Stupid Leftists — whether they are being stupid on micro or macro levels — are the gifts that never stop giving for my illustrated edition posts.
As we give thanks this Veteran’s Day for our vets both past and present, please remember too that we on the home front must preserve what they fought for.
They do say Republicans know how to meme, and this post-election edition, with some bonus Jim Acosta and Jeff Sessions stuff thrown in, proves it’s true.
There’s still much to say about the mob heading for our southern border, not to mention transgender madness and the upcoming election (plus yodeling).
Several comments/observations on the mob (and I use that word intentionally) traveling from Central American to our southern border:
– Pictures show very few women and children. Yet we are told that these two groups make up most of the mob. Pictures I have seen show young men between 15 and 30. And the news from Guatemala (I think it’s that country.) expelling 100 ISIS warriors does not fill me with confidence that all these people are harmless.
– Marchers are carrying flags from Central American countries and defacing the American flag. And these people want to become Americans? (I know they don’t, they just want our social benefits. But this is never questioned by the MSM, even when they see this mob waving their flag and burning ours.)
– None of the pictures show any of the mob carrying anything – no luggage, sacks, etc. I’m pretty sure if I were to leave my and set off across a thousand miles or more, I would take everything I valued plus extra clothing, water, and food. None of these people seem to be carrying anything. Yet, there they are crossing into Mexico. (Yes, I know that they are funded by George Soros, et al. but the MSM seem incapable of investigating such an obvious inconsistency. Just like in the first comment.)
– It clarifies my thinking about this “mob” when I consider that a “Division” in the US Army is composed of 2 to 4 brigades. A Division thus can have 10,000 to 30,000 soldiers. I don’t think it’s that big of a stretch to see this mob, which intends to physically storm our southern border, as an Army Division. I doubt any American, unless of the extreme left, would not oppose such an assault. I would support President Trump sending the military to close the border and station the military to prevent this “Division” from entering the US.
– If America does not stop this mob, Central America will only send more.
A final observation, when Nancy Pelosi, etc. are on TV supporting this flouting of our laws and offering support for this kind of activity, I wish someone interviewer would ask, “How many is enough?” How many are we supposed to take in? When will should it stop?
One thing I always do when considering an issue, is carry the thought to the logical extreme. In this case, it means accepting anyone who can get here. If done, America will no longer be. Do Pelosi, etc. want this to happen? I know Pelosi and her cohorts have enough money to insulate themselves and their children from the consequences of their actions, but what about grandchildren, etc.? They may have enough money to insulate themselves from the immediate consequences, but long term is another matter.
I pray that President Trump continues to have the strength of his convictions and the fortitude to ignore the yapping dogs at his heels.
I heard on the radio that the mob has modified their course and are heading to Tijuana. Interesting end point: California, a sanctuary state. I’m sure this is in hopes of setting up a confrontation between President Trump (and the US Army) and Governor Brown (and the California National Guard). If nothing else, the chaos of Californians vs the Army will allow most of the mob to cross the border and claim refugee status. Were I President Trump, I would address the nation regarding this situation and announce the closing of the border and the movement of the Army to its defense. Drastic, yes, but I think the bluffs must be called. There is one in play from the mob and I think there would be another bluff from Governor Brown and the rest of the Democrats.
I must think a little more about the situation, but those are my first thoughts. This is a “defense of the nation” moment and we must decide if we are to be a nation of laws or just a large area that is nothing special and anyone can be here.
Hear! Hear! [Read more…]
If you like Trump’s accomplishments and hate the Dems’ Kavanaugh circus, vote strategically this November. Here are some ideas for the mid-term election.
We’re slightly less than a month away from the mid-term election. For those who have put off thinking about it, it’s time! As a nation, we are at a fork in the road, so people need to think very seriously about their choices.
The most important thing is that, contrary to the saying that “all politics is local,” this is not a local election. For once, it’s not about whether your particular Congress critter brings home the bacon to your district. Instead, the only thing that matters in this election is whether it gives Trump a Congress that will work with him or gives him a Congress that will work against him.
Even that, though, isn’t the correct formulation. Trump is the agent of the American people. This mid-term election is about you as an American, not you as a resident of this county or that state.
To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, as we head into the mid-terms, you need to ask yourself whether you as an American are better off now than you were two years ago. If you are, then you must support Trump to enable him to continue the policies that benefit you and the nation as a whole.
Regardless of your personal feelings about Trump, therefore, you need to take a step back and see if you objectively like or dislike what he’s done for America as a whole. The following is an off-the-top-of-my-head list of Trump’s accomplishments to help you decide whether you mostly support or mostly oppose what he’s done during his time in office: [Read more…]
Brett Kavanaugh’s martyrdom before unfounded, bizarre, nonsensical accusations, is a Salem witch trial redux with hints of Mao’s Cultural Revolution.
The ordeal of Brett Kavanaugh takes us back to the bad old days of the Salem Witch Trials, though our proggies add their own Maoist Cultural Revolution gloss. If they succeed with Kavanaugh, he will be the first, not the last, to be hanged at Salem’s gallows hill.
And it is just in time for Halloween. The parallels we are seeing with the Salem Witch Trials are striking. Wild accusations. No physical evidence, but the mere charges and their number by “wronged” women supposedly being the proof. The townspeople thrown into mass hysteria, which plays out today with the mass hysteria the media is trying to create surrounding Brett Kavanaugh.
And as Corey Booker said yesterday, channeling Cotton Mather far more than Spartacus, facts proving innocence or guilt do not matter. The sheer weight of accusations is sufficient to dispense with Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination. Dispensing with Kavanaugh’s nomination because of that accusatory weight is a much more humane way of dealing with the accused sans trial than pressing him to death with heavy stones, as the Puritans did to Giles Corey in 1693.
Even the condemned in Salem were given more in the way of due process and a presumption of innocence.
Brett Kavanaugh, an eminently qualified jurist nominated for the Supreme Court, has, by all accounts, acquitted himself stalwartly and honorably as an adult. And yet the progs and their media arm are throwing everything at the wall hoping that something — anything really — sticks so that they can keep him off of the Supreme Court, forcing another choice that could not possibly be confirmed prior to the November 2018 election . . .
So let’s do a quick review of the charges and the ever-moving goal posts. [Read more…]
Democrat hypocrisy: Kavanaugh hearing reveals hate for Due Process, Men, Whites, Black Conservatives, anything else that smacks of normal life in America.
An anonymous woman has penned a searing, emotionally powerful accusation that Senator Mazie “Just Shut Up” Hirono assaulted her.
I received an email from an anonymous source raising disturbing and serious claims about something Senator Mazie “Just Shut Up” Hirono did some time ago. Because the accusations are so serious, I’m grateful that modern journalistic and political standards mean that there’s no problem just because I don’t actually know Anonymous nor have I questioned her or anyone else to try to confirm her claims. As it is, we know from the New York Times’ recent conduct, and the media’s approach generally to anonymous or other thinly sourced materials, that these claims are credible and automatically meet all journalistic standards without further corroboration.
Also, please don’t worry about the missing facts or logical inconsistencies in Anonymous’s statement — a statement that no one forced her to make and that will subject her to demeaning, hate-filled, misogynistic demands for more corroboration. While the email is obviously lacking a few facts about time, place, witnesses, etc., and the author was apparently several drinks into the day when the events described occurred, the powerful emotion burning through the email tells me that every word Anonymous says is absolutely true. As Democrats in and out of the media repeatedly tell us, it is now mandatory for us to believe a woman’s assault narrative without any further proof and irrespective of the accused person’s denials.
With the new rules in mind, I hope you appreciate how serious the following letter is: [Read more…]
With Ford allegedly testifying tomorrow, and Kavanaugh definitely testifying, what better time for a Kavanaugh illustrated edition (plus a little extra)?
A 2012 New Yorker piece naming Kavanaugh as a potential Romney pick for the Supremes may provide the genesis for Christine Ford’s questionable accusation.
By now you’ve all heard that Christine Blasey Ford is the woman accusing Kavanaugh of attacking her 35 years ago, a claim he strenuously and absolutely denies. Her story is a bizarre pastiche of precise details and huge memory holes. It’s also got a big lie planted right in the middle, which is Ford’s claim that she always meant to be private and only went public now because she couldn’t hide anymore.
That’s bull crap. The moment Ford sent a letter to a Democrat pol, she knew with absolute certainty that this would be a big deal, that her name would emerge, and that she’d become the Democrats’ new darling.
But this post is going to focus on one of the more weird things about Ford’s accusation against Kavanaugh, which is the fact her therapist’s notes date from 2012:
Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room. (Emphasis mine.)
Put aside for now the fact that the notes don’t jive with the accusations Ford is making. Focus, instead, on that date: 2012.
It’s a weird date. Keep in mind that Ford, aside from being a Bernie supporting academic, is a psychologist. Part of getting a degree in psychology is going through analysis. One would think that, even if, as a shy 15-year-old, Ford was too afraid to go public with her charge against Kavanaugh, when she went through psychoanalysis on her way to her degree, she would have spoken about this alleged assault, especially because she says it traumatized her for years. But she didn’t. Instead, suddenly, in 2012, she’s bathed in flop sweat from an incident decades before.
So what happened in 2012? Coincidentally (or not), 2012 was another election year.
In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.
For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012: [Read more…]
I’ve got 44 funny posters (heavy on the Trump versus Obama theme) plus a true video highlighting media histrionics. It’s all funny and thought-provoking.
For years, the San Francisco Chronicle has been a reliable Leftist propaganda outlet — but one article and its surprising comments counter that narrative.
San Francisco is a Leftist city and, in the San Francisco Chronicle, it has a hard Left newspaper. I stopped subscribing to the paper 20 years ago because I found it impossible to be part of funding an anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-capitalist newspaper (and that was when I still called myself a Democrat). I still check it out online, but I like to think that my “Brave” browser ad blocker keeps me from sending too much money its way.
Still, even the San Francisco Chronicle occasionally has the capacity to surprise. For example, last fall, it had truly superior coverage of the fires ravaging the North Bay. In other words, when called upon to do actual, old-fashioned reporting, at least a few people can still do it correctly.
Today’s surprise was an article entitled In defense of Trump’s policies, written by Grady Means, a former adviser to Vice President Nelson Rockefeller. As is de rigueur for anyone who wishes to be taken seriously in today’s journalistic circles, Means doesn’t hold back on the Trump bashing:
I didn’t vote for Trump, don’t understand him, don’t think he has a great grasp of the issues, don’t care for his style.
Trump’s rhetoric is at (most) times clumsy and harsh. . . .
Politics (derived from “poly,” meaning many, and “tics,” meaning blood-suckers) is an ugly business, and Trump certainly has not put any lipstick on that pig: His rhetoric and style demonstrate macro-aggression.
Yeah, yeah, we get it. You’ve established your bona fides. You’re not some crazed, hate-filled, racist, bigoted, homophobic Trump sycophant, we reasonable people are allowed to listen to you. Skipping past the ritualistic denunciations, though, one finds plenty of really good stuff in Means’ article: [Read more…]
Is the #WalkAway movement the tipping point that will destroy the Democrat Party or is it as ephemeral a movement as 2009’s Iranian Green Revolution?
In case you haven’t already seen it, this is the video that started it all:
Since then, thanks in part to a push from James Woods on Twitter, Straka’s video has gone viral. Straka says what so many former Democrats (myself included) have said, which is that the Democrat party no longer reflects our values. Our parents’ Democrat Party (the one that wasn’t part of the Jim Crow South but was the party of FDR and JFK), might have been a Big Government party, but it believed in a few core things:
- American exceptionalism,
- Sovereign borders,
- A more or less free market,
- The Bill of Rights, and
- A world in which people are judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin,
to name but a few traditional Democrat Party tropes. That’s the Democrat Party I was raised in.
That old Democrat Party bears no relationship whatsoever to today’s Democrat Party. Today’s Democrat Party:
- Hates America;
- Wants open borders, which ends American sovereignty (no borders, no state) and means America will be swept under by an uncontrolled wave of immigrants steeped in the values of some of the most corrupt Big Government countries on earth;
- Heralds open socialism as its future;
- Believes, as Turkey’s Erdogan pithily says, that democratic principles are a finite bus ride (“Once I get to my stop, I’m getting off”) that ends once you attain power;
- Desires a recession in order to retain power, despite the horrific damage the eight-year long saggy, draggy Obama economy caused to Americans;
- Is obsessed with race and racial divisions, thereby harking back to Southern Democrats, rather than the working and middle class configurations of the North and West; and
- Despite a blind loyalty to the God of Science, believes that gender is not a biological reality but is, instead, a social construct,
to list just a few examples of the hard-Leftism that’s swept America’s Democrat party. [Read more…]
Ben Shapiro’s insight that the media created Donald Trump reminds me of nothing so much as the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Ghostbusters.
It’s no secret that Ben Shapiro does not like Donald Trump. Shapiro, a refined type himself, really struggles to see past Trump’s vulgarity and the constant dodging and weaving of someone for whom everything is a negotiation. Still, Shapiro is an honest man, and he recently acknowledged that Trump is the most conservative president in his lifetime:
— Fox News (@FoxNews) June 5, 2018
The above clip reveals that Shapiro has yet to figure out that Trump’s rhetoric is not wild, but tightly controlled, and is part of his power. But that’s not what I want to talk about. I want to talk about one other thing that Ben Shapiro said in an article he recently wrote. Shapiro thinks, and I agree, that it was reasonable to believe when Trump, a lifetime Democrat and a social liberal, started campaigning, the he would have governed as a centrist or even as a soft Leftist. Certainly that’s what most conservatives worried about when they thought of President Trump. I wouldn’t denigrate Trump as Shapiro does, but he’s right about the fact that a warm Democrat embrace would have resulted in a very different Trump presidency:
Democrats had a massive opportunity when Trump was elected. As an ideological nonconformist and a reactionary personality, Trump seems particularly susceptible to praise and flattery. Imagine if Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) had strolled into the Oval Office during the first week of Trump’s presidency, sidled up to Trump, and told him that they’d love to impose indelible change on America by granting everyone comprehensive health care. There’s a decent shot that with the help of then–White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, Trump would have gone full Bernie Sanders. That isn’t complete speculation — in September 2017, Trump went over the heads of congressional Republicans in favor of working with Schumer and Pelosi to avoid a government shutdown.
Democrats, though, were so invested in Hillary, and so reflexively hostile to anything Republican, that they went in an entirely different direction. First, they ridiculed Trump: [Read more…]
The Democrats’ newfound love for MS-13 has given rise to some spectacular political commentary, which I share here, along with more laughs and insights.