Part 2: Liberation Theology and politics

My last post compelled me to expand on the same topic, which has been a preoccupation of mine over years. I know it may not interest a lot of people, but there is a niche it does.

The words Liberation Theology normally conjure up certain images and, to many of us, is closely associated with Obama or his radical preacher in Chicago. Now all that may be true. However, I don’t think too many people realize the scope of influence it has had on Christianity, churches, or the well-meaning Christian faith.

There were plenty of links in the previous article for a primer. Still an in-depth look at it is really necessary. I started seeing connections many years ago and the subject, with its influence, has stuck with me. I often wondered why I am so bothered by it?

Well, that is self-explanatory if people understood exactly what it is. It sort of validates the concerns all by itself.

Start with the Black Liberation theology that most of us heard of, thanks to Barry and a few others. It is often subtly promoted while lumping in MLK Jr. I don’t agree with that notion but he is commonly used to promote the theology.

Black Liberation Theology is more a radical strain of an already radical ideology. See, in as much as it is a theology, it also seems eerily similar to a political ideology.

(Wikipedia):”Black theology, or Black liberation theology, refers to a theological perspective which originated among African American seminarians and scholars, and in some black churches in the United States and later in other parts of the world. It contextualizes Christianity in an attempt to help those of African descent overcome oppression. It especially focuses on the injustices committed against African Americans and black South Africans during American segregation and apartheid, respectively.

Black theology seeks to liberate non-white people from multiple forms of political, social, economic, and religious subjugation and views Christian theology as a theology of liberation—”a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the Gospel, which is Jesus Christ,” writes James Hal Cone, one of the original advocates of the perspective. Black theology mixes Christianity with questions of civil rights, particularly raised by the Black Power movement and the Black Consciousness Movement. Further, Black theology has led the way and contributed to the discussion, and conclusion, that all theology is contextual – even what is known as systematic theology.”

But Liberation Theology itself is not just race specific. According to the Britannica Encyclopedia, it has its roots – at least the current form – back in Latin, South America decades ago in the 60’s. The crossover made Christianity both its promoter and apologist.

That puts it back around the same time as the youth unrest and protest movements in the US. (commonly known as the radical 60’s) It also puts itself around the time as Saul Alinsky developed and pushed his radicalism. Of course, Alinsky’s version would not involve religion or Christianity – or does it? Anyway, it means radicalism is not specific to Christianity; but just became a new vehicle to promote and spread radicalism via making common cause in using the Christian community as an ally.

In Latin America, Catholic clergy developed this movement primarily as an answer for poverty they saw and as a way to relate to those people, the poor.

So Liberation Theology is described, in Britannica [1] as:

“Liberation theologians believed that God speaks particularly through the poor and that the Bible can be understood only when seen from the perspective of the poor.”

Basically, they “affirmed,” at a Catholic Bishops conference in 1968, “the rights of the poor and asserting that industrialized nations enriched themselves at the expense of developing countries.“[1]

Does that sound at all familiar?

Also, the Catholic Church for years is more than aware of the theology. As usual, the RCC has written on the subject.

THE RETREAT OF LIBERATION THEOLOGY

by Edward A. Lynch (EWTN Library)

Few intellectual movements have begun with more immediate, favorable
attention than the theology of liberation, developed by Latin
American scholars in the 1960s and 1970s. Encomia to the “new way of
doing theology” came from North American and European scholars and
from many Latin American bishops. At the Second General Conference of
the Latin American conference of Bishops (CELAM), held in Medellin in
1968, liberation theology seemed to come into its own even before the
English publication of Gustavo Gutierrez’s 1973 .

Twenty-five years later, however, liberation theology has been
reduced to an intellectual curiosity. While still attractive to many
North American and European scholars, it has failed in what the
liberationists always said was their main mission, the complete
renovation of Latin American Catholicism.

Instead, orthodox Catholic leaders, starting with Pope John Paul II,
have reclaimed ideas and positions that the liberationists had
claimed for themselves, such as the “preferential option for the
poor,” and “liberation” itself. In so doing, the opponents of
liberation theology have successfully changed the terms of debate
over religion and politics in Latin America. At the same time,
liberation theology had to face internal philosophical contradictions
and vastly altered political and economic circumstances, both in
Latin America and elsewhere. Having lost the initiative, liberation
theologians are making sweeping reversals in their theology.

The response to liberation theology was sophisticated and
multi-faceted. Nevertheless, it is possible to describe its essential
ingredient rather briefly. John Paul II and the other opponents of
liberation theology offered it a cultural challenge. That is, they
took issue with what liberation theology tried to say about the basic
meaning of human life and what is most important to living that life. …./ More

Now that we know what it is today, we also can see the effects it has had on anything from the church to the culture, to every other segment of society. Basically what civil rights and the anti-establishment protest movement did to society, liberation theology did to the Christian church at large.

So while there have been reformations in Christianity’s history, this liberation theology has also now permeated it – in my view. Some may argue, but I only ask that they look around with a critical eye and then tell me it has not.

To simplify it: a sociopolitical Marxist construct that pits the poor against the wealthy.

This conveniently fits into the Democrats’ Marxist paradigm while tying materialism to the church — in that case to the RCC. So it fits the bill all the way around, at least for the progressive Left who use it as an apologetic for their ideology. (doubling as a recruitment tool) But I don’t want to get into whether Democrats actually stand for the poor or downtrodden. The Left has the rhetoric down, and this provides a religious, achem Christian, validation and authority for it. This also conveniently fits with some Hispanics or Latin American immigrants familiar with it from their homeland.

The orthodoxy of the Roman Catholic Church did take issue with it. Those like Pope John Paul II had opposed it. However, as we find in other areas, mere opposition of something does not equate to abolishing it.

What happened though is this movement theology lined up to merge forces with the secular left, as well as leftist political ideology, and the anti-Christian atheists. It fit for both worlds, while reducing any perceived threat to or from secularists — because it had a mutually shared set of goals and platform. It detours Christians from their central faith, to one based on materialism. If Marxists could find anything in that to oppose, I don’t know what it would be. It fits Christianity to Marxism and its step-child socialism uniformly.

What’s not to like for Atheists, Secularists, or Marxist progressives?

The second beauty of the Liberation Theology is that it inherently mixes religion and politics, almost by its nature. And that has many Leftists thrilled with it. No, you thought they had this issue on the left about combining religion and politics, with something called the Separation of Church and State? Wrong. This was exactly what the doctor ordered.

So Liberationist clergy are also ecstatic at the perfect union. And who is to complain, after all? Not the secular Leftists, not the church or clergy, not the Marxists. Who’s unhappy?

That brings us to the next point. Many Christians, even some evangelicals, have latched onto the ideas. That means it has spread across the spectrum of denominations, from the RCC to Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, to small local Christian organizations. See, that was the idea. I call it an epidemic — with as many negative consequences.

That takes us to the polls.

To the polls, to the polls… the Left wants that Christian vote. And, if you think about it, in many ways it even opposes traditional Christian thought and influence. So it is a stealth counter-influence to traditional, real Christians — namely at the voting booth. Now the paradox is that the Left really cares nothing about Christianity, per se, but Liberationist Christians do care about leftist ideology, making them common cause allies. Christians apparently don’t care that the alliance really opposes Christians.

Footnote – reference: [1] By Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica
[2] EWTN https://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/LIBERATE.TXT
[3] Black Liberation Theology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_theology

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

Cops vs. Statues

Six cops are shot while leftist snowflakes are melting over offensive statues. The media gives concrete and metal, or statements about them, more concern than dead cops — or why they are being targeted.

Sorry, I have no sympathy for the snowflakes. So now Democrats are running in 2018 against Russia, Racism and Statues.

Hillary funding resistance

Hillary Clinton Sent $800K from Campaign Funds to Her New ‘Resistance’ Group

Group will fund other liberal ‘resistance’ groups
Wa Free Beacon

Failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has sent $800,000 from her campaign funds to her new political action group, Federal Election Commission filings show.

Clinton announced her intent to be “part of the resistance” in May with the formation of Onward Together, a political action group that will fund a number of established “resistance” groups that can quickly counter President Trump with direct action and protests.

The group is dedicated to “encouraging people to organize, get involved, and run for office” and advancing “progressive values and work to build a brighter future for generations to come,” according to its mission statement.

Federal Election Commission records show that Clinton has sent hundreds of thousands from her campaign funds to her group the same month she announced its creation. …/

http://freebeacon.com/issues/hillary-clinton-sent-800k-from-campaign-funds-to-her-new-resistance-group/

Can’t find her emails but never loses sight of her money, and what she does with it. Too dumb to be a criminal but smart enough to undermine government.

Awan tries to cop a flee

And what is Imran Awan’s defense, after being arrested trying to flee for Pakistan over fraud charges, while working for Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Man does she know how to pick them, or what?

His lawyer told Politico later on Tuesday: ‘This is clearly a right-wing media-driven prosecution by a United States Attorney’s Office that wants to prosecute people for working while Muslim.

‘A quick glance at what the government filed in court today confirms the lack of evidence or proof they have against my client.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4730382/House-aide-arrested-fraud.html#ixzz4nzEV0f00

Sure that explains it…right! That makes people do things like smash hard drives.

Schultz promptly fired him, after his arrest. Rapid response.

Once again, for a major story you have to turn to the Daily Mail just to read it. Seems there is an embargo in media on the story for some reason.

Daily Caller exclusively reported the arrest 3 days ago and no media besides Fox wants to touch it. I know, it’s radio active. Debbie is glowing in the dark.

Media can run with anonymous sources all the time, or out a CIA operative overseas, for the need to know but this is too hot to touch? Tells you something. Maybe if Awan was a transgender person it would fit the media’s narrative.

Better hacks

Dems ask: How can we get a better deal? Well, by dissolving the Democrat Party.

Better Deal, resistance at all costs. Undermine and obstruct the government and rule of law. Better at deconstructing America. How can deconstruction of the economy be the economic message you are selling? Dems began their “better” plan.

‘We want our power back’ is the real purpose. Elections are all they care about. They don’t care about working people or values we keep hearing so much about. Unless by values they mean to obstruct and stick it to the American people.

But now, they declare “better” as their new buzzword. Better than what?

If being a political hack is the goal then they are no doubt getting somewhere.

So the Marxists take their show on the road. Trot out the most divisive, most radical, lust-for-power progressives to push their message. Note: they are not interested in selling their ideas, they want to force them on the people. Better force.

They roll out their plan — should I say ideas because they are not plans — and then comes Elizabeth Warren out to demonize corporations and large employers. What they need to do is to take them “head on,” she says. Back to fight, fight fight. Better fight.

That’s the way they are going to create a better deal, better jobs, better wages. Better than what? Is better the new dog whistle for resistance? Better resistance.

Are we to believe they are going to run this dual track agenda? On one hand run their resistance movement against the Trump administration, tearing down not building up; while on the other run a pro jobs program, demonizing the very people who create them.

Who could believe this utter nonsense? They don’t have any answers, they have problems. It is a bash the economy agenda. So out of all that bashing, they believe they will shake jobs down out of the trees. It will just happen.

They are 6 months late to the jobs agenda. But then it is just a lie anyway.
They can’t even think up an original message.

But if the objective is really for them to be better hacks, then call them successful.

Why can’t Democrat, progressive, Marxists, socialists ever tell us what they really stand for, and what their real agenda is, or what they really care about?

(meteorologists are now reporting Hurricane Hillary is moving off to sea. We’ll see. I hope someone will still keep an eye on her anyway)

RightRing | Bullright

Having An Emotional Fit

This would be laughable under most circumstances….except that it was the most important presidential election in decades. Well, Libs don’t disappoint in their effort to emotionalize their reactions to the election — as only they can emotionalize.

So CNN had this article, including clips of voicemails from election dissenters. Here is just one gem from a woman who complained she had to take off her Bernie bumper stickers because of fears. Afraid too, to even go back to rejoin her family. Oh the pain and humiliation of it all. She said this:

“I finally had to take the Bernie bumper sticker off my car,” Gibbens continued in her voicemail. “I almost got rear-ended at an exit coming off the freeway. I mean just harassment because I had a Bernie sticker on my car. It’s really ugly. It leaves us scared because there’s so many people who seem more emboldened to be bullies.”

Scary because so many people seem emboldened to be bullies? Could that be those bullies on the Left? No she isn’t talking about the real bullies. How about weaponized bullies?

The article goes on to apply psychoanalysis to their emotional meltdown. As I said, it would be funny, except they are serious. Of course this is just as dangerous as the psychiatrists desperately trying to diagnose Trump from their clinical armchairs. And just as fruitful.

Paula Niedenthal, a psychology professor, opined on the caller:

“There’s this anxiety about being exposed. You have a bumper sticker, it’s almost like having a Green Bay Packers sticker and being in Texas.”

Yes, it’s every bit that bad in another way. How can therapists so easily identify with these nuts? Yes they do need real psychological help, but not because of the results of the election or because Trump won and is president. But could it be because of their very deep expectations that Hillary was going to win or, indeed, that she already did win?

There was no room for doubt. Then they were crushed when their beliefs didn’t comport with actual results. ‘How could this be?’ ‘We all said she would win…what happened, what went wrong? This cannot be happening. I won’t believe it! I won’t accept it!’

You can almost hear those internal deliberations echoing in their vulnerable brain cells. Could it just be that their expectations ran so far ahead of the truth that they could not possibly handle an alternate result? Isn’t that what elections are: a verdict, a final decision from the people? How can one know in advance, or be so sure, of the election?

It seems they had so much invested in their outcome. Even Hillary was so invested, literally in the preferred outcome, along with her backers and donors that there was no room for a different outcome. The amount of money riding on it alone was huge. But of course that would be hard to accept. They did it to themselves. Republicans, on the other hand, were tasked to believe the exact opposite before the election: no way, no how was it possible to win. What with the Democrat machine, their blue wall, illegal vote and all. Now, after the fact, Republicans are supposed to be apologetic for the results. Really. The only acceptable reaction to the left is for us to apologize for winning, and to deconstruct it.

Democrats are so far in denial that they have no options but to dissent from reality. Of course there is nothing acceptable to the left with what has happened since election.

It is worth looking at the piece (here) and listen to the voicemails.

RightRing | Bullright

Dems lose on a champagne, caviar budget

One of the strangest, and funniest, things I witnessed was Van Jones prosecuting Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Never mind that 8 months later, Dems never had a real autopsy over the death of Hillary’s campaign.

He gave a speech in Chicago with just that subject on the docket.

The Hill — People’s Summit in Chicago.

“The Hillary Clinton campaign did not spend their money on white workers, and they did not spend it on people of color. They spent it on themselves,” Jones told a packed house at McCormick Place in Chicago. “They spent it on themselves, let’s be honest.”

“Let’s be honest,” Jones continued. “They took a billion dollars, a billion dollars, a billion dollars, and set it on fire, and called it a campaign!”

“That wasn’t a campaign. That’s not a campaign.”

Jones continued, attacking the Clinton campaign’s reliance on consultants and polling data that proved to be wrong.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/337253-van-jones-rips-clinton-campaign-they-spent-money-on-themselves

It could be the case that she spent more money than anyone in history to not get elected.

Now, despite all the money flowing into the Georgia-6th District, once again their expensive scorched earth strategy ended in ashes, with Ossoff losing by 6 points.

It is not what pundits expected and it wasn’t what Ossoff hoped. And he was beat by a woman…with a real vagina rather than a Planned Parenthoody imposter.

Elections have consequences, for sure….. they empty bank accounts. So while Republicans want to Drain the Swamp, the Democrats just want to drain bank accounts.

A Democrat message in a bottle to anyone listening

Welcome to the Left — I mean the new reality. (oops even ‘reality’ is a pun now.)

I heard interesting conversations from libs in the last few days, after the Alexandria shooting. It was “one nut,” “one crazy guy.” So you point out that it is more than one guy out there with the DNC. They scoff. Then you point to tweets and Libs’ blame of Trump for even shooting Reublicans. Nice. They deny it has anything to do with partisan politics.

They tell you how they condemn all forms of violence by anyone. “It is not a left vs right thing,” they claim, “we support peaceful action.” Why can’t we all get along, why the bitterness? We point out the Left’s problem and propensity for violence, so they claim they haven’t seen or known anyone like that. You can only play dumb for so long. (below)

Actually it looks and feels a lot like arguments about Islam and terrorists. The same tactics and strategy in both. If it is one thing I concluded over the years, it is that violence is the Left’s plan-B when it can’t get its way.

To the rescue: Pat Buchanan has ‘Exhibit-A’ chronicling the long, bitter history of the Left with hatred and the violence accompanying it. Hey, they don’t call it Hard Left for nothing.

By Patrick J. Buchanan

James T. Hodgkinson of Belleville, Illinois, who aspired to end his life as a mass murderer of Republican Congressmen, was a Donald Trump hater and a Bernie Sanders backer.

Like many before him, Hodgkinson was a malevolent man of the hating and hard left.

His planned atrocity failed because two Capitol Hill cops were at that Alexandria baseball field, providing security for House Whip Steve Scalise. Had those cops not been there, a massacre would have ensued with many more dead than the gunman.

More at: http://buchanan.org/blog/long-history-leftist-hatred-127223

But we have an evolving view playing out in front of us. Here is an exchange.

Excuse number one:(from a Dem strategist)

Sigh or high-five, who can be sure?

Of course it is only a sampling, there are too many to mention. It is cool to talk up their hatred insisting that somehow the Left’s violence could be justified because of Republicans’ agenda or what we did. Blame the victims as if Repubs should have expected this.

And then there is the class war argument. How long have libs been running on class warfare? Yet the idiots have that figured out too. Dems class warfare is our fault too — even though it is about all they have to run on. Their strategy is blamed on Repubs.

Have you ever witnessed a bunch of people more averse to taking any responsibility than the liberal left? Republicans and conservatives aren’t even in the same race.

State of Deep Denial and Defiance

The Democrats want to impeach the campaign and candidacy of Donald Trump. That’s what this is all about. It’s about the campaign, stupid.

Forget the Russian hacking, the Left has stolen our election from us. You remember the one last November? And I’d like to see the investigation over that.

The Left also stole the concept: we were and are the resistance. That and Trump’s election is exactly why we see the response from the entire establishment across the spectrum, aiming its guns on Trump’s administration. Meanwhile, there is a complete shadow government combined with Deep State focused on Trump.

It’s no secret, the Democrats wanted Comey gone for what he did to Hillary alone. Trump fires him, Dems jeer and then use Comey as grounds to impeach Trump. I have to check if the earth is still orbiting the sun or has their “Mother Earth” just gone rogue?

Meanwhile, the left issued a new dictum that Republicans cannot bring Obama and his legacy of lies, scandals or Hillary into the discussion. Take Obama and Hillary off the table? How convenient this web of deceit is.

However, scrubbing Obama and Hillary creates the convenient excuse to mention Nixon in every conversation. That is when they aren’t gossiping about Russia and Putin.

A fired Comey is suddenly the center stage character in this soap opera. How’s that figure? Discredited director Comey instantly has unimpeachable credibility. Beam me up, Scotty.

All while Obama writes and edits his Memoirs from Hell. Eric Holder, Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Huma Mahmood Abedin, Hillary Clinton have get out of jail free cards from media. So Obama’s official tenure of blame has ended. A new phase of blame has begun.

RightRing | Bullright

Chelsea forming swamp of support

Brought to you, again, by the corrupt Clinton’s perpetual campaign of enablers. Back, by unpopular demand, is the slobbering press now pimping Chelsea Clinton for mass public consumption. Who cares about Chelsea? Well that doesn’t matter.

How cool? Not. Power of women? Oh, they found just the perfect model… of nothing.

The corrupt Clinton machine is busy grooming her for what, as a favorite politician? A bridge way too far.

They aren’t floating her possible candidacy, They are steaming full speed ahead Titanic style toward the biggest iceberg out there. The last Clinton has not yet admitted why she lost, but here’s another… in case you couldn’t stomach the last one. Cool?

Goose and gander: Obama vs. Trump

Okay, “Russians interfered in our election” is the talking point. I get it. It’s the outrage of the decade, sure. Interference in our elections or policies is offensive. That’s the big issue.

Then why is Obama’s former presidency trying to sabotage the new sitting president somehow not a problem? Not a concern? How could you ignore that if you were so worried about the sovereignty of something like elections and the stability of our government?

News flash, elections were never really threatened. If you cannot weather some secondary outside probing, then your election system is really frail and in trouble. Hearing them say "our Democracy was at risk" is a huge leap. Russia could have destroyed our democracy. Then why is sabotage and undermining by the former administration not a threat?

RightRing | Bullright

2008: Obama campaign talks to Iran — and ghost of Ted Kennedy

Get ready for a short trip in the way-back machine to 2008.
Obama’s campaign had a series of communications with both Iran and Syria.

Obama Held Secret Talks With Iran, Syria Weeks Before Election

Malkah Fleisher, 02/02/09 | Arutz Sheva
U.S. President Barack Obama employed representatives to hold secret high-level talks with Iran and Syria months prior to his election as president.

United States President Barack Obama employed representatives and experts to hold secret high-level talks with Iran and Syria months prior to his election as president, organizers of the meetings told Agence France Presse on Monday.

Over the past few months, Obama campaign and election officials, as well as nuclear non-proliferation experts, had several “very, very high-level” contacts with Iranian leaders, according to Jeffrey Boutwell, executive director for the U.S. branch of the Pugwash group, a Nobel Prize-winning international organization of scientists. Former defense secretary William Perry, who served in Obama’s election campaign, also participated in some of the meetings, which included discussions on Iran’s nuclear program and the Arab-Israeli conflict. …/

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad affirmed the reports Monday that Obama officials had repeated contact with his country for some time prior to the U.S. elections. “Dialogue started some weeks ago in a serious manner through personalities who are close to the administration and who were dispatched by the administration,” Assad said. ../ Read more

So guess who was talking to Iran months before taking office? I don’t even want to get on the Iranian Valerie Jarrett off-ramp. No SNL skits, only a “thrill up the leg” to media.

Hearings, investigations, wire taps, outrage, Independent Counsel…. don’t be silly.

While we are in the way back machine, let us go a few decades back to 1983. Good ol’ lion of the Senate, Mary Jo Kopechne killer, Ted Kennedy made his grand invitation to the Soviet’s Communist Party, and Yuri Andropov, to come intervene in our election. A quid pro quo. Senator Kennedy was trying to challenge Reagan and needed an edge.

American Thinker

The Democrats are desperately diverting attention away from their rigging the nomination fight by charging that Russia is interfering in our election. But there was a time when going to Moscow to help defeat the other party didn’t seem to disturb Democrats. In fact, with the help of friendly media, the entire incident has been sent to the memory hole. Once upon a time it was revealed, but nobody outside of the conservative ghetto remembers.

So he promised Soviets wide access to the American media to make their case. But how would he assure Soviets of such unprecedented access? Well, Ted won’t be talking, nor anyone else either. Maybe we could ask his media friends? Investigations? FBI probe? Logan Act? Surely you jest.

Rantzilla on having a new President

Buckle up I have a rant for you, if you are interested. What a difference a few long months makes?

The National Coalition of Trolls (DNC et al) has kicked off their newest operation, fashioning itself as a Tea Party type movement. Hey, I’m not writing their script, only commenting about it.

Seven years after the popular Tea Party rise, Democrats are imitating the movement. Wait, they spent all that time mocking, attacking, ignoring, and calling them racists etc.; but now say they are following in their footsteps. Media spent 7 years attacking it, trying to marginalize and discredit them.

Whatever they say.

Wait, the Tea Party was set off by government intervention in healthcare, bailouts, stimulus, arrogance of power, and taxagedon to grow government and its control by dolling out goodies to people. Yet Liberals and Democrats say they are following Tea Party’s lead? The original call for Tea Parties was led by Rick Santelli on CNBC saying enough is enough, announcing the idea of Tea Party, hearkening back to the days of patriots dumping tea in Boston Harbor to protest taxes and the King’s control schemes. Everything about that is contrary to the modern Left, and any movement it started.

Tea Parties also had strong overtones about freedom of speech, religion, the Founders and the Constitution. Not necessarily what we see in today’s left. They do call themselves progressives but the new term, coined by others, is regressive. They are about shutting down speech of others or labeling different views hate speech. Still, they continue their imitation narrative.

Never mind that the left is also caught up in their civil disobedience and violence agenda. It is basically nothing like what conservatives or Republicans did. Tea Parties had a respect for law enforcement and kept the demonstrations neat — even though they were grassroots organized. Not the Left. Tea Parties were bottom up grass roots, even resisting the intervention of some Republicans who wanted to commandeer it. The Left is always organized top down, by those in power, or close to its power center. (George Soros et al) But it is staged to seem grassroots — Move On. It’s their business model.

Here is an interesting tangent to liberals.

I have a theory involving market forces and the Left’s willing gullibility to believe in all these things they do, so easily. I figure if you can find a way to target that segment of people, it would be a goldmine. How so? Just think about it. Obama ran on a faith-based message and they all bought it: lock, stock and barrel.

I mean if you have people who are that easy to sell anything you want, then you have a powerful market of buyers or consumers. They demonstrate a willingness to believe in things based on little proof. And once they do, believe in it, you can hardly even talk them out of it. That, my friends, is gold to any marketing agenda. That’s the utopia salesman have searched for. Think about that slogan, change you can believe in. Then think about Obamacare and all the lies. You couldn’t even tell them they were lies, even after Gruber came out admitting it. Even after it was proven to be lies, they still believed it.

So that is the secret, getting them to believe it. That isn’t hard, they are an easy pitch. But once they do, they remain loyal even if results are not what they expected. Now that is the kind of people any marketer wants to find.

Whether this quote is from James Carville or not, it is true from the standpoint of reality. And Obama constantly proved it.

The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That’s why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd. — credited to James Carville.

So couple their mentality with the herd mindset and you have a powerful consumer base. You could sell them anything. And they create the demand all by themselves. What could be wrong with that? And then, once sold on it, you could not talk them out of it.

All you have to do is look at the last election. Bernie scored big with Dems, some say he could have won. He promised them free healthcare, free college and a 15 per/hr minimum wage. They believed and remained loyal. Just what they wanted to hear. You couldn’t talk them out of it. They sent in their five box tops and sat there waiting for it to arrive.

Wake up and smell the crazy.

Democrats discovered a new phenomena called Voter Rage. And it is catching on in the media. They like this movement, of course. Remember all the attacks at Tea Parties? Not so with the perpetual protestors, which are nothing more than re-branded Occupiers, who re-branded themselves Bernie’s base, who re-branded themselves as the Resistance.

Something happens they don’t like, take the rage to the streets. Mix it with anarcho-commies, it gets very colorful. They weaponize rage and hate as tools.

What we have with the Left is the biggest case of projection I have ever seen. They lost the election but now think they can project themselves right back into majority power, or at least a potent minority one. Their perception is supposed to become everyone’s reality.

Democrats have that other time-worn weapon. If they don’t get their way, they take to the streets and protest. That is a powerful force for them to get more stuff, or promises. See how this cycle works? Once they believe, they’ll do anything for that cause whether they understand it or not. It makes no difference. People wonder how so many people can be self-claimed socialist? My opinion is they aren’t all socialists — many are Me-ists. As long as they think it benefits ‘Me’ they’re fine with it. If it is not, then cue the rage.

RightRing | Bullright

Maxine Waters Stirring Her Impeachment Latte

Some things just defy words.

And then there is Maxine Waters, which is why we have video today.

“Eventually, we’ve got to do something about him [Trump].”

She failed to say if that was North or South Korea. I’m sure it was an oversight.

But just keep leading the way, Maxine, for the DCC and DNC to follow.

Problem is CA, LA, America needs to do something about Maxine… before it’s too late.

Telling Teen Vogue magazine on the subject of impeachment, she said:

“I think we should go for it.”

Dems may need “lessons” to talk to Trump voters

What else would you expect? When Dems take a whooping like they did in November, they don’t need an autopsy for what they did wrong. No, they just need to learn to talk to those Trump voters. Er, you know, the people they have worked so damn hard to ignore for oh, about a decade or more.

I’ll take more ignorance, please, as long as you’re dishing it out.

Democrats hold lessons on how to talk to real people

Gathering in Sheperdstown, W.Va., Democrats were scheduled to hear from liberal political operative David Brock on Thursday, who ran a session called “Hold Trump Accountable” with Center for American Progress CEO Neera Tanden and Priorities USA CEO Guy Cecil. Earlier in the day, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) moderated a “discussion with Trump voters,” according to a draft schedule obtained by POLITICO.

[topics include] “speaking to those who feel invisible in rural America,” “Listening to those feel unheard,” and “Rising America — They feel unheard too.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/democrats-real-people-lessons-234198

In other news, Tucker Carlson gets jonathan Gruber back on Fox for his pinata routine.

BizPac Review

“I think that’s a prime example of the misinformation that has been spread. I just don’t think people understand what the law has done for them,” he said.

When asked about the people the law has hurt, Gruber said, “This law was never supposed to help everybody, Tucker. That wasn’t the design. The law was actually explicitly designed first in Massachusetts and then for the nation to leave the vast majority of Americans alone.

Gruber said the belief was that people who had health insurance would eventually benefit in the “long-term” by lowering cost. The law was designed to “fix what was wrong in our system.

Problem was it was sold on lies. All lies. So when they promised it would not affect people, it did. It did not leave us alone. But that was really the design. The sales pitch was that it would leave us alone. He got the sales pitch and design mixed up.

So you want to be a liberal

I thought it might be good to have a piece that describes the nuances of how to become a liberal. Many younger people might be trying to figure out what it is. It’s not for everyone.

I will describe some of the proper ethics to today’s liberalism — not to be confused with the old classical liberals a century ago. The two aren’t compatible.

Get acquainted with ideas of modern, post sixties, liberaldom. Identity, identity, identity.

The golden rule is every identity group has their own formula to follow to be a proper, politically correct, liberal. It’s all about who you are, first. So it is very important to know who you are. Most of it, and your view, is based on who you are. Identity matters a lot.

At this point, you may want to look into the mirror and familiarize yourself with: skin color, your heritage, sexual identity, age, your religion, status in this country, the language you speak, type of education you have, the school(s) you went to, the degree you have, your career choice, your type of employment, union you belong to, organizations, how much money you make, whether you are married, single or living with someone, the children you have, their ages, their races, the kind of home you live in or neighborhood, what denomination you are, or what your other beliefs are… just for a few things to start.

You may think of more categories later. Extra credit — good trainee organizers learn to be naturally creative at finding new categories. That all matters to being a good liberal.

Get used to that group identity because it is all you’ll be seen as, in liberal circles — or cocktail parties and social rallies you will attend. Liberals learn to stay in their own lane.

Now to really be mainstream on main street, you’ll have to learn this simple formula: your identity is the key to your role and identity in liberaldom. Don’t leave home without it.

Practical applications

If you listen to liberal activists, they’ll tell you to “check your white privilege at the door.” However, as is with liberaldom, things are often different than what liberals say publicly. Some would call those lies, but you don’t have to worry about that in liberaldom. You don’t exactly check white privilege, you punctuate it. You can’t check your identity.

One of the most import things today is the race card. To use it the right way, like the tool it is, you have to know how it works. Different rules apply to different groups.

If you are black, you generally play the race card by promoting your race and culture. Then you denounce structural racism, which is everywhere. If you are white, it is the opposite. You play it by acknowledging and apologizing for being white, first. You must go through initiation. It’s like a fraternity, you take an oath to preserve black or minorities’ culture, while demonstrating guilt for your perceived white privilege.

Understand if you are white, you will never be able to live down or say anything that removes the stain of your whiteness nor its stain on society. That’s important because you must assume responsibility for anything ever done to another race or minority, on behalf of anyone who was white in the history of this country. You can never overcome that damage, and no amount of penitence will fix it. For instance, your posture is to feel guilt while blacks’ is to be proud. Then you can move on to the general denunciation structural racism.

Feel free to play the race card within those boundaries.

Now you have learned the simple pillar on which everything else in liberaldom is built. You must see everything, culturally and politically, through the lens of identities. There are other categories to also use but identity is the basic. It grows on you.

You can then broaden out to apply this identity formula toward all political opponents. Then you can add Alinsky rules and tactics toward your enemy. When attacking your target, pick apart his/her positions by singling out people by groups or categories. Use the identity of anyone or everyone to your own advantage. That is what they are for.

The Mafia has the Omerta pledge, while Libs have political correctness. P/C rules.
One final rule is to defend liberaldom at all costs. No exceptions or exemptions.

RightRing | Bullright

Negative Impact On The Election

Okay, which one had more negative effects and impact on the election:

(A) hacks and wikilleaks’ dumps of a couple email accounts connected to Hillary Clinton
(and so-called Russian intervention in the election via influencing voters) OR

(B)the hyper-radicalized media coverage attacking Trump 24/7 for over 9 months ?
(while dumbing down coverage by ignoring criticisms / record of Hillary Clinton)
 

You decide. Shall we examine the headlines and press pages, too? Mo’ investigation!

RightRing | Bullright

Schumer recruiting Trump

Cheesy Chuck Schumer declared that the only way Democrats could work with Trump is if he abandons his Republican base and joins Democrats, instead.

Well, I guess he already forgot who won the election. See their idea of bipartisanship?

Take note McCain — it is going to get increasingly lonely on his pedestal. But then he probably already made that choice.

The Year of Whining Liberals

After much thought, I am going to declare 2017 the year of Whining Democrats.

And they are off to a great start setting the narrative. Post election, their incessant whining began and it won’t stop, over anything and everything .

Thus, the year will go right from one whining Democrat bitch into the next one.

There are not enough crying towels to go around. It will be a non-stop crying fest.

That will go nicely with Obama’s shadow government running the opposition department for the DNC right down the street from the White House. Obama, The Shadow Whiner.

Connie Francis, “Who’s sorry now?” — circa ’58

Obama’s Desparate Push To Handcuff Trump’s White House

Andrew WestFriday, December 30, 2016

President Obama is acting in unprecedented angst during his last month in office, in what could only be described as an attempt to sabotage the agenda of incoming President-Elect Donald Trump.

http://linkis.com/patriotupdate.com/GYt1A

Whining — definitely not to be confused with winning.

 

Note: One year ago today, I said 2015 was “the Year of the Outsider” before others did.
Just call me Captain Obvious, at your service.