Evolution Of The Left

It is troubling how words and definitions of the Left change over time. For instance, the word liberal meant one thing at one time, then the left adopted it to soften the badgered progressive term. The word liberal so corrupted would never be the same.

Many of their terms do not mean what they once did. Their language evolved to suit their fancy. And people allowed it or we went along with it. We knew it but no one objected effectively. We all went on with it.

Here’s one of my own. A well-heeled liberal used to be one thing and now it is another thing entirely. It was a snobby liberal, usually a Democrat, who claimed to stand up for rights and working people but was caught up in institutionalized, ivory-tower hypocrisy. It was a dreamy person who thought they had the answers to all problems. The smart snobs.

Now a well-heeled leftist is not actually a liberal at all, in the traditional sense, but an anti-American zealot who’s only connection to working class is solidarity with socialism or communism. They only see working people as a political-power base.

Other than that, he or she has no relationship with working people.

Even apologizing for America is not good enough anymore. One must despise the roots of everything meaningful to American history or American identity. Doing so openly and loudly is the rule not the exception. They have posited everything in political disagreement is their enemy. Their duty is foisting that hatred on the rest of the country, until it all bends or conforms to their will. “Submit!”

We used to accept the well-heeled liberals as just wrong. Now Leftists have become the problem with almost everything because their ilk are embedded into every part of government or dysfunctional bureaucracy. But that is the nature of the modern radical.

Today there is no difference, politically, between the well-heeled Left and Democrats. They are collectively radicalized, organizationally or loosely, to oppose the foundations of the country. The US, and we, have become the problem and enemy to them. Anything that hurts the country they will support. A quick glance at recent hearings will confirm it. They do the bidding for violent protestors, BLM or antifa right in the US Capitol. Whatever constituency which sent them to DC is not even a distant concern.

But the fools may be those very people who did put them there and continue to keep them there. But the well-heeled certainly are not working for constituents or their interests. They have been cannibalized by the most radicalized elements in their party. Then the whole party base seems to follow them right down that hole.

So the two words that most offend me now are peaceful and protestors. That’s because those words have been so corrupted by leftists. Peaceful is not what we think it means and protestors do not fit a first amendment definition of protestors. They are revolutionaries. Willful marchers who do not know that are only fodder for their movement.

But I can play the language game, too. I’d like to rename them more appropriately. They are not really protestors; they are fauxtestors. Pretend protestors. Just as there is no truth to the peaceful adjective. When did terminology become so errant and controversial? Calling antifa, violence or looting “peaceful protestors” really takes the cake.

I’ll just call them fauxtestors and be done with it. They never evolve the other way.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2020

Cancel Culted: Real Life

I heard the news that Mike Adams has died. He was a criminology and sociology professor at University of North Carolina – Wilmington, and a regular writer of columns on TownHall.com. Apparently it was a suicide.

I did not know Mr. Adams but I almost felt like it because of reading his personalized columns, which always brought a strong sense of right and wrong, civility and a little Adams humor mixed in. Plus he had the flair for activism.

But often they were true-life stories, on many of his encounters with the modern Left. Being a professor and his activism naturally provided a wealth of resource material for them. He was in their world – but not of their world. And a Christian at heart.

Anyway, as I heard this news it seemed like such a loss. If it is one thing Mike Adams had to offer was his intellect and wisdom on controversial and moral issues — such as pro-life and Christianity. And a knack for explaining them.

Now with that, I am posting an old 2005 column that can be found on TownHall. Ironically, those same columns often caused him so much ire from the campus establishment. Yet he refused to let that shut him up. He actually seemed to thrive on it, which likely drove them crazy in their ivory towers. Its written at one of those times he was under attack.

So here it is in full, followed by a special dessert:

Life and how to live it

Mike Adams  | Posted: Jul 26, 2005

Over the weekend, I received several emails from readers warning me that I might lose my job over the article I wrote criticizing my university’s new harassment policy. Readers who sometimes suggest that I should learn to hold my tongue fail to understand my simple philosophy of life. It is an uncompromising philosophy that guarantees both peace of mind and success in any important endeavor. It can be roughly summarized as follows:

1. If you want to be happy and successful, you must immediately disabuse yourself of the notion that there is no such thing as good and evil.

If, for some reason, this is difficult for you to do, take the time to visit the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. If that still does not convince you, take the time to visit Auschwitz.

2. You must also immediately disabuse yourself of the notion that good and evil are simply relative terms. There are moral absolutes and they have absolutely nothing to do with your personal feelings and perceptions.

It should be noted that people who claim to believe in moral relativism are just lying in order to make themselves appear to be morally superior to others. Their actual belief in moral absolutism is revealed when, at some point, they openly proclaim that there are no absolutes. If everything is relative, the philosophy of moral relativism can’t be absolutely true.

3. Take some time every day to fine-tune your understanding of the difference between right and wrong.

Recently, a good friend of mine lost his mother to cancer. He later made a casual suggestion about the need for some sort of handbook, which could be used to sort out the difficult problems and answer the difficult questions one encounters in life.

Fortunately, such a handbook exists. It is called the Holy Bible.

No one can call himself educated if he has not read the Bible at least once. Even after several readings of the Bible some things will remain unclear. Some questions will remain unanswered. Nonetheless, upon every reading of the Bible, greater wisdom is gained. After all, life is a journey. It is not a destination.

By the same token, one should never go to a psychologist or any other counselor who is a self-proclaimed atheist or agnostic. I cannot think of a single important principle the field of psychology has established that wasn’t already established in the Sermon on the Mount.

4. Life will present you with plenty of encounters with good and evil. Just as you should never pass up an opportunity to promote good, you should never pass up an opportunity to combat evil.

One of my favorite verses of the Bible is James 4:17. It states that “Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.” That verse reminds us that we don’t have to actually do something to be morally culpable. In other words, there is such a thing as a sin of omission.

It can often be tough to step up and combat evil when one may be risking, for example, one’s job. We humans are so weak and frail that it is often tough to stand up for what is right even when the consequences are merely ostracism or momentary ridicule. In those times, the following verse (Hebrews 13:5) helps: “For He Himself has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”” Remember when you read that verse that, quite literally, nothing else in life matters.

In the past, I have been faced with some risky decisions that involved the prospect of taking on campus radicals; some have been communists, some have been feminists, all have been, in some way, morally decadent. But some of these morally bankrupt individuals also happened to have some degree of power over me and over my economic livelihood.

When, in the past, I have contemplated the prospect of cowering away from these situations, I have sometimes found strength by thinking about some old war veterans; some in my family, some friends, who risked or even gave their lives to preserve our nation and our freedom.

The next time you find yourself tempted to cower from something you know you should do, just imagine a roomful of old war veterans. Get in a quiet, dark room. Close your eyes, concentrate on their faces. Then just imagine walking up to one of them to have a face-to-face talk about what you are cowering from and why.

Once, I imagined myself walking up to my grandfather who was hit with grenade shrapnel in World War I and saying something like this:: “Thanks for serving to protect my First Amendment Rights. I’ve been meaning to stand up to some campus feminists who are violating the constitutional rights of some students on campus. But, frankly, I’m afraid of feminists and what they might say about me.”

You might want to end this mental exercise before you picture one of those veterans punching you in the nose.

Just remember that Jesus didn’t die on the cross for you to run from what is right. And war heroes didn’t die on the battlefield for you to cower away while this country is destroyed.

5. Standing up against that which is wrong invariably means that you will have to take on a lot of angry people. If you cannot do it with a sense of humor, you are less likely to prevail.

Without question, liberals are the angriest people in America these days. If you respond to them with anger, you will allow them to conceal this fact while playing upon stereotypes of conservatives that are no longer accurate. In addition, you will not be able to influence people in the middle.

Now, you know a little more about my simple philosophy of life. In my next column, I plan to answer Dr. Phil’s favorite question: “How?s that working for you?”
To be continued. …”

More irony is that he was engaged in a battle with the NC Governor over shutdown. And yet another with the NCUW over words in some tweets. The cancel culture mob was after him. He was going to retire August 1.

He subsequently wrote many many more parts of ‘Life and how we live it.’ I think it was up to 8 last December. Always apropos. RIP Mike Adams.

Now for a sense of what effect Mike had, here is an older clip of a Rush Limbaugh Show using one of his letters for a backdrop. Enjoy the truth and humor. (2013)

Right Ring | Bullright

Barry, Hillary downplay Sri Lanka victims

The dynamic duo of revision are back at it. Almost synchronized

Hillary: “On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I’m praying for everyone affected by today’s horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.” – 1:17 PM – Apr 21, 2019

Obama: “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.” — 10:02 AM – Apr 21, 2019

Surprise, they call it the exact same thing. We are not Easter People. We are Christians.

The Bible explains they were first called Christians at Antioch. Apparently Hillary now wants to rewrite the Bible, it seems Benghazi wasn’t enough for her.

But for a pair of subversive deniers that did what they did on Benghazi, should it surprise anyone that they want to downplay Christians as victims? You could not get either of them to do or say anything about Christian persecution. Barry loves saying Mooslims.

Everything morphed into some mealy-mouthed dangerous world or humanity thing.

Just try to name one group of people who have been at war with civilization and humanity, who do not accept anyone’s life as legitimately justified but theirs? It’s a difficult question. A people who hate everyone else and think it is their job to cause war and chaos everywhere in the name of their religious faith. (and I don’t mean Democrats)

It’s even worse than that. Since his remarks, the proud Barry worshipers carry and defend his statement using whatever means they can, like always. But the truth is he just couldn’t single out Christians as the dominant victims. He couldn’t do it.

For the secretary of evil, Hillary, by next week she could just say “oh, what difference at this point does it make anyway who they were?”

It’s only a vivid reminder of the nightmare those eight years were. And next, maybe Obama could talk about the Crusades again, being brutal or the intolerance of Christians. Then he will use the pronoun Christians.

He never has a problem referring to Muslims when they are victims. He doesn’t call them Ramadan worshipers. He could hardly call Jews “Sabbath observers.”

But for us Christians, we are labeled Easter People as “Easter Worshipers.” So they were attacked for their faith but Obama cannot even mention that faith by proper name. Then he also has a toxic opposition to saying “Radical Islamic Terrorists” He just can’t do it.

Right Ring | Bullright

AOC The Snake Charmer

I have tried to probe the intellects of Aristotle and Solzhenitsyn over the years, but now I’d like to try something different and go where no man has gone before.(or lived through it) That is to attempt to probe the intellectual curiosity of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez.

Even more to this challenge, I will do it without the aid of alcohol or hallucinogenic drugs.

First thing though is she reminds me a lot of Jim Carey. She is looking dumb and dumber all the time. Now you see what an enormous challenge this is.

Pink Floyd had a song with the lyrics

“Hello? (hello) (hello)
Is there anybody in there?
Just nod if you can hear me
Is there anyone at home?”

With AOC, who knows what answer would come forth. Maybe something like “Who dis?”

Sure, I mean she does have a stupid reputation. Is that really fair to her? Does she deserve all the attention she receives? Can she last in the annals of politics? Does she have a bright future ahead of her? Can anything good come from the AOC experiment? I’ll inquire.

But is there possibly more there within the canyon walls of her brain that she is hiding? More to its utility than we can see? Stay with me on this. So far in 2 weeks that she has actually been in office, she has called for a purge of Dems non-conforming to her ideology. (that word fails to describe her politics, but I’m working on a more suitable term for it)

At first look, she probably does not deserve the resources expended in an any article about her. We shall see. She has been sucking all the oxygen out of every room though, so what is her gimmick? Why does it seem to keep working in her favor? What lessons can we draw or learn from her case study? I know, so many questions…. so many roads.

To establish the prevailing point, whether the most important one about her or not, that she is a narcissist of an extreme level. Does that remind you of anyone else? She also seems obsessed with attention, not that it is the same as narcissism. No, she demands attention. She lept out into the public spotlight in her race but never crawled back into her hole. For most people, there is a shelf life on that national spotlight. Not with her. Whatever she is doing must be working to keep bestowing all that nationwide attention on her.

Is it her dumbness that everyone is fascinated by? Is it her naivete? Is it that she fits the stereotype of many young people today? What is this magnetism by which people seem drawn to her? Is it our fault? Did we create this Frankenstein and now we don’t know how to stop it? Can we reprogram that power, whatever it is?

She also does not seem to care what people think of her, or say about her for that matter. She is proud of herself. That is a trait of many snobby, spoiled children. Is she still a child, because in many ways she still acts like one? Finally, is she really as dumb as she seems?

She definitely appears to be just as oblivious to others as she seems to be. Two times when prominent Democrats, one a seasoned politician and one a comedian personality, have denounced her upitiness and behavior only for her to dismiss them and snark back at their advice. She is a know it all who seems to know little about anything.

From waitress to Diva, without a particular skill or talent to her name, in record time. Or is that a skill in itself, to be perpetually relevant? But that strategy has not always worked for Hillary and look at all she has done to get it. It seems to come easy for Miss Sleazy Ocasio. Is she the female version of a Che Guevera?

Of course we can sit around blaming her for a lot of what is wrong with politics today, post-Clintons and post-Obama. She fits the mold for criticism of it all quite well. But are we really almost as much to blame for what she is? That thought sickens me.

I would rather blame Hillary and Bill Clinton, Obama and Bernie Sanders. Indeed, she could be a byproduct of all three, made to order. Especially Bernie. Funny, the guy we laughed at and mocked as a socialist years ago turned political superstar in 2016. And AOC rode that subway in large part to power. If there was something to fear from it all that would be a good place to start.

Is she as complex a political creature as some think, or only as conniving as she appears?

The synopsis

The point I inevitably come to is that she is a mirror reflection of society today. Maybe not all of it but enough. She is what that comic strip Pogo was talking about in that line, “We have met the enemy and the enemy is us.” Sure we can blame and pick her apart but is she not a reflection of the modern politico and activist of the left? She is the consummate leftist, no wonder they all seem to gravitate to her. She is everything they are and want, but afraid to admit it about themselves.

So she continues on her way, championing one grand leftist idea after another, barely taking a breath between them. Exactly the way they talk. She must know the policies are pie in the sky, with no real definition. Who cares? But enough to have Democrats cheering for it and more. Fiction or reality makes no difference, it is only what they perceive.

And in the end, I come to the conclusion she is a talented snake charmer. She is able to communicate in telepathy with the hard left, which is all she cares about. She is everything they want and nothing they don’t. They are her targets. She plays the tunes and they dance. It all goes off as one big show.

It seems to be working because she has them believing that melody is all that matters. They are coaxed out of their baskets like trained serpents. Some Democrats may complain but her methods are working. The masses consistently respond to her seduction.

Right Ring | Bullright

Say No More Clickbait

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Right Ring | Bullright

Word of The Year

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

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

Oxford explained it: (excerpt)

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

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

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