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.