The real party of death

The Republican Party is remarkably close to passing a repeal and replace of ObamaCare. It’s not a perfect bill, but anything that removes the individual mandate is a significant improvement on the disaster that is/was ObamaCare.

Naturally, the Democrats are in full-scale meltdown. (It doesn’t take much these days.) The standard party line is that the AHCA is “mean.” They are saying people will die as a result, as though sick people will drop dead the moment President Trump signs the bill into law. Some are even citing actual numbers of Americans who could die as a result of repealing ObamaCare.

This is standard fare for the Democrats. We heard the same thing when President Trump pulled us out of the Paris climate agreement. If liberal policies are repealed, then people will die. They can’t possibly be getting any mileage out of this, because Democrats keep losing elections, but I suppose it does assuage their fruitcake voters and #fakenews apparatchiks.

I submit to you that not a single person will die as a result of the AHCA. I also submit to you that not a single life would be saved if ObamaCare were left in place. It’s just words that liberal politicians use when they have no actual ideas.

The irony is that the Democrats’ attempt to portray the GOP as the party of death is yet another example of projection. You see, the Democrats are the actual party of death. They lament that “children will suffer” if the AHCA passes, yet completely ignore the irony that it is they who support the wanton killing of more than 1M unborn human beings every year. They are the ones whose followers have taken to violence, portraying President Trump’s beheading or actually using GOP congressmen as target practice.

So when you hear a Democrat accuse the GOP of wanting to kill Americans, just write it off as one more example of liberal projection.

Similarities between jihadists and radical leftists

I have made the point here in the past that the left has elevated jihadists & rank-and-file Muslims to the very top of their list of protected groups. And it has always baffled me, because the Muslim faith stands in opposition to so much of what the left says it believes. For example, liberals say they are champions of women’s and gay BLT rights, yet this is anathema to Islam, which relegates women to second-class status and executes homosexuals.

Also, you will find no greater apologists for radical Muslim terrorism outside the Muslim faith than progressives. Why?

Yesterday, after the shooting in Virginia, it finally occurred to me that I’ve been looking at the relationship between progressives and jihadists/Muslims the wrong way. I’ve been focused on their differences. But now I’ve started to look at radical leftists and jihadists according to their similarities. And there are some remarkable similarities. Thus, this strange relationship is starting to make sense.

I haven’t spent a great deal of time on this, but I have come up with several points of similarity between jihadists and radical leftists.

  • Disregard for human life
  • Hatred of America
  • Jihadists are radicalized by their imams, radical leftists are radicalized by the “imams” in the Democrat Party, #fakenews media and their fruitcake entertainers
  • Jihadists target religious infidels, radical leftists target political infidels
  • Jihadists use Sharia Law to discriminate, radical leftists use political correctness to discriminate
  • Overt intolerance toward those who hold different beliefs
  • Hatred of Christians and Israel

The lines between jihadists and violent progressives are starting to blur

When I was initially made aware of the shooting this morning at a congressional baseball practice in Virginia, my hunch was that the victim(s) was/were Republican(s) and that the shooter was an unhinged Democrat lunatic and that this was not a jihadist attack. It turns out that I was right on both. However, the lines between unhinged Democrat lunatics and jihadists are starting to blur.

Not only do we have this morning’s shooting, but many more examples of liberal rage and violence were on display at Trump rallies during the campaign, and also continue at liberal college campuses whenever individuals with opposing views are scheduled to speak (most notably at UC-Berkeley).

I’m sure someone in the Democrat Party and/or #fakenews will try to blame President Trump for conjuring up this hatred on the left, just as they blame the victims of jihadists for enraging jihadists, but the progressive movement in the U.S. owns this completely. They are the ones creating the #fakenews, creating the hysteria, and manufacturing all the rage. The Democrat Party and its various apparatchiks represent the largest hate group in America, and today we saw that left-wing rage spill over into actual violence.

Remember, these are the ones who lecture those of us on the right that love trumps hate and “when they go low, we go high.” Dear readers, those of us on the right aren’t angry. We’re winning, and not just at the polls. We’re winning on the economy, we’re winning on healthcare, we’re winning on illegal immigration, we’re winning in the judiciary. Granted, we have disdain for #fakenews and the Democrat Party for its efforts to obstruct President Trump’s highly effective agenda of making America great again, but if you’re looking for actual hatred — unbridled, unhinged, fanatical, foaming-at-the-mouth hatred — it’s all on the left. Their leaders have stirred up this hornets nest totally apart from President Trump, the Republican Party, and those of us who support President Trump. So let them own it.

Bernie Sanders Doesn’t Think Christians Are Fit For Public Office

“It’s important to understand what’s going on here. The Left, itself a kind of secular religion, does not really think it’s okay to be religious—to hold strong convictions about eternal salvation or the divinity of Jesus Christ. Progressives believe this is disturbing and un-American. The irony is that the opposite is true, as John Adams put it: ‘Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.'”

http://thefederalist.com/2017/06/09/bernie-sanders-doesnt-think-christians-fit-public-office/

Why I no longer engage leftists

I have reached the point in my life where I realize I no longer have to suffer fools, and so I choose not to.

Really, the only time I ever encounter liberals is on Twitter, and on rare occasion on this blog. I typically don’t respond to their snark, or when I do it’s in parody form, never a serious engagement. I mean, why bother?

Something has happened during the last, say, 10 or 15 years that has caused the already unstable left to go full bore insane. As a friend of mine noted on Twitter just this morning, half of us loves the country, the other half hates it.

There is no use engaging liberals in a serious way. You will frustrate yourself. Facts and logic mean nothing to them. There really is an alternate state of reality occupied only by liberals.

“Progressives,” as they like to be called, are convinced that down is up and up is down, left is right and right is left, light is darkness and darkness is light, good is evil and evil is good. What do you do with that? There are no points of agreement. There is no ground upon which to compromise. There sphere they inhabit never intersects reality, not even on a single tangent.

I no longer engage leftists because there is no point to it. Nothing productive can be gained. The only thing to do is to expose them for who they are, tune out their #fakenews, and defeat their political candidates at the polls.

Not a friend of Democrats

If you are a productive member of society, you are not a friend of Democrats. In fact, you are the enemy. If you have learned a marketable skill and are self-sufficient (i.e., don’t need government), you are an enemy of Democrats. If you stay on the right side of the law enjoy a monogamous relationship with a member of the opposite sex while raising children according to your values, then you are an enemy of Democrats. If you are a Bible-believing Christian, you are an enemy of Democrats. If you stay informed using reliable sources outside the progressive #fakenews media, then you are an enemy of Democrats. If you are a proud American who waves the flag and loves his country, you are an enemy of Democrats. I you self-educate, you are an enemy of Democrats. If you are white, a gun owner and/or an entrepreneur, multiply the enemy factor by two. Yes, there are prominent progressives like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Al Gore who have become wealthy and accomplished, but they are friends of Democrats because they repeat the party line. The rest of us are enemies of Democrats. And if you think I’m out of my mind, when was the last time a Democrat stood up for you?

Liberalism’s three-headed hydra

Nine days ago I wrote a blog post that sort of piggybacked on something Rush Limbaugh had said on one of his shows, about the #fakenews media being the de facto leader of the progressive movement and the Democrat Party merely serving as the elected wing of the mainstream press.

Yesterday, the Maha Rushie was at it again, further clarifying this relatively new concept regarding the progressive movement as it is presently constituted.

Everybody expected Hillary Clinton to be in office with Hillary appointees all over the cabinet, all over the bureaucracy, and the slow-but-sure stealth takeover of America to continue. And since the Democrat Party lost, since the Democrat Party has lost over a thousand seats since 2010, other elements of the progressive movement are taking over as the impetus and energy.

I’ve been thinking about this and have come to view liberalism as a three-headed hydra consisting of a propaganda wing, an elected wing, and a militant wing.

With the elected wing of the progressive movement, the Democrat Party, faring so poorly in the elections of 2010, 2012 and 2016, progressives must advance themselves using other means. They aren’t just going to accept the election results and go home. They don’t recognize any other authority but themselves and are bent on subverting the country as it is presently constituted.

So you have the #fakenews media. And believe me, the gloves are off. There is no longer even a pretense of objectivity. They are going pedal-to-the-medal progressive. The media are the leaders in the progressive movement, and are protecting themselves as still being in power even though the elected power all belongs to the GOP.

Then there is the militant wing of the three-headed hydra. At one time, the KKK served as the militant wing of the Democrat Party. Today, it takes on other forms. (But they all wear masks.) Primarily, the militant wing is funded by George Soros. At one time it was Occupy Wall Street. Then it was Black Lives Matter. Today, it is Antifa, or whatever the mask-wearing paid rioters call themselves. You’ve seen them at Trump rallies trying to stir up trouble, assaulting people and destroying property. We most recently saw them at Berkeley.

But there is also another element of the militant wing of the progressive movement on the rise in America that is not funded by George Soros. It is militant Islam. If you’ve ever wondered why there is such a cozy relationship between jihadists, the Democrat Party and #fakenews media, it is because they have two things in common: a blatant disregard for the rule of law and a determination to overthrow America.

These various factions within the progressive momvement have one common, singular enemy: Donald J. Trump. And, by extension, Trump voters and supporters are also the enemy of the left. So whenever I hear a negative story about President Trump coming from the #fakenews media, my default reaction is to not believe it. Most likely, it is #fakenews.

Just because we elected Donald Trump and a GOP majority last November, the fight for the soul of America is far from over. Progressives never give up. Politics is their religion, and total power and authority is their singular objective. They won’t stop until they achieve their aim. One side is ultimately going to win.

What does the left have in common with Islam?

Rush Limbaugh dedicated a significant portion of his show last Wednesday to explaining the Democrat Party and its refusal to recognize any governing authority other than itself. It was an insightful series of monologues, and the Maha Rushie even made a comparison between liberals — he calls them “the radical left” now — and Islam that I found to be quite accurate.

The way the left behaves today — in virtually everything that they do — do you realize how close it is to radical Islam? You know, minus the terrorism. Let’s look at the similarities. For the kind of Islamists we’re talking about, the Sharia Islamists, there is no authority but Islam. To the left, there is no authority but themselves. They respect and recognize no other authority. They don’t recognize the authority of elections. They don’t recognize the authority of public opinion. They don’t recognize the authority of the Constitution, even though they all swear an oath.

Link

#fakenews media completely unhinged

But you knew that already, because it’s been so well documented.

You might have heard that President Trump has banned mobile devices larger than a smartphone from airline flights. But do you know why? According to the following #fakenews headlines, you’d be left scratching your head as to why the president would do such a thing. Get a load of these, then skip down and read the real reason for the ban.


Believe it or not, the New York Times, in a random act of journalism, gets it right. The real reason for the ban is that the Islamic State is in the process of developing explosives that will fit inside a laptop.

WASHINGTON — Intelligence showing that the Islamic State is developing a bomb hidden in portable electronics spurred the United States and Britain on Tuesday to bar passengers from airports in a total of 10 Muslim-majority countries from carrying laptop computers, iPads and other devices larger than a cellphone aboard direct inbound flights, two senior American counterterrorism officials said.

Two additional American officials said the explosives were designed to be hidden in laptop batteries. All four spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to publicly discuss the sensitive information.

And do you know how we gathered this intelligence? The Yemen raid that took place right after President Trump took office in which we lost a Navy SEAL (and which the left has heretofore completely discounted as having been a fruitless endeavor).

So there is a credible threat, after all. But look at the way #fakenews has reported it. This just illustrates how unhinged they are. Imagine how different the headlines would read if the circumstances were the otherwise the same, but Obama were still president.

Imagine if we had this intelligence but did not act on it, and some jihadist managed to take down an aircraft using an explosive he had hidden inside a laptop. They’d try to impeach Trump if that occurred.

Folks, I maintain that the left, and by “left” I’m referring both to the Democrat Party and #fakenews media, wouldn’t mind a terrorist attack occurring if it meant they got to pin the blame on President Trump. That’s how unhinged and partisan they have become. Trump’s election has left them bordering on insanity. The Democrat Party, its accomplices in the #fakenews media, and the lunatics who vote for them and believe the #fakenews represent the largest hate group in America, and it’s on display literally every single day.

Why do you think the Democrats have opposed President Trump on every single safety measure he has tried to put in place to protect Americans from jihadists? It has nothing to do with their adherence to the Constitution — they don’t even know nor care what’s in it — nor is it about fighting racism or xenophobia. They are trying to hinder the president’s ability to protect us while at the same time making it easier to jihadists to do what they do. They want chaos so they can undermine the president. This is who Democrats are and what they do.

Book review, quote du jour, and brilliant commentary all in one post

I just finished reading (the day before yesterday, in fact) Brett Baier’s new book, “Three Days in January: Dwight Eisenhower’s Final Mission.” The core subject of the book is that brief transition of power between President Eisenhower and President Kennedy in January, 1961, and hones down even deeper to Ike’s farewell address to the nation just before he left office in which he warned the American people (and the president-elect) about the growing military-industrial complex. The Cold War and an arms race between the United States and Soviet Union was going full throttle by then, and President Eisenhower was trying to keep us balanced between strong national defense and runaway military spending. Also built into the novel is a loose biography of our (highly underrated) 34th president, who saw himself, even in retirement, as more of an Army general than former chief executive.

This is a fabulous book. Baier is an excellent writer, and the material was thoroughly researched. I first heard about Baier’s book a few weeks ago when he was a guest on the Rush Limbaugh Show. It is extremely rare for Rush to invite guests onto his show to talk about a book. It literally only occurs once every few years. So I figured it had to be a special book to warrant this level of attention from the Maha Rushie.

There is one quote from the book that I’m adding to this post, because it allows me to segue into some commentary on liberalism and the Democrat Party, and it’s a quote that serves as Baier’s interpretation of how President Eisenhower viewed Soviet communism:

But what was its appeal? He looked at the scene and saw an illusion where people were promised liberation at the expense of personal freedom; community at the expense of individuality. There was the myth of superiority grounded in a rickety economic system.

As I read this, my immediate reaction was, my gosh, this sounds a lot like liberalism in the 21st century.

There are two elements here that warrant explanation.

1). Liberalism promises liberation at the expense of personal freedom. In the end, you get neither.

For example, let’s look at ObamaCare. What does ObamaCare presume to offer? It’s not just health coverage, because ObamaCare isn’t just about health coverage. It’s about putting government in control of health care. And when government controls your health care, it controls YOU. With ObamaCare, liberals presume to offer a person liberation. Liberation from what? Liberation from the whims of free-market health care and greedy, heartless insurance companies. Liberation from being one hospital stay away from bankruptcy. You know the left’s arguments.

In the end, you lose personal freedom because government is now in control of your health care. But the liberation you were promised also proves elusive; since ObamaCare places enormous mandates on health insurers, competition is discouraged, premiums skyrocket, and on top of that, your deductibles are often so high that you end up paying thousands of dollars out-of-pocket before you ever get to use your health coverage. So instead of of liberation, you find yourself in bondage to government.

2). Liberalism promises community at the expense of individuality. In the end, you get neither.

This is particularly ironic since we just had a community organizer as our president for eight years. Yet we’re more divided as a nation now than we were before. Liberalism discourages individuality in the name of equality. But what liberalism ultimately produces is sameness, not by elevating those on the bottom, but by reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator. The only sense of community under liberalism is among homogeneous groups. This is because liberals drive a wedge between different groups by pitting one against the other, thus discouraging any sort of cross-group sense of community.

With liberals, it’s poor vs. rich, women vs. men, blacks vs. whites, gay BLT’s vs. homophobes, Muslims/jihadists vs. Islamophobes, transgenders vs. bathroom signs, etc. Each homogeneous group is united around one thing: victimhood. The left seeks to turn all these protected groups into victims. Most often, the victimhood is contrived, and the ones doing the victimizing are simply straw men created by the left. So with liberals, you lose your individuality, and really the only sense of community is among homogeneous groups united around a contrived grievance against made-up bogeymen.