Music And Politics Sitting In A Tree

But let me start off with a made to order joke. Bless their little young hearts.

Sometimes I get a kick out of young people today, their naiveté still intrigues me. Even though they often seem ignorant of basic history. That is not all their fault.

So one day I was in a fast food place. The employees were having this discussion about the upcoming 50th anniversary of Woodstock. I couldn’t help listening because I was not doing anything except standing there waiting for my order.

All three of the guys were fairly young, and the only women was about middle-aged. She appeared to be schooling them on Woodstock, odd as that seemed to me at the time.

Then the one young guy ask her impatiently “well, was Hip Hop going on then, too, were they doing that?” I couldn’t resist cutting in to say, “they hadn’t even put those two words together yet” and I chuckled. They all looked at me with their upper wheels turning.

I looked at the guy who asked and said “ Man, they barely knew what rock and roll was back then. They were still breaking it in.” But then I saw his big eyes and knew that went right over his knowledge base and sailed into the deep. I smiled and walked away.

Dummy me, I thought maybe a joke would illustrate the point and further their discussion. But instead it ended it and left me wondering if it was my delivery that failed? And if it was some generational thing I crossed? At least I thought it was funny, they will probably never know if it was true, funny… or both?

Joined At The Hip

Say what you will about the original Woodstock which stole headlines some 5 decades ago this year. Those discussions are still going on, as I can testify. Organizers are planning a 50th anniversary to the Woodstock concert this year. But déjà vu all over again.

The original site in Bethel, NY has plans for an anniversary to memorialize the Max Yasgur Farm concert in ’69 and has already booked one top headliner, Carlos Santana.

But Michael Lang, one of the original promoters, has planned what he claims is the only original sanctioned anniversary celebration, which he announced will be in Watkins Glen, NY. In that one, political activism and sustainability will be a central theme for the event. And no doubt for the “woke” as well.

Not only is he drafting top talent, but also encouraging their political activism for the event too. So is this where Farm Aide and Woodstock exchange vows and officially tie the knot, joined in a river of political activism? No matter what the location, it will be billed as Utopia. Who knows if the National Anthem will even be allowed in this one? (old reference to Jimmie Hendrix) Or if maybe the Black Bloc and Antifa will do security for the event?

Take it from Lang himself: (CBS News January 11, 2019)

The festival will also evoke its predecessor through activism, with sustainability efforts and screenings, panels and art installations by non-profit organizations. “The Woodstock 50th
Anniversary will be about sharing an experience with great artists and encouraging people to get educated and involved in the social issues impacting everyone on the planet,” said Lang.

“”We want this to be more than just coming to a concert,” Lang told The New York Times. “And hopefully a lot of the bands will become part of this effort to get people to stand up and make themselves heard, to get out [and] vote. And if they don’t have a candidate that represents their feelings, to find one — or to run themselves.”

From coming to sexual awareness to coming to political wokeness. Is that where mud baths come in? Is it where the white rabbit has a coup over the enchanted forest?

Okay, so music, history, or anniversary may not be the real motivation here. Political priorities, you know. No word whether any of the up and comers in presidential candidates are booking the event. They could have hours of speeches to a captive audience if they go all out. How nostalgic would that be? I don’t recall that was the message of Woodstock but that was then and this is now. What better place to grease the skids for socialism?

And now, being the radicalized leftist culture it is, supposedly on the rise, I can see it “and now a word from our movement icon, Bernie Sanders.” To which the crowd roars to their feet and gives him a fifteen minute standing ovation.

That could only be followed by another speech from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez bringing home the Socialism message. And Michael Moore applauding waiting in the wings.

If you were one of the headliner bands, how on earth could you follow that bad acid trip? It also has me wondering what would be the definition of “success” for such a grand event? I guess you measure it in political success and, of course, by fundraising totals.

So Woodstock….you are finally 50, now how about growing the f*** up?

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

Crazy Corners

Welcome to the place here called Crazy Corners but I didn’t invent or discover it. The area is pretty well populated though. Not to be mistaken for Crazy Town, that’s another place.

I’m standing here on location at the intersection of Broad and Normal Streets. And for the moment, it seems so confusing that I am not sure which way to turn. Whether toward the suggested, approved route or the other way.

Robert Frost might be intimidated here. The way “less traveled by” could get you into some big trouble. Let me tell you about a couple of the identifiable highlights of this place.

I need to preface it by saying I’m in no way condoning the use of blackface. In fact, I really don’t understand the fascination. We can agree it is offensive. There done, I think.

But for the sake of it, there is this exposed issue of people wearing blackface. That’s been all the news here and everyone is aware of it. That is another thing, it seems hard for many people to talk directly about it because it is that offensive. They don’t want to chance stepping into any unintended snafus by doing so.

Instead they talk about people and personalities who have wrongly donned blackface attire at some point in their lives and condemn them, loudly and voraciously. Here is the rub on the rules of getting along around here, just a few cultural do’s and don’ts to be aware of.

I’ll just describe some of what I’ve seen to give you a flavor for the culture.
 
So that blackface is a huge NO NO. But there are festive parades and competitions everywhere for cross-dressing and transsexuals. They encourage it on youth. You know, “don’t knock it till you try it” but even then you better not knock it. Though you better hide that black shoe polish and straw hat attire.

Wearing pussy hats is not offensive….it is endearing to women and their reproductive rights. Doesn’t matter who wears them either: men, kids, teachers. Popular at marches.

Biology be damned.

Using the men’s room or ladies’ room is only a matter of individual preference, regardless of gender, and to hell with everyone else. Other conforming users have no rights to object.

In schools coaches are expected to watch girls dressing in boys locker rooms so they aren’t harassed or assaulted. And they are reprimanded if they disapprove of it or fail to watch.

Don’t get caught wearing black makeup, you get run out of town and banned from public.

Blackface gets you booted from office, where cross-dressing is non-firable and protected status. In fact, government should pay for sex change operations if they can’t afford it.

And children should not be told their biological gender because, until they can tell us for themselves, they have none. What it is, is not necessarily what it is or will be.

You can identify as any biology or thing you want. But you cannot identify as a Native American. So far, the do nots seem pretty strictly enforced.

Though one must be very careful because your personal preferences today could be considered don’t do’s tomorrow, depending on what yours are. It is a little bit like fashion, when it is out of style, man, is it called out. Then later they can go back in time to condemn you for previous offenses. It seems like they are cultural-fashionista trendsetters.

My understanding is people from Crazy Corners also want to rewrite the Constitution, or twist it into a Gordian knot until they do. It needs to breathe or evolve, like biology, to suit.

In fact, now that I write this, I am starting to feel I might have to get out of here quickly.

Right Ring | Bullright

Have you no decency left?

Sorry, I had to ask. That question should not have to come up. And there is no easy way to ask it. Everyone must now know what NY’s legislature and Gov Cuomo passed into law.

Let not the sacred stand in their way.

Looking at what NY did for abortion should have broken any outrage meter still remaining in this country. But even that, as hard as it is to believe, is not even registering on the MSM dashboard. It’s not a blip on their radar screen. Well, full swat raids on Roger Stone don’t even raise leftists’ eyebrows.

Folks, this no longer is that slippery slope we all feared for years. it is a full scale avalanche. But what exactly did they do you ask? Well, basically they legitimized and legalized what Kermit Gosnell was doing, and went to prison for. They wrote infanticide into a bill.

The New York Assembly voted Tuesday night to pass a landmark bill to expand abortion rights in the state, about 90 minutes after the bill cleared the Democratic-controlled Senate by a vote of 38-24.

The Reproductive Health Act moved to the desk of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who immediately signed the bill into law Tuesday night. – Syracuse.com

They timed it on the Roe V. Wade decision anniversary. Building evil upon evil.

But let’s dispense with the usual BS about it. Snopes already has a fact check piece claiming it is not what it appears to be and what we say. Supposedly it just protects the health of the mother, they claim. Come on, because it is dressed up under some guise of a healthcare right does not change what it actually does. Legalizes late term abortion and infanticide.

So infanticide, or whatever name you want to give this, was passed by a Democrat majority in the state senate and gleefully signed into law immediately. That’s right, I said gleefully. Instead of sneers and hisses, with moral outrage, it is actually being celebrated.

Cuomo announced it under the banner of “Reproductive Justice” with “no time to wait.”

That’s right, at one time people would instinctively run to try to save lives, but in this case Democrats scrambled to legalize killing lives. This is not a culture war, this is annihilation of culture. Of life itself in the most vulnerable form. Is even life not sacred now? Even if you don’t believe life begins at conception, which science seems to confirm, then you must accept that life begins at some other point. But by any measure, this exceeds that and then some. This is killing human beings and no one can or should deny it. Justice?

Never mind the worry about what Russia did, what is happening in the Middle East, North Korea, or Venezuela; look instead at what a state in this country is doing. Then they celebrate over it and dance in the streets. Is this America or is someone fooling us?

The very same people lecture us on the Statue of Liberty caption for immigration. New version: “Give me….your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” and we’ll kill them.

How long will a nation that cannot protect its most vulnerable last? Here is where I take issue with some popular notions. Many people complain how bad things are that hardly anything surprises them anymore. Very true. I see it a little differently. Sure, culturally things are bad. But, despite all the evil going on for all to see, I believe there is a huge dam holding back a tidal wave of evil not yet seen or calculated. There are now some fractures in that dam, and structural fissures are mounting.

So while we all complain about the bad and evil we see, there is a greater threat looming over us worse than we even imagined. Dare our opponents or critics on the other side, politically, complain about climate change and destruction of our environment on the horizon, while this type of thing passes as an accomplishment to cheers.

There are evils ahead on the heels of this we cannot fathom. It is the way evil works. It is difficult to even talk about or write, much less conceive it. And then doing it in the name of some good or noble things is just an added bonus. Pretty soon we may dispense with that notion entirely. Why invent a clever name for it? People at some point may just demand evil in its plain, raw form. Who cares what anyone thinks; it is what they want.

Then, to hell with excuses or arguments to assuage, just do it because. So it is nice that while leftists lecture us on humanitarian wrongs and rights, the same people could come to a moment when they can drop all that moral posturing – or otherwise. Who needs pretense and a premise? Not them. Until now, the need for illogical arguments to convince us was all that stood in their way. But what is the point if that is no longer a problem?

And when things we have been worried about and warning of for decades start to happen with more regular frequency, at a faster pace than even we could have predicted, will the people stand for it? It turns out that does not matter if there is no longer much opposition. They will just do it because they can then damn you for trying to undo it — if even possible. Does this seem to surpass even Orwell’s predictions? I’d say so.

Democrats already have schemes to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The prohibition of Government funds directly paying for abortions. Not that Planned Parenthoods do not already get enough taxpayer funds. Plus, removing that burdensome restriction will likely be a key part of any new Democrat healthcare bill, especially a single-payer one.

My fear is very justified and real. The dam withholding that evil — vastly worse than any of these singular things — is looming large over us. And if it were to open, the torrent of evil unleashed would make the status quo so far look like a kindergarten recess. Somehow I see those stalwart Leftisits just hoping and plotting to blow that dam wide open. They’ll even use the euphemisms of freedom , greater good or protections to do it. They have no clue what it would do. But then they don’t care.

Late term and partial birth abortion seem to be the final solution but it is not the final evil, I assure you. It may be only a foretaste of far worse to come.

Right Ring | Bullright

A New State Is Born

Doing a short and sweet here for the blog. Once again the country of the US is busting a move to make history. And the Left is proudly taking a central role in it. We have now become 51. It is final, the Democrats have founded a brand new state in the nation.

It is called the State of Denial.

No word so far on how many Democrats populate it, growing rapidly as it is. Safe to say most Democrats either live there or are in the process of moving in. Real estate demands being what they are. Square miles of it are unknown, yet is already considered vast.

There is only one problem, it doesn’t really fit in with the United States of America — as unification is not a characteristic. It also infringes on other states but that shouldn’t be a problem. Though make no mistake, it is actually a state in America. Sure it will demand all of the perks of a united state but it is united only with itself;. its only allegiance is to itself.

It should now get entered into the history as such, and credited to Democrats for founding it. It needs its own Wikipedia page. Though its geographic coordinates are still being worked out in real time, its unique presence has already been felt and made known.

So it will be interesting what this new State of Denial brings to the table or what fateful influence it will have on the USA. We will have to wait and see.

Another problem is that it does not particularly believe in borders. It does not accept the Constitution either, except where it can find some twisted agreement with it. And it does not accept the authority and responsibility that the federal government has to secure other states and people from invasions. Nor does it accept the oath of office as written.

But surely it will send as many Congressional representatives to Washington as it can, by fact or fraud…. because “what difference at this point does it make anyway?”

We should all plan on hearing much more from this boisterous state, soon. It doesn’t like sitting idle or waiting its turn. It is rather arrogant and its nasty tentacles are long. Stay tuned to see if the 51st state will destroy the other 50.

Already many people are wondering if we should still call the country a union? You may want to put a question mark by that word for future use.

Ref: Wiki

“The Admission to the Union Clause of the United States Constitution, often called the New States Clause, found at Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1, authorizes the Congress to admit new states into the United States beyond the thirteen already in existence at the time the Constitution went into effect.”

[*Note]“The Admission to the Union Clause also forbids the creation of new states from parts of existing states without the consent of both the affected states and Congress”.

But then why should that particular detail apply when they can just ignore, defy and deny the rest of the Constitution — in whole or in part? So I’m still going to refer to it by it’s proper name, (united) State of Denial. No comment from Google or GPS makers yet.

By the way: all the rules you might think should oppose its erection really don’t matter. They don’t apply to it. Rumor is all the news networks are putting a home office there.

The good news is there is no need for an extra star on the flag since they don’t believe in that or the flag. Their trademark symbol would be black bloc or flames anyway.

God Bless America because the Left sure won’t.

Right Ring | Bullright

Food guy goes sweet and sour in Chinese comment

P/C police found another atrocity to chase, this time in the food isle. Suit up, pilgrims.

Background: renowned food show guy Andrew Zimern is opening an upscale Chinese restaurant in Minnesota, but he sort of trash talked Chinese fast food restaurants. A grievous offense by calling them “horseshit restaurants.” (He has since apologized)

Okay food critiques or political swordsmiths, take your shot. The question here is: is the guy right or wrong in what he said and what he is doing?

Does he sink or swim on those comments? Should he? Should he be run off and boycotted — if not burned at the stake? (I have a feeling neither one is a good solution)

See the video interview(@ 8 min) in the piece if you want the full context. He sure is taking heat for it. Some compare it to cultural appropriation. Some say let the market decide.

Andrew Zimmern Sparks Outrage With Chinese Restaurant Comments

by Bruce Haring | Deadline –December 29, 2018 — Interview by Fast Company

The man who eats strange foods for a living now has to eat some humble pie.

Bizarre Foods host and celebrity chef Andrew Zimmern has caused a firestorm in the Asian-American and foodie communities over his comments that Chinese food in the Midwest is served in “horseshit restaurants.” Zimmern made the comments to promote his own Midwest Chinese restaurant chain, Lucky Cricket, in an interview with Fast Company. The first outlet for Lucky Cricket just opened in a Minneapolis suburb mall.

“I think I’m saving the souls of all the people from having to dine at these horses - - t restaurants masquerading as Chinese food that are in the Midwest,” said Zimmern.

More: https://deadline.com/2018/12/andrew-zimmern-sparks-outrage-with-chinese-restaurant-comments-1202527169/

 

Call me old fashioned or not, I don’t think his identity should dictate whether or not he can cook Chinese food. But here is some other food for thought, I notice Walmart now has General Tso’s chicken at its hot foods counter. I’m pretty sure they didn’t hire a Chinese guy to come in to make it. He does have a point about their cookie cutter menu.

But I see other large supermarket chains that delegated space at the deli to sell local Chinese food by Asians. I don’t know where Walmart gets its General Tso’s chicken.

Is it off limits for a white guy to open say a soul food place? How about a northern city person cooking Southern food; a non-Latino cooking Latin food? Or does the fact that he is doing it commercially for a profit business have something to do with it? But is he right?

I’ve already seen liberals drop the cleaver on him and promise to boycott it — presumably until he starts cooking something culturally aligned with his identity as a white guy.

You decide if the guy and his restaurant chain should survive, or be nipped in the bud.

If it was so offensive, then why did the (obvious liberal) interviewer not stand up, say “that’s it,” shove the table to the side and walk away? Isn’t that what the identity and word police would demand he do? Or was publicly skewering him the main dish?

I say “pass the duck sauce and give him a break.” But that’s just white guy me.

A publicity stunt or now stunted publicity?

Of course my other conspiracy theory is still that there are only 5 Chinese guys who make all that food for all Chinese American restaurants. But that’s another issue.

Right Ring | Bullright

Night And Day Politics: good vs. evil

I figure it this way: there are some percentage in the country who are not pulling for America but instead actively working or hoping against the country in some way. Now I conservatively peg this number at between 21-30% of the people. This probably fluctuates according to external circumstances at a given time. For example, it might be particularly higher during something like Vietnam protests, or other contentious events, while being at a lower tide at say the 9/11 attacks. I see an ebb and flow to it.

I’d say it is flexible.which would mean that the more stirring the times are the more that number is on the upper side or increases. The more settled the times the better.

But I don’t see the same dramatic results from positive circumstances. I don’t see that those help to unify as much as those negative circumstances tend to increase the American angst. It could also be a little like the swing-voter effect, from one side to the other.

At any rate, with that premise it doesn’t take much to consider all the ways a hostile foreign power might want to take advantage of these trends or tides of opposition. Indeed they are always looking for ways to extort the present situation for sinister gains.

It also occurs to me that this extortion should be used by our own government to capitalize on those unifying good things to boost pro-American sentiments. This is something Trump seems to be tapping into, whether it is due to this strategic theory or not. He seems to try to extort good circumstances for positive gains to the country.

But on the left, they do almost the polar opposite. They use negative events, situations, animosities, circumstances or anxieties for their political gains. (against the country)

Considering the way this left operates in their tactics, it reminds me so much of the exact way our arch enemies operate. For instance, Putin is an opportunist who finds a way to extort any negative situation — even some positives — to us for his personal gain.

So I am seeing the same formula between Putin and how Democrats operate. Of course I don’t think it is by coincidence. They both use similar political tactics. Anything bad for America is to be converted into political gain for them. They are so much alike.

Naturally, I think the conservatives and Republicans have to do a much better job using positive things, wherever we can find them, as positive influences for America. And convert negative things or events into positive results. We must start politically operating more like opportunists. This does not come easy for people used to relying on basic truth to sort things out, who are much more reserved about ‘using’ circumstances for political gain.

But why should we be timid about doing that? It is for a good cause. It is to better the country, right? Not that progressives want to really benefit the country. Tearing it down and apart has been their trademark. That is not their objective, but it is ours. And we should not run away from that motive.

Why should we be restrained in the face of an outright assault on our Republic? Why be hands off in the face of foreign invasions; whether orchestrated from hostile states or powers, or by hoards of people amassing against our borders — whatever the motives.

Right Ring | Bullright

Democrat Dream Candidates

Identity politics has had a head-on collision with reality. It’s too early to know the full outcome yet. It seems the investigation is still underway. Results will take time.

Democrats have long played the identity politics game and 2016 was a perfect case. But a strange twist is happening they probably had not anticipated. And it might just affect the 2020 election and not in a positive way.

You know the rules and the way it works. Democrats only see identity when they pander to voters. Elections are the whole purpose, The group rules, individuals are just fuel.

So it has all worked in their political strategy the way they wanted it to. But the campaign is already heating up to decide which person. (at least I think they are all people) They have two old guys in the top slots for starters. That is Bernie an Biden leading the pack.

But both these guys are old and white, right? Well that doesn’t play well. There is no identity gimmick to that. The voices of dissent are already rising from their mob. They say it does not represent a preferred identity. They see room for one of the other identities.

S0 it got me thinking. Democrats also have that other identity game going. Actually, it represents more of a problem. They pandered to LGBTQs, gays or any of the others.

However, the trans community has also been playing identity politics. They developed a new thing I will call sexual choice. According to theory a person has the right to claim how he/she identifies, as a personal preference, which must be respected by everyone. Example: Bob decides he identifies as a woman and his new name is now Judy. It is all biology irrelevant so no matter what he claims is his/her accepted identity.

And how one identifies decides everything. No questions.

Now you have these two old white guys — not to forget Warren and Gillibrand. What could two old white guys need to do to spice up their identities? Maybe they could try the new identifies game. I mean it is all about preference, right?

Well, maybe Bernie could identify as a young male rapper? How about a young biracial male rapper? He does have a hand gesture going for him. Why not? What is preventing Joe from identifying as a Latino? Whatever they are comfortable with goes. (for as long as they are) And no one should be able to question their choice of identity, right? Joe might go with the female version to align it with restroom preference.

And that is the way this whole race could go now, using the left’s preference rules. Actually, under that standard they could even change identities again if they wanted. It is whatever works for them. Who could argue? Maybe the first gender-neutral candidate?

See how opportunistic this all can be? Why can we see a problem there but Democrat dumbos cannot, or will not admit to it anyway? That is where we are headed.

Looks like liberals have taken the 60’s sexual, counterculture revolution and kicked it up a few notches. Now everyone must play according to their preferences. It’s identity limbo.

Right Ring | Bullright

Shopping Sprees

I’ll make you a bet, do you think I could do a non-political post? I bet I can.

So I’ve taken a swing at almost anything else and why not say something about consumerism — one of the biggest and quirkiest subjects of our time? In my opinion.

Actually there is something in it worth talking and thinking about. It was made clear to me in a recent trip to some very old familiar turf. I hadn’t been through there in about ten years so sure there would be some changes.

What unfolded in front of my eyes almost defies description. Yep, everyone knows how development goes on and how it’s all done in the name of progress…or so they say. I have never seen that much change in that amount of time to one area.

I didn’t see the housing developments though they must have been there lurking in the background. Though I could not miss the amount of commercial, and I mean 90% retail, development. Other than that I could not miss the monstrous growth of schools either. (I thought they were plenty large then) But let’s just stay with the retail, business end.

Now years ago there was a hot debate over the condition of retail. The consensus seemed to be on the side of brick and mortar’s decline. Well, judging by what I saw, I can safely confirm that did not happen. But one did not expect an explosion of retail expansion anywhere. I guess anywhere other than there. Okay, it was always a hub of discount retail activity and sort of the bargain basement of the area for outlets with tourism. But no more. I saw every major chain represented that I could think of and a few new ones, too.

Of course the whole purpose of this piece was the topic of consumerism. That old debate centered on Internet sales taking over business of brick and mortars. Or at least squeezing them out of the market share. Ha, well, maybe that market is much bigger than even I originally thought. And in the marketplace there should be room for all.

Doing my own thinking about this, while driving along miles of brand new retail stores and mega-plazas, I came to the conclusion that B&M shopping is different than online. My rule of thumb now is that if you want or need an exact item you may go online to purchase it. But if you aren’t locked in on an item, want to examine things, compare or just shop then you would do well to hit the stores — despite traffic and the headaches.

I hear a trend everyone talks about where people are buying almost everything online. Some people that is. Good for them, convenience and all. But there are others who are not sold on the total online bit, not yet anyway. For them the shopping may be split between types. It occurs to me though that the total online crowd may be missing something.

If I stretch out my personal theories, which are no better than yours, I could see a day not too far away when some people may not really know how to shop in real life. That virtual shopping is much different. They got that techno-retail thing nailed.

Like the way cell phones and their addictive use seems to consume people, there could be a time when people just don’t know how to do something without the smartphone or the internet. Face it, shopping is a thing most of us grew up with and adapted to. We may hate it sometimes. But I can foresee a time when some people don’t have those basic life skills. Did I just say shopping is a life skill? Sigh.

I mean actually running down the isles to find something or settle on a different thing or brand without the use of their good old technology crutch. A good trade off? After all, once in a store Google is not going to tell them what isle the coffee or pickles is in. No GPS coordinates with Siri, the obnoxious navigator. They have to look for it which will be like work to them. Physically taxing. That also requires familiarity with the store to be able to quickly find things. You can’t have that when you don’t spend time in a real store.

And I can see a time when it might require stores to have guides for newbies, walking them by hand through their mission. An adventuresome culture shock. I may be exaggerating but not by much. It could be an overwhelming or traumatic experience for them. They might think, “I remember when I was little my mother used to come through the store and she didn’t like it.” So some people may have phobias over that kind of shopping and maybe even need therapy to get accustomed to it, if they even want to.

Well, my little trip just reassured me that there still is a lively market for “retail reality.” With all the new stores someone is shopping in them. But that’s another question, just who are all these people? However, maybe I am the extreme exception because my trip had nothing to do with shopping or buying anything. Observation was enough for me.

Right Ring | Bullright

Who’s Sorry Now?

What an abortionist had to say about deciding to stop after doing them for years.

Live Action (read here)

Besides her pro-abortion philosophy, Aultman gives two other reasons why she became an abortionist:

“I also could make a lot more money doing abortions than I could make working in an emergency room. I enjoyed the technical challenges of the procedure and prided myself on being really good at what I did.”

More: https://www.liveaction.org/news/planned-parenthood-abortionist-ted-bundy/

So give her some credit for changing and stopping. But she did make a lot of money doing it and probably provided her a nice and comfortable lifestyle, until she did.

Then add this:

“I probably murdered more people than Ted Bundy or any of the mass murderers if you consider all the abortions that I did,” she says.

Consider that the abortionist and woman having an abortion may have the same economical motivations for their actions. I just never heard it put in such direct terms before. Well, I find it awfully hard not to make some deductions about that.

This opens a Pandora’s box in philosophical terms. You go to school to study medicine for the purposes of using it to fix people and save lives. Then you go to work using the same knowledge and talent to extinguish lives. How does the latter justify the former?

Should it take three scenarios to sound warning bells that something is wrong with this?

I’m not sure what to think of it all. Chew on that.

2018 Doctrine of Cultural and Civil Order

…that is, as defined by the left. And they wonder why so many people have problems with this paradigm of perversion propelled across the land by ‘liberaldoom’.

 

Dislike is being criminalized across America as hate; while genuine hatred is encouraged and rewarded for political gain as “tolerance.” Protecting the murder of babies becomes sacred doctrine as ‘law of the land.” One person’s objection removes or abolishes the free speech of masses, as the “social media.” Yet that is just par for their course.

Isaiah 5:20 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” 21Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight.” …”23who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of justice.”

Social Justice is miscarriage of justice and lawless behavior. Sexual desire of one supersedes any privacy and protections of everyone else under social justice.

Sedition is the highest, respectable form of patriotism. Criminality is rewarded and encouraged; abiding by and respect for the rule of law is hated.

Fair means by any means necessary, to the left. Protecting democracy now means destroying the Constitution. Sanctuary means special rights and privileges for some. Equality means picking winners and losers. “Antifa” is just a license for fascists. Fair means fomenting bias. Racist and racism is anyone who disagrees with the fascist left.

One person’s choice to use any bathroom outweighs everyone else’s privacy and choice in using that bathroom. You will be punished, if not charged, for objecting.

Choice is ratified as no choice for others. Murder is justified as the sacred choice and every official must swear on the altar to preserve it.

Mob rule under ‘pitchfork democracy’ is speaking truth to power. Resistance is conformity. Resisting democracy is saving democracy. Serving the public means being served by the public. Counting votes is cancelling votes or not accepting the vote count.

Investigation or impeachment is a diversion from corruption and treason that shall be honorably protected. Heroes of deceit shall be promoted to the highest level.

Transparency is keeping information from the public, whatever it takes. Only corrupted officials with conflicts of interest have integrity and cannot ever be charged — all others need to be recused from supervisory roles. A coup is now “preserving democracy”.

Dear God, save us from this ‘liberaldoom.’

Right Ring | Bullright

Gaseous Alert: S. Florida Area

Breaking….I have a real news alert. And they wonder why people are outraged.

From the Fox News 13 affiliate:

DANIA BEACH, Fla. (AP) – A Florida woman faces an aggravated assault charge after authorities say she passed gas in line at a dollar store and pulled a knife on a man who complained about it.

Citing a Broward Sheriff’s Office report, the Miami Herald reports 37-year-old Shanetta Yvette Wilson passed gas while waiting in line at a Dollar General Sunday night and upset a nearby customer. The report says the offended customer and Wilson then got into an argument “in reference to the defendant farting loudly.”

It says Wilson then pulled a small folding knife out of her purse and told the victim she was going to “gut” him while moving as if to attack him. Wilson was arrested and charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill.

Records show she was given a $2,500 bond.

It’s unclear if she has a lawyer.

Consider yourself informed.  That is “Breaking Wind News” for today.  Good thing, once again, Broward Sheriff’s office was on top of the situation.

We go from passing off mysterious votes to the right to pass gas in public.

Only in Broward county.”…deadly weapon without intent to kill.” And how exactly do they know that? Did they think she was only a damsel-in-distress?

My next question is will this judge have to recuse himself for conflict of interest? Or will it have to be heard out of the area because she cannot get a fair trial in that court?

Maybe, just maybe, this case has gaseous civil right issues that could reach all the way to the Supreme Court? But special precautions will be needed in any courtroom.

No word from discredited Broward Sheriff, Scott Israel, if he stands behind her defense.

 

Dispatcher: “One Adam-12, One Adam-12, see the woman…public disturbance. Farts fired! Repeat, farts fired!…approach with caution. Backup needed!”

I thought the gas passed over midterm elections was bad!  Wow, a $2,500 fart.

 

Okay, Unit….I know it’s coming. It’s your home field. Let it rip! (pardon pun)

Waste No Time 2020

All the chatter has already shifted to the 2020 campaign. That didn’t take long. A Rolodex of names are being floated out of Dems just dreaming to be president. It would be easier to say who is not running. About every Democrat is running.

But before the 2020 race is a thing, could we at least get one thing straight? Pundits and media mention names like Biden, Sherod Brown and some others as “moderates.”

Moderate what? Moderate socialists? Now socialism is an endearing term to Dems .

Quit playing games. Can we all agree there is no such thing as moderate Democrats anymore? Democrats are all progressives now and there are no moderate progressives. Maybe Dems will try to invent them – for the sake of a ruse to confuse some people.

Moderate Dems on the national stage have been extinct since at least 2000. Even before that there were only a few. And those few lived out a dormant existence.

There is no such thing as moderates in the pool of progressives. There may be various levels of progressives at a given time but moderate is not one of them. Can we finally stop pretending they exist? Dems know it and so should we. It is exemplified in pro-life.

Look no further than abortion to see how far they’ve come in a short period. To show this contrast just look at the issue of life. Or in DFLA, Democrats For Life of America.

In 2003 “John Zogby found that 43% of Democrats “agreed with the statement that abortion ‘destroys a human life and is manslaughter.”” Now they have a litmus test that you cannot thrive and survive in the Democrat Party by being pro-life.

That is one of the best indicators of the state of Democats. But you could go issue after issue, to the latest Democrat primaries, only to find that on issue after issue they are progressives with a strong socialistic bent. It is the Marxist consolidation of America. There are many reasons for this homogenized statist affection, with organizing being one of the chief facilitators. Commie organizers are us, now led by Obama.

And in the last decade it has gotten worse. Remember the pro-life guy who pushed for changes in the Affordable Care Act? Bart Stupak is not even a footnote in most places.

(Vice News)“The Democratic Party has never been very welcoming to pro-life Democrats,” said former Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, the Democrat who led the charge against the Affordable Care Act over abortion restrictions in 2009. “They’re even less warm now, and the relationship has gone south.”

South? Even Stupak understates the real dichotomy. There is no room for pro-life Democrats at the Party table the way there was no room for Mary, Joseph and Jesus in the Inn. We need to stop entertaining all these fantastical hallucinations otherwise.

People must stop pretending there are moderates among national Democrats. The DNC must be laughing their asses off at that whopper. Christians should quit facilitating the notion, too. (but then that’s another big problem) I don’t like the pretend game.

Right Ring | Bullright

Say No More Clickbait

So occasionally, like other people, I have fallen for the clickbait. Sometimes the story is of personal interest or I want need to know their hyped take on it.

Like when they find a deserted ghost ship washed up somewhere you have to click through the 20 or so pages to find out “what happened”.

Well, I have seen enough of them and followed through. I know they are just there to pique your interest. I know all that yet I admit falling for the ‘I have to know’ hook, line and sinker. Once committed, a person flips through to the last page. I get that.

So my main issue is who writes this stuff? Usually, there is a typo in about the second paragraph or it makes me wonder if someone wrote it from a remote island without the luxury of whiteout or a delete button. And who proofreads the copy?

It reads like a 6th grade creative writing class. Then they will repeat the same thing over and over like they really have to drive home the point. No, the point is already sold because it drove me to the story. Now I want to know. You don’t have to keep repeating “…so what happened?” Just tell the story. At least do it with the reader in mind.

I mean you went to all the trouble to lure them to this page, now don’t blow it on error-ridden language and poor delivery to really turn them off.

I am convinced they sub it out to writers who get a commission on typos. The more you have and a person still reads it, the better pay rate you get. Just proofread it, you know, before putting it out on the world wide web as clickbait in thousands of ads on real news stories. Have some respect for the readers is all I’m asking. Don’t insult them.

Either follow some basics or don’t say it at all. If the rest of us can follow basic guidelines, then high profile attention hounds can. Stop repeating the opening line on the 9th and 10th pages. It is monotonous. A newspaper could not do that and neither should they.

And no, I am not the language gestapo and make lots of mistakes too. But come on, all stars of clickbait, what’s the problem? You are obviously making money on it.

Clickbait go home, brush up, or just shut up!

Right Ring | Bullright

Word of The Year

Oxford Dictionary has decided that the word of the year is “toxic.” Of course, toxic masculinity gets a minor mention or credit for its use.

Gee, I wonder why that is? But leave it to politics to wear a word out.

Oxford explained it: (excerpt)

“The Oxford Word of the Year is a word or expression that is judged to reflect the ethos, mood, or preoccupations of the passing year, and have lasting potential as a term of cultural significance.

In 2018, toxic added many strings to its poisoned bow becoming an intoxicating descriptor for the year’s most talked about topics. It is the sheer scope of its application, as found by our research, that made toxic the stand-out choice for the Word of the Year title.”

Preoccupation…..that’s the word I was thinking of. Wonder what the preoccupation will be with next year? Obsession may be the better word.

Crazy Town

Well, now that was easy.

It is Now Legal to Defecate and Urinate on Denver Sidewalks! What???

Joe the Plumber

Denver just decriminalized public defecation in order to make life easier for immigrants and the homeless.

After decriminalizing defecating on sidewalks, the Chamber of Commerce will probably rename Denver as the “Mile High Pile City.”

No Board of Health? That’s how diseases spread. Now every time I think of Denver I will see visions of poop and other body fluids on the sidewalk. People are required to dispose of dog poop and Denver is letting humans defecate any where they please.

More: https://joeforamerica.com/2017/12/now-legal-defecate-urinate-denver-sidewalks/

No commentary here could suffice. I’ll settle for WTF?

Oh maybe one….sanctuary shit.

Liberal complaints in 4, 3, 2, 1….Never.

The Culture of Investment

I went on a thought journey to explore what it meant to be the person I am and noticed some things that tie in politically these days. You may have discovered the same things.

The first thing noticeable today is those who support Trump are given a dichotomy. On one hand you see yourself being targeted and villainized by a concerted effort of institutions, media, Deep State interests; while on the other we are actually winning. We are changing an old guard and its way of thinking. They do not like that, hence a resistance.

But as this back and forth continues, we are actually winning because we are having the battle at all. The battle itself is evidence of victory. A taboo and forbidden battle.

Well, media or pundits keep asking the same tired questions of Trump supporters, “at what point will you abandon Trump, when will you denounce him? Does this do it?”

The problem of course is that you can denounce something he did or said or how he reacted, while at the same time not denounce what he has actually done. Get it? That is clear to me. But what media or elites want is a total and absolute condemnation.

If something is critical enough to criticize, it still does not erase what he has done. It does not cancel due credit he deserves. In that respect, does it really matter that one does not like a statement or two or his tweeting habits — which are only communications?

Investments

What does that have to do with investments? Put it this way, if I was to write a full defense of why I supported Trump and think he is the right man in the right job, I would have to cover the last 15 -20 years to make a substantive case. That would be a monumental task. So short of that let me just say I am sufficiently invested, heavily, in Donald Trump. By no monetary means or connections but in a philosophical and political way.

I feel invested in that the way anyone invests in what they feel is important, such as education, a career, family, where they live, financial investments. All of those help to shape who we are. Trump also represents a part of who I am, not the total sum.

Not like I just bought something on a whim thinking “I can always take it back.”

We may differ on certain things but there are commonalities that surpass those. Listing all those wouldn’t even make the case. But since I do, in a way I can see and live vicariously through his presidency. There is a personal investment. And I believe that is what has been missing in the last 4 presidents – a personal connection.

People may have thought they had that with George W Bush for a short time but it wasn’t real and did not last. We saw the differences with his priorities to ours and a few hallmarks of those were in nominating Harriet Miers and in the amnesty immigration scheme. There were certain other red flares that he was not really one of you. At any rate, even at the beginning I was not personally invested the way I am with Trump.

That was what was missing. Barack Obama had support, yes, but were people personally invested in him the way people are in Trump? I’d say not. Though Democrats were invested in him. And it was just like most of what the left does — it was deception, lies and an illusion. There was a huge illusion constructed around Bill Clinton. And that illusion carried over to Hillary both times she ran. They were not real. Sure Democrats believed them but they were lies like everything else the Left does.

Here we have Trump, with all his flaws, and there is a realness that was never present in any of the others. Campaign promises were not just campaign promises. He did not have years in the government sewer to provide an air of legitimacy. In fact, it was his detachment from government that gave him credibility.

I am at the point where I am tallying my investments that I have made and ones I did not. Though this one, supporting Trump, crosses so many personal areas that it is a natural fit. It is almost uncanny how it relates to other areas. So the idea I would have some moment to say I was all wrong, or the whole thing was a wasted effort, is as close to impossible as me going to Mars. I don’t know how many other people feel that way. I’m sure some do. (probably more than anyone realizes or media cares to think)

It takes us back to those other presidents’ legacies. There was a steady prevailing vacuum. It may not have been intentional but there was a void and disconnect with the very people who elected them. Regardless what they said, their interests and priorities were not aligned with the peoples. They did not care about the same things. When George W Bush tried to ram through amnesty on illegal immigration, with all it involved, with the gangs of, despite the will of the people, it was a lighthouse moment.

When the people finally did rise up in Tea Parties, the reaction everywhere only confirmed this national insult that had gone on as long as I remember. Not only did the critics not care about American citizens or real people but they were actually lined up opposing the public. And there is no way you could compare that moment of revelation to what the Resistance is all about now. It is not the same thing. In truth, they are the anti-Resistance.

It’s a little like this analogy. Say you originally found a good investment that fit for you. It worked and made you profits. It did what it was supposed to do. Then came a time where it fluttered or stalled out, or maybe lost a few points. Would you condemn the whole thing and say you should not have have bought it in the first place? Would you say it was all a complete mistake? I doubt it. See you cannot deny that it worked and got you the effects you were looking for. Nor can you deny the profits. (unless you condemn them too)

It is the same way with other investments in life. Do you denounce the family because it is not everything you think it should be? Do you denounce you education because one day it does not seem to benefit you how you want? The same works in the faith areas of life. Do you throw out your faith because one day it was not benefiting you? That seems to be a pretty selfish and materialistic way to look at everything. I’m sure some people do apply similar formulas: today I don’t like that, yesterday I did. No, people usually accept there will be bumps and hurdles. You don’t throw out all the work, time and energy you gave it because you are not presently satisfied with something.

Regardless of what new and stunning things media or the establishment may throw out at us, it does not change what progress has been done. Just as nothing changes all the damage those critics have done. I won’t turn my back on that. And I won’t deny it.

Well, short of running through my 15 years of reasoning and experiences that brought me here, this is my attempt to explain it. I also do not throw away, dismiss or deny all that experience long before Trump came along. But they are now joined in a way I could not have predicted. It’s a personal investment. I can denounce the resistance, mostly because it is not real and only more deception. Imitation is flattery except when it is a mockery.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Moral Of The Story

Let me start this personal rant by saying if anyone thought I was one of them there tongue-tied Christians when it came to the flock, you can count me out on that strategy,.

In fact, there is an awful lot to criticize among Christians today but I usually refrain. Such is the exception on this occasion. Allow me to get my rant hat on.

First a little background on this particular one. There’s a guy that floats mostly on the margins now but is quite full of himself. No, not Jim Wallis or one of the other infamous leftist preachers, take your pick. They aren’t quite in his league.

This one is proud to say he rose in ranks with Jerry Falwell (Sr) back in the day with the Moral Majority. Chuck Baldwin thought of himself as Jerry’s right hand man that would one day probably take over the movement, if anything happened to Falwell.

However he did it, he became pretty full of himself to the red hot narcissist, radical level. He’s now moved on to sort of a solo hologram movement, within smaller Christian circles, in the style of any of many conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones out there. He’s a former, still recovering in my view, Democrat liberal who doesn’t know or want to admit it.

As for me, I used to think at least on rare occasion he would get a nut or two. But these days it’s clear where the nuts have all gone. I just can’t tolerate his rhetoric any more, which got even worse than it was. He’s a self-styled critic of everyone else, which conveniently leaves him on top of his own hill, with a small loyal following still. Diehards.

This guy did run for president though when he formed a rout against much better known, former Ambassador, Alan Keyes when he was running for president. See, he used his muscle in the Constitution Party ranks to oust Keyes. Well any moral authority Chuck Baldwin still had went out went out the window about then. What little he had anyway.

Baldwin fancies himself as the speaker for the Christian political movement though he isn’t. He dreams big, if only they would listen to him. His shtick is attacking fellow Christians on the right, a common target today. But he specializes in attacking them and the Republicans the way McCain did. Meaning he doesn’t reserve much animus for liberals or Democrats.

No, he’s an inside player who mocks Rush Limbaugh or any other big talkers on the right. He’s the guy you would want on your team only if you were plotting a coup from within.

Back to preaching. He did start up and build a good sized church in Florida. Then several years ago announced he’d be moving to Montana to settle. Big change, well, maybe what he thought. He already had a radio show and the necessary political capital. He could always draw from Christian networks with his tough talk and rhetoric.

Oh and he also feels that churches shouldn’t take 501 status so they can be free to speak out on politics and abortion and so on. Those who don’t are enslaved or just ignorant.

Since then he has gotten even more vocal on his political positions. Maybe he’s planning another run, I don’t know. But he keeps up his forte for attacking Christians from within. That is any but the big liberal leaders. You don’t find him railing against those or Dems much these days. I guess he thinks we are the ones who really deserve his ire. And he has plenty of that to give them.

He boasts of flattery he received from icon Howard Phillips – another organizer on the right. He got the right endorsements from leaders of movements, enough to prod him on. One wonders if they were feathers in his hat or only stepping stones to give him street cred with conservatives. I haven’t decided. His so-called hard line positions seemed to have morphed into deep-seeded biases. The object of which are firmly directed at the Christian right and what he terms Republican enablers. Fed up with both Democrats and Republicans who he calls worse and more dangerous than the former. The usual anti-fare plays well in the CP and with disgruntled conservative Republicans.

Chuck Baldwin’s objective is less clear.

His stands, if you could sum them up, come off a lot like disenchanted liberals. He pushes the freedom thing, styling himself a Constitutionalist and bill of rights expert along with a historian. Sure there is enough to attack Christians on today. Though he takes a glee in doing it where I reserve mine for the right occasions without taking great pride in it. But he just never has much fire in the belly left for progressives and liberals now, as if they don’t exist and Republicans are the only culpable targets of opportunity.

His conservative positions are drenched in popular liberal antiwar and foreign policy notions the way Ron Paul’s was, with extra passion and a bitterness that exudes.

Then comes his latest column. Usually it includes his standard screed with a few current issues thrown in to season the pot. Exactly as he did in this piece. What are his favorite taunts? Well, there is always conspiracy stuff and always a rant against Israel into the anti-war rants. His angle is on attacking media as Jew controlled rather than the MSM. He has a particular distaste for Trump and basically echoes any of the left-wing talking points about him. A common dead giveaway. Like you know where he takes his news cues from. The Jews control Hollywood too, in case you didn't know that.

But his favorite line of attack script in this piece was Christians don't get it. They just think they do. And if you don't agree with his stands on issues then you are one of his chosen targets. Doubly so for supporting Trump. I never heard this ferver about Obama. He sometimes mocked our anger at Obama and failure to concentrate on the Christian Republican side of the isle. Like we needed circular firing squads under Obama. Christians were the real problem. That is where we are, apparently we don't get it – if we ever did.

The implications here are strong. He knows much better.

Therefore, we are the problem not the solution. He being the much wiser and studied on the matter does get it. He does not have the flaws in understanding that we do. And his loyal following is attuned as well. But they share no blame in any of this. He is the only one who does get it, in the end.

In that arrogant reasoning, this column fit him like a well worn glove because it touched all the highlights from Jewish controlled media to attacking our cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia with the murder of Khashoggi. Mostly they are your typical liberal fare wrapped in a warm blanket of Christians are too stupid to know. Somehow I cannott picture Paul going on a lecture tear like that saying you people just don't get it about the Roman thing.

I hear the same tired mantra directed at Christians from the Left. Obama at the Prayer Breakfasts come to mind. Amazing that the world is still spinning on its axis with all the culpable blame of Christian conservatives. It seems to be reversed. I hear little practical advice coming from this (or these) critics of current political culture. Do they get it?

Tell me the difference between this snipe agenda and the Left’s popular Resistance?

Right Ring | Bullright

No means “no” except when it should

It would seem pretty ironic that the party of the radical left who never misses a chance to say no, in defiant “resistance,” just cannot say no to condemn violence of their left wing radical base. They can’t ever do that.

Instead, they will go to any lengths on the left not to voice any opposition to, or offer no condemnation for, the left’s violence. Whether it vandalizes a Republican building in NYC, burns police cars, or commandeers a chunk of a city in Washington, or whether leftists chase down conservatives in restaurants to create a crowd, or shout down Congressional hearings so you cannot hear. Dems will say or do anything else to avoid condemning it.

Out of those same zipped lips for condemning they call us extremists and dangerous. They have a phobia to the word no when and where it matters. But we know why.

They do condemn our use of the word Mob though, when that is how the miscreants act and who they are. But they can never condemn a possible friendly group to the Left, even if it is a rented one. They couldn’t even call MS-13 gang members animals for what they do. Instead, Nancy Pelosi said they have a spark of divinity.

The same spark of divinity that an unborn baby lacks.

They need anyone who could be a potential voter bloc for them whether legal or illegal. If they can use violence to their political ends then what won’t they use? That also fits the definition of terrorism — using violence to perpetuate their political ends. Yet we are supposed to be hostage to this political blackmail of the Mobacracy. And what does the Mobocracy want and support? A Thugocracy. Democrats call that a value of democracy.

No condemnation for cop killers, violence addicts, fascist Antifa, or those working on behalf of the Mobocracy. The only question remaining in the end is who is really in control in this Mobocracy of the left? Is it their politicians? Doesn’t seem so to me.

On the contrary, Holder said “when they go low, kick them.” Hillary said we can never have civility until they are in power. No, their hallmark is incivility, regardless.

So, I wonder why we didn’t see any civility when they were in control of all branches? What we got was “I won”….shut up and get in the backseat. We don’t need to hear from you. Incivility always rules; in power or out makes no difference. We got Obamacare lies.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Threat Within America

In their own words:

“We oftentimes had these debates and discussions about ‘out of the streets and into the suites’ — that was the term that was used to describe the swan song of the civil rights movement. … He made a decision and thought he could make a difference by being on the inside.” [emphasis added] — Socialist Workers Party member and University of Minnesota Professor August Nimtz on long time friend Keith Ellison.

See: https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Ellilson_Burn_This_Book.pdf

Of course Ellison thought he could make a difference by being on the inside. We know that is what he is there for. Most radical leftists start by believing they can make a difference. Then position themselves or act accordingly to carry it out.

Radicalism is not a spectator sport.

H/T to The United West

From the foreword of “Burn This Book” by Trevor Loudon:

“On July 17, 2018, Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota wrote Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos, demanding that his company censor books and other products by those deemed to be “hate groups” by the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. He called for such materials still in Amazon warehouses to be “destroyed” over the next three months and an end to the company’s publication of similar “physical and digital materials.”

There is reason to believe that you are reading the impetus behind Keith Ellison’s call for book burning. In the course of a July 3rd interview with author Diana West on our nationally syndicated “Secure Freedom Radio” program, I mentioned that we would shortly publish a book about the Congressman’s ominous past and present ties to Marxist and Islamist groups and their agendas.

Since the hard left monitors our show assiduously, word of this publication may well have reached Mr. Ellison before the 17th. And, as the Center for Security Policy Press uses Amazon’s CreateSpace service to publish its many monographs and books, censoring such works – past, as well as future – could prevent readers from seeing this one. That is because the Center for Security Policy is one of the organizations the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has falsely characterized as a “hate group.” By pressing Amazon’s Bezos to use the SPLC as the arbiter of what content can be published or maintained in inventory, Rep. Ellison could achieve the censorship of CSP’s products without spedifying us as the target.

As this book by Trevor Loudon amply demonstrates, such stealthy subversiveness is the stock-in-trade of Keith Ellison. His associations dating back to his involvement with the Nation Islam as a student at Wayne State University and continuing to his present —and ongoing —involvement with Muslim Brotherhood fronts and his role as chairman of the radical House Progressive Caucus, Keith Ellison’s record is one of unbroken ties to extremists committed to subverting our country.“

This insight is all the more alarming in light of a dangerously mistaken, but widespread assumption: When an elected official in the United States swears an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, they are presumed to be truthfully saying they are able and willing to do that. Consequently, such representatives of the American people in the U.S. Congress are not subjected to the sort of background investigations aimed at confirming that assumption that is required of, for example, postal employees, securities personnel and school bus drivers.

Unfortunately, as author, filmmaker and national security expert Trevor Loudon documents exhaustively in this volume, Rep. Keith Ellison’s many and longstanding personal associations with groups openly hostile to the principles and even the existence of the U.S. Constitution, would likely make it impossible for him to to pass even the most cursory of security checks.”

Wow, I can think of nothing to add to that. Book is here in PDF form.

Also: Keith Ellison, who does NOT have a MN license to practice law, yet is running for MN Attorney General.

News, email, and this and that

Has Twitter suddenly made email obsolete? You might think so. If you think that the public form of twitter is a substitute for private email, then you don’t understand technology, culture or the dynamic of it all.

It seems the trend is on using Twitter. But until recently it was so limited by character count that it would render it worthless for serious communications. Yet that is probably what some people would like about it, being limited.

But of course it could be an excuse to eliminate email which some people do not want to bother with anymore. I’d like to add that Twitter never will be a replacement for email. And email has not gone the way of the dinosaurs, yet. Too bad if people don’t like to use it or read them. It’s so old fashioned since the social media explosion. Poof, you don’t need email.

Isn’t it interesting that the major news or media centers all prefer everyone use Twitter as a contact method? But these and other businesses are also the same ones who like to use email for news letters and updates — for your convenience of course. But if you want to get in touch with them, they want it on Twitter.

What’s up with the contradiction, Fox and all the rest?

BTW: Fox will be launching its Fox Nation project later in the year. They want you to sign up on the email list for updates. It will be a new subscription service for their viewers. Oh dandy, another avenue of access to their content from most of the same people. But it is subscription-based.

“Fox Nation reveal: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson among stars on streaming platform ….Content you love, voices that matter.”

Now if your voice mattered to them at all, why scrub the email option?

Okay, if they really have a new product, why don’t they complete that newness by having some new faces? One of the headliner newbies showcased is Tomi Lahren. How new is she and what expertise does she bring? Born in 1992, maybe that’s what they mean.

I sort of thought having a new format they should have some regular folks. I don’t know, like everyday conservatives or viewers of their content over the years. People that have an opinion and view. There are plenty out there. I see people all over the internet and social media who would add spark to an otherwise recycled format. Fresher than Lahren.

While I think of it, I also remember when Town Hall was rolling out its new model that would shake the earth to its core. It was all hype. Indeed, that was about having a forum of conservative, like minded people writing their own stuff and their collective friends it would bring, along with other news centered content.

Well, it lasted a while and morphed into what you see as Town Hall today. (some here remember those days) Why is it that it is always the everyday normal people that are the problem? No, we need mouthpieces like famous spouters of conservative opinion to tell us what really matters. Sure we do watch because there is nothing else to watch.

“Tweet me, text me, hit me on Instagram,” they say, “or find me on FaceBook.” What if I don’t want to? I just want to email you. Well, it has become a problem. Right about now I am starting to feel like Andy Rooney. Oh, few people would remember who he was.

Maybe I am finally just old or old fashioned?

Still, if you listen now, you can hear the same undercurrent of criticism about Twitter among those same on air personalities starting all over again. ‘The scourge of contacts and feedback.’ The same things you used to hear about bothersome emails.

Someone else doesn’t like or appreciate getting our emails. Congress. Funny that liberals never seem to have that problem. They shout into an elevator and voilà, instant reaction.

Right Ring | Bullright