Liberals’ Narrative of Rage

I could use a 1,000 words on the state of liberaldom and liberal media but it almost defies description in many ways. Yet there is no doubt about what they are doing. That liberaldom, and its apologists, are an institutional danger.

When media has mainstreamed propaganda to this level by well-known people, with so-called journalists, we have entered a new state. That it is yet celebrated is another symptom.

Ana Navarro of CNN said Trump “is unfit to be human.” Talk about dehumanizing. The vice-mayor of Charlottesville only calls him 45 because Trump hasn’t earned the respect or title of president. David Gergen, former presidential adviser, said Trump cannot “deal with racism in the country until he deals with the racism in his own heart.”

Just a few more for amusement. A consensus at CNN was Trump is now the ‘Supremacist In Chief.’ Michael Moore declares any white person who voted for him is a racist.

Welcome to ‘No-Reality TV’ – media.

Media: Agents of Ulterior Agenda

I thought it would be useful for scientific purposes to look at who it is the MSM thinks they’re talking to? Who are their preferred viewers or readers? Who is their focus?

First of all, it would be someone who is able to be influenced. Zoom in on those like a laser. So that means that people can be influenced. If they didn’t think so, then they would be wasting their time. Maybe not all, though those are the ones they are concerned with.

And evidently, media thinks this segment of people are pretty dumb. At least uninformed to the point media’s new, enlightened information can possibly change what they think or believe about something, like Donald Trump. Too dumb and you are of no use to them politically, which is of course all that matters.(politics)

That also aligns with what Obama believed, when he always lectured us about not understanding or comprehending what he was doing and saying. You know, it was the ignorant people who were just too dumb to know what was good for them. But he, the smart guy he was, always knew what was good for us. We heard it for 8 years.

The idea is if people were only as smart as they are, we all would agree with libs. It’s their no-brainer, self-evident truth. If persons still don’t believe in Liberal’s agenda, then they are either dumb or some ignorant form of sub-human beings. And discarded as such.

There are basically only two choices: smart like them or ignorant if you disagree. Media and Obama read from the same script. If you are the dumb unconvinced type, you should be rolled by masses who believe otherwise, with no compassion for your views. Having any compassion for your views would humanize you — they must avoid that at all cost.

The people media are concerned with are those that can be pushed, shoved or corralled into supporting libs’ views, in some way. So media wants to be talking right to them as much as possible. It isn’t worried about the ones who do agree, only those who don’t. (they are a threat) That is why Obama, Pelosi or now media have to demonize them.

 

This made me contemplate what I would be if I was their ideal target? I would be someone who is not locked into any belief. (unless to their liberal views) I would be someone who just is not very familiar with any “real” facts. (*real as liberals term them)

I would be impressionable and could believe something based on my sensitivities — natural or coerced — to other people. I would be someone who could give in to peer pressure or brow-beating. Or, alternatively, I could be someone who gives in easily if faced with some unified front of opposition – or defeated by coercive force.

I might also be someone who believes in the nobility of man’s motives or desires, as generally good. I would be someone who is basically gullible, or enough so that I accept what they tell me as basically correct and have a tendency to agree with simple profound points projected at me.

I would believe in, or accept, a zero sum ‘one way or another’ ideology that tells me I either agree with liberals or stand condemned. I would believe that liberals probably are correct about most of the major issues, the more I learn and study about them.

I might also accept the fact, or learn it, that critical thinking only needs to be applied toward non-liberals. I would also soon learn that there is only one way to look at things, in the end. Other views are invalid or need to be abolished. I might also accept that liberals bestow freedom on us and that, in the end, they should control it as its most intelligent caretakers. Throw in someone with an anti-American bias as a bonus prerequisite.

Incidentally, when I consider this profile, I think how it overlays with someone Russians or Marxists look for. So their ideal targets of opportunity seem to overlap the same types.

More could no doubt be added. But Obama, liberals, and media target the same profiles and people. They just believe it is all a matter of informing us enough with their material — be it news or propaganda — to convert us into a usable, controllable political commodity.

It’s worth noting, too, that this group of liberal orthodoxy and their mindset are the ones orchestrating this self-declared Resistance movement. What is wrong with that picture?

RightRing | Bullright

Nothing new to CNN and blackmail

Back on the day before Trump’s inauguration, CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, basically threatening Trump and his administration, that:

“One of the things I think this administration hasn’t figured out yet is that there’s only one television network that is seen in Beijing, Moscow, Seol, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus – and that’s CNN.

The perception of Donald Trump in capitals around the world is shaped, in many ways, by CNN. Continuing to have an adversarial relationship with [us] that network is a mistake.

Do the translation of that. We hold your perception in our hands, act accordingly.
Our media monopoly = your ‘perception’ demise, should we decide so. From the network with 93% negative coverage of Trump. (that is not adversarial, it’s vendetta journalism)

Forward to today and one objectionable meme to CNN. They hunt down and solicit an apology and he removes content, and then CNN says:

“CNN is not publishing “HanA**holeSolo’s” name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.”

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

Andrew the self-anointed speech cop for CNN claims no threat.
Now we are “misinterpreting” their statement. Nah, don’t think so.

Two “Becauses”, one “in addition” and one “reserves right should ANY of that change.” = no threat? (IOW: a veto right to our nondisclosure of your identity and whatever we like.)

Where is his “right” (speech) “reserved”? No, it is now conditional upon CNN’s approval.

Misinterpreted? Lots of “intent” there. Who made them speech judge, juror, executioner?

(But if it were a CNN anonymous source, ignore and reverse all the above.)

175 & Counting Lawsuit and Blackmail

Who are the 175? Well, it’s the beginning, and growing, number of plaintiffs who are part of a class action lawsuit against CNN for its discriminatory practices.

Wonder why you don’t hear about this and it never comes up on their own news network when they talk about discrimination? Funny how that is.

Here’s Something You Don’t Hear Much About: The 175 People Suing CNN For Racial Discrimination

By: Joseph Curl | Daily Wire

There has been much ado — and rightly so — over the goings on at Fox News Channel – sexual harassment, hush money allegedly paid to victims, a string of high-profile resignations (some of which were really firings)…./

There has been much ado — and rightly so — over the goings on at Fox News Channel – sexual harassment, hush money allegedly paid to victims, a string of high-profile resignations (some of which were really firings).

“The lawsuit against CNN, meanwhile, claims the company’s Atlanta headquarters is rife with racism,” The New York Post wrote on April 27.

“The lawsuit against CNN, meanwhile, claims the company’s Atlanta headquarters is rife with racism,” The New York Post wrote on April 27.

Minority employees had to endure bigoted remarks such as “It’s hard to manage black people” and “Who would be worth more: black slaves from times past, or new slaves?,” according to a complaint by former workers Celeslie Henley and Ernest Colbert Jr. filed in Atlanta federal court.

Colbert Jr. also claims he was paid thousands less than white colleagues as a manager at the affiliated Turner Broadcasting System.

Henley, a former CNN executive assistant, says she was fired in 2014 for complaining that black employees were being paid less than white counterparts.

See more: http://www.dailywire.com/news/16140/heres-something-you-dont-hear-much-about-175-joseph-curl

 

Another Offensive Move from CNN media

Compounding their injury, CNN has now engaged in a blackmail campaign against the meme-maker of the CNN – WWE smackdown video, featuring Trump. These people apparently have no sense of humor whatsoever. And they cannot take any mockery at all, even while they ridicule and mock the American people and White House daily.

They threatened this social media person, a 15 yr-old kid man, with exposing his real identity and other posts they found objectionable. How they got the information, supposedly from ISP via TWC, adds to it. They basically made him agree to shut up.

But what difference does it make who made the clever little video joke that went viral? Only CNN cares because they claim it “incites violence.” They also want Twitter to shut down Trump’s Twitter account for posting it. Now they claim they’ll continue asking Twitter why they haven’t taken action? Whew-wee, have they taken it too far or what?

That is the same network chronically complaining about ‘off-camera’ White House press briefings. That curtails their grandstanding and filibuster capabilities. Even though there is no such requirement in our US Constitution to them.

The same network who daily uses more anonymous sources than freckles. They demand protection and guarantee it to “sources,” no matter how controversial their leaks are. No problem, the leakers need Constitutional protections.

However, a private citizen who made a clever, funny meme on the internet is sought, bullied, threatened and blackmailed by CNN into silence. (Read, threaten to turn left-wing goons on him) They don’t really have a clue on the first amendment or the Constitution.

So the lesson, class, is no free speech in the first amendment for the people. Only plenty of far-reaching protections for the MSM elite media, “press” though.

Conclusion: CNN has become 1st Amendment Assassins — my first amendment view.

(*Correction: so it was not a 15 yr old kid, but again that only matters to CNN)

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.

Time for a Truth Bomb for Pelosi

This is inconvenient, for a lady who claims to be a stalwart Catholic, familiar with Catholic doctrine, who also often finds herself out of step with traditional teachings on life or other cultural issues.

But in this episode, in San Fran Nan’s zeal to attack the Republicans’ alternative plan to Obamacare that passed the house, and her rush to defend Obamacare — Affordable Healthcare Act — she really muddies the water on religion and politics.

Pelosi made her remarks at her press conference shortly after the passing of the latest Obamacare alternative in the House. But it was a repeated lie she had already used against the former Republican bill, which was pulled and did not get passed.

She rattles off a list of organizations opposed to the Republican plan (many of which originally supported Obamacare) She then lists churches or faith-based institutions along with the United Methodist Church.

First let’s start with the previous bill, on 3/09/17, at her press conference, Pelosi said:

So again, on three fronts, of course, the Affordable Care Act and all that it means to families is very important. The United Methodist Church, in their statement, said people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care. AARP, the American Medical Association, the hospital association, nurses and physicians, patients, insurers, and consumer groups all oppose the GOP bill.

Again, last week on 5/4/17 Pelosi says: (at an open press conference)

“Sister Simone Campbell said, ‘this is not the faithful way forward and must be rejected.’ The Catholic Health Association wrote, ‘we strongly encourage the full house to reject this replacement bill.’ And the United Methodist Church said, ‘opposing Trumpcare, this is what they said, people will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.

Lutheran services of America said, ‘Trumpcare will jeopardize the health care and long-term service and support of millions of Americans.’ The Episcopal Church said, ‘Trumpcare falls woefully short of our spiritual calling to care for the least of these, as well as the noble values upon which our great nation was founded.’ End of quote. And all that was said before the Republicans decided to destroy the protections of Americans with pre-existing conditions. — [Pelosi- press conference on 5/4/17]

Below is apparently the UMC statement from the article Pelosi was referring to:
Note the author says she is the General Secretary [excerpt]

Health Care is a Basic Human Right

The General Secretary’s statement on Congressional Efforts to rollback health care

by Rev. Dr. Susan Henry-Crowe on March 07, 2017

“We must not allow our leaders to take away affordable and accessible health care from the communities who need it to live and live abundantly.

This bill has been promoted as a “fix” to the health care system in the United States but will do nothing to improve access and affordability. Instead, it will harm many in the congregations and communities in which we live and serve. People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.”

That is basically marked as the General Secretary’s personal statement. How could it be conferred as the statement from the national conference board of the UMC? It s one member’s personal position, though it is posted on the GBCS.org website.

It was one member of the UMC church, as influential as she may be. It does not speak for the entire church itself, as Pelosi suggested. No, she insisted on two separate occasions that it was a statement on behalf of the United Methodist Church.

Dr. Henry-Crowe stated in conclusion: (note the pronoun I)

“I will be calling my members of Congress to urge them to vote no on the bill, and I encourage United Methodists in the United States to join me in advocating for a health care system that leaves no person behind.”

She encourages other members to take that action……on behalf of herself, as the Secretary. But she does not speak for the entire church. Again, she has it posted on the GBCS website. Henry-Crowe, not a medical doctor, also offers no proof for the claim that “people will die”.

Another UM news outlet disected Pelosi’s dilemma: [excerpt]
Good News – Walter Fenton- [*GBCS is General Board & Church Society]

“We were confident no such [“people wiill die”] statement existed. The UM Church, thankfully, does not make a habit of pontificating on every bill that comes before Congress. Only the General Conference, which meets every four years, can pronounce authoritatively for the UM Church. What we suspected was that Rep. Pelosi had read something a UM bishop or the General Secretary of GBCS had said about the bill. And sure enough, Henry-Crowe had recently opined, “People will die because of efforts like this to roll back health care.” Pelosi gladly took Henry-Crowe’s personal prognostication that “people will die,” as the UM Church’s official word on the bill. It is not.

Henry-Crowe, who holds two degrees in theological studies, and for 22 years served as the dean of the chapel and religious life at Emory University before her role at GBCS, offered no evidence to support her hyperbolic claim. Her remark is particularly interesting in light of a recent column by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat. To be sure, like Henry-Crowe, Douthat is not a health care expert. But unlike her, he actually references reputable studies that find claims about how many lives this or that insurance plan will save to be overblown. As Douthat notes, since the expansion of Medicaid under the ACA, Americans have not become healthier or experienced lower mortality rates (they’re actually higher in some of the states and counties where Medicaid was expanded).

It is hard to understand why, in a church with rank-and-file members from across the political spectrum, GBCS has felt compelled to march almost uniformly to the left on most issues. And it often seems incapable of even acknowledging people of good faith and good will might find alternative prescriptions to be reasonable, responsible, and compassionate. GBCS has a propensity to close off options and stifle conversation before it gets started. So if you don’t stand with Henry-Crowe and GBCS on the recent bill before Congress, you’re evidently comfortable with a plan that will allow “people [to] die. (read full article here) ”

Listen to two more excerpts in the same article which make the point:

“GBCS [General Board] seems to have no dialogue partners in a church that desperately needs them.”

“This is odd and even unhelpful coming from an organization appointed to serve and represent the whole church, not just its left wing.”

“Progressives often style themselves as community organizers for social justice, but you seldom get the impression that GBCS folks are actually out organizing among the grassroots. Instead, they are more often found provoking laity and pastors with progressive pronouncements issued from their Capitol Hill offices in Washington D.C.”

“In the future, we hope Henry-Crowe can find the good in other proposals and refrain from conversation stoppers like, “people will die.”

So, in the end, Pelosi was duped or lied. Though she should have at least looked at the statement — it is not a UMC dicta. Maybe other Methodists were even hoodwinked by Pelosi’s careless public assertion about a specious commentary, coming from one member who happens to be a Secretary.

Though if Pelosi is going to go out and make a proclamation representing an entire organization, or church, she should have confirmed it first.

It’s also interesting in light of President Trump’s executive order over the Johnson Amendment. For years, there have been threats to churches about taking part in politics, yet, as the author above states, some members freely associate the church with left-wing politics on current issues. That political activism is celebrated, just as this was by Pelosi, as a formal church position on progressive, liberal political issues. That is no problem at all.

Funny how whenever it is abortion or other cultural, traditional issues then people claim it is over the line, off bounds for the church. There are plenty of examples.

When churches or clergy sign a petition to Congress to investigate aid to Israel, no problem with that lobbying. But there is never any dialogue, criticism of left wing positions the UMC adopts…. even taking advocacy positions on sanctuary cities or sanctuary status for UM churches — I’ll call them Sanctuary Sanctuaries. No harm or foul in that.

Ref: http://goodnewsmag.org/2017/04/people-will-die-2/
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/3917/
http://umc-gbcs.org/faith-in-action/health-care-is-a-basic-human-right
http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/5417-6/

Maddow on the warpath

Check this out for statements from space. Rachael Maddow on her fear about Trump:

“So it’s a weird tension. It’s a dangerous time for the first amendment and the free press in this country. At the same time, we’re oddly influential with the guy who wants to kill us.” – Rachael Maddow roadshow via Mediaite

Notice Maddow’s flippant use of the words “kill us.” The first literal way to take it is so absurd it is hard to conceive what she meant. For the sake of it, just take it that she means effectually killing the first amendment. That’s bad enough. Killing off the news media?

This is a running screed in media and the left that Trump is killing their first amendment, or certainly that is his goal. I don’t know where they come up with that.

Now if anyone had a problem with the entire 1st amendment, it was Obama. Media sycophants weren’t the least concerned over that: speech, religious freedom, assembly, (bad) press etc. He was at war with most of it, and anyone using it against him.

Know who your friends, enemies are

One of the campaign issues Trump sounded a bullhorn on, at least to evangelicals, pastors and churches, was getting rid of the Johnson Amendment.

That is the one burdening pastors and pulpits under political restrictions to the first amendment, by using 501 status as a lever against them. Holding them hostage you might say. Also placing restrictions on churches. Well, seemed popular didn’t it?

But over the years, so many have become programmed and indoctrinated to this policy. Like a lot of liberal theology, it becomes normalized. No excuses, plenty of complacency.

That’s where it is comes time to know who are your friends and who are your enemies, And so often the latter are closer than you think.

Hundreds of religious groups call on Congress to keep Johnson Amendment

Harry Farley Journalist 05 April 2017 | Christian Today

Nearly 100 religious groups are urging Congress to keep the ‘Johnson Amendment’ which limits churches’ political activities.

President Donald Trump has vowed to repeal the law which blocks ministers from endorsing political candidates from the pulpit or religious organizations from donating to either party. Many Republicans back him and argue the amendment infringes on religious groups’ free speech.

But 99 different groups have written to oppose the move.

‘The charitable sector, particularly houses of worship, should not become another cog in a political machine or another loophole in campaign finance laws,’ they write.

The strongly worded backlash comes from across the religious spectrum from The Episcopal Church and Baptist groups to Catholic, Jewish, Islamic and Hindu movements.

‘Current law serves as a valuable safeguard for the integrity of our charitable sector and campaign finance system,’ [they] say in a letter to top members of Congress.

……./

Continue reading at Christian Today

Here they come, in the name of ‘protection.’

Or basically all your liberalized arms of churches. We know how to interpret that. Many are the proud who call for boycott, divest, and gov’t sanction actions toward Israel.

Funny, they never seem restrained at all in pushing the progressive political line in churches. That, of course, was never really restricted. We see no applied restrictions on black or leftist churches. They don’t have to worry.

Though even speaking about abortion, and protecting life, has been deemed political and too taboo for prime-time pulpits. Except if you want to protect baby killing, that’s okay.

So now they reveal who they are. Take note. They will stand and defy the action we want. Just as the sanctuary cities stand in defiance to the law and will of the people. Or should I say much like the activist, Sanctuary Churches? Get the idea? Or let them preach Climatology from pulpits. No, that is celebrated. Does that not illustrate the blatant hypocrisy of what they are lecturing us about?

Proverbs 27:6
“Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.”

RightRing | Bullright

Blocked and Rolled Media – Press

You know it’s a bad day for media when they have to report that they’ve been blocked by WH press dept.  You know,  this may be the kind of prohibition that I could get behind.

[NYT] WASHINGTON — Journalists from The New York Times and two other news organizations were prohibited from attending a briefing by President Trump’s press secretary on Friday, a highly unusual breach of relations between the White House and its press corps.

Reporters from The Times, CNN and Politico were not allowed to enter the West Wing office of the press secretary, Sean M. Spicer, for the scheduled briefing. Aides to Mr. Spicer allowed in reporters from only a handpicked group of news organizations that, the White House said, had been previously confirmed to attend.

Organizations allowed in included Breitbart News, the One America News Network and The Washington Times, all with conservative leanings. Journalists from ABC, CBS, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, and Fox News also attended.

More: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-briefing.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

Crying and whining media is offended. They ought to check their press privilege.

Enemy within: Media War on the People

Two statements made news over the weekend. And they were set off by a Trump tweet which you’d think spoke for itself. Maybe these people are not even smart enough to read a tweet and comprehend it.

McCain adds his two cents. You’d never catch him putting it in a tweet.That’s beneath him. He’d much rather run to the Mainstream media wolves to vent.

“A fundamental part of that new world order was a free press. I hate the press. I hate you especially. But the fact is we need you.”

“I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That’s how dictators get started.”

“When you look at history,” McCain said, “the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press. And I’m not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I’m just saying we need to learn the lessons of history.”

He tried to clarify that he was not saying Trump is a dictator. Just referencing it.

Senator Graham cracker has upped the flame by declaring in Germany that 2017 will be “the year Congress kicks Russia in the ass.” (…will they go Obamacare on Russia?)

MSM had its view, from CNN to Chris Wallace on Fox, that they don’t like that talk. Oh, too bad! Get a grip on yourselves. Why is it when the people say something, it’s either disturbing or outrageous? Then when Trump says it, it is downright “dangerous.”

Just look at media, or the press. Adversarial press is the word they like to use. But they’ve gone from biased to adversarial, to opposition, to cheerleaders for obstruction. They are in protest of Trump every day.

Then there is the “I am a Muslim too” protest. Followed by the “Not My President’s day” — impeach him protest. In Britain, elected officials are in protest against Trump receiving a state visit in UK. No state visit for you, Donald! Stay away from our Queen. People in the UK are actually betting how long Trump will last as president?

So President’s Day for Trump means national protest day. Well, every day is protest day for Trump. We have sports’ and Patriots-players’ protests. Pope Francis had more criticism for our domestic and immigration policy. Francis, tear down your wall!

Now getting down to the crux of that media’s war on the people. That is basically what it comes down to. Media doesn’t like that being said or that language? Oh well. Stop acting like the enemy of the people then. Even before Trump won, the media and liberals began attacking Trump’s supporters. It’s a typical leftist tactic to blame and ostracize the supporters — as a basket of deplorables and irredeemables.

Why is media the enemy of the people? Well, this their seventh year of really proving it. Where was this adversarial press for the past eight years? Where was Media mafia on Benghazi.We still don’t know what Obama or officials were doing?

Did they ask probing questions about the Iran deal? No.Did Media care the IRS was targeting Obama’s political opponents. Did they cover Fast and Furious? Did they cry outrage when Obama’s campaign talked to Iran before getting in office? Or call for an independent consel-investigation? Did media pursue Obama’s Russia flexibility?

Did media sympathize with or cover Tea Parties? No, they attacked them relentlessly.

Media despised anyone who was not onboard with Obama; they mocked and probed them and kept reminding everyone that Obama is the president.

Adversarial press? Hardly, they were his biggest cheerleaders. Now press is just more the loyal opposition and the middle man between boycotting, dissenting politicians and the Resistance — which are all really the same thing. Rrah-rah!

They went from Obama’s sycophant press to just the unabashed enemy of the people.

RightRing | Bullright

Open Borders and Closing Freedom

The new paradigm of the Left is much like the old one. The only thing that changes are the means. They call themselves progressives using many cute slogans like “lean forward”. Their speeches are laden with phrases like “we want to keep moving forward” or “we aren’t going backwards.” But the direction they go is to their same old ideas of the past.

The left is now into its regressive movement. That is to close the door on freedom while opening the borders to anarchy. Or open our borders to hate while cracking down on opposing speech by calling it hate speech. Dems don’t have problems with hate.

Just recently South Carolina Senator Tim Scott read a list of the comments he regularly receives from the left. They are filled with names like Uncle Tom, sellout to your race, traitor. All names and labels are fair to them. By design they are meant to hurt and inflict pain. Force and intimidation are two of their favorite weapons.

But what we don’t hear is anyone asking the Democrats to condemn the remarks. They obviously haven’t done so on their own. But these people are the Democrats’ base, and the very people who put them into office. Yet they cannot denounce their words. and no one actually expects them to.

If a Republican supporter said these they would demand condemnation immediately. Look what they did with any racist or KKK statements. Not so with the left, they are free to offend anyone, even rewarded for it. Elizabeth Warren rakes in big dollars for name calling and attacking. She organizes their hate-fest. And the hateathon’s dollars roll in. But our condemnation of that speech is out of line and must be stopped, however possible.

The modern regressive movement is about stomping down the threat of freedom everywhere, even in the womb when they can. Doing the latter under the guise of freedom of choice, or reproductive rights. Nipping freedom in its nurturing womb is an ultimate goal, ripping out its roots before it grows. Nip that seed of freedom in the bud.

But open borders? Now that is something that needs to be unrestricted. Judges decide if we have the grounds, or authority, to restrict non-citizens’ freedom to invade. Though our freedom is wilting on the vine, if left to liberals. The left has set the default position to ‘unrestricted’ and say we basically cannot do anything about it; even if it is a matter of national security against those who declared war on us. Speak nothing about that.

So, open the borders wide and slam the door shut on freedom.

RightRing | Bullright

Free speech is rioting and damaging property

Free speech was once again on full display in Berkeley, CA on Wednesday night. Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak at the campus in Berkeley but was prevented from that by the free speech police (brownshirts) and a coalition of tolerance.

So we see this is not your parents’ free speech. Now there are designated free speech zones, which doesn’t protect from the tolerance brigade attacking any undesirable speech.

Free speech now means the right to destroy property with impunity, and rioting to prevent other speech they don’t like. Media claims this seems ironic considering the Berkley campus was the birthplace of free speech in the sixties. Really? But we always had free speech in that thing called a Constitution. Those rights did not come from Berkeley.

Actually, Berkeley wants abortion of free speech — in the womb — out of their own selfish convenience. So now free speech is really approved speech. All other “speech” is cause for rioting, violence, protests, or all the above. That equals freedom in their 1st Amendment.

LA Times called this a “free speech clash.” Why is it so hard to say riot? Other media reported it was peaceful until anarchists started rioting. It usually is peaceful before rioting. Forced cancellation of a scheduled speaking event is a real clash of free speech.

Update: Robert Reich floats idea on CNN that the rioters may have been right-wing paramilitary types trying to deceive people that it was the leftists. Possibly even in concert with Milo.

RightRing | Bullright

Bannon Bombs Media

Steve Bannon made a statement in an interview and all mainstream media go ballistic. What was his capiital offense., it? He basically told them to shut up_for a while, and just listen. I guess those are fighting words.

As is usually the ]problem, there is the statement(suggestion) and then what media says ABOUT it. And they can say a ;ot. So their talkathon continues and now they even throw in their “we won’t…we won’t.” But the public at large knows what the media or press have been doing. There is not even a question about it. This just gave them an additional thing to talk about.

According to the NYT :

“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while,” Mr. Bannon said in an interview on Wednesday.

“I want you to quote this,” Mr. Bannon added. “The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”

It is the opposition party — as opposed to what they were doing for eight years of Obama.

The hyper-hypocrisy flared when CNN had whining-fest over this comment. Christiane Amanpour went into overdrive saying this constant criticism from Trump everyday is an attempt to delegitimize them, CNN, and is so very disconcerting. It is not fair, ha ha.

But when Sean Spicer complained at the podium about the constant drumbeat against Trump, they laughed and said he was whining, that this is their job and they’ll proudly continue. Now they are complaining. Criticism got under their skin.

Nothing stops their non-stop attackathon on Trump. So is it war? You decide. I just think its a welcome change to finally see them back on their heels.

I mean in one week they already questioned the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency, called him a liar, and CNN called his advisers propaganda ministers.Basically anything they wouldn’t do or say to Obama. I don’t believe a lot from them, but when they are this disturbed, I gotta know that is for real. So they want their conduct to go unchallenged.

That old journalism rule is to never become the story. They blew that one right out of the water. Now media itself has become the story. They had already lost their credibility way back. But now they became the central story because it is so bad. Even after they were exposed trying to help Hillary and colluding with the DNC. They are now advocacy, activist journalism. They warned us that we’re in for a bumpy ride for the next four years

But they do it non-stop over every detail Trump does. He goes around or over them on Twitter. They keep carping away. No you know one thing for sure, that never would have happened under Obama, and they wouldn’t allow it under Clinton. Just for one full day, I’d like to see what it would have been like with Hillary and just one press conference.

The way I see it, media has picked a hell of a hill to die on. The left will tell media to keep attacking and run right into the fire. Everything the people wanted and stood up for, they stand against. It’s going to be one long, amusing battle. … CNN still sucks.

RightRing | Bullright

Game on: media goes scorched lie

It did not take media long, to uniformly do what they refused for eight years to do. I’m talking about calling the president a liar.

Nicholas Kristof actually asked CNN’s Don Lemon “what are you calling it here?” They both agreed that the proper official term should be “lie” to describe what Trump said on the crowd size. With that it has become normalized to call the president a liar.

That’s right, we know they refused every way to use, or even allow, the term lie to be used about Obama. It not only was wrong, but unjustified then.

Remember all the lies if you like your plan you can keep it; if you like your doctor you can keep it. If you have insurance this will not affect me. Illegals will not be getting Obamacare. Remember the not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS? What about the big lie on Benghazi that a video was the cause of “protests” which caused 4 Americans to be slaughtered while our government and officials went AWOL?

Or what about the recent lie that Obama’s administration was scandal-free for eight years. But it is now normalized, and highly encouraged, to call President Trump a liar. Not just voices on the margins but mainstream news organizations.

Kristof even points to NYT having a meeting to decide to use the term. And it only took them 4 days to whip out the Lie-card. CNN pulled it out the day after inauguration. The most trusted name in news lulled it right out. Now all the media can agree.

Truth is media have been calling Trump a liar all along. Just that now as president they can call him a liar, sort of gives them a real thrill. It probably also thrills them to freely use the term now when they were so adamant against using it on Obama.

In September 2016, NYT said:

As the Times gets more comfortable with the “L” word, it will be interesting to see whether other news outlets do the same.

But then, to the media, this is war. Any means to defeat Trump are acceptable, including twisting every statement and lying about him. Of course they will excuse this saying that is how Obama was treated, but it wasn’t .And they wouldn’t stand for that treatment of Obama. Since it is Trump, they can savor every opportunity to use the “lie” word.

And, well, he was already called “illigitimate” by a sitting, senior congressman a week before he was sworn in. Lie or liar just has that extra zing to it.

Remember the good old says when liberals analyzed every use of the the term lie down to some politically correct sludge?

These were the same people propelling the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie about Brown and Ferguson. Remember they had those on location reports saying “mostly peaceful protests”.

RightRing | Bullright

Protest to Protest and F-bombs

Media swivels on its head like the exorcist movie to cover the “massive protests” going on everywhere and “all over the world.”

Before they get too full of themselves, just listen and no one knows exactly what they are protesting. (I think we know it is basically anti–Trump) Actions of a man who was just sworn in, when they organized protests weeks before.

Funny how they describe the “energy” of the protest march as infectious but failed to read the energy levels of the election, even in blue states.

Nevertheless, leave it to CNN in their breaking news coverage on protests, the anchor said: “Oh, Madonna is speaking … we HAVE to go to Madonna.” (just have to go there)

Madonna said welcome to the “revolution of love” before listing off reasons she is upset. Then to saying F-U not once, not twice but three times before they cut it off. She got the trifecta. Not even a voice-over when it happened. “Revolution of Love” to F-bomb?

What is wrong with that? Throwing to Madonna live at a campaign rally, what did they think she was going to say? What happened to media’s concerns about young children listening, at the protest or on TV, being offended by hearing that language?

Yet they did not cut it on the first F-bomb, or the second, but the third F-bomb.

CNN, Wolf Blitzer want Trump to tone down attacks on the press

Here’s Wolf Blitzer, who says he is on a steering committee and he believes in the Freedom of the press. Fine Wolf, but we the people believe very much in free speech. That includes the right to call you out for your blatant bias.

I have an idea. Maybe if you weren’t so bias, and colluding with political allies the way you’ve been, then you might receive different treatment. Dial that in Wolf.

Wolf Blitzer pleads with Trump’s campaign manager to dial back attacks on reporters

By Christina Manduley, CNN

Washington (CNN)CNN’s Wolf Blitzer pleaded Tuesday with Donald Trump’s campaign manager for her to ask the GOP nominee to dial back his harassment against the media, saying it endangers reporters.

Kellyanne Conway responded by saying that part of the responsibility lies with reporters who tweet “negative” against Trump.

Throughout his campaign, Trump has lashed out at the media during his rallies, calling reporters a variety of insults including “dishonest,” “sick,” and “corrupt.”

More: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/26/politics/wolf-blitzer-donald-trump-kellyanne-conway/

Now let’s talk about all the reporters taking to the front pages to attack Trump and his supporters too — that’s us. And the closer it gets to election the worse. Just look at all the things he’s been called and the fear mongering about him. Oh Wolf calls that business as usual, and that’s to be expected. Well, Wolfy, I hope you get used to it.

The problem is that this time there is finally someone willing to fire back and Wolf doesn’t like it. Are we now like other countries where press is just another arm of the political power, and where it does the handiwork for the power brokers? It looks like it is.

Notice how Wolf calls criticism “attacks” on the press. But their bias and selective editorial control delivers attacks on Trump and the people every day. They even nuclearized the threat adding Russia and the nuclear arsenal into the mix.

Since people are now protesting CNN and others by saying “CNN sucks,” they don’t like the idea of protesting or our freedom of speech anymore. But they are all for the protestors of BLM and others in what media labels “mostly peaceful protests,” even when they end in burning property or violence. Just like they treated Tea Party protests, painting them all as sccary, angry, crazies — with liberals like the SPLC sounding terrorist warnings.

Now that Trump is in their sights, the same thing applies to him and his supporters. But mainstream media’s problem is people criticizing the media. That’s so not fair!

All radicals all the time — Clintonistas

Welcome to the truth inside the Hillary campaign. (video)

What about the protest at the Chicago Trump rally? Well, surprise. (which is no surprise)

It doesn’t matter about legal… or ethics, we need to win this M-Fer.

We knew they were behind all this radicalism, but it is what they do.

Ever heard of Democracy Partners? Oh, the dark Hillary campaign that no media dares report on. Alive and thriving via Hillary’s campaign.

Sometimes the crazies bite…. sometimes they don’t. Portraying people as psychotic…. all sinister dark creatures of Hillary’s campaign.

“We want it coming from the people, not the Party.”

“We’re starting anarchy here.”

PETITION on BLM

Formally recognize Black Lives Matter as a terrorist organization.

Created by Y.S. on July 06, 2016

terrorism is defined as “the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims”. This definition is the same definition used to declare ISIS and other groups, as terrorist organizations. Black Lives Matter has earned this title due to its actions in Ferguson, Baltimore, and even at a Bernie Sanders rally, as well as all over the United States and Canada. It is time for the pentagon to be consistent in its actions – and just as they rightfully declared ISIS a terror group, they must declare Black Lives Matter a terror group – on the grounds of principle, integrity, morality, and safety.

Petition here:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/formally-recognize-black-lives-matter-terrorist-organization

Patriotism gets bombed with red glares

Guess where?

Ashamed to be an American? Towns crack down on American pride

By Todd Starnes Published July 01, 2016 | Fox News

The Star-Spangled Banner survived the rocket’s red glare and bombs bursting in air – only to face a modern-day threat – silly town ordinances and petty bureaucrats.

I’m not sure if it’s an epidemic of anti-American nincompoopery sweeping across the fruited plain or if it’s a general lack of common sense. Maybe it’s both. I’ll let you be the judge of that.

In Lexington, South Carolina Marine veteran Bob Michaelis was told to remove a patriotic display from his mattress company.

Mr. Michaelis lined the front of his store with American flags – to honor our troops.

“We got 10 flags up,” he told television station WIS. “I thought maybe it was about time we return the patriotism in America. There’s not enough of it. It seems to be lost.”

But instead of congratulating Bob’s patriotism, the town fathers dispatched the law. He was informed that the flags violated an ordinance.

“The town of Lexington says they got to come down because there’s an ordinance in place,” he said.

The town administrator told WIS they did not issue Bob a citation nor did they tell him to take down the flags. …/

More at: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/07/01/ashamed-to-be-american-towns-crack-down-on-american-pride.html?intcmp=trending

Welcome to the 4th of July under ‘new and revised’ Amerika. Not on campus at Berkeley but on main street in South Carolina. The silence from Liberals will be deafening.

No, Libs, patriotism is not an “emotional thing.” But the new and revised America is driven by Emotionalism and P/C BS. Where are the lists of “most P/C places in the US?”

So LGBT pride is in — American pride is out of fashion. Didn’t know it had a shelf life.

Right

Wrong

gay flag

 

Word police, DHS, Jeh Johnson and speech p/c

DHS report before Orlando massacre: Political correctness needed to fight Islamic terrorism

Washington Times

A report by the Homeland Security Advisory Council released days before the Islamic terror attack in Orlando, Florida, stressed the importance of combating extremism by avoiding terms that might offend Muslims. A HSAC subcommittee first created by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson in 2015 published its report on June 9. Some instructions found in the report include:…

More

The Daily Caller reports:

The report urges DHS officials to “Reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.”

For example, the report says the DHS should be “using American English instead of religious, legal and cultural terms like ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia,’ ‘takfir’ or ‘umma.’”

The report acknowledges that, “There is a disagreement among scholars, government officials, and activists about the right lexicon to use around the issues of violent extremism.”

Nevertheless, the report states, “Under no circumstance should we be using language that will alienate or be disrespectful of fellow Americans.”

“We must speak with honor and respect about all communities within the United States. We should give dignity to the many histories and diversities within our nation and advocate for a consistent whole of government approach that utilizes agreed terms and words. Tone and word choice matter,” the report states.

Read more

It says that they should not use words like Sharia, Jihad, Takfir and refrain from using religiously charged terms. But the President of Islam defense goes to the prayer breakfast and lectures about Crusades and criticizes Christians.

The report advocates using and promoting gender diversity to youth. But avoid those things and terms that may be charged or problematic toward Muslims or Islam. Though any opportunity they get to critiize Christians or speak ill of them is acceptable.

For instance when they promote abortion and same-sex marriage, those are not divisive, religiously charged or problematic terms. My disgust meter registered a new high. Talking derogatorily about and marginalizing Christians is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged.

I bet that would have some effect on Radical Islamic Terrorism.