UK you have a problem

Not that we don’t have one in the US.

UK: 68-year-old imam accused of raping teenage girl, says she urged him to have sex with her

Jihad Watch
Apr 26, 2018 2:55 pm By Robert Spencer

Yes, of course, teenage girls are always making sexual advances upon men in their sixties with beards dyed orange (in imitation of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam). This is yet another example of how Islamic supremacists, when caught in wrongdoing, never, ever take responsibility for their actions, but always — always — blame someone else and claim victim status. No matter how ridiculous the tale that is consequently spun may be.

Imam claims he ‘didn’t rape teenager during spiritual healing,’” by Suzy Gibson, Leicester Mercury, April 26, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

An imam, accused of twice raping a teenager during spiritual healing, told a jury she had urged him to have sex with her – but he turned her down.

Komar Uddin (68), a dad of 11 and a grandad, said the young woman became annoyed at being spurned then threatened to expose him as an illegal immigrant.

Read https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/04/uk-68-year-old-imam-accused-of-raping-teenage-girl-says-she-urged-him-to-have-sex-with-her

A textbook example of what to expect.

Advertisements

Discrimination of MAGA is alive

Read the case of a lawsuit decision about the Trump supporters rejected from the bar

Judge: bars are allowed to throw out Trump supporters

NY Post

“A Manhattan judge ruled Wednesday that there’s nothing “outrageous” about throwing the president’s supporters out of bars — because the law doesn’t protect against political discrimination.”

Read: https://nypost.com/2018/04/25/judge-bars-are-allowed-to-throw-out-trump-supporters/

Nothing outrageous, nothing to see here. Move along. Read and weep but the reasoning makes little sense. Apparently only discrimination of one’s religious belief is the only kind that is a violation.

Now had it been a gay or transgender person, maybe that would matter. On further note, seems if one cannot show others have that belief then the belief of one person is not protected. So discrimination really is okay?!

And Away We Go

Calexit gets go-ahead to start collecting signatures

Fox News

Advocates who want California to secede from the rest of the United States were given the green light Monday to begin collecting signatures for their initiative.

California’s Secretary of State Alex Padilla announced the ballot proposal had been cleared.

The latest measure would ask voters in 2020 to decide whether to open up a secession discussion. If passed, a second election would be held a year later asking voters to affirm the decision and become an independent country.

Advocates have until mid-October to gather 365,880 signatures of registered voters to get it on the ballot.

Marcus Ruiz Evans and Louis J. Marinelli, co-founders of the group Yes California, said the second vote would show that Californians are serious about secession and would strengthen the case for foreign governments to recognize the state’s independence.

More: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/24/calexit-gets-go-ahead-to-start-collecting-signatures.html

Dysfunctional Resistance is New Normal

Let me try to explain the current family tree of politics. The left’s hallucination now is Mitch McConnell as the divider and culprit of the chaotic, abnormal state we are in.

Yeah, right. Try as they will. It would take a whole lot of wrongjuice to believe or accept that as fact. So here we go, allow me to paraphrase it as colorful as I can:

Abby and Normal eloped in Obama’s first term. Harry Reid officiated the wedding. That is the place where right became wrong and wrong became right, up became down and down became up. Unconstitutional became the rule of law. Dissent became a crime. We became a country governed by a man and political party, instead of the rule of law.

Abby and Norm are still on an extended honeymoon. No hope for annulment and it doesn’t look like a divorce will come anytime soon. Theirs is one marriage I wish would not last. And they seem to have enough distant relatives to make a lot of mischief.

It turns out, all it takes is a radical minority of hell bent miscreants to ruin functionality of the system. They have now perfected it. From the Justice of Peace to justice of chaos.

So even people on the left ask, “when will normal process be coming back?” They ask us? The culprits who encouraged Abby and Norm to hook up now blame their marriage on anyone else. But they cannot deny Abby and Norm are hitched. That fact doesn’t bother them. They incite all the effects and do everything possible to keep them happily together. Nothing is off limits for the Abnormals. The trick is to make everything normal’s fault.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Illinois plague: can it be contained?

While not new, again causing problems in Illinois is the state of the pension plans. There do not seem to be any options for the state. Maybe Obama can chip in for old time sake?

Harvey, IL pension crisis ‘canary in the coal mine’

By Rick Moran — April 20, 2018 | American Thinker

Harvey, Illinois is in the midst of a financial crisis that represents the tip of the iceberg for literally hundreds of small towns in Illinois.

The city of 25,000 in the far northwest suburbs of Chicago is suffering from high unemployment (22%). An astonishing 32% of the population lives below the poverty level. This is a deadly mixture that has caused catastrophic shortfalls in revenue, leading to a crisis in funding pensions for the city’s retired workers.

Since state law prohibits municipal bankruptcy, Harvey has been forced into a situation Illinois has never seen. In February, the state began to garnish Harvey’s revenue to fund its pension liabilities. The city was forced to lay off 40 police and firemen – 25% of police employees and 40% of firefighters. This, in a city already known for high levels of crime.

The irony is that the state of Illinois’s own pension crisis is even worse. But fear is growing that unless a massive infusion of pension money is forthcoming from the state, dozens of towns will suffer a similar fate as Harvey.  ……./

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/04/harvey_il_pension_crisis_canary_in_the_coal_mine.html

Or maybe by the time Obama gets his library built, he will have to hire his own police force and fire department there to protect it. Maybe pay for the plowing and road repair too.

Some Like It Rotten

Who are these people? With all the resistance and anti American sentiment coming full mainstream, it makes me wonder. We seem to mainly react to what they say and do.

The old myth is that there is some theoretical discussion of “common ground” to be had with the left. There isn’t. Their goals, to the extent leftists have permanent ones, is antithetical to what most Americans believe in.

This idea about discussion some people have is only an illusion. The big goal of the left is to shut down speech so who in the hell needs conversation? Then “dialogue” becomes only a perpetual list of demands. That state is where the Leftists want us to live.

In other words, subservient to their demands — not requests, not dialogue. There is no discussion to be had. If you can control speech of others, what is the purpose of discussion? It is more effective to control speech than a conversation.

Right Ring | Bullright

Sponsor of DOJ

And now a word from our acting Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein:

“From now on, our Department will not usurp Congress’s job of making the rules. We will stick to enforcing them.”—Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein

Either this is the all-time best spoof on you’ve been pranked. or the guy who gave that speech in Florida is being held somewhere in seclusion against his will.

I have an idea, while we are at it. Hey Government, DOJ and FBI et al, we the people have a taint team that needs to review government documents.(our documents) ASAP.

At the very same time DOJ stonewalls and refuses to cooperate with simple document requests from Congress, they handed off to the Southern District in NY to break in and seize Michael Cohen’s documents. They don’t have any problem with blatant hypocrisy.

Rule of law has sort of a ring to it.

Saving Sanity: a noble cause

Is a once a week rant too much to ask or expect for a blog? Yes, as a matter of fact it is. The problem is not the lack of material but rather the sheer volume of it.

That also can lead to things like burnout, exhaustion, even suffocation in a sea of mud. Just saying. So silence is not golden but may at times be the only viable option.

Something has bugged me though ever since I have been doing this blog. It is the amount of humor we use and whether it is appropriate? I mean these are serious times, and does the humor contribute to the coarsening of culture? I’m not sure.

Well, blah blah. I remember a past Bible study over whether humor is bad thing or acceptable? See, there was a belief at one time that Christians should refrain from humor, certainly in Church settings. I think that might have fallen by the wayside, but was once a real issue. The point was humor diminished Christianity.

It took away the seriousness of issues. It was seen to some as an insult. We know some people, for many reasons, do not appreciate humor anyway. But on serious matters it was frowned on. It was thought a type of mockery that didn’t belong in serious debate or dialogue. Using it diminished one’s credibility.

Someone finally wrote a book explaining that humor was not wrong and listed examples of humor in the Old and New Testament. So one cannot ban humor in theory.

My issue with all this is how can you look around today and not have a sense of humor about things? That doesn’t mean you take issues less seriously….or does it? This is where rationality and sanity come in. A rational person is aware of the serious nature yet can still poke fun at the condition of society. It doesn’t diminish one’s sincerity, or an issue itself.

Sometimes humor is the only way — or one of the ways — people can cope or deal with a given situation. It can cover pain, or masque all kinds of personal emotion.

It is similar with some violence these days. You see random murders and people killed for no visible reason. One struggles with trying to understand why? As if we need to know why to make sense of it. Humor is different. Humor makes sense in a funny way. But we are struck at a murder that had no rational reason for it. That it keeps on happening adds to all those questions. We don’t know and may never know. Sometimes even the killer had no reason. This is where rational thought has a problem. We almost need to see why. And some people today are uncomfortable with just calling it evil. It bothers us and it should. We don’t want to lay a blanket excuse over it just to try to explain it. An excuse that may or not be true. And explaining evil may be excusing it.

Humor can punctuate events without tainting them — or at least intending to.

Does using humor on serious issues take away seriousness from them? Maybe it can; though attributing false explanations also takes away from them. We almost expect those. I question fairness in a lot circumstances and think of humor as a great equalizer. Is that wrong? I don’t think so. Sometimes humor points out the absurdity. Sometimes nothing short of a punch line does it justice. (no matter how bad the event) I think we know that doesn’t mean the thing was funny or a joke. We don’t mean it is not serious.

Late night comics in recent years have gone to a whole different level. In fact, their humor has become the absurdity — and maybe even the thing that drives any of their jokes. And less, their jokes don’t seem to be funny anymore but their absurdity is obvious. Then for these intended jokes to be taken as fact or for mainstream political dialogue is another matter. Their absurd humor replaces political thought. It becomes mainstream opinion. This has been validated over and over since Trump took office.

Defamation of character?

They have basically turned Trump, or what he is about, into a joke. I get the joke part and we make jokes about Hillary. But that is different, no one loses sight of the seriousness of the threat she represents. We still understand all her real flaws. Still we use humor to poke fun at or take the edge off the hyper-serious nature — seriousness she imbues on herself. We don’t lose sight of the greater issue. The fears and concern so big that humor can be a coping mechanism because we cannot see or visualize the whole extent. It is beyond simple description — and breaks all past comparisons. So you see there is a difference. Their political objective is to reduce Trump to an absurd caricature

But these days the joke is the entire issue. The left turns the joke into reality, instead of vice versa. Humor is used as ridicule, and the left does ridicule as a political weapon well. In fact, the purpose of it is to bury or lose sight of the truth and reality.

See there is a proper purpose for humor as hyperbole. It is also a tool. It points out the error through exaggeration. Again, that is not to lose sight of the truth. It is not to try to turn hyperbole into literal reality. The Bible uses hyperbole for emphasis. The object is not to make hyperbole a fact. We are also supposed to know and see the difference.

But then when Trump uses hyperbole or exaggerates something, the truth slayers run out to correct any errors. Yet they have accepted their fictional character of Trump as reality. Trump, off the cuff, uses a lot of rhetorical tools. That is why the left likes it, they busy themselves pointing out any perceived inaccuracies. Funny how they don’t “factcheck” themselves or their depiction of Trump and coverage.

We are in an era when reality has no value to the left. Into that void they have put narrative, and perception has become their only reality. So when humor is applied, it is taken as perception — which it is — but then taken as fact or reality. The narrative rules and protecting that narrative becomes their chief mission. Humor is not humor, it is now reality. That narrative drives their politics, even moreso than they drive the narrative.

Right Ring | Bullright

Facebook Faceplant Hearing

Notable points from Facebook, Zuckerberg hearings.

House notes on Energy and Commerce hearing
2012 Election

“In 2012, the Obama for America presidential election campaign worked with the company to allow users to sign into the campaign’s website via Facebook. According to accounts at the time, the Facebook application gave the campaign access to both those that signed into the campaign, as well as the “Friends” of such persons — “the more than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the app gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friend lists.” This gave the Obama for America campaign access to “hidden voters” for which they otherwise lacked contact information.

Carol Davidsen, Director of Integration of Media Analytics for Obama for America, via Twitter, stated that “Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graph, but they didn’t stop us once they realized that was what we were doing.” This in turn allegedly allowed one political party to download and retain individual user data which was not provided to other political organizations. “

It worked well for Obama. The problem comes when someone else from the conservative side finds a way to use Facebook. Zuckerberg was also asked but completely ignorant about details of past privacy lawsuits. This proved he was just an empty suit. 

Sham, most Republicans were simply not up on the technology or prepared. Pandering was on full display. Zuckerberg also could not address the data collection of non-FB users.

Overall, he kept returning to his canard that Facebook does not sell data. I think that line might haunt them. But marketing people’s personal data to companies at a profit may as well be. Their commodity is your personal information. If I market cars in a lot I can say I am technically not selling them, but I am getting paid for doing it.

Congressmen and Senators were more interested in looking to get broadband access for their districts and constituents, which Zucky was happy to say he would work toward.

On the censoring part, Zuckerberg had no answers. He claimed they would have over 20 thousand content screeners (FB conflates with security) by the year’s end. And he said they were working on creating more AI (artificial intelligence) tools to do censoring.

So the censoring will go on, and will be automated. He also referred to users flagging or reporting offensive content. So is it a mob sourced censorship platform too? To posture, pander, promote FB should not have been the objective for Congress.

Then, Mr. Zuckerberg, are you willing to help us with making the regulations etc.? Oh, he would be more than happy to have his team assist. Sure, sounds like a plan. 🙂

PS: Georgia Republican Rep Buddy Carter said he doesn’t want to legislate morality. Great. But Zuckerberg and his Facebook fascists do — and are hard at work trying.

Right Ring | Bullright

Steve Wozniak deletes FB account

Apple’s co-founder decided to delete his Facebook account in the wake of the privacy scandal. Well, seems no love is lost there.

“In an interview late Monday in Philadelphia with The Associated Press, Wozniak said he had been thinking for a while of deleting his account and made the move after several of his trusted friends deleted their Facebook accounts last week.”

Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak deleting Facebook account in wake of privacy crisis

Another wicked excuse for Hillary

One more excuse to Hillary’s bottomless bucket list of denials, now from Politico.

Hannity.com

Politico published an article Sunday titled, “Trump thrives in areas that lack traditional news outlets,” suggesting the President was able to “Swamp Clinton” in areas that had low subscription rates to local newspapers.

The data suggests those voters relied on national news outlets and social media for information instead of more traditional media outlets such as newspapers and local television reports.

Notice how in this one they get to take a shot at ill-informed people, popular anti-MSM sentiment, and pat themselves on the back while attacking social media and online news. If only people would have listened to them. The hubris.

Next, they’ll be blaming MSM’s lack of credibility and downfall on Trump, like NYT. So then why are the left and their MSM minions dumber than rocks? So dumb to believe all of Hillary’s excuses? So stupid they never saw that big Trump truck coming?

China and the Left

I see a similarity of China and the Left here, aside from the communism ties. It is not a stretch, the political strategies align. You might say birds of the feather.

It is always about the goal with the left, as it is with China. The means are only the vehicle, to be discarded when the goal is achieved. And anything that achieves it is acceptable.

Regarding the trade deficit with China, and recent tariff announcements, Trump said that there may be some pain but in the end we will have a stronger country. That is the first time I heard a leader reference the long game of what we want. (okay maybe not first) A lot of people probably shuttered to hear that.

I bet that got the Chinese’s attention because he is referencing the long game. Something we don’t always stress. It shakes their predictability about us. In other words, that we would be willing to weather some pain to get to the benefit in the end.

See the strategy to Chinese is really as simple as the lefts’ is. Both are focused on the destination not on the means. Whatever the means matters little. The destination is king. That is the same with the Chinese. And If they really believe in their dominant end, and we know they do, then that tells the real story.

To Chinese they want to control or run the world. See if that is their goal then nothing else is important. Do you get it? If that is where they see themselves, at that point there is nothing anyone can do to them about anything — there’s nothing to negotiate. That may seem a fantasy to us, but if they believe it then it gives their strategy away. Once they are in the driver’s seat the game is over.

We, however look at this as a long term game that will continue. It won’t once they reach their destination. They will be the tyrants they want to be and it will be tough to anyone who disagrees. That is what they have in mind. Nothing like our goals or strategy. We want a working relationship, for the long term. They are just thinking as the short term until they get to their destination.They think none of this stuff will matter then.

It is the same type mindset the Left has. They look only at achieving their desired ends. Once that is done, nothing else such as rules apply. It is a king of the hill perspective. They plan on keeping the hill once they get it. That is the way their plans work. Do you see the similarity? Power is rule, and rule is permanent not temporary. At that point, all resources go to preserving and keeping that permanent rule. Sure, it is a scorched earth plan but so what? That is how they play. We are looking at it as a balancing act but they don’t want anything balanced. They want control and once you have it, you run the show. If we do not look at the end game, goals, of those like China, Russia, N Korea, or Iran, then we underestimate the game. The days of just ignoring it are dwindling.

This is why we, meaning media and talking heads, are concerned about a trade war. It’s a perpetual real war to China, and they plan on winning. So the state of a trade war does not matter to China at all. This is also why intellectual property is a major issue to us and not to them. Their end doesn’t see a problem with private intellectual property.

It is sort of the same thing as CNN or MSM worrying about so-called Russia collusion. while the rest of the country is concerned about trade. The two are not on the same wave lengths, like two different orbits. Which one matters?

Right Ring | Bullright

Sicko Soros Election Meddling

Calling all election meddling cops.
Breitbart

Hungary: George Soros Interferes in Election Campaign Through NGOs, Media

“Hungary’s government spokesman Zoltán Kovács has warned that open-borders financier George Soros is interfering in the country’s upcoming election through pressure groups and media outlets.

Speaking on Kossuth Radio on Sunday, Dr. Kovács referenced a recording obtained by The Jerusalem Post which revealed the head of the Soros-funded Civil Liberties Union for Europe admitting to lobbying Germany against Hungary.

The government spokesman said that the audio recording proves that “forces arranged into an international network” are attempting to pressure Hungary into abandoning its NGO transparency law and anti-mass migration policy.”

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/04/04/hungary-george-soros-interferes-election-ngos-media/

Wait for public outcry, and demand for investigations. Waiting……

Privacy and use of info data

I’ve got a new thought. It might still have some wrinkles but I’ll throw it out there. All the attention focused on privacy and social media, I share your concerns. Then come all the news of Facebook selling your data info, without your permission or knowledge.

Surely they aren’t alone either. Obama pilfered data just fine. They cheered.

That said, who likes having their data used and sold off as a commodity? Then they promise you security. No, how about the owner of the info gets paid for their own information? What’s wrong with that? I like the idea that they pay me. Clicks and everything else is a cash cow for merchants of info. It is now a business model.

So how about they pay you for your data they want? We have a commodity they want, we create it. Why should we get cut out of the market? A middle man sells it off and you don’t know how it is used nor by whom. If it really is a market that is. That’s me. Glitches?

Right Ring | Bullright

DNC clowns easy marks for Awan family

See no evil say no evil… but if you see evil: say nothing, know nothing, do nothing.

I told you so is written all over this. No interest from the press, wonder why?

Daily Caller

Every one of the 44 House Democrats who hired Pakistan-born IT aides who later allegedly made “unauthorized access” to congressional data appears to have chosen to exempt them from background checks, according to congressional documents.

All of them appear to have waived background checks on Imran Awan and his family members, even though the family of server administrators could collectively read all the emails and files of 1 in 5 House Democrats, and despite background checks being recommended for such positions, according to an inspector general’s report. The House security policy requires offices to fill out a form attesting that they’ve initiated background checks, but it also includes a loophole allowing them to simply say that another member vouched for them.

Among the red flags in Abid’s background were a $1.1 million bankruptcy; six lawsuits against him or a company he owned; and at least three misdemeanor convictions including for DUI and driving on a suspended license, according to Virginia court records. Public court records show that Imran and Abid operated a car dealership referred to as CIA that took $100,000 from an Iraqi government official who is a fugitive from U.S. authorities. Numerous members of the family were tied to cryptic LLCs such as New Dawn 2001, operated out of Imran’s residence, Virginia corporation records show. Imran was the subject of repeated calls to police by multiple women and had multiple misdemeanor convictions for driving offenses, according to court records.

If a screening had caught those, what officials say happened next might have been averted. The House inspector general reported on Sept. 20, 2016, that shortly before the election members of the group were logging into servers of members they didn’t work for, logging in using congressmen’s personal usernames, uploading data off the House network, and behaving in ways that suggested “nefarious purposes” and that “steps are being taken to conceal their activity.”

More http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/01/democrats-pakistani-background-checks/

Looks like all one big happily incestuous family. The DNC Cosa Nostra.

Well, why would anyone have to go to all the trouble to hack a system when they can just walk in there and do it, get paid for it, and then have Congressmen vouch for them?

Let’s just say they are all having a big Sister Sledge moment

    Everyone can see we’re together
    As we walk on by
    And we fly just like birds of a feather
    I won’t tell no lie
    All of the people around us they say
    Can they be that close
    Just let me state for the record
    We’re givin’ love in a family dose

Leave it to left to define Roseanne

After throwing his own family under the bus, as the typical Trump -supporting, racist-type family, this NYT columnist says about Roseanne’s show and Trump-supporters:

Read here.

“The dark underbelly of the white, working-class, the intolerance that permeates so much of their lives, is completely absent, and that absence can serve a dangerous purpose: to reinforce the delusion that they’re actually supporting somebody like Donald Trump for honorable reasons.”

But this deserves commentary. It seems so easy for them to try to shove (no pound) Trump supporters into some stereotype but it doesn’t work. That’s probably what frustrates them. It is a delusion, he says, and nothing about their support is honorable.

Rather their view is some distilled elite, deceptive, liberal projection of people that no one in the world should like. Or that is the hope. ‘Who could like these despicable people?’

Maybe he should look in the mirror and face the kind of world view he and his Liberal ilk represents. It is they who are so far off the mainstream of any political alignment with reality, much less the electorate — and proudly bigoted about it.

In truth, as Sterling might say in Twilight Zone, “he seems to have turned into a caricature of himself.” And speaking of dysfunction, how functional could these Leftists be in their families or community? It is also a ruling-class elitist mindset that asserts only they know better how to fix or run your lives. If you only follow their plantation politics.

Maybe I will do a satire on the kind of people Liberals would like to see portrayed to represent their politically correct, leftist view of how a typical family should be and live.

So says the misinformed Lefty antagonist. Trumpism, whatever you term that to be, is not an ideology. You sure missed every lesson offered in 2016.

The Left’s Hogg Business Model

Yes, give us a description how that anti-business model works. Inquiring minds.

The Media Matters thuggery behind the astroturfed boycott of Laura Ingraham Tolerance bullies.

Conservative Review — by Chris Pandolfo | March 30, 2018

Media Matters is once again using its tired, sleazebag astroturfing tactics to bully and intimidate those who don’t agree with its far-left agenda. This time, hiding behind a child, the despicable thugs are pushing for advertisers to boycott Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show after she mocked 17-year-old Parkland shooting survivor and anti-gun activist David Hogg, for which she has since apologized.

On Wednesday, Ingraham tweeted a Daily Wire story, “Gun rights provocateur David Hogg rejected by four colleges to which he applied,” adding “and whines about it.” Hogg responded on Twitter, asking about her “biggest advertisers” and tweeting “#BoycottIngramAdverts” [sic]. He later tweeted a list of Ingraham’s top twelve advertisers.

At 1:06 p.m. ET on Thursday, Ingraham apologized “for any upset or hurt my tweet caused him or any of the brave victims of Parkland.” Yet after she apologized, at 2:15 p.m., Media Matters published a story on Ingraham’s “bullying” and linked to a list of her advertisers. Hogg rejected Ingraham’s apology exactly two hours after she issued it, saying “an apology in an effort just to save your advertisers is not enough” and demanding that she “denounce” Fox News’ coverage of the Parkland anti-gun activists, saying “It’s time to love thy neighbor, not mudsling at children.” The calls for an advertiser boycott against Ingraham continue, and according to Media Matters, nine companies have pulled their ads from “The Ingraham Angle,” including TripAdvisor, Joseph A. Bank, Hulu, Expedia, and Johnson & Johnson.

So a leftist social media mob has been organized against Ingraham, and there are a few important things to note.

First, this is not a grassroots effort led by Hogg. Media Matters has a long history of organizing boycotts against conservative media figures like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Hogg’s age and his victim status as a Parkland survivor are a shield that cowardly Media Matters is hiding behind to obscure its astroturfing. His voice is a sword the organization is taking advantage of to launch an attack on Ingraham (and other conservatives). The media is complicit in this abuse of a child.

Second, this is not a campaign against Ingraham. It’s still going on after she apologized. The real target is Fox News and anyone in conservative media. Media Matters founder David Brock has previously described the mission of his organization as “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” against the Fox News channel. In 2010, arch-progressive financier George Soros gave $1 million to Media Matters, noting, “Media Matters is one of the few groups that attempts to hold Fox News accountable for the false and misleading information they so often broadcast.” This group has an agenda, and it’s out to destroy those who disagree with it.

Third, it will not stop with Laura Ingraham. Media Matters has previously used its social media mob to go after several conservatives. This is far from the last time it will attempt this, especially if it succeeds in driving more advertisers away from Ingraham’s show. The Left takes pleasure in ruining the lives and livelihoods of conservatives who do not submit to their agenda. And if you do submit, if you do back down, if you do apologize, these petty tyrants will keep trying to grind you into the dust. Who will be next? Another conservative media host? A real estate agent who tweets something that upsets the Left? Will they destroy her business? Or a doctor’s? A mechanic’s? ~ ~ [see]

 
Being schooled by children? Ed-U-K-shun.

But we’re told to lighten up. Then we’re attacked for supposedly attacking or hating the kids. I know I was.  Like we just hate kids. Saying anything back to or about these kids constitutes an “attack”. What kind of nonsense have we slipped into?

Now businesses are supposed to kowtow to the whims of children, who make the rules, law and decide who you should do business with. They decide where you can advertise or, more importantly, where you can’t. That’s a business model?

The world is supposed to look at this and say it is normal? What is wrong with all those that comply? Okay, corporations, do you want to turn the reins of your company over to children who can barely drive? How responsible is that? What does that portend for the future of the country or business?

So you liked those eyeballs a few years ago when you were targeting them as your captive audience of TV viewers. But now that they are intervening in your board room and bottom line, you just have to suck it up. There is nothing you can do about it.

Who makes your decisions?

As I have said here before, is that really how much you care about your company? These kids were obsessed with Nickelodeon while you were building a brand. Now you are going to turn the integrity of that brand over to children? And you can’t do anything about it but give it to them? I guess I’m confused…and disappointed.

David Hogg lists a bunch of businesses to boycott because of tweets from Laura that some universities have rejected him. Shouldn’t he be boycotting the universities? Oops, seems he already is. I guess it is how he deals with rejection. Somehow she’s the bully.

What is it called when you bully businesses into taking actions or making decisions to suit you, on a sliding scale? And instead of these children going on a national political campaign, shouldn’t they focus on the local politics and policies that led to this avoidable shooting?

Right Ring | Bullright

Roseanne reboot praise or bust?

Is the intention to make the lead character, Roseanne, just sympathetic enough so that even Trump supporters can laugh at the caricature they create? Maybe they can convince them how dumb they look? Some people think so. Sitcom or situational politics?

Is Hollywood trying to play a high-brow sophisticated game of satire? But it does seem clear to me, as popular as the show may be, that if they were to lose that base of viewers it would no longer be the great hit it appears. All you have to do is remember that Hollywood does have a knack for flops. Every sitcom doesn’t work.

This one is a reboot which brings back a certain nostalgia too. I’m not sure that would work for all sitcoms. I’m just curious about this one. I think I know their original intent. I keep hearing from liberals how we “aren’t getting it” and that by about the 5th episode we will see it is the opposite of what we think it is. In other words, it is really poking fun at the caricature of Trump supporters.

That’s a pretty big stereotype of a pretty big group. And being Roseanne is a woman, it would be a shot at women who went that way. It seems to fit all their needs. Would it be cool to mock women? Add Hillary’s critique about why they vote that way.

That could be true. I wouldn’t put it past Hollywood and writers. In fact, I will give them the benefit of the doubt there. It could be that they want to make both sides into a caricature of themselves. But in doing that one side wins out. I mean one side could be more appealing. One is more outrageous or funny. A lead up to 2020?

Is it possible the writers are throwing Roseanne under the bus? That they are really mocking her character? That is a funny thing to do to the lead character. Archie Bunker was another such character. He ended up being more sympathetic than they expected.

The key is this: it will have to remain sympathetic to a degree to Roseanne because otherwise it turns into another bash fest mockery of the character they are exploring. And do we really need to see more of that? We have plenty of it already. It’s nothing new, in fact it is old. So if they go that route it becomes a bomb. That is popular only to Liberals.

Liberals always want to laugh at people on the right, but make a game of doing it without them realizing it. It fits the narrative of dummies who don’t know they are the joke.

The problem is if a pro-Trump type character is the butt of the joke it looks bad. Then they are mocking a large number of people. It is not above Hollywood to try that. They mock religion like that. There was another sitcom targeting a protestant minister and his family the same way. It didn’t last though the mockery was obvious. Here it is working class people. The same type that liberals are disconnected from and now trying to schmooze over. So do they shoot themselves in the foot?

Where does the racism come in? It does make me wonder what an All In The Family reboot would look like today? What do other people think? I suppose we will know in time. Playing with fire or burning themselves out? A last gasp for Hollywood relevance?

Right Ring | Bullright