Search This Blog

Thursday, January 31, 2019

Virginia Governor Northam Advocates POST-BIRTH Abortion...

Northam on Abortion Bill: Infant Could Be Delivered and Then ‘Physicians and the Mother’ Could Decide If It Lives

More Unborn Babies In New York Identifying As Convicted Criminals So They Can't Legally Be Executed

From the Babylon Bee:

NEW YORK—According to a new report, unborn babies in New York have adopted a new strategy to help them stay alive under the state's barbaric new abortion laws: identifying as convicted criminals so they can't legally be executed under the state's constitution.

Since capital punishment in the state has been banned but abortion is legal pretty much whenever and however you want, unborn babies quickly formulated the survival strategy of identifying as murderers, rapists, and genocidal maniacs.

"I now identify as a serial killer indicted on five counts of murder," said one 6-month-old baby, whose mother was considering an abortion. "Therefore, under state law, I cannot be executed. Sorry, mom."

"Guess you'll just have to like be a mom or something," he added, shrugging.


Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Kathy Tran introduces Holocaust bill in Virginia, making Dr. Gosnell's murders perfectly legal

The Repeal Act, introduced as HB2491 by Delegate Kathy Tran (D-Springfield), would repeal restrictions on third trimester abortions, allow abortionists to self-certify the necessity of the procedures, eliminate informed consent requirements, repeal health and safety standards for abortion clinics, allow late-term abortions to be performed in outpatient clinics, waive ultrasound requirements, and eliminate the 24 hour waiting period for abortions in Virginia, among other provisions.
“Where it’s obvious that a woman is about to give birth, that she has physical signs that she is about to give birth, would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified?” Gilbert asked.

“She’s dilating,” he continued, using the term for a woman’s cervix naturally opening to allow a baby to exit his mother during birth. “I’m asking if your bill allows that.”

“My bill would allow that, yes,” she said.

When Dr. Kermit Gosnell was convicted in Philadelphia in 2013, his crimes included murdering babies who had been born alive, snipping spinal cords, and performing late-term abortions. Now, late-term abortions like those he performed are legal in the state of New York, and if Tran’s bill were to pass, in the state of Virginia. That’s because these bills also decriminalize crimes against unborn babies.

For now, the subcommittee recommended the Virginia Repeal Act to be laid on the table, but is not expected to pass, with Republicans holding a small margin of the House and Senate. Nevertheless, the passage of New York Gov. Cuomo’s “Reproductive Health Act” has opened the flood gates to allowing what many consider infanticide.

If you ever wondered how people could be so depraved as to murder millions in cold blood, don't wonder any longer.  Kathy Tran is one of your neighbors, an elected official, and is perfectly fine with killing babies as they are born.

Tuesday, January 29, 2019

Does the FBI and the DOJ need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission?

After the end of Apartheid, the South African government established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, South Africa (TRC), a court-like body to help heal the country and bring about a reconciliation of its people by uncovering the truth about human rights violations that had occurred during the period of apartheid.   

Its emphasis was on gathering evidence and uncovering information—from both victims and perpetrators rather than prosecuting individuals for past crimes.

Perhaps we need a TRC to allow people in the Justice Department and the FBI to come forward and admit the abuse of civil rights that occurred during the Obama Administration as officials in the FBI and the Justice Department conspired to prevent the election of Donald Trump and, following the election, to engineer a slow-motion coup against a duly elected president. 
It appears that naming a new FBI director, Christopher Wray has done nothing to end the cover-up that continues unabated.   

The FBI just sent 29 armed and armored agents to arrest a 66-year-old man with no criminal record for the purpose of a televised “perp walk” designed to inflame the public.   

The DOJ refuses to reveal why, on the morning of November 19th, sixteen FBI agents raided the Maryland home of a DOJ whistleblower who was in possession of Clinton Foundation and Uranium One documents implicating Robert Mueller who now heads a group aimed at removing President Trump from office.

The DOJ has empowered a two-year investigation of any links between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin with the result of zero findings of collusion but the creation of process crimes created by the investigator.  

We are told that there are honest people in the FBI and DOJ who are angry about the cloud that now hovers over their departments.  If these people could come forward without fear of losing their jobs or going to prison, would that allow the truth to be revealed?  Would Truth and Reconciliation prevail, or are the battle lines now so sharply drawn between the sides that one side must destroy the other?

Mark Steyn: Man interrogated by police for liking a 'transphobic' tweet

Mark Steyn parts the curtain about what's going on in Britain where you can get a call from the police for "liking" a "transphobic" tweet.

The copper assured Harry that "it's not a crime, but it will be recorded as a hate incident". Liking a Tweet doesn't seem much of an "incident", yet in the new Orwellian England it suffices. So, for the record, here's the offending poem, which is not in fact a limerick even if it is a "hate incident":

Your breasts are made of silicone
Your vagina goes nowhere
And we can tell the difference
Even when you are not there
Your hormones are synthetic
And let's just cross this bridge
What you have, you stupid man
Is male privilege.

A land in which the police can lawfully investigate you merely for checking the heart icon underneath such a tweeted verse is no longer free. And the fact that neither the constable nor his superiors are ashamed of the

Monday, January 28, 2019


Sarah Hoyt:
When democrats screw up and need a distraction they drag an innocent (well the filmmaker was innocent of the massacre or our ambassador) out of bed and arrest him before the cameras. It’s time we tell them it’s over.

And btw, in this entire Russian collusion thing, no one has asked the obvious question: supposing Trump was dirty and wanted to cheat his way into the presidency, WHY would it ever occur to him or anyone even slightly sane that Putin had the keys to the white house? Not since Jimmah Carter tried to get them to help him with reelection has such a crazy idea struck anyone. At least Jimmah tried to do this while the Soviet Union existed and had power but why would ANYONE think Putin would put them in the white house?

Are the democrats ALL still being blackmailed with their KGB files and do they therefore attribute near-magical-powers to the Russians? One has to assume that. The alternative is heavy hallucinogen use.

More from Neo:
You can rest easy in your beds, folks, because the intrepid FBI has captured fearsome process criminal Roger Stone:

You wonder sometimes whether there are any sane liberals left.

You wonder sometimes whether there are any sane liberals left. Every day the craziness seems to spin farther out of control. Today’s exhibit (one of many, actually) is law professor Larry Tribe, who was once spoken of as a likely Supreme Court nominee for a Democratic president. I knew Tribe when I was a law student and he was a young professor. He was a smart guy then. So, what went wrong? Check out this tweet from yesterday:

Saturday, January 26, 2019

Left wing liars

This is CNN

The Covington incident: activism, and how to provoke and shape a story

The Left's ambush technique.

Oh, that Shithole Media!

Poorly sourced, slanted reporting has become the new standard among prestige media. Three weeks ago, a little girl, black, was shot and killed in a Houston parking lot; initial reports that the shooter was white turned a local police item into national news. The New York Times ran stories on the case for days, exploring the implications of targeted, race-based murder in an age of intolerance. When it emerged that the child was killed by two black gang members gunning for their enemies, coverage of the story ceased....

. . . Over the last year, we've seen a spate of cellphone videos capturing petty disputes amplified across social media and reported in the national media--as long as the footage depicts a white person complaining to or about a black person doing something relatively minor. Whether the incidents in question have anything to do with race is unimportant. Pushing the narrative that Trump has ignited a firestorm of white racism across the country requires a continual flow of stories making that point, regardless of accuracy or context. . .

Remember that Nathan Phillips and his group got to frame the narrative that produced such rage against the Covington boys -- before the activists knew that another video existed. "And if that longer video hadn't existed, Phillips would have succeeded in the technique that Professor Jacobson has described, because no one would have believed the students against the word of this righteous Native American elderly guy."

Main action item: if you are ever in a position where you may encounter hostile leftists, have video running before you encounter them. Because otherwise, the videos will start when they start screaming.

This is the FBI - Oh, Lord help us.

Viet Nam from lies the MSM's "Native American Elder"

John Hayward Tweets on the fundamental press lies about the Covington story

Imagine if Fox News had done to a Muslim School what the MSM did to the Christian kids

The shrinking press

The Epic Struggle of Being a Living Legend.... The Jim Acosta Story by Jim Acosta.

Suggestion: have Sanders answer all future questions by walking up to reporters and banging a drum in their faces.

Thursday, January 24, 2019

Gilette Parody

The Media Botched the Covington Catholic Story

Did you expect anything else?

Lying Indian

Patrick J. Buchanan: When Democracy Fails to Deliver...Because Elites Refuse To Accept Losing

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible ... make violent revolution inevitable," said John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy was right.

While populists have won elections and carried out peaceful revolutions, [Brexit & Trump's election] often the policies for which they have successfully worked are never implemented.

In the 1975 book "Conservative Votes, Liberal Victories: Why the Right Has Failed," this writer sought to explore and explain the forces that so often deny the right the policy fruits of its political victories.

Foremost among these was "the New Journalism."

"The essence of press power lies in the authority to select, elevate and promote one set of ideas, issues, and personalities and to ignore others," this writer wrote. "The press determines what 'people will talk and think about' because of the monopoly it holds over the news and information flowing out of Washington."

Among the reasons for Trump's political success, such as it is, is that today's conservative media did not exist back then, nor did the new social media that he has mastered so well.

Yet still, the left's power over America's character- and culture-forming institutions remains overwhelming. It dominates public schools and teachers unions, mainstream churches, college and university faculties, media and entertainment, TV and film.

What is taking place in the West today might be described as a struggle between the capital and the country it rules. England voted to leave the EU; London voted to remain.

In the last analysis, Kennedy was surely right. People who see the policies they have voted for rejected again and again, by the very elites they defeated, will inevitably turn to other means to preserve what they have.
We may have to have a second American revolution. 

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

"Passive Conservatism" and the Surrender Caucus

Well said by John Hayward:

Passive conservatism was so thoroughly terrorized away from social issues over the past generation that it became reluctant to engage even when leftists are clearly the aggressors and their attacks are utterly dishonest.

The debate on the passive Right was never about pushing back or fighting, especially not by top-tier Republican officials looking to preserve their "electability." The only serious topic of discussion was how much ground to yield, how many of the Left's premises to agree with.

The idea was that yielding all cultural battles to the Left would allow Republicans to focus on "fiscal conservatism" and win over moderate voters who only care about pocketbook issues. Curiously, the Left never saw it that way, not for an instant.

As we would learn, ceding cultural battles to the Left without a fight, or actively HELPING them to score a little Strange New Respect and maybe some roundtable seats, made the "pocketbook issues" largely irrelevant. The Left frames EVERYTHING in moral terms now.

"Moderates" are not a homogenous voting bloc, and not many of them were soothed by Republicans putting on their green eyeshades and waving stacks of financial reports while refusing to engage fiercely in cultural battles. Instead, middle Americans felt bereft of representation.

What passive conservatism ceded to the Left was *righteousness*. Every left-wing issue is presented as a righteous crusade which no one can legitimately resist. The motives of dissenters are ruthlessly challenged and they are damned as apostates by the Church of the State.

The Left gained an almost unchallenged ability to designate cultural villains and target them for destruction, an ability they were boldly exercising against the Covington kids until citizen-journalists brought them up short with amateur video.

Meanwhile, the Right was completely stripped of righteousness. It cannot present anything as a moral crusade, not even when it speaks up for unborn children or victims of violent crime - not even when it champions those the Left allegedly cares about, like the "working class."

The passive Right lost the ability to project righteousness even when defending core American principles, and indeed the pillars of Western civilization, like the presumption of innocence. The Left openly demands we sacrifice those things for THEIR crusades.

Now it's free speech and even basic political rights on the chopping block. Wearing a MAGA hat and marching for life? You deserve whatever happens to you, including life-destroying fake allegations and even violent assault. Shut up, stand down, and submit or your life is forfeit.

The Left defines what your symbols mean, evaluates the true content of your heart, and parses every word you speak. What an insidious assault on free speech - your every word and even facial expressions mangled by hostile translators, your ability to impart MEANING stolen.

And passive conservatism does nothing to help, because they're terrified of engaging in cultural battles they believe themselves fated to lose, because refusing to engage for decades gave the Left absolute cultural dominance.

They don't want to accuse the media of being thoroughly corrupt, because they want to become "respectable" parts of it. They don't want to upset the delicate surrender negotiations they've been conducting with the Left. They dislike the "deplorables" almost as much as Lefty does.

The academic heavyweights of passive conservatism are beginning to think religion is effectively dead as a cultural force, the people who cling to it scare away those much-sought-after "moderates," and causes like pro-life are a futile waste of their energy.

Above all they are animated by the dream of a "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" moderate majority quietly turning to them and delivering electoral victory. They tell themselves such a silent majority lurks in every demographic, awaiting the right activation signals.

Passive conservatives are easily frightened away from any issue they think might disturb the dreams of this socially liberal, fiscally conservative sleeping colossus. Shrewd left-wingers know this and play to that passive conservative fear to manipulate them.

The fatal problem with this strategy is that the Left plays by no such passive rules. It ACTIVELY reshapes the electorate with government power and cultural influence. It's not worried about freaking out the moderates - it subdues and conquers them by redefining what is "normal."

The Left attacks relentlessly because it pays no price for failed assaults... because it has no active conservative enemy to make it pay. There's nobody else on the field. Passive conservatives merely quibble about how many yards the Left should get on every play.

Trump appealed to that quiet group of moderates precisely because he saw them under attack and offered to take some hits by standing up for them. Criticize his approach all you want, but which of his GOP opponents even saw the problem? Who else saw moderation itself under attack?

So yes, Trump inevitably wades in for the Covington kids, as most prominent Democrats would do for their treasured constituencies... but as few other Republican leaders of recent vintage would do for theirs. Sure, Trump fumbles some balls, but he's in the game. /end

Glenn Beck Exposes the Real Story of the Covington Catholic High School Controversy


Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Lawyer for Covington Catholic HS Families Threatens Lawsuits Against Media Unless They Retract False Stories


Liberals Are Bigots, But It's Okay Because That Kid Had a MAGA Hat

Then, every lib on earth went completely insane. They saw a white kid wearing an enemy uniform, and they projected all their fears and hatreds onto him.

Back in the old days, white supremacy meant burning crosses, threatening and hurting and killing people, saying racist things, etc. Now all you need to do is stand in one spot, literally saying nothing, and that's white supremacy. It's a lot less work, I guess?

The white kid, who I'm not going to name, didn't roll up on the elderly Native American man. He wasn't trying to intimidate anybody. He just stood there while some dude he didn't know walked up and banged a drum in his face, after listening to some other guys he didn't know screaming insults at him. The kid's big crime was... smirking. That was it. A teenager smirked at somebody who was trying to provoke him, and it's national news because the troll was a designated victim and the kid was wearing the Hat of Evil.

You've heard of "Standing While Black"? Well, this was "Smirking While White." What this country needs is some common-sense smirk control!

This was a highly successful propaganda effort. It's completely unfair to this kid, but the people who created and disseminated the propaganda don't care. They don't care about people as individuals, and they know their target audience doesn't either. They just see a face they're supposed to hate, underneath a hat they're supposed to hate. So that's what they do. They hate. Then they congratulate themselves on standing up to "bigotry."

Orwell was an amateur.

So now what are they going to do? Ruin this kid's life? They're already doxing him, and doxing people who vaguely resemble him. The roaming outrage mob has found its new target. It's MLK Day, and they're judging a young man not by the content of his character, but by the color of his skin. And hat.

End of the world ... again

In addition to everybody dying from Trump’s tax cuts, net neutrality, and Brett Kavanaugh being seated on the Supreme Court, all these earlier final countdowns surely finished civilization off:
President Obama ‘has four years to save Earth.’
—The London Guardian, January 17, 2009.
Warming expert: Only decade left to act in time.
—NBC News, September 14, 2006.
U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked:
A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of “eco- refugees,” threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
—AP, June 29, 1989.
And finally, this classic:

Monday, January 21, 2019

4 Lessons We Can Learn From The Despicable Smear Campaign Against The Covington Catholic Students

There are way more than four, but the number one lesson is that the MSM lie.

More Covington

Mark Steyn: "The Drumbeat of the Mob"

~Guest-hosting for Rush on Friday, I mentioned the strange need of the right to virtue-signal to their detractors - as in the stampede of Congressional Republicans to distance themselves from their colleague Steve King over an infelicitous interview with The New York Times. Democrats never do this; Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam declare that the Jews are pushing defective marijuana on black men in order to turn them gay - which would appear to be a prima facie slur on at least four Democrat constituencies: blacks, gays, Jews and potheads. Yet Clinton, Obama et al speak not a word against Calypso Louie.

There was another conservative virtue-signaling stampede over the weekend. A short video from the Lincoln Memorial went "viral" (notwithstanding its ubiquity, I'm keeping the word in scare-quotes because, like any other virus, this one should be contained): it purported to show a group of Catholic schoolboys in MAGA hats harassing an elderly Native American drummer. The lads were instantly identified as students from Covington Catholic High School, which I'd never heard of but is clearly the kind of tony white-privilege joint where they book Brett Kavanaugh to spike the punch at the gang-rape prom. So naturally social media instantly convicted them and moved on to the usual doxing and death threats. The school itself leapt to dissociate itself from its own pupils and threatened to expel them.

Midst the present fevers, my advice and practice is that, when the media are in lockstep on a particular "narrative", proceed with caution and, if you must join the great thundering herd of independent minds, tag along at the tail end out of sight. A genuinely conservative temperament should be wary of crying "Me too!" and scampering after the media-Democrat-cultMarx bandwagon - if only because, regardless of the wrongs and rights, no true conservative should assist in furthering the nano-second due process of trial by social media, through which whole lives are destroyed by the reflex twitching drive-thru jury of Twitter. "Sentence first - verdict afterwards," said Alice's Queen. Hang him high - and we'll figure out later what, if anything, he's guilty of. That's about as deeply unconservative a proposition as one could find. The cure is worse than whatever disease (racism, sexism, transphobia, Islamophobia) it claims to be healing.

Yet, instead of a prudent skepticism, my former colleagues at National Review joined the stampede and decided to get way out in front of the story. My old friend Jay Nordlinger was anguished:

The images of those red-hat kids surrounding and mocking that old Indian are unbearable. Absolutely unbearable. An American disgrace.
Of course, the virtue-signaling availed him naught from fellow Tweeters. Alex Natt:

'Old Indian'?

Tracy Kennedy:

Yeah, 'Native American man' or 'Indigenous Man' or even 'Vietnam Vet'...


National Review decided to up their game and published a piece by their deputy managing editor, Nicholas Frankovich (presumably the assistant to Jason Lee Steorts), with the arresting headline:

The Covington Students Might as Well Have Just Spit on the Cross

Unfortunately for the scolding schoolmarms of the right, the facts were not as they appeared to be from that brief clip. Over at Reason (with hindsight, a better name for a magazine than I used to think it was), Robby Soave watched the two hours of surrounding footage, and found - surprise, surprise! - that it told an entirely different story:

Far from engaging in racially motivated harassment, the group of mostly white, MAGA-hat-wearing male teenagers remained relatively calm and restrained despite being subjected to incessant racist, homophobic, and bigoted verbal abuse by members of the bizarre religious sect Black Hebrew Israelites...

They call them crackers, faggots, and pedophiles. At the 1:20 mark (which comes after the Phillips incident) they call one of the few black students the n-word and tell him that his friends are going to murder him and steal his organs. At the 1:25 mark, they complain that "you give faggots rights," which prompted booing from the students. Throughout the video they threaten the kids with violence, and attempt to goad them into attacking first. The students resisted these taunts admirably: They laughed at the hecklers, and they perform a few of their school's sports cheers.
Under sustained crude and obnoxious provocation, the boys were remarkably good-humored throughout - a credit to the school that threatens to expel them.

Halfway through, Jay's "old Indian" decided to insert himself in between the Black Hebrew Israelites and the MAGA cracker-faggot-paedo schoolboys, and start his "Native American drumming". A little ethnic drumming goes a long way with me. Have you ever heard that Japanese taiko drumming? It's not exactly Buddy Rich. So I wouldn't welcome someone doing it in my face, and needless to say, if a white male drummer (from the Edinburgh Tattoo, say) went up to some black kids and started drumming, it would be a hate crime.

Nathan Phillips, on the other hand, is a revered tribal elder - so revered he plays one in a "music" video that has 380 million hits (best to hit the mute button before pressing play):

Almost nothing about this story is as reported. Jay Nordlinger's "old Indian" isn't that old: he was born in 1955, which, not to be ungallant or anything, puts him in slightly-older-brother territory to Jay - who has known some seriously old men, like the recently departed Bernard Lewis, born 1916. Nathan Phillips seems to be some sort of Native American version of Quaker Oats pitchman Wilford Brimley, who's been playing old since Cocoon in 1985, when he was barely fifty yet was cast as a contemporary of Don Ameche, Hume Cronyn, Jack Gilford and other chaps three decades his senior. In fact, Steve Sailer wonders if Nathan Phillips is, in fact, a "Vietnam vet", at least in the quaint and possibly obsolescent sense of having been in the vicinity of Vietnam while wearing a military uniform. All US forces were withdrawn in March 1973, when Mr Phillips would have been either a few weeks past his eighteenth birthday, or still seventeen and in drum school.

Curious. But, as the appellate judges say (hey, welcome to my world), we need not reach the merits of Mr Phillips' antiquity, because long before that question arises the official media narrative turns out to be thoroughly bogus. This was just another fake hate crime - I believe you can do a Master's in them at Oberlin. My old boss at National Review, Rich Lowry, has deleted his Tweet, as has Jay Nordlinger (seconding Rich with a somewhat perfunctory "same here"), and the spit-on-the-Cross piece by their hysterical junior editor has disappeared from the website. By contrast, over at The New York Times, the in-house conservative, Ross Douthat, can rouse himself to no more than ecumenical scolding:
Good rules for life: Don't let your Catholic school's students wear MAGA hats on a field trip for the March for Life.

Don't *immediately* make a teenager a symbol of everything you hate about your political enemies based on a short video clip. Give it a day at least.

That doesn't quite do it for me. What's disturbing about this fake hate crime is not that the Twitter mob scented blood in its nostrils and went bounding after its prey, but that a big chunk of Conservative Inc piled on, as enthusiastically as the left. And Jay Nordlinger's finger-wagging about an "American disgrace" is absurd in its sanctimony: However you wish to characterize a professional tribal elder intervening in a showdown between upscale Catholic private-school pupils and "Black Hebrew Israelites", it isn't an "American" disgrace. An American disgrace is the declining life expectancy of white males due to addiction, or the collapse of the family in rural America, or a bipartisan political class admitting millions of unskilled illegal immigrants to the country so that MS-13 gangs are now a fact of life in suburban Long Island in order that the Dems can get voters and the GOP's donors can get cheap labor ...or any one of a ton of other "American disgraces" Conservative Inc doesn't talk about because it only takes to the field on the left's terms.

I talked on Rush last Friday about the folly, in philosophical terms, of always accepting your opponents' premises, even unto accepting and advancing the notion that "western civilization" is hate speech. How is that in the interest of even the most milquetoast and watery version of "conservatism"?

But accepting not just your opponents' framing of the argument but their most repulsive totalitarian rituals is even worse. The Orwellian Twitterstorm is something utterly disgusting: It reduces man to a cyber-jackal, feasting on whatever prey is tossed in his path. I have argued, at some length, that you cannot have truly conservative government in a liberal culture. Culture is like air - it's all around, and you don't even think about it. So we live in an age of social-media feeding frenzies that can vaporize a fellow's Oscar-hosting gig or drive an unfortunate porn actress to suicide. There is nothing in the least bit "conservative" about such a world: It's like the young student in Milan Kundera's great novel of Warsaw Pact totalitarianism, The Joke, facing the party committee and wondering why none of his friends will speak up for him - except that it's now at Spaceballs Ludicrous Speed, and the respectable right cannot even bring itself to forgo the pleasure of getting played for saps. Every time.

The Covington chronicles: on hating the face of a teenage boy

What is it about the boy's face that caused so many people to hate him and wish to do him harm?

One of the most chilling aspects of the hatred fanned by the duplicitous reporting on the videotaped incident regarding the Covington students and the 60-something Native American has been the venomous rage directed against the face of one of the students, as well as the conclusions drawn about the expression on the face and what it might signify about the person.

I’ve talked about Orwell before in connection with all of this, and I’m going to bring him up again, because the anger unleashed resembles Orwell’s Two Minutes Hate (although this hasn’t been limited to two minutes at a time). In Nineteen Eighty-Four Orwell wrote of the feeling stirred up in the audience—interestingly enough, by a propaganda film designed for the purpose:

A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic.

The image that provoked a truly hideous rage in an enormous number of people on the left and some on the right was of a teenaged boy named Nicholas Sandmann, whose statement can be found here along with the video screenshot that seems to have sparked the most outrage:

“Bullying” doesn’t even begin to describe what has been done to Sandmann by supposedly responsible and thoughtful adults. Even if the original story of what occurred had been true—and it was most definitely not—the depth of the rage would be way out of line....

From the article by Ruth Graham, which shows us what the author is fantasizing based on the manipulated story and video:

I think the real reason the clip has spread is simpler: It’s the kid’s face. The face of self-satisfaction and certitude, of edginess expressed as cruelty. The face remains almost completely still as his peers hoot in awed delight at his bravado. The face is both punchable and untouchable. Many observers recognized it right away.

What is it they “recognized”? A face that is now permissible to hate, apparently; they’re not shy about writing about their hate and signing their names to it. That face is white, male, and supposedly “privileged” (whether they know a single thing about that person’s actual life circumstances or not). I have come to think of it in a kind of shorthand as hatred towards the “frat boy” in their minds. And it’s not new, although I’ve never before seen a national eruption of this hatred expressed towards someone who is not yet an adult

This hatred is bigoted and prejudiced, pure and simple. The hatred’s origins lie not just in the work the media had undertaken to shape its audience towards feeling this hatred—although that is most definitely part of it—but it also is an opportunity for the viewer to draw in all sorts of historical references to other white men and/or boys they have grown to hate, and to make often-absurd parallels....

The people hating on Sandmann ought to be ashamed of themselves, but there is no indication of even a flicker of that feeling. Nor are they likely to damp down their hatred based on the evidence of Sandmann’s innocence.

They know that face, you see, and it’s the face of their enemy.

HATE HOAX: Native American Activist Approached Chanting Covington Catholic Teens, Got In Their Face

A comprehensive rundown of the hoax of Covington Catholic teens harrassing a Native American man.

Read the whole thing.

Statement of Nick Sandmann, Covington Catholic High School Junior, Regarding Incident at the Lincoln Memorial

I am providing this factual account of what happened on Friday afternoon at the Lincoln Memorial to correct misinformation and outright lies being spread about my family and me.

I am the student in the video who was confronted by the Native American protestor. I arrived at the Lincoln Memorial at 4:30 p.m. I was told to be there by 5:30 p.m., when our busses were due to leave Washington for the trip back to Kentucky. We had been attending the March for Life rally, and then had split up into small groups to do sightseeing.

When we arrived, we noticed four African American protestors who were also on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. I am not sure what they were protesting, and I did not interact with them. I did hear them direct derogatory insults at our school group.

The protestors said hateful things. They called us “racists,” “bigots,” “white crackers,” “faggots,” and “incest kids.” They also taunted an African American student from my school by telling him that we would “harvest his organs.” I have no idea what that insult means, but it was startling to hear.

Because we were being loudly attacked and taunted in public, a student in our group asked one of our teacher chaperones for permission to begin our school spirit chants to counter the hateful things that were being shouted at our group. The chants are commonly used at sporting events.

They are all positive in nature and sound like what you would hear at any high school. Our chaperone gave us permission to use our school chants. We would not have done that without obtaining permission from the adults in charge of our group.

At no time did I hear any student chant anything other than the school spirit chants. I did not witness or hear any students chant “build that wall” or anything hateful or racist at any time. Assertions to the contrary are simply false. Our chants were loud because we wanted to drown out the hateful comments that were being shouted at us by the protestors.

After a few minutes of chanting, the Native American protestors, who I hadn’t previously noticed, approached our group. The Native American protestors had drums and were accompanied by at least one person with a camera.

The protestor everyone has seen in the video began playing his drum as he waded into the crowd, which parted for him. I did not see anyone try to block his path. He locked eyes with me and approached me, coming within inches of my face. He played his drum the entire time he was in my face.

I never interacted with this protestor. I did not speak to him. I did not make any hand gestures or other aggressive moves. To be honest, I was startled and confused as to why he had approached me. We had already been yelled at by another group of protestors, and when the second group approached I was worried that a situation was getting out of control where adults were attempting to provoke teenagers.

I believed that by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to diffuse the situation. I realized everyone had cameras and that perhaps a group of adults was trying to provoke a group of teenagers into a larger conflict. I said a silent prayer that the situation would not get out of hand.

During the period of the drumming, a member of the protestor’s entourage began yelling at a fellow student that we “stole our land” and that we should “go back to Europe.” I heard one of my fellow students begin to respond. I motioned to my classmate and tried to get him to stop engaging with the protestor, as I was still in the mindset that we needed to calm down tensions.

I never felt like I was blocking the Native American protestor. He did not make any attempt to go around me. It was clear to me that he had singled me out for a confrontation, although I am not sure why.

The engagement ended when one of our teachers told me the busses had arrived and it was time to go. I obeyed my teacher and simply walked to the busses. At that moment, I thought I had diffused the situation by remaining calm, and I was thankful nothing physical had occurred.

I never understood why either of the two groups of protestors were engaging with us, or exactly what they were protesting at the Lincoln Memorial. We were simply there to meet a bus, not become central players in a media spectacle. This is the first time in my life I’ve ever encountered any sort of public protest, let alone this kind of confrontation or demonstration.

I was not intentionally making faces at the protestor. I did smile at one point because I wanted him to know that I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation. I am a faithful Christian and practicing Catholic, and I always try to live up to the ideals my faith teaches me – to remain respectful of others, and to take no action that would lead to conflict or violence.

I harbor no ill will for this person. I respect this person’s right to protest and engage in free speech activities, and I support his chanting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial any day of the week. I believe he should re-think his tactics of invading the personal space of others, but that is his choice to make.

I am being called every name in the book, including a racist, and I will not stand for this mob-like character assassination of my family’s name. My parents were not on the trip, and I strive to represent my family in a respectful way in all public settings.

I have received physical and death threats via social media, as well as hateful insults. One person threatened to harm me at school, and one person claims to live in my neighborhood. My parents are receiving death and professional threats because of the social media mob that has formed over this issue.

I love my school, my teachers and my classmates. I work hard to achieve good grades and to participate in several extracurricular activities. I am mortified that so many people have come to believe something that did not happen – that students from my school were chanting or acting in a racist fashion toward African Americans or Native Americans. I did not do that, do not have hateful feelings in my heart, and did not witness any of my classmates doing that.

I cannot speak for everyone, only for myself. But I can tell you my experience with Covington Catholic is that students are respectful of all races and cultures. We also support everyone’s right to free speech.

I am not going to comment on the words or account of Mr. Phillips, as I don’t know him and would not presume to know what is in his heart or mind. Nor am I going to comment further on the other protestors, as I don’t know their hearts or minds, either.I have read that Mr. Phillips is a veteran of the United States Marines. I thank him for his service and am grateful to anyone who puts on the uniform to defend our nation. If anyone has earned the right to speak freely, it is a U.S. Marine veteran.

I can only speak for myself and what I observed and felt at the time. But I would caution everyone passing judgement based on a few seconds of video to watch the longer video clips that are on the internet, as they show a much different story than is being portrayed by people with agendas.

I provided this account of events to the Diocese of Covington so they may know exactly what happened, and I stand ready and willing to cooperate with any investigation they are conducting.

This is the only statement that has been made by the Sandmann family. Any comments attributed to any member of the family that is not contained in this document are fabricated. The family will not be answering individual media inquiries.

In the Progressive moral universe,

The answer lies in the statement of a man named James Roche, newly famous as Brett Kavanaugh’s freshman roommate at Yale. Speaking of Debbie Ramirez (accuser #2), Roche said: “I cannot imagine her making this up…I believe that he and his social circle were capable of the actions that Debbie described.” Bingo. He and his social circle. Not Kavanaugh as an individual; Kavanaugh as part of a group. Not he “did”; his type “were capable.”

The pieces fall into place. Progressives hear generic stories about a preppy jock turned frat boy who enjoys parties and beer. “Guys like that” have been getting away with murder for years. (Just ask Ted Kennedy.) “Guys like that” skirt on DUIs. (Just ask Beto O’Rourke.) And who are their victims? Innocent women from the same social circle. (Just ask Bill Clinton.)

In the Progressive moral universe, it all makes sense. It doesn’t matter what teenage Brett Kavanaugh did or didn’t do, the allegations are credible because they describe the “sort of thing” that “guys like that” do. Kavanaugh is guilty because he was a “guy like that.” His accusers must be believed because other women have been doubted in the past.

This reasoning is not an anomaly. It is not mere cynicism. It is not mere politics. It is an entirely illiberal replacement morality. It is an intentional rejection of human rights, personal responsibility, and the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is something very new — and it is, by every standard of Western civilization, profoundly evil. It also is terrifying: a brutal caste system that inflicts punishment based on gender, race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, and orientation; a venting of rage, without regard to impact on individuals or civilization.

Senator Booker’s self-aggrandizing Spartacus reference made him an instant laughingstock. In many ways, however, gladiatorial combat — or perhaps the auto da fe — is the best possible analogy to the gruesome public spectacle of an innocent, decent, honorable public servant being slaughtered to satisfy Progressives’ thirst for blood. But Kavanaugh himself is not the Progressives’ real target; he is just as much collateral damage as is Dr. Ford. This Progressive bloodsport provides a glimpse of what American life will become should the new Democratic Party ever gain power.

Meet the “woke” feminist behind that Gillette ad (video).

The sexist, racist ad that Gillette ran.

Sunday, January 20, 2019

Who is dividing the Conservative Movement?

Let me count the ways.

Could it be that it was the time when so-called “principled conservatives” decided that they would not support the Republican nominee? Even though Trump has backed and enacted more conservative ideas and programs than any president in memory, the cucks not only turned their backs on him, they actively backed the Democrats.

Rich Lowery’s NR gang called for Trump’s defeat before, during and after the last Presidential election.

Not a day passes without Bill Kristol demanding someone, anyone, deny Trump re-nomination.

“Conservative” columnist George Will left the Republican Party and called for Republicans to lose in a landslide because of Trump.

“Conservative” columnist Jennifer Rubin is a Trump obsessed zealot who changes her position moment by moment to oppose Trump’s even if in the previous moment she professed the exact opposite.

“Conservative” columnist Max Boot has gone on CNN to give the nation 18 reasons why Trump is a Manchurian Candidate controlled by Putin and ready to surrender the US to Russia.

I’m just a humble nobody with no national audience. But those who have that audience have been trying their best to destroy the most effectively conservative president since Reagan. I suspect it’s because they were fine with losing if they were leading the losing team. They were the stars of the political Washington Generals, the were comfortably rich where they were and fear that if the political winds actually change their fecklessness and ineffectiveness will be exposed.

Fortunately, most conservatives support conservative programs and actions no matter who implements them. If your paycheck comes from the Washington Post your honesty may be questionable.

National View: Democrats' junket in Puerto Rico goes largely unnoticed

You can be sure if Republicans took a junket during a government shut-down the media would be all over it.

More than 109 lobbyists and 39 Democrat members of Congress attended a "winter retreat" last weekend in Puerto Rico, ... The fun in the sun was enhanced by a limited run of the Broadway hit "Hamilton," starring its creator, lead actor, and Democrat partisan, Lin-Manuel Miranda.

Much of the media ignored what used to be called a "junket," probably because the cast of characters were Democrats and the major media prefer to focus on bashing President Donald Trump and Republicans.

University demands student pay $500 for public records on its Chinese propaganda institute

Chinese communist propaganda in Kansas?  Sure, why not?

What makes a liberal want to punch a child?

The progressive media doesn't care about what really happened when it has white boys in MAGA caps to hate.

Saturday, January 19, 2019

Friday, January 18, 2019

Karen Pence, Are You Now, or Have You Ever Been, Part of a Christian Ministry?

David French is a Never Trumper and writes for National Review which became the 24/7 organ of Never Trumpers.

He's now trying to ride to the rescue of Karen Pence who's under assualt for practicing her Christian faith by teaching in a Christian school.

Immanuel is a church ministry applying the church’s theology. No one is forced to attend the church. No one is forced to attend the school. It’s a voluntary association that is protected by the First Amendment and rooted in the faith that guides the lives of tens of millions of Americans....

Not only is this not scandalous, but it’s also the exercise of a fundamental First Amendment right. If Lois Romano or Kate Bennett or any other Karen Pence critic wants to argue against Christian theology, then have at it. Most Christians I know welcome the dialogue. But if they want to condemn a woman for the free exercise of her Christian faith? If they want to argue that there’s something inherently wrong with orthodox Christians’ associating, worshipping together, and teaching their children? Well, then they’re exhibiting a deep intolerance that’s at odds with pluralism itself.

This is a great example of why French, National Review and the Never Trumpers lost the culture war. He's whining to be left alone to people who hate Christians. He's accusing Liberals of hypocrisy when that has never, ever, ever been shown to be effective. The Left revels in its hypocrisy because - thanks to people like French, they own the media. They ARE the media. The media creates the worldview that we live in. The only people that French is writing for are people who already agree with him; he's preaching to the choir. And he's in full-time hate mode against the only president in my lifetime who's actually pushing back against the anti-Christan animus of the Left.

Here's his gratuitous swipe at Trump:
How is a statement of faith rooted in ancient religious orthodoxy at all relevant to Trump? If the school followed Trump’s beliefs, it would reject Christian sexual morality and embrace adultery.

Yet Trump is the President who supports the right of organizations that have moral objections to abortion to exclude those procedures from their medical coverage.  He's never called Christians "bitter clingers" or referred to normal people as "deplorables."  Trump has allied himself with Christian faith leaders and actually rescinded regulations that inhibited the public expression of Christian faith.

French is that kind of public intellectual who would rather go to hell if going to heaven meant being led there by a sinner.

Ann Coulter on the manufacuring of White Supremacists

Liberals lie all the time, but when they know they're vulnerable they lie even more than all the time. They're vulnerable on immigration. Even heroic, nonstop lying doesn't help -- as CNN has discovered.

So, naturally, the media have turned to their larger project of relentlessly trying to discredit conservatives as "white supremacists."

Unfortunately for them, apart from a few crackpots -- whom I assume exist in a country of 320 million people -- there are no "white supremacists." There were white supremacists 50 years ago, and they were all Democrats. (See my book Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama.)

Today, "white supremacy" is nothing but a comfortable fantasy the left developed to explain its sick preoccupation with white people.

Talk about a manufactured crisis! The same people who love to snicker about Fox News viewers worrying about Sharia law sweeping the country are convinced that mythical "white supremacists" are hiding under every bed.

The whole concept is bogus. In my life, I've encountered a number of white people -- some of them are my best friends. I've never heard any of them suggest that whites should rule over other races. None of them has argued that a substandard white person should get a job over a more competent person just because he's white -- you know, what every other group openly advocates for itself.

There is a whole swath of journalists who have decided that instead of investigating relevant news, they will spend their time doing oppo-research on prominent conservatives, hoping against hope to call them "racists."

If the facts don't fit, they'll make them up. The New York Times' Maureen Dowd once famously imagined a Republican congressman calling Obama "boy."

On the other hand, the NY Times hires all the culturally appropriate racists it can find who can write English
Last year, The New York Times hired Sarah Jeong, a Korean journalist who has posted such venomous anti-white tweets as:

"White men are bullshit."

"(F)uck white women lol."

"White people have stopped breeding. (Y)ou'll all go extinct soon. (T)hat was my plan all along."

"Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants."


"Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?"

"(O)h man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men."

There's no question but that such racist attacks would never be tolerated toward any other group. Jeong never apologized and happily took her seat on the Times' editorial board.

On that Gillette ad:

Consider the current Gillette ad, "We Believe: The Best Men Can Be" (after the board of directors rejected the more accurate title, "ANNOUNCEMENT TO SHAREHOLDERS: WE'RE FOLDING THE COMPANY"). The ad shows only white men harassing women -- and being corrected by minority men.

As long as they brought it up, every culture in the universe is galaxies more misogynistic than Western European culture. The ad should have been titled, Hey, white America, you've got to stop doing the things that everyone BUT you does.

In casual Liberal racism:
When other groups talk about themselves, they instantly go to: We rock, we're awesome! Only the descendants of white Western Europeans are not allowed to be proud of their culture.

There is still casual racism, and that should be quickly and severely condemned. Iowa Rep. Steve King, for example, was fanatically obsessed with vindicating a white defendant accused of, first, murdering a half-Pakistani woman, and, second, falsely accusing a Congolese man of the murder.

Except King never did that. Newsweek's Burleigh did, writing an entire book in defense of alabaster-white Amanda Knox, after she was convicted of the brutal murder of her half-Pakistani roommate -- later overturned -- and also convicted of falsely accusing an innocent Congolese man of the crime, for which she served four years.

Liberals could never, in a million years, survive the standards of "racism" applied to conservatives.
...If you want to know about white supremacy, Nina, interview yourself. After that, maybe you can learn your maid's name.

The creepy #MeToo Movement

The Gillette ad depicted normal American men as insane sexual predators.  The real insane sexual predators are Liberal men who work in places like PBS and Hollywood who use their faux feminism as a way to nail as many women as possible.

Want to see real “rape culture?” Look at a lefty stronghold like Hollywood, or DC.

Thursday, January 17, 2019

Georgia man plotted attack on White House, authorities say

Authorities can't figure out the motive.
Hasher Jallal Taheb, 21, of Cumming, was taken into custody in Gwinnett County while allegedly trying to exchange his vehicle for explosives. He later appeared in court in downtown Atlanta in the case brought by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force. Authorities said Taheb was acting alone and they made no accusation that he had ties to any terrorist group. He was arrested after a tip from a resident who said the young man had been radicalized....

“Taheb explained that jihad was an obligation, that he wanted to do as much damage as possible, and that he expected to be a ‘martyr,” the complaint said.

Latest caravans from El Salvador, Honduras start treks to U.S.

Not a problem say Dems.   Importing more voters.

After Ignoring Angel Moms, Senate Dems Hold Rally for Government Workers Affected by Shutdown

Democrats hate you and want you dead.

Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Progressive Christian Refreshes Bible App To See If God Has Updated His Stance On Homosexuality

Fact Checking Trump- the media's on it.

Surprise: Genius behind man-hating Gillette ad is a radical feminist

Actually not a surprise.

She'd previously made the bizarre "Viva La Vulva" spot for Swedish feminine hygiene company Libresse. In that surreal ad, objects that included a conch shell, sliced orange, papaya, and coin purse stood in as ersatz female intimate parts.

Democrats are great at Gaslighting.

Putin puppets #CNN and Max Boot do Russia's bidding by destabilizing the U.S. with "Laundry List" Persuasion, your clearest signal for fake new. (If they had one good reason, that's all you would see.)

I have understood for several years that the MSM is doing Putin's work in  destabilizing the US.  The only question is whether they are doing it as Putin's servants or just because they hate America as much as Putin does.

Trump Hatred–Or Is It America Hatred?–German Style

Embrace the power of AND. 

Monday, January 14, 2019

Conrad Black: America's resurgence is reshaping the world

... the economy of the United States is astoundingly strong: full employment, an expanding work force, negligible inflation and about three per cent economic growth. And it is a broad economic recovery, not based on service industries as in the United Kingdom (where London handles most of Europe’s financial industry, while most of British industry has fled), and not based largely on the fluctuating resources markets as has often been Canada’s experience. In the eight years of president Obama, the United States lost 219,000 manufacturing jobs; in the two years of Trump, the country has added 477,000 manufacturing jobs. This was not supposed to be possible, and this time, unlike in the great Reagan boom, it cannot be dismissed by the left (and it was false in the eighties) as a profusion of “hamburger flippers, dry cleaners and people delivering pizza,” (all necessary occupations).

It is clear that China is feeling the heat of American tariffs. Their magnificent hypocrisy of gamboling in a $360-billion trade surplus with the United States while extorting technology from American companies and reducing American high-tech giants like Apple and Google to snivelling on China’s behalf when their sales in that country are reduced, and all the while leading G-77 in cupped-hands requests for relief from the economically most advanced countries for their pollution of the world environment (although China is the world’s greatest polluter), all of it is ending. The United States will not be the world’s premier chump anymore. The most enthusiastic support the United States is receiving in its trade stance with China is from China’s neighbours, from India to Japan. Of course China is the world’s second-greatest power and must be treated with respect, but that does not mean the shameless grovelling of Trump’s predecessors, paying court to Beijing like lackeys kowtowing to the emperors of the Middle Kingdom.

Sunday, January 13, 2019

What a Socialist Really Wants

Skip all the bullshit and cut to the chase.
"I'm a socialist" means "From now on, I'll be in charge, fortunately. You can take a hike."

In the words of Sarah Hoyt:

In socialism ... the most awful people on the planet strive to be your lord and master. Think Lenin. Think Marx, who often threatened his rivals with these words: "I will annihilate you." You have to ask, Who talks like that? Psychopaths are probably the main category, along with socialists and communists.

Saturday, January 12, 2019

Hiding Evidence: The Continuing Cover-Up

More information is supporting the theory that the current big Justice Department "investigations" are actually functioning as big cover-up operations. Robert Mueller's team is effectively hiding key evidence related to serious crimes committed by government officials. Mueller has nearly complete control over what the public or any investigator can see. He has control over what witnesses can talk about....
I did not know this:

You will remember the case of Valerie Plame, where a special counsel was empowered to find out who "outed" supposed covert agent Plame. It was known early in this politically motivated investigation that the chosen target, Dick Cheney's top aide, Scooter Libby, was not the person who had leaked Plames name. There were two earlier leakers whom Mueller's FBI knew about. But the special counsel did not want to let a good investigation go to waste, so he prolonged it for maximum political effect. Sound familiar?

We know that the person who leaked Plame's name to Robert Novak was Richard Armitage. The Watters-Cary column added a new twist to the story by introducing an earlier leaker, who was hidden by Mueller. An FBI employee, Sibel Edmonds, did not like the extensive illegal surveillance she was witnessing. She wanted to expose the criminal actions of the FBI. Director Mueller intervened on two occasions to silence her. Some of the information from the surveillance related to Plame. Watters and Cary write:

One of the "secrets" that Mueller did not want Edmonds to expose was that the FBI has a 2001 recording of Under Secretary of State Marc Grossman outing Plame's identity as a CIA employee to a Turkish diplomat. This was long before Richard Armitage claimed he "accidently" [sic] outed Plame to Robert Novak.

Silencing Edmonds enabled Mueller to position his protégé, Deputy Attorney General James Comey, to eventually appoint their mutual, close friend, U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, as the Special Counsel tasked to discover who leaked Plame's identity as a CIA employee. Everyone with a need to know already knew the original leaker was Grossman. But the public didn't need to know, and so the spin-up to the lengthy Plamegate puppet show began.

American media is now like the Middle Eastern media, simply propaganda outlets fighting for one faction or another, and usually paid by Middle Eastern potentates too.

How the American press is being used by Middle East potentates and lying to the American people ... big time.

Reality ceased to be very important in inbred Washington elite circles long before the cosmic war of Trump and anti-Trump. Yet the October murder of Saudi national Jamal Khashoggi gave the jaded nerves of Washingtonians a jolt, because it wasn’t part of anyone’s playbook. The free-for-all that followed was a chance to see how well the players could improvise off-script.

The play, as it developed, was like a page from a comic book: The narrative held that since the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia himself, Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS), had directly ordered the grisly assassination of a dissident journalist who wrote for an American publication, the Washington Post, and was a green-card holder, the Trump administration must hold Riyadh accountable.

Thus, the Khashoggi affair became a platform for Turkish intelligence, Qatari agents, Democratic political operatives, and the media to tilt Trump policies against Saudi Arabia. Should the American president not heed their alarums, he himself would be guilty of murder—in addition of course to treason.

The specific goals were easy to spot: Ending U.S. support for the Saudis’ war against the Iranian proxy Houthi forces in Yemen; curtailing U.S. arms sales to Riyadh; and compelling Riyadh to push aside the crown prince, presumably in favor of someone who was less enamored of Trump, or otherwise less of an impediment to turning the U.S. foreign policy ship back towards the course set by Obama, which in truth was endorsed by both Democratic and Republican D.C. elites.
The lies fly thick and fast. We were treated to weapons grade FAKE NEWS by the Washington Post and the NY Times and their paymasters in the Middle East..
Yet holes had already appeared in the story. Jamal Khashoggi was not, as the press had insistently reported, a U.S. person, meaning a permanent U.S. resident, a green-card holder, or an American citizen. Rather, he was a foreign national who owned an apartment in northern Virginia, and was in the country on an O-1 visa, granted to individuals with “extraordinary ability.”

The media patched that hole by inventing a new category for Khashoggi. Rather than a U.S. person, he was a U.S., or American, resident—a phony designation that could just as easily apply to an exchange student or an undocumented alien.

Then, in the wake of the operation’s success, a week after the Senate vote, the Washington Post dropped a story in the middle of the holiday lull that sought to launder the paper’s role in the operation. Buried halfway through an article describing Khashoggi’s difficult and lonely American exile was evidence that he was neither a dissident nor a journalist. He was something else, evidence of the new direction the press has taken in the Trump era, a sign of something troubling that no one really wants to explore in prime time.

Khashoggi had requested $2 million from the Saudi government for a think tank in Washington, which, according to the article, would “work on behalf of Riyadh ‘to regain its positive role and image.’” In other words, he was brokering his services to influence U.S. policy and public opinion on behalf of MBS, until he was pulled in the other direction—by Saudi Arabia’s Gulf Cooperation Council rival, Qatar.

The background of this bidding war was that, in June 2017, Saudi and its allies, particularly the United Arab Emirates, had launched their own campaign against Qatar. The reason, according to Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, was Doha’s support for Sunni extremism, its flirtation with Iran, and efforts to interfere in the domestic affairs of other GCC states. A major battleground in this inter-Arab conflict is Washington.

It is no secret that much of Washington is now getting paid directly by one side or the other, or otherwise drawing on the deep pockets of oil-rich Arab states who are engaged in a vicious propaganda war against each other, with the aim of influencing U.S. Middle East policy. The New York Times, for instance, sourced a story about Trump donor Elliott Broidy to emails that Broidy alleges were stolen by Qatari hackers—the Times euphemistically described the source as “an anonymous group critical of Mr. Broidy’s advocacy of American foreign policies in the Middle East.”

Did you know that Khashoggi didn't write English?

Yet the entire story about Khashoggi—that he was a U.S. person, a dissident, a journalist—was false. He was a Saudi national whose murder was used to launch a successful intelligence operation targeting his home country and U.S. policy. The news was fake, but the information campaign set off by his murder was real....
Which is it? Those lamenting the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and the deaths of thousands of Yemeni children appear to have few qualms about sticking American boys and girls in the middle of the Syrian desert as a tripwire, and with no coherent policy to confront Iranian aggression.

This glaring contradiction exists in plain sight because much of the Republican establishment is still sucking on the fumes of George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda, a Middle East strategy that privileged the ostensible aspirations of foreigners at the expense of American lives and resources.

That strategy failed in nearly every way possible. Moreover, it’s not at all clear what political or philosophical principles America is now supposed to be exporting to a region that Obama torched after Bush smashed it. If America is an exceptional nation, what’s the logic in squandering American power in the effort to remake foreigners in our own image?

While we were engaged in this Alice-in-Wonderland adventure, it seems likely that we imported the wrong things from the countries that we decided we could somehow Americanize.

Narratives like the Khashoggi operation are not part of any rational debate about American foreign policy. Nor are they attempts to explore any kind of human truth. Nor are they politics as usual. They are a new kind of weapon, like an improvised explosive device, stuffed with rat poison, loose screws, broken glass, whatever is at hand and seems likely to kill or maim. No one cares what they’re made of.

And it’s not Trump who’s being targeted anymore, either. It’s us.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Church Service Canceled After Guitar Cable Identifies As Female


Christian Just Voting For Whichever Political Party Less Likely To Make His Faith Illegal One Day

It's the Babylon Bee so it's not entirely satire.  But it's the truth.

Democratic Operatives Used Misleading Facebook Pages To Suppress GOP Turnout In Midterms

Putin and Liberal billionaire Reid Hoffman working together to undermine elections.

Sandy "Red" Cortez Whines About Being Fact-Checked, and Suddenly the Leftwing Media Rushes to Agree, "Yes, Fact-Checking is Biased and Ideologically Motivated"

Biased fact checking is only bad when its victims are conservative.

Liberals, like Hitler, are finally telling us what they plan to do.

Liberals are now open about shutting Trump up. Washington Post:
I wouldn't suggest, for a moment, that network television and the rest of the mainstream media should ignore what the president says. That would be irresponsible, not to mention impossible....
But broadcasting him live and unfiltered -- whether in an Oval Office speech, or an impromptu news conference, or at a campaign rally -- has been a bad idea for quite some time.
Instead, whatever news is produced can be presented in context with facts woven in from the start: Truth first.

In other words, we'll tell you the parts of Trump's speech we want you to hear. Trust us, we know best.

CNN also wants to censor Trump and are quite open about it:
Yesterday, Ed wrote about CNN's Don Lemon who wondered aloud whether Trump's speech should be delayed. That idea didn’t come from Lemon. He was probably borrowing from CNN's Senior Media Reporter Oliver Darcy who published a story last week under the headline "Cable news networks air Trump’s comments in real-time. But should they? If you know anything about CNN or Oliver Darcy you can probably guess which way the story was slanted.
Ace of Spades:
For some time, the conservative movement has been divided between liberals who don't really mind liberal rule because they like liberals because they are liberals, and actual conservatives, who feared, correctly, that the left was as serious as Hitler when it has repeatedly told us exactly what it intended to do, which is to punish and suppress any speech they think is "wrong." They have repeatedly told us that all issues are now "beyond discussion," and they have repeatedly proposed methods of punishing/criminalizing those who engage in such wrongthink.

Many of us said that there could be no compromise with this. Liberal Bill Kristol doesn't need to fear the liberal censorship state, because he's a fellow liberal and is useful for fighting their current political fight, but anyone who is actually opposed to leftwing hegemony and speech criminalization does need to fear them-- as they fear us.

Well, we're now at the point where the left has agreed (funny how they're always so swift to agree about revolutionary proposals in such a short window of debate, almost as if they have been deciding these things behind closed doors before introducing to the public) that even The President can no longer be permitted to offer his unfiltered arguments to the public.

Just like the leftwing decided that no longer would any Wrongthinkers be allowed to speak on college campuses.

John Sexton either noted or quoted someone to the effect: "We will all be living on the Evergreen State campus before long."

Now, between the claim made endlessly by so-called "reasonable Republicans" (actually: moderate liberals) that "My good friends on the left can be trusted and do not wish to criminalize you for your speech" and the radical firebrands who have been shouting, "The left, like Hitler, is telling you exactly what they intend to do, and you're determined not to believe them," who's right?

Should we all continue listening to David French and Jonah Goldberg?

Democrats are now openly attacking Christians for their faith.

If you believe in God and are a practicing Christian the Democrats in Congress and the media say you are not fit for public office.

With illegals flipping elections now, Democrats' opposition to a wall is all about their grip on power

Well, yeah.  that much has been obvious for a long time.  And it has the MSM seal of approval.

The Revolution is not being televised - France is burning and UK media is covering it up

If a riot occurs in France but it's not on the news, did it really occur?

There is no footage of this on the BBC website.
There is no footage of this on the ITV website.
There is no footage of this on the Sky News website.
Check any of the traditional media sources websites, none of them are showing this footage.

They'll show photos of protestors, maybe a few flares, maybe a fire or two.

None of them will play footage of riot police getting completely over run. None will show footage of the motorways being barricaded and shut down for the 8th week running.

That's because they don't want anyone getting ideas.

It's about optics, mainly. About packaging the story in such a way that they can say they reported it.

But if you arent reporting the over run police, the shut down motorways or the protestors getting sniped, are you really reporting it?

When the Green revolution went through Iran, we got that, footage and all.
When the orange revolution went through the Ukraine, we got that, footage and all.
When the Arab Spring rose up, we got that, footage and all.

When it happens just next door in France, we don't get that.

Why do you think that is? Why the difference in editorial?