Lawless Left

Did you miss it all evolving? Maybe you could have, if you were not paying attention this week. Within a day of an unknown candidate winning a primary race in Queens, NY, over Joseph Crowley, Democrats solidified their “abolish ICE” position. Three days later they were in the streets protesting to demonstrate their newfound position. Mainsteaming it complete. Within days, NY’s junior Senator was wholeheartedly sporting the position.

But no one saw that one coming. They could be excused for a host of reasons. But no one heard of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez before that either, the 28 year-old Bernie socialist.

It was like a meteor hitting. By Saturday, media reported 750 marches of protest across the country. It was so quick; evolution is now lightning speed with Democrats.

It normally starts with the same line.

Let’s be crystal clear, when Democrats say “this is not who we are,” what they are really saying is that we are not a country that respects the rule of law. We are not a country that should protect its borders from invasion. And finally, what they are saying is that we are a lawless people….or should be. That’s the way, uh-huh uh-huh. they like it.

Yes, I know that is a radical statement but it is not hyperbole. At least it represents the Democrats and their party to a tee. Lawlessness is key in their agenda.

But I know people disagree. Somehow I am being dishonest. Though the facts stand contrary to that argument. They only “respect” the rule of law when it fits their political agenda, and only for as long as it does.

So Democrats are lawless, like those people they “stand up” for and encourage.

Obama pipes up, as the latest push of the illegal invasion spawns media stories about children being separated from parents and families. Washington Examiner:

Obama added Americas hold the common ideal “that all of us are created equal, and all of us deserve the chance to become something better.”

“That’s the legacy our parents and grandparents and generations before created for us, and it’s something we have to protect for the generations to come,” he continued. “But we have to do more than say ‘this isn’t who we are.’ We have to prove it – through our policies, our laws, our actions, and our votes.” — Obama commenting on World Refugee Day.

Here we go with the same code words again, ‘this is not who we are.’ They said it on preventing terrorists from coming to America, or getting tough on Islamists. The travel ban was the latest. But thankfully that power has remained within the president.

Look, they have no respect for law really. When in their favor, they say “that’s the law, period.” But otherwise, if you don’t like the law, or don’t believe it is right, then civil disobedience is the answer. Defy the law, and protest it. But respect it? No chance. So there is no illusion Democrats respect the law. If they don’t like it, they simply ignore it as their right. And they will go to battle against the rule of law.

Another great line for Democrats in prime time talking points.

Their other favorite words to repeat, “we are better then that.” But no, Democrats are not better than that. They only use words like a lemon meringue pie in your face. They are revealing the truth, they have no respect for the rule of law — only the politics of activism. The more radical the position the better it sells.

They want open borders and lawlessness. What is next, you might ask? They already called for abolishing local police forces. That seemed radical even for them, but maybe no more. Basically anything that stands in the way of lawlessness could be a target. Or anything that stands in the way of chaos and anarchy. (their other best friend)

It is a hard case to make that progressives want vast government control over every element in your lives, where the nanny state rules, and yet want people to be lawless. I guess that is what happens in “evolution,” sometimes it missfires. If you have people that don’t care about consistency or hypocrisy, or even decency, and grounded by nothing larger than themselves, then this is the inevitable result. A collision of forces.

Desperation can do dangerous things. The left will cling to any new – hopefully radical — idea now that might be popular with their radical, angry base. All at an alarming speed. What is the next new thing? Who could predict? But it is not pretty.

The central rule is Republicans and conservatives, their enemies, should follow and be saddled by the law but Leftists? Not so much.

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

Clown Express: last call to Washington elites for 2018

The increasingly irrelevant George Will may be defrocked but he is still bloviating about his political strategy — supposedly to stop Republicans.

Ed Morrow tore it up in this piece. George Will’s satchel of descriptors

George Will Willfully Wills Defeat

Consider the first paragraph of [George Wills’] recent Washington Post column, “Vote Against the GOP”:

Amid the carnage of Republican misrule in Washington, there is this glimmer of good news: The family-shredding policy along the southern border, the most telegenic recent example of misrule, clarified something. Occurring less than 140 days before elections that can reshape Congress, the policy has given independents and temperate Republicans—these are probably expanding and contracting cohorts, respectively—fresh if redundant evidence for the principle by which they should vote.

“Carnage,” “telegenic,” “temperate Republicans,” “expanding and contracting cohorts,” “fresh if redundant,” and two uses of “misrule”—all in two sentences!

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/25/george-will-willfully-wills-defeat/

Will, indeed, is laying it on thick. Not content with opposing Republicans in 2016, he is back now opposing Repubs in 2018, counseling you to do exactly that. Sure he can explain his 3-cushion (attempted) bank shot. But why would anyone take Will seriously now?

Resist Stance for Memorial Day

” RESISTING Trump’s attacks on our democracy.” — Where in the hell did the left pull that line from, the bowels of George Orwell or something?

Cut to the chase. They are resisting democracy, that’s what they are doing.

As for Trump’s attacks on our democracy, well, that ain’t happening. What is true is Obama attacked us all over the place. Then he went over and promised Medvedev and Putin he would be more flexible after his last election in 2012. And Russia collected.

I hate these cooked up, meaningless phrases of the left. So where did this latest iteration come from? The cream of the sewer that’s where.

“This Memorial Day weekend lets honor the women and men who bravely sacrificed their lives fighting to protect our nation’s freedoms by RESISTING Trump’s attacks on our democracy. #TheResistance is the highest form of Patriotism!” he Tweeted on May 27.

See:: https://constitution.com/as-americans-honor-our-troops-liberals-attack-us-to-smear-memorial-day/

So that is how Leftoids spend Memorial Day, by resisting democracy.

What’s a little astroturf on gun control?

Why Did It Take Two Weeks To Discover Parkland Students’ Astroturfing?

The Federalist

The Miami Herald credited their success to the school’s stellar debate program. The Wall Street Journal said it was because they were born online, and organizing was instinctive.

On February 28, BuzzFeed came out with the actual story: Rep. Debbie Wassermann Schultz aiding in the lobbying in Tallahassee, a teacher’s union organizing the buses that got the kids there, Michael Bloomberg’s groups and the Women’s March working on the upcoming March For Our Lives, MoveOn.org doing social media promotion and (potentially) march logistics, and training for student activists provided by federally funded Planned Parenthood.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/01/take-two-weeks-truth-emerge-parkland-students-astroturfing/

When Dems say grasroots they mean astroturf. Almost made to order. Hmm.

There comes the protest pussy hats

I could be a little old fashioned on newfangled ways but I still like to think women do not have to wear funny hats and clothes, then go out to march in the street with a sign, to better their circumstances. Maybe that’s just me?

Oh look, it’s the Pussy Hat Brigade on their way to their beat.

Uh, hello, “elephant in the womb”? No one thought about that one too long.

It’s not an elephant. But that’s what happens when they pay absolutely no attention to the March For Life, which has been going on for many years, unlike the Pink Wave fadinista.

But then who would have thought that in 2016 women would be voting with their reproductive organs either? Evolution?

Oh well, hey hey ho ho….

I’m sorry for the language but what else do you call them? I mean the hats.

Pelosi goes off along with the obnoxious left

WATCH: Unhinged Pelosi Claims Tax Bill ‘Does Violence’ To Vision Of Founding Fathers

“… it betrays the future and betrays the aspirations of our children.”

Daily Signal

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi spewed utter nonsense on the House floor on Tuesday, hysterically claiming that the Republican’s tax plan “does violence to the vision of our Founders.”

Pelosi railed against Republican lawmakers in her speech, decrying the bill as a morally obscene “scam” designed to “install a permanent plutocracy.”

“This GOP tax scam is simply theft, monumental, brazen theft from the American middle class and from every person who aspires to reach it,” Pelosi said. “The GOP tax scam is not a vote for an investment in growth or jobs. It is a vote to install a permanent plutocracy in our nation. They’ll be cheering that later. It does violence to the vision of our Founders. It disrespects the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, who are a large part of our middle class and to whom we owe a future worthy of their sacrifice. And it betrays the future and betrays the aspirations of our children. It demands, it morally demands a no vote from every member of this house of the people.”

Earlier in her remarks, the pro-abortion Democrat pulled out the tried-and-true “think of the children” tactic and managed to connect it to Christmas.

“In this season, we celebrate the miraculous blessings of God,” Pelosi began. “We reflect on the wondrous joy of children and our responsibility to them. We remember our duty to live justly. And for those of us blessed to serve in this Congress, we must remember our special responsibility to govern fairly, to meet the needs of all of God’s children.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24888/watch-unhinged-pelosi-claims-tax-bill-does-ryan-saavedra

Fred Barnes writes, of the resistance, in the Weekly Standard: “Feeble Resistance”

Still, we’ve learned a bit from the resistance. Their policy views haven’t changed much. “Democrats are for jobs, but they’re against business,” Moore says. “They’re no longer a growth party, they’re a redistribution party.”

I don’t know if I’d even say they are for jobs. But they are certainly against business. Really, they are for politics and elections in particular. That’s what they care about. A tax cut? Not so much. Nothing personal but nothing gets in the way of their obsession with politics, not even an international terrorist-crime syndicate like Hezbollah can do that.

The fact that Pelosi has to call tax cuts violent tells us something. Calling it a tax scam, or trying to make their resistance as poisonous as possible, is their gig for successful politics. Start the fundraisers against tax cuts and for impeachment. That is their entire mid-term campaign.

But rest assured, there is always that bastion of world stability called the UN. (achem) Well, they vote to condemn our decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem. So Nikki Haley gives them an ultimatum that we are watching and will remember. So for that, John Brennan rushes out on social media to condemn her message. Now having a memory is considered a “threat.”

Only to an Obama radical, remembering the damage done is a bad thing. We all could need full-frontal lobotomies to accomplish that. How can they write and glorify Obama’s legacy like a gift from on high while we are looking at the effects?

The real problem is not just Trump, to them, but all the people who voted for him. It was Nancy’s last part that took it right over the top, making resistance into a religious doctrine. ‘Save the people by opposing Trump on everything,’ is the message. She lost her credibility card by being in bed with Planned Parenthood. Now she lectures us on taking care of the children? A bit much even for my stomach.

So their rhetoric is high but their ethics and responsibility are not. They can oppose the American people who want to fix the problems, not create more of them. People wanted a wall, border enforcement and to grow America, instead of destroying and dividing it by every conceivable group. Dems want the latter.

Now if any of that seems or is offensive to you, well, you are probably right on the mark. It offends because it is meant to. All the left’s agenda drives the message of protest as the means — when elections and courts don’t yield the desired effects. From blocking roadways, to shutting down businesses, to tearing down statues, all are means to offend people. That is the point of it. They tell us that we must be made to feel uncomfortable, made to feel their ridicule. That, they say, is the motive for change.

When NFL players took a knee toward the national anthem and flag, we rightly called them out on it. We said it was offensive to the rest of the country, to the military, to the country at large. And they told us good, I’m glad you are, we want you to be. That’s why we are doing it, that is the point of protest and civil disobedience to disturb and make you feel uncomfortable. Until lots of Americans are offended then nothing changes.

So in that same spirit they carry the offensive objective into the halls of Congress. Resistance. Make no mistake, when it rolls out and hits you right in the face as outrageous and offends you, because that is their whole point. They want to inflame.

Is it any wonder then that it is almost impossible to deal with or work with them? No it isn’t and also why they are in a perpetual protest mode. They operate on the same M/O as terrorists do: to force a political objective, whether it is baking cakes, changing bathrooms, or removing statues, or removing displays, or violent protests, or defending corruption.

And if some of their policies also offend you even more when they are carried out? That’s all the better, it keeps you in the perpetually offended mode, awaiting their next demand. These are not just the collateral effects and consequences of the left, these are their very intentional means. But tax cuts are a violent attack on the founders?

Right Ring | Bullright

The Post Facto Coverup

I apologize for yet another rant, though I like to call them op-eds on the current state of liberaldom. And the current state is disgusting.

I have a little familiarity with language but that fails when it comes to describing what is going on. As is my usual argument about liberalism, perception is reality — being that perception is what they live in.

I am continually amazed how far they will go to either assert that perception as fact or in denying the reality around them. Such is the liberal animal though, since it is a creature of habit and habitiat, driven by its ideology. The other chief tool is projecting on opponents their own exact faults and abuses. The failures of what they do either do not exist in their minds or are just more opportunities to obfuscate the truth.

You know the saying that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” but there isn’t enough sunshine at the equator to disinfect this corruption from the left. No, I’m not buying that excuse that both sides do it and one side didn’t create all this. We see where the corruption is rolling like a river from.

And you might say, “but you are not being objectively fair.” That’s the problem with the left, I do have a bias for good reasons and don’t pretend to be an impartial tool. And most liberals don’t have an ounce of objectivity. They pride themselves on being biased. They demand objectivity from everyone else.

So we have an investigation into Trump over Russia. But a dossier with information from Russian operatives was assembled to use against him.

Here’s the line the left uses: if Mueller is removed it creates a Constitutional crisis. But the Special Counsel investigation itself created a Constitutional crisis. We don’t have to worry about an investigation getting corrupted, it was born of corruption — what else could it be?

We’re getting to the real point, the obvious mission of the investigation. First, it was started in search of a justification. But that is not the problem now. We see what the whole thing really is: the purpose of the investigation is a cover up for what went on. It is a giant cover up operation for the mass politicization and corruption of the DOJ and FBI.

Now the whole Trump campaign that evolved into the transition of President-elect Trump has been pilfered by Mueller. It is an investigation of the whole apparatus.

Let’s be clear that this is an investigation of a campaign and the election. We have the loser colluding with government against the president — as they did during the campaign. What we had even before the investigation is government targeting a president. And it continues. There is not enough sunlight to sanitize this. We know what is going on, from warrantless searches to surveillance of a candidate/campaign, however falsely they justified it.

Then we have one more interesting thing. I complained back in the campaign about the way they treated Trump. And I was outraged by their branding him with names. Remember former CIA director, Mike Morell went to media to write an op-ed attack on Trump, using his years in intelligence as his credentials for it — to add a certification of legitimacy for his charges. He called Trump an unwitting agent of a foreign government. That was akin to treason. Obama also followed that similar track.

Update, the same Mike Morell comes out to apologize for getting it wrong saying they reacted badly. Sorry, not really! It was the half-hearted dance the liberal bastards do when their heads are in a vice. See how he morphs a feigned apology into pointing the finger of blame… but on Trump: The Hill

Michael Morell, the former Acting Director of the CIA, recently confessed that maybe it was a mistake for himself, the former chief of the CIA and NSA, Gen. Michael Hayden, and the then-Director of the CIA, John Brennan, to criticize candidate Donald Trump. He admitted that he failed to understand how Trump would interpret their campaign criticism, which is pretty damning coming from someone who briefed presidents on how foreign leaders think.

Of course, Morell didn’t cop to his behavior, saying, “So, I don’t think it was a mistake. I think there were downsides to it that I didn’t think about at the time … I don’t think I fully thought through the implications.” [more]

Wait, he does not apologize saying it was “not a mistake”. Mike just didn’t “think through the implications” — the implications of politicizing intelligence and calling someone a traitor. The problem is he knew exactly what he was doing then. But the new revelations of biases would taint what he did so he’s trying to duck and cover it.

He didn’t know how Trump would respond to that? I don’t know, how do you respond to be called a foreign agent of an enemy? How do you respond to government and intelligence conspiring against you? If Hillary would have won, that would be the end of it. Success. No need to ever mention it again. Don’t even pull the knife from the victim, just let him lay there. I have a special contempt for Morell after what he did. So the problem was how Trump interpreted it?

But what Morel took part in, and helped cause, was real damage. Even apologizing now would never undo any of that. In fact, they get to have it both ways — just like Clinton defenders — because they got to do their political attacks and benefited from them. Now they are still reaping all the benefits of the false attacks. Except they want to be excused for what they did.

That brings it back to the investigation. Never mind the faulty premises or the conflicted political biases, or the illegalities involved. Never mind spending a year beating on the results of the election with a sludge hammer. Never mind what the last administration did, or what the other candidate did in the process of “democracy.” Never mind the sheer corruption and bias involved across government.

Finally, never mind that this whole thing has been a cover up and a diversion from focusing on the real corruption that ran rampant for 8 years. They needed a scapegoat and a whipping post. Never mind what this cover up of corruption does to democracy. Yet they had the nerve to complain that Trump was somehow threatening or destroying democracy, “as democracy was under attack.” There is no undoing what they did, or turning back.

Right Ring | Bullright

Holder calls for protests against Trump

Some things defy words. So here is Exhibit A of the resistance – opposition operation. First, Eric Holder claims to represent the vast majority of Americans.

Then he goes all in on resist and sedition.

Since when does Eric Holder “speak on behalf of the vast majority of Americans”??? Who elected Holder? NO ONE! Not a single person went to a poll and voted for him, much less elected him.

Yet he is organizing calling for protests against a sitting president. Former AG calls for protests? Are these elitists or what? Who are the people that take marching orders from Eric Holder? Obamfiles are radicals, pure radicals.

And then there was Light

My editorial juices have been running a little low lately, and I have been tapped out of ideas feeling, as Solomon said, that there is really “nothing new under the sun.”

My friend Pepp recently wondered if Shakespeare was alive today, what he would say? That got me thinking with all that is going on today, he would have a field day or go crazy. One or the other.

Then I saw this article in the Federalist by someone that caught my attention. It was sincere, only by a self-described liberal who had awakened to the media bias during the election. I hope you check it out. From that point of view it is informative.

Up until now I figured it was mostly a lost cause, but this person gives me a little hope that there is life out there after the liberal bubble. (her own term) Though it made me think of the countless others I see on social media. I could almost write one profile to include them all. These are your typical liberals from not-so informed to hard line Marxists. And there often is not that much that separates them.

Anyway, so predictable that you can expect their words. I’m beyond, way beyond, feeling sympathy. I mostly accept that they are not reachable anyway, which seems a fool’s errand to try convincing them of anything. It is what it is, as they say.

But this piece gave me renewed hope for some of them. (I am not going soft or gushy) For a moment, I considered their point of view, or perspective. I know what they think. I may not know the why in many cases. I know the what though.

Their view of the media, their positions, their favorite candidates and policies, even their dislikes, and best what sets them off. Maybe that is a study in psychology in itself. Considering their perspective did reveal something I hadn’t thought much about.

One of the triggering things to them is always conservative media. Fox News is akin to poison to them. More than anything else they love to bash Fox, almost as much as Trump. That is the key.

Now think for a minute what that person thinks and feels, not their ideas. Well, Fox is the worst thing that came along. And if you were they, it is Faux News and always lying or agenda driven. However, it is the central problem. That means all other mainstream media is okay but Fox is the problem.

So that presents a simple view. One just has to believe Fox is wrong and everything else is, well, right. It is not hard to take that there is only one enemy, maybe a few marginal others, while everything else is friendly and honest to you. They don’t try to lie to you.

Doesn’t that make things so much easier thinking only Fox News is wrong? Sure, then you accept everything else as authentic at face value. You can accept it. You don’t have to be suspicious and question what comes from Mainstream Media.

Go a step further and you can accept all our institutions as good, except on their structural racism thing. Other than that everything is on the up and up and the media all have pure motives because, after all, they agree with most everything you think and believe.

It’s much easier and simpler that way. They are on your side. Everyone is looking out for you too. No, they don’t really like America, or that antiquated patriotism. The government is your friend, or should be. The government shouldn’t even believe in an exceptional America or us first. Blame America first is cool.

But then there is always world globalism which is basically on your side too. It’s a rosy-eyed view but the enemies are caricatures backed into corners. They are the flat-earthers and the like. But the general “mainstream” (i.e. liberal stream) all thinks and believes much like you. And those are the people who get to authority, because we stick together and get them there.

I figure that is so much simpler, it’s an easy way out, and lazy. In that backdrop you’d have to think that coming out of that la la land would be a challenge. It’s much easier to stay and believe in that illusion. Or keep believing, as Obama said. You don’t need critical thinkers, you just need lock-steppers.

So now isn’t that a crazy way to look at things? But you don’t have to think or worry about things except those creatures in the corner infringing on your paradise. Then there was Obama who confirmed to them all that they owned this phony paradise. Now they are flailing at anything that might distrurb those happy thoughts. They’ve already infested everything and everywhere of importance so that they are embedded and radicalized. All of it is based on your ideological worldview that you all accept, voluntarily of course.

I followed it out because it really makes the case of an easier less-complex way of looking at things. Well, you can be suspicious of those outside that bubble. You may question their motives all you want. Make fun of them, mock them, call them names, they are like animals anyway.

Still it is an easier lifestyle. Corporations and even markets should be in your favor. Everything should be in your favor because your are the ideal people. And within being a member of that society you can do anything. Those outside it should be questioned and accused on every little thing. You have an exemption card. You don’t want to leave.

It just gets me that all you have to know is that Fox is wrong. Everything and the media is right. They are the intellectual betters so don’t need to question anything except Fox. And in that situation it seems the only way to change that thinking would be on their own. You or I could probably not convince them. So they have to see it. It must be their doing.

Reference article in The Federalist: http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/30/im-liberal-agree-sean-hannity-american-journalism-dead/

Right Ring | Bullright

My Dear John letter

I think a letter is in order to McCain. He McCan’t do anything that might help the GOP even though he had them all helping drag him across his last election.

Now, what GOP, what help? “I don’t need any stinking GOP.” No, he is happy basking in the glow of the left as a proud member of the Resistance.

Last repeal he said was not in AZ’s state interest. This time the governor endorses it and McCain finds an excuse to oppose it on process. Well, John, process this!

You used your conscience for your excuse. Your conscience would not allow you to support it. Maybe you shouldn’t have used that excuse.That very convenient, expedient conscience of yours that most of us didn’t know you ever had.

Those chilling words, “I cannot in good conscience…” Funny how look at everything else his conscience allows him to support. How about the help for those other missing POWs? His conscience was fine with burying all that, and he used as much of “the process” as he could for the means to do it. In fact that is what the process was for, to bury inconvenient things. Process he created to obstruct and confuse the process. How about the process of Campaign Finance Reform, where he used the process to try to control free speech?

McCain was the willing dupe that the left used over and over again through the years. He was media’s go to darling to attack the GOP, since McCain never attacks the left but reserves all his animosity for his own party. (his own party is being generous)

Maverick McCain — nothing Maverick about selling out or trading out. The Maverick who referred to Evangelicals and the right as Agents of Intolerance. We always deserve broad brush names but liberals deserve his best compliments, like Chappaquiddick Ted.

That is another point, John constantly told us that he came in under the Reagan Revolution. Indeed, Reagan had already won and laid the groundwork. All McCain did was attach himself like a leach to the Reagan train. A foot soldier he calls himself. What did he fight for? What part of that Revolution was his? He promptly started a revolution within against the revolution that helped usher him in. And he’s a keeper?

Eventually he would hookup with his stepbrother, Ted Kennedy. Never realizing he was a useful mark for the left, always was. But his heart was in it. That is where his true loyalties lie, with the left. Democrats had him figured better than he did them. Then Republicans granted him wide berth because he called himself a Maverick. More like the 1970’s ford Maverick — cheap, dated, unwanted and obsolete. A Maverick, what’s he given us?

In the 80’s McCain and fellow Senators gave us the Keating five scandal on Lincoln Savings and Loan. That cost the taxpayers over 3 billion and many people lost their life savings. But McCain wasn’t gone. He was worried about himself, not investors or losses. He was one of two Senators who survived to run for reelection. But then he went right back to being the stab in the back Senator.

Then he’d go on to run for president. Kids, don’t try that. He jokes about having lost a few expensive aircraft in his Navy days. He’d go on to basically throw the election for Obama, whom he could not criticize. Sarah Palin could not make up for his compromised campaign.

Failure McCain goes on to deliver the dossier to the FBI in 2016. He flirted with not endorsing or voting for Trump. He came around to run on the same platform declaring he would lead the repeal and replace charge to Obamacare in the Senate. That saved his tough reelection. But afterwards, he promptly went back to opposing Republicans.

So on Obamacare repeal, he claims his conscience just wouldn’t allow him to vote for it. But then he knew his was the decisive vote to kill it. Even prior to taking that vote, McCain went over to huddle with Democrats telling them he was a “No.” That overjoyed Chris Coons, as just one in the group with Chuck Schumer. And he told Dems to take up the defense bill as soon after that vote as they could. He was already maneuvering and moving on after leaving American people in the lurch by his pompous vote. That conscience….

Not quite done wrecking our agenda, he now plans on upending the tax reform bill, if he can. And on and on for the foreseeable future, as long as he is there.

So it’s time, John McCain, to bid you farewell, good riddance. Your so-called conscience has put you way beyond remediation on anything else. A conscience I cannot recognize.

On Tuesday’s election, McCain tries to validate himself — using the left’s talking points:

(CNN)”I predicted this, OK? And unless we get our act together, we’re going to lose heavily,” said Sen. John McCain, …pointing to two recent speeches he’s given where he warned about the President’s divisive rhetoric and impact on the Republican Party going forward.

Your conscience called and wants its excuse back… with interest. Maverick Maniac.

Right Ring | Bullright

Defining dissent in the kneeling protest

I’m trying to get a grip on this Anthem, flag protest attitude, so I’ll give it a whirl.

The “protesters” are evidently the type of people with an attitude that look around at the current conditions or circumstances in the country to decide if they approve of America, based on satisfaction. Then of course they can’t bring their resentful hearts to respecting the flag or Anthem. The whole America concept is tainted by their disagreements.

It goes hand in hand with identity politics that everything — including your judgement — is based on your own identity. And that is why identity politics are so divisive. By contrast, only if you are satisfied with everything can you support the Anthem or flag. That’s the synopsis of their view. Who could be happy about everything they see? It becomes a false flag; and so dissatisfaction becomes a convenient straw man for American dissent.

If everything is based on your current condition or circumstances, as you see and interpret them, then it is subjective to each person. The old saying is “you can’t please all the people all the time.” – John Lydgate

“You can satisfy some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot satisfy all of the people all the time” ― John Lydgate

Dissent has been turned into an art form.
Enter the Colin Kaepernick kool-aid brigade. 🙃

Right Ring | Bullright

Mayor Carmen Cruz the terrorist supporter

Well, that didn’t take long. The lamestream media made an instant hero out of the San Juan mayor, to oppose Trump. Now they’re entwined with the terrorist supporter.

BUSTED: Anti-Trump Puerto Rican Mayor Supported Terrorist Oscar Lopez Rivera

Got News – Sep 30, 2017

Carmen Yulin Cruz, the anti-Trump Mayor of San Juan who has used the national spotlight of Hurricane Maria to attack Trump, has a long history of supporting convicted terrorist Oscar Lopez Rivera, a Puerto Rican radical who ran a paramilitary group that waged war against the United States.

Since May 29th, 2012, Cruz has used her official Twitter account 49 times to lend support to Lopez, a man arrested by the United States government in May of 1981 for seditious conspiracy against the United States and conspiracy to transport explosives to destroy government property, among other charges. Later that year, Lopez was sentenced to 55 years in jail for his various crimes.

Moreover, it appears Cruz is more than just a supporter of Rivera’s; she appears to be a personal friend of his. On May 29th, 2016, Cruz posted a tribute to Rivera, and wrote “for a great friend, a great patriot: for you Oscar Lopez Rivera.” …/

Read http://gotnews.com/busted-anti-trump-puerto-rican-mayor-supported-terrorist-oscar-lopez-rivera/

Maybe she should drop the Resistance program and concentrate on the assistance.

NFL Goes Full-Blown Protest Mode

PC crap, here is NFL’s new ad on unity — I suppose that is the message. But you figure out what “inside these lines” means….or is supposed to mean.

So game day turned to P/C day.

Steelers announced they would stay in the locker room for the National Anthem.
All but one of the Steelers stayed in the locker room for the opening. (*later revealed they were in the shadows of the stadium.)

Hey, Steelers, I got a real protest for you:
Just stay in the locker room ….if you really want to protest.
Sit out the game. Stay off of the field …show us you can really protest.

All these teams protesting now. What’s next, eliminate the National Anthem… maybe flag burning? The Anthem could be too divisive, so just eliminate it. Is that where this is going?
You want to protest, cancel the game. See how that goes.

Roger Goodell called Trump’s remarks about flag and National Anthem protests “divisive”.

Goodell issued a statement Saturday

The following statement is in response to President Donald Trump’s comments last night…

STATEMENT FROM NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL

The NFL and our players are at our best when we help create a sense of unity in our country and our culture. There is no better example than the amazing response from our clubs and players to the terrible natural disasters we’ve experienced over the last month. Divisive comments like these demonstrate an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL, our great game and all of our players, and a failure to understand the overwhelming force for good our clubs and players represent in our communities.

Roger, what is divisive is this protest crap taking part of opening ceremonies, now that is divisive. Lack of respect for the NFL? You deserve respect? Seriously, the irony of that.

This is not football day, this is National Protest Day.
Call it what it is….but football has absolutely nothing to do with it. So why there?
It is only another public opportunity for glorified protest.

But don’t blame President Trump or our NFL Boycott then.
But don’t, don’t demonize and condemn our protest of you.

“Get your protest here….get ’em while they’re hot!”

National Protest America Day, fireworks to follow.

Right Ring | Bullright

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

The Dreamer Obummer goes to the Wall

It’s okay For Democrats to fundraise off of redacting DACA but it is so wrong to tie future legislation to funding the wall and border security. What a heap of manure.

Now which two of those things are part of the illegal immigration issue?

Obama said Tuesday, after the decision:

“And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future.”

“What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals…”

“That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.”

“Shifted responsibility” from the White House? It was him that put it there when it belongs in Congress. He’s completely reversing it and then expects people to believe him.

Those ideals. “Reach our more perfect union”… by illegally making unconstitutional, fiat law? That is not an ideal America stands for. But then the guy who created this mess would have to be so far out there to justify it.

Those “Dreamers” must really be dreaming if they would rather have their status subject to a president’s Unconstitutional, fiat law. That is defending Unconstitutionality.

Obama even knows it. So he is probably laughing real hard to have them all defending his Unconstitutional actions thinking “those morons don’t even know it.”

Once again, here we are dealing with another disaster Obama created — while he is cruising in some yacht, writing revision history standing American rule of law on its head.

I’m tired of the protest crap. Protest this, protest that, boycott this, trying to shut down free speech. And there is one person still at the center of it all, Obama.

One protest sign from Dreamers says “Support DACA Not Walls.” Failure to build a wall helped create DACA. It was lack of border enforcement that caused the problem in the first place. Are these Leftists just mentally-challenged or do they really expect people to believe their contemptible BS? America doesn’t buy it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Our Country Rewritten

I took the liberty to rewrite the sentiments the way Leftists see things in our country.

Rewritten: the way it was, according to today’s Left:

Four score and seven years ago, our forefathers brought forth to this continent a new racist nation, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created unequal….

That it is government’s duty to make and keep them unequal; that equality of people was never really intended to exist in the US, or be guaranteed by its Government.

Therefore, it is now government’s foremost duty to pay for that. Though this ideal may never be accomplished, it must always strive to admit its racist founding and structuring. But that is not enough.

So groups and minorities can and must hold fast to perpetual grievances against government and others, and dutifully pass them on to the next generation.

That the grievance industry of non-whites be forever granted wide reprieve for any offenses committed against whites on account of this original, ongoing sin of structural racism.

That this white racist nation never be able to shed its blame or guilt for social injustice, inequality, bigotry, systemic and institutional racism, and its offenses to humanity.

That AmeriKa shall never be healed from, or forgiven for, its systemic racist past.
(*I’ll call that the Getty Redress)

Hence. we are the United Racist States of America, or so says the left.
 
Exhibit A: when the Marxists and leftists see the pictures of that march in Charllotesville, they see AmeriKa as the KKK clan. That is how they really see America, like a clan state.

That picture is just a metaphor for their distorted view of the whole country.

But in reality, what normal non-radicalized Americans see are angry, hate-filled leftists: streaming down the streets, stopping traffic, shouting slurs at cops, lighting police cars on fire, burning down buildings, breaking windows, rioting, in black hooded attire assaulting people, shouting down every speaker they don’t agree with, destroying statues, shutting down businesses, looting stores, shutting down bridges and highways, protesting or threatening businesses that don’t align with their political agenda; while calling opponents any names and _phobes they want, who can’t be reasoned with or confronted, and who’s actions are justifiable by government’s structural or other people’s systemic racism.

So the radical left’s metaphor is really only a graphic diversion from the correct picture of reality Americans see unfolding in front of them. Reality does not fit with the left..

Right Ring | Bullright

Triggering Statues

It seems like those triggering statues are everywhere, to the left. They are so offensive they need to be removed from the offended eye, barred from public, or destroyed.(who said art needed to be perfect?)

So I think I have a solution. It’s very simple. People should think of statues like tweets. Offensive ones may be out there but you can either ignore them or just accept them.

People retweet for different reasons. Sometimes maybe they want others to see it. You don’t agree with everything.You can retweet an offensive comment because you think it deserves to be seen by others.

People can’t ban every offensive tweet. Sometimes you want others to see some offending thing or they make their comment on the retweet.

Not every tweet or twitter person is 100% pure. You wouldn’t want people on twitter to only be able to say certain agreeable things. Only certain authors should be able to tweet. But if you don’t like or appreciate it, you don’t put a like on it or don’t retweet it.

Now the opposite is quickly becoming the case. Some people want to do to twitter and tweets what they are doing to statues: remove or ban the offending ones, as if it is actively offending you because it is there. Therefore, it does not deserve to be on the media or internet and must be banned, possibly along with the author.

Is that what they want to do to the internet? That’s what they are doing to public spaces. What type of statues then can we have? What shall be allowed? Who will decide it, who will enforce it?

Outrage move on over.

Colin Kaepernick can take a knee or sit out the national anthem but a coach is fired and told by a judge that he cannot take a knee to pray on the 50 yard line. So he deserved to be fired. Now, Kaepernick is having a hard time getting employed as people demand he be given a spot, no matter how good a player he is. He needs affirmative action to be hired. His protest deserves a spot. A coach taking a knee deserves to be banished from coaching. But the left doesn’t see this as crazy.

You can be radical enough to stand down on the national anthem and get celebrated for it. Yet you should be rejected for taking a knee on the 50. Where is the rule book for conduct? Where’s the tolerance?

But if you are going to ban statues then you must ban Twitter. It’s too triggering for the public. On the other hand, if you can accept Twitter, then think of statues like Tweets.

Right Ring | Bullright

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.