he’s right). He thinks the entire #NeverTrump movement boils down to the border wall. 'The one thing that conservative intellectuals will not embrace is a border fence,' Hugh said. 'They will not do it. They have refused to do it for ten years.'"
"My real problem with Hugh’s theory is that it is a variant of what I discussed above. Rather than take me, [...] at our word for why we oppose Trump, the real reason must be some unstated ulterior motive."
Goldberg misses one other thing. Trump will NEVER enforce the god damned immigration laws!
Even if Trump does build the wall, he'll only be doing it as a tribute to himself! Immediately after announcing the wall he said it will have "a big, very beautiful door". Trumpers ignored. He announced he wants what amounts to touchback amnesty. Trumpers ignored. He loves the Visa program, source of 40% of illegals. Trumpers ignore. He hires and defended hiring and importing foreigners for his American hotels, using the excuse Americans don't want the jobs
I don't JUST want a wall. I WANT THE RULE OF LAW. Trump isn't going to give us that. It's a long con.
Remember when the gaystapo told us things like this were never going to happen?
Remember when they mocked and insisted there is no gay agenda? And still do, as it continues to march on?
It Takes A Village To Bully A Transgender Kindergartnerhttp://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2016/04/22/3771366/dave-hannah-edwards-transgender-kindergartner/
"When Dave and Hannah Edwards were lucky enough to win the lottery to enroll their child at Nova Classical Academy in St. Paul, Minnesota, they were excited about the charter school’s small classrooms, the kind teacher they’d met, and the special attention their kid would receive. What they didn’t anticipate was an entire community rising up against their family as they became the latest victims of an anti-transgender backlash sweeping the country.Over the course of the school year, the kindergartner would transition from a gender non-conforming boy to a transgender girl. At every step of the way, the Edwards sought accommodation from Nova to help protect her from bullying and make sure her classmates understood who she was
, and at every step of the way, a growing force of anti-transgender parents shut them down, creating a public spectacle and only increasing the harassment their daughter experienced."
So to translate from psychotic left into rational human being:
These child abusing (leftist) parents are allowing their boy to pretend he is a girl, and made a point of harassing the school into knowing that every other child and adult in the building would be required to participate in the abuse or risk being labelled for "hate".
The school actually got lucky. Lawsuits have already begun to force school districts to "protect" these mentally ill children of abusive parents.
What that means is that every single actual girl (or boy if it's a girl who is ill) in whatever school the child attends will be forced
to share a bathroom and changing room with someone of the opposite sex or they
, the normal ones, risk ostracism and even a permanent label of "hate speech". Everyone in the school will be forced to pretend a girl is a boy or vice versa, they will be forced to deny the reality they know, to humor this latest in the leftist/gaystapo phase.
There are two reasons why they want this.
The first is the reason of the rank and file, the plebs, the serfs of the left. They are obsessed with what they think is inequality and they all long to be champions of some downtrodden mass. These suckers are easily manipulated by the oligarchs of the left. All the oligarchs have to do is figure out how to frame an issue so the useful idiot class can feel they are Champions of the Oppressed.
This is the real reason behind it all...
'Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth" exists. ... The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, "It never happened" – well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five – well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs.'
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell writes:
'In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then?
If the left can use government to force people to pretend that obvious truths are no longer true then people will be conditioned to say and do anything just to make the government leave them alone. That is the totalitarian "utopia" leftists dream of. That's the root of almost all "hate" accusations.
Surprisingly good from Vox.
The smug style in American liberalismhttp://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberalism
"Finding comfort in the notion that their former allies were disdainful, hapless rubes, smug liberals created a culture animated by that contempt. The rubes noticed and replied in kind. The result is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Financial incentive compounded this tendency — there is money, after all, in reassuring the bitter. Over 20 years, an industry arose to cater to the smug style. It began in humor, and culminated for a time in The Daily Show, a program that more than any other thing advanced the idea that liberal orthodoxy was a kind of educated savvy and that its opponents were, before anything else, stupid. The smug liberal found relief in ridiculing them."