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

Advertisements

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.

Foxing the White House

(no, not ‘out–foxing‘) | 8/18/2017

What the left at large has done to Fox they are now trying to do to the White House, and the West Wing in particular, with the same fervor. Just the way Leftists claimed several top scalps already at Fox and more on the list, they are running the same play against the Trump White House.

Steve Bannon is gone from the White House — a mark the left has targeted all along. That only encourages Leftists rather than quells their demands, as it always does.

Immediately after Bamnon’s exit, they moved on to demanding scalps of Sebastian Gorka and Stephen Miller. Well, there are others but they are the next priorities. This is how the left operates, we’ve seen it enough times. Adding to the list of firings.

That will start a daily narrative, “how can they remain?” The clock is now ticking. Of course what the left really wants is to cut off any and all support from Trump. They want Trump himself. But they’ll settle for some top advisors to start with, one at a time.

Let’s see if they get any Republicans to echo their call. The Marxist left is getting skilled at this. I expect the same results. Even many Republicans agreed with O’Reilly and other firings. Now toward the administration where Republican voices matter, I expect them to cave. Mitt Romney was one of the first to jump right on the Charlottesville statements. You know Mitt, as an example, can go along with an anti-statue agenda. Spineless. Basically Mitt will go along with anything the left wants or demands.

This will also show which side Trump is on. I imagine he will give the Left a few scalps here and there, maybe to appease them, maybe because it is convenient, maybe for other senior officials. (Jared, Ivanka, McMaster, Kelly, Cohen) But the left is never satisfied.

So Trump will be Foxed. Whether he goes along or not is the question? But I think I know which way the Republicans in Congress will go though. (what do they ever get for it?) Do they split the party? It all comes down, at some point, to the Swamp scoreboard.

It always seems inevitable, how the people come along to support an organization so far and then, at crunch time, it turns away from the people who helped build its popularity. That is a lot like Fox: we came, we saw, we conquered, and then comes a pivot point, like the Murdoch sons throwing in a monkey wrench.

Yet the point is this agenda of the Left won’t stop. It will continue until it finally meets a wall it cannot penetrate, whether it is on Marxist groups, politics in Congress, or on White House staffing arrangements. No one asks why the left should get to choose who fills these positions — or who works at Fox? Arrogance is thy name of the Left.

Then there is the overreach problem of the Left.
Will ‘Foxing the White House’ work and succeed?

Right Ring | Bullright

Washington, Media Cabal of Chaos

They are in a tizzy. Let’s look at the media. They say there is a false equivalency here and that there is/can be no moral equivalency with White Supremacists and Nazis.

First, Trump was not making a direct moral equivalency. But he suggested violence on both sides. Now then, the left’s great equivalency argument.

If they hate any moral equivalence, then why is the Left drawing a moral equivalence of KKK, Nazis, racists with Trump and his entire base? Why can they freely apply an equivalence by comparing and associating Trump with racists or white supremacists?

Now the Left (et al), including antifa, will apply these same protest tactics to anything tied to Trump they can — as if they are racist terrorists. There is a rally planned next week in Arizona. My bet is the Left is staging a major protest for that. They want to apply the same public hatred and resentment against supremacists at the moment, , onto Trump. Get it? Yeah, I smell what the radical left is cooking.

The media has called on any high level Trump administration officials to quit in a show of separation with Trump over his latest statements on Charlottesville. So they want to see mass resignations in the administration. If they can’t directly oust Trump at the moment, they want to shame Trump’s advisers and team into abandoning him. It is now a real part of their anti-Trump strategy. It is disturbing how this is pushed by mainstream media and CNN . This is not a few low-level rogue leftists.

As Trump shut down the manufacturing and business councils, this was one more shot at Trump. It all happens when Trump is on vacation. The left has been ramping up pressure against Trump for months. They want to turn public opinion against Trump when he is on vacation, and undermine support for his agenda. It really is how they think.

I’m calling this a back-door coup. Trump goes out the front door on vacation, and the left tries to storm the back door in a coup d’etat. That is by driving distance between administration officials and Trump. No, it is not going to work like that. But getting any resignation would be useful against Trump. They hoped for a mass show of opposition to Trump. That would set the table for Congress when they return.

Screw America and the people’s agenda, all that matters is the Left’s agenda.

All to show ‘no confidence in Trump,’ of course. Imagine if they did anything like that to Obama? The left wants to drive public opinion/sentiment down so that he cannot carry out anything. Dysfunction is the Left’s best friend. On a regular basis you can turn on news to hear them question if there is any public confidence at all for Trump? I know, but this is what they are doing. Then they pose the old fitness for office question to bolster the argument for the 25th Amendment.

Their latest useful item is Bob Corker’s criticism in questioning Trump’s competence, and stability, for office. Corker said Trump has not demonstrated that he understands the character of the nation. Get that? There is another trophy for the left to use in its war against Trump, along with criticism from McCain, Rubio, Kasich and now McConnell. The usual suspects. What can the left do with that? Just add it to their Russia boondoggle.

The American people are being screwed as usual, by the same people who have been doing it for years, but now on a different level. It’s on, a coup in motion against Trump.

Right Ring | Bullright

A cue from Britain right on time

So the violence, the left says it abhors, is really just a matter of taste. And it is not even a matter of wolf whistles or code words. Boldness of speech is one of the lefts’ tactics.

Punch a Nazi, shoot a Republican — how far you want to take it is a matter of taste

Washington Examiner – Op-Ed
by Dan Hannan | Jul 3, 2017,

There’s a bellicose undertone in a lot of Leftist rhetoric these days. People who preach peace and tolerance, rainbows and unicorns, can switch to a very different wavelength the moment they start talking about conservatives.

Listen, for example, to the way even mainstream Democrats discuss Donald Trump’s healthcare reforms.

Here is Hillary Clinton: “Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they’re the death party.”

Here is Elizabeth Warren: “I’ve read the Republican ‘healthcare’ bill. This is blood money. They’re paying for tax cuts with American lives”.

And those are the leaders, for heaven’s sake. Gaze into the maelstrom of left-wing Twitter and Facebook activism, and you find an altogether less restrained tone. Republicans, you read, are monsters who have gone into politics for the express purpose of murdering the poor. They are not political opponents; they are enemies of humanity, vermin.

Here is a typical example from a Bernie Sanders supporter, who saw the healthcare reforms as proof that Republicans hated the working class:

“Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”

Not long afterwards, the man who posted those words went to a congressional baseball practice session intent on shooting Republicans and left a GOP Rep. Steve Scalise in critical condition.

You can just about follow his logic. Even many moderate leftists now seem to agree that Republicans are murderers, intent on killing low-income Americans for some opaque reason of their own — possibly sheer sadism. And, if Republicans are murderers, then getting your shot in first is a form of self-defense, is it not?

For a brief moment, as happens in the aftermath of these atrocities, all sides came together and stressed the things they had in common and condemned violent rhetoric and yadda yadda. But, within less than a month, leading Dems were back to calling the GOP “the death party.”

Don’t get me wrong: The only person responsible for the Alexandria abomination was the perpetrator. Sure, it’s hypocritical to complain about the rhetoric of the NRA or about using a crosshair as a metaphor for targeting a seat and then to talk about Republican “blood money.” But hypocrisy is not the same thing as complicity.

Still, we should be clear about where the legitimation of political force can lead. In Britain, we have recently seen a sudden rise in violent protests, partly because a group of Trotskyists has taken over our Labor Party. The Labor leader, Jeremy Corbyn, refuses to accept the recent election result, possibly seeing Parliament as a bourgeois institution. His deputy, John McDonnell, called for a million people to take to the streets and “force Theresa May from office”. A “Day of Rage” was duly scheduled (the terminology borrowed directly from Hamas), but happened to fall during a heatwave – and, as you may have noticed, Brits are never much use in the heat.

Just as in the United States, the language of dehumanization – what Leftists call “othering” when rightists do it – is becoming commonplace. Following a recent tragedy, in which a tower block burned down, McDonnell accused the Conservatives of murder, as though they had somehow started the fire. Unsurprisingly, there have been violent demonstrations since the blaze: Why wouldn’t you hit back at politicians who – again, for vague and unspecified reasons – want to exterminate the poor?

You thought of Britain as a civil and courteous country? A country whose people say please and thank you, a country of orderly queues, a country whose police go unarmed? That’s what we thought, too. See how quickly thuggish rhetoric can debase a political culture.

Let me spell it out. Either physical force is legitimate in democratic politics, or it isn’t. If you allow it in any circumstances, then its exercise becomes a question of tactics, not principle.

If it’s okay to stop Milo Yiannopoulos or Ann Coulter from speaking on campus by rioting, then political violence is legitimate. If political violence is legitimate, then the question of who is an acceptable target becomes one of personal choice. For James T. Hodgkinson, the Alexandria shooter, it was Republicans. For Dylann Roof, the Charleston shooter, it was black people. For Micah Johnson, the Dallas shooter, it was white people. It’s all a matter of taste.

Every act of physical coercion – throwing paint over a politician, vandalizing the property of an arms manufacturer, preventing a speaker from reaching a podium – weakens the taboo against violence. The difference between “punch a Nazi” and “shoot a Republican” is merely one of degree.

Dan Hannan is a British Conservative MEP.

Originally posted at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/punch-a-nazi-shoot-a-republican-mdash-how-far-you-want-to-take-it-is-a-matter-of-taste/article/2627594

Griffin, slide on over… it’s a big pool

So on one day that everyone at least can agree to decry what Kathy Griffin did as vile, another has surfaced to defend her. Go figure, who would be as unhinged as her?

You might have guessed, Keith Olbermann. The guy who’s pimping a new book called “Trump is F****ing Crazy.”($27) He’s just the advocate for the CNN-fired Griffin.

He took to Twitter to lambast the biggest name he could find.
So where did he land his venom and vitriol? Franklin Graham.

Graham denounced the art project of Kathy Griffin on Twitter:

“I work with Christians whose family members have been decapitated. @KathyGriffin is sick and disgusting.”

So Olbermann snaps back…

This is all too rich even for the chronic hypocrite, Keith Olbermann:

“And you’re a professional bullshit artist who exploits the stupid and poor. Shut the hell up #LetHeWhoIsWithoutSinCastTheFirstStone “

That’s a new low for him. Griffin gets wide berth and Graham gets attacked. Graham does a lot to help humanity, even in the Ebola outbreak in Africa, but Olberman needs to preach to Franklin’s demons. Then Keith throws a hashtag at Graham, for merely calling out the disgusting, attention-seeking mockery Griffin swims in.

Let me see, think of a bullshit artist who exploits stupid and poor people and who’s name would bubble right to the top? It has to be the Clinton name. Haiti anyone? They aren’t happy with either of the Clintons. Incidentally, the last I looked. the Clinton Foundation was still using Haiti’s last disaster as part of its fund raising scheme.

If anyone could try to make Kathy Griffin’s act look rational, it’s Keith Olbermann.

O’Reilly’s take on Roger Ailes’ death

I am slightly offended by Bill O’Reilly’s analysis of Roger Ailes’ rise and demise.

His assessment seems far too kind to the radical left and their objectives.

This quote comes by way of the Conservative Tribune

“We are living in a rough age, with technological advances changing behavior and perspective. The downside of that is turning us into a nation where hatred is almost celebrated in some quarters,” O’Reilly stated. “Roger Ailes experienced that hatred and it killed him. That is the truth.”

http://conservativetribune.com/oreilly-knows-killed-roger-ailes/

Except that analysis almost blames technology for the state of hatred of the left. No, actually it is an old hatred, just manifesting itself by any new means possible.

The left has long celebrated its vitriol and hatred — mainstreamed really since Reagan. Morality has nothing to do with it but the ultimate result of it is a valid charge.

However, I sense another book by O’Reilly, “Killing Roger Ailes,” is already under draft.

As I have said before, it seems only when ones own ox is publicly gored does one recognize the size of the problem. It suddenly becomes serious then. It’s always been dangerous.

Harvard does separate and equal, by choice

Now isn’t it neat when black students decide to have their own graduation?
From the halls of Ivy League to separate but equal. What can Brown do for you?

Ivy League Black Students Decide To Hold Their Own ‘Black-Only’ Graduation Ceremony

Amber Randall — 05/08/2017 | Daily Caller

Black Harvard graduate students plan to host a “black-only” graduation ceremony later in May.

Approximately 125 students will participate in the ceremony, which took over a year to plan, reports the College Fix. The event is supposed to celebrate how black students have succeeded in higher education.

“This is an opportunity to celebrate Harvard’s Black excellence and Black brilliance,” Michael Huggins, a master’s student in public policy, told The Root. “It’s an event where we can see each other and our parents and family can see us as a collective, whole group. A community.”

More at http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/08/ivy-league-black-students-decide-to-hold-their-own-black-only-graduation-ceremony/

Ripples in a world of news

Leaked Docs Show UK’s Spy Bill Would Force Internet Providers To Track People In Real Time

A draft of a proposed new surveillance law in the U.K. leaked Thursday shows the country’s government wants the power to force internet service providers (ISPs) to give up people’s communications in real time.

The Investigatory Powers Bill, colloquially known as the “snoopers’ charter,” originally passed under the helm of the Conservative Party in November.

Read Daily Caller

Other world news

Venezuela — NBC News

In cities around the country there are reports of political unrest by day and shootouts and looting at night. Scenes include students and housewives armed with sticks and rocks, confronting National Guard troops with anti-riot gear using tear gas, water cannons and other weapons to beat back crowds.

Does any of that sound vaguely familiar?

Who knew El Chapo Guzman had a wife who is an American citizen, with twin girls? Just consider those thoughts for a moment. – NBC News

Defending the Indefensible

I’m almost amused by the political dialogue — to use the term loosely — of the left these days but if one thing sums it up, it would be defending the indefensible.

They apply those talents to Obamacare. What is there to defend? It is a total mess even for doctors and healthcare professionals, and prices are going through the roof. But if anyone can defend that it would be Democrats or the liberal left. Calling that a success is sort of like calling the burnig of Rome a strategic victory.

It isn’t the only place they’ve applied their expertise.They defend Obama’s sham legacy, his leading from behind foreign policy. He doubled the national debt….. “winning!”

Finally, Trump has taken the opportunity to say he was left a big mess all over. That was a strange way of securing Obama’s legacy. Now that Trump elegantly points that out, shrieks come from thhe heckler section. Dare he say that? Mess is an understatement.

Remember Obama’s doctrine was “don’t do stupid shit!” Apparently they didn’t follow their own doctrine. Unless fertilized evil was their idea of smart?

The Democrat party is in a scorched-earth campaign to deny the effects of the last 8 years, and to defend the entire scandalous, evil hole called Obama’s legacy. But it was a pretty big giveaway how bad it is when their biggest claim was Obama had a scandal-free administration for eight years. And Valerie Jarrett echoed that across liberaldom.

Leading from behind and “don’t do stupid shit” being pillars of that tenure. If it looks like and quacks like a duck, guess what? It ain’t a pig. Besides, there isn’t enough lipstick to cover this mess. But who’s trying? How quick their perspective changed from a yellow brick road under a rainbow; to a black plague in every corner with red-alert problems everywhere, just as he leaves. They can complain about leadership now.

On one hand they’ll be defending, on the other they’ll be condemning everything, everywhere. Their hope and change turned to Mope and Complain.

RightRing | Bullright

The Obama Agenda: Trumping Reality

Let’s boil it down to what this whole assorted affair is about — and I mean all the political dissent and consternation. Well, it is pretty simple.

It is really just two things. Almost all of the hyper political climate and fear mongering is over Obama’s legacy of disaster and 2)his last famed achievement, the Iran deal.

That too simple? Some might say duh, we knew that. Maybe, but it really is that simple. At least that is all that is driving it — aside from some powerful egos marinated in Obama’s legacy of lies. I mean what would you expect from those people surrounding the Captain of Treason?

Remember the schoolyard meme that one person is merely putting down another in order to build himself up? That must be an elementary lesson people learn. In this case, it’s one Obamafiles need to fully utilize — to preserve all that they did.

Or as Steve Bannon told CPAC “if you think they are going to give you your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken.” They aren’t. “Everyday it is going to be a fight.”

 

Insiders: Obama Holdover ‘Shadow Government’ Plotting to Undermine Trump

by John Hayward17 Feb 201 | Breitbart

Several intelligence insiders have come forward over the past few days to describe a “shadow government” of Obama holdovers leaking information to derail the Trump presidency, with National Security Adviser Mike Flynn’s resignation their first great success.

There are even allegations that former President Barack Obama himself is actively involved, citing his establishment of a command center in Washington and continuing involvement with activist organizations.

Retired Lt. Colonel Tony Schaffer, formerly a CIA-trained defense intelligence officer, said in a Fox Business appearance on Wednesday: “I put this right at the feet of John Brennan, and Jim Clapper, and I would even go so far as to say the White House was directly involved before they left.” He also mentioned Ben Rhodes:

Schaffer said it was clear that sensitive information that could compromise U.S. intelligence-gathering methods was divulged to the media as part of the campaign to bring down Flynn, by people who had access to beyond Top Secret material. That should narrow the list of suspects considerably.

The Washington Free Beacon quoted “multiple sources in and out of the White House” on Tuesday to describe a “secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran.”

Since all news coverage is now driven by leaks of dubious accuracy from anonymous sources seemingly above evaluation, it seems only fair to entertain some insiders who wish to leak on the leakers.

According to the Free Beacon’s sources, the Obama loyalists are highly organized, under the direction of former Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, famed for his ability to sell false narratives about Iran to credulous reporters. His critique of media types as young “know nothings” whose only experience “consists of being around political campaigns” would seem validated by a press corps that eagerly runs with just about anything an anonymous source hostile to Trump feeds them.

Rhodes shoveled a lot of manure to cultivate the Iran nuclear deal, and he is not going to let it go without a fight. According to the Free Beacon’s sources – one of whom is identified as a “veteran foreign policy insider who is close to Flynn and the White House” – Flynn was targeted because he was preparing to “publicize many of the details about the nuclear deal that had been intentionally hidden by the Obama administration as part of its effort to garner support for the deal.”

Another official who purportedly sits on the National Security Council said “the drumbeat of leaks of sensitive material related to General Flynn has been building since he was named to his position,” and his resignation was “not the result of a series of random events.”

“Last night’s resignation was their first major win, but unless the Trump people get serious about cleaning house, it won’t be the last,” warned a third source, suggesting these Obama loyalists are just getting warmed up.

More – http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2017/02/17/obama-shadow-government-may-working-undermine-trump/

 

Here’s what frames it in context — aside from the fact this author is not calling it a shadow government. Proof of that seems to be in the pudding. (daily)
 

Revenge of Obama’s ‘Former Officials’

Obama officials are waging war on the Trump White House.

For a president who has a uniquely hostile relationship with the press, positive news cycles are both rare and fleeting. The Trump team displayed remarkable discipline by refusing to step on the president’s well-received address to a joint session of Congress. A lot of good discipline did them. Just 24 hours after Trump’s address, a series of troubling reports involving links among those in Trump’s orbit to Russian officials reset the national discourse. Those stories make for a trend, though, that has little to do with Trump and a lot to do with his predecessor. The Obama administration’s foreign-policy team seems to be campaigning to rehabilitate itself one leak at a time, and the press is helping.

The frenzy on Wednesday night began with a revelation in the New York Times that members of Barack Obama’s administration had left a trail of breadcrumbs for investigators who happen to be looking into the Trump campaign’s contacts with the Russian government. The report revealed that intelligence officials intercepted communications between Russian officials and “Trump associates,” and that the administration worked frantically in the final days to ensure those revelations could not be buried and forgotten after they left office.

Continue reading at (may need subscription)

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/american-society/revenge-of-obamas-former-officials/

 

Donald Trump may be busy but so is the Democrat Left.(what remains of the political left) While Trump works long days on his agenda for the people — who elected him by 306 electoral votes — the fiction writing, revisionist Left is as busy creating a means to oppose him. Though there is a deeper reason why they oppose him.

Obama’s agenda needs to trump reality for Obamafiles to succeed.

See, they are not happy with opposition alone but set their sights on undermining, destroying, ousting or overthrowing him. And that, according to their radical base, is “by any means necessary.” Labeling these conspiracy theories is dangerously naive.

Sure they have openly called for and mentioned a slew of hopes and schemes, including political ones for the midterm elections. But the threats that are far more credible, in my opinion, are the ones many people want to poo-poo.

According to the author above, the theory goes that there are nine designated Obamafiles to cover the tracks and rewrite the dismal mess of foreign policy failures they made of things. Cleanup in isle one! From Syria to Yemen, and Ukraine to Iran, and all their applied negligence along the way. Protecting the Iran deal is job #1.

There is one solution, besides rewriting history, to divert all attention to Trump. Then to photoshop Trump into the entire foreign policy picture. Yes, remember Ben Rhodes also has that idea of journalists as young and pliable know-nothings, which he can lead on Obama’s narrative. They can write it as fast as media can report and cover it.

That only begs the question: does media realize it is being led on this narrative? They have yet to ask Obama and his people any questions. Did you notice how quickly the N Korea nuclear issue became an “immediate short-term” crisis? They dispensed Obamafiles to news channels to defend the Obama legacy by setting off all these alarm bells about immediate problems across the globe. Meanwhile, applauding their foreign policy disaster.

But while the Iran Deal from Hell was being negotiated, no one could say anything about the problems or what to do about them because, in their minds, everything hinged on securing Obama’s legacy deal. Of course, there was no time for anything else. They only cared about one thing, and sacrificed everything else in order to get it. Never mind that it was a failure too. Even liberals are restless and tired of defending Obama’s record.

As every group has a de facto leader, the comrade in charge of the nine elite Obamafiles is fiction writer Ben Rhodes. It only makes sense. He in turn would answer to Valerie Jarrett and Obama. This group would be the lead defenders for Obama’s holy grail, his legacy. As Iran is the living monument of that, it requires lots of protection — by any means necessary. Russia is just a choice diversion.

What is odd here is that for years Obama refused and avoided any action toward Russia in hopes of getting the Iran deal done. In Syria, he did much the same: he ignored Iran’s meddling in Syria and elsewhere, with their agents of terrorism that flows across the Mid-East. He would not upset that to get an Iran deal done. So basically he sold us and our security out to terrorism, in order to get his deal. Now we know that; the intelligence community has to know that, Iran knows that, and Russia knew that.

The irony is Obama needs an entire apparatus(Shadow Gov) to protect his legacy of lies.

This is something we need to get used to. It’s not going away. If I read one I read five articles just today that concluded this is not going to change. This is what the left is. They are in perpetual protest.There always has to be something to protest. It’s how they get what they want, how they exist.

However, now they are merely doing it to protect their legacy of policy failures. The problem is that the left does not understand the whole paradigm. They see one thing at a time and that’s all they care to see. They don’t care about the big picture so it’s a challenge just to break through. It is on the media, it is that way to youth and a whole lot of regular working people. So Bannon is right, we have to fight this thing and this mental subterfuge every day and not fall for the simple, colorful narrative.

Goose and gander: Obama vs. Trump

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

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

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

RightRing | Bullright

Assessment of the Left

Remember the old Van Jones’ cliche about how he viewed the progressive, liberal strategy?

“Top down, bottom up, inside out.”

Van Jones: “Change has to be top down. bottom up, and inside out. It’s got to be top down… we can’t just leave the federal government in the hands of our enemies and expect to make a lot of progress.

So even if we can’t get everything done we WANT to get done out of DC, we certainly can’t let other people have the levers of control of DC. But also, you can see right now, DC can’t do much by itself. You have to have that bottom up movement….and that’s what’s been missing is that bottom up sense of movement to get the best out of DC. And What’s {inaudible – cog]…in stopping that is the inside out piece. “

Van Jones said “we need to have the right president and the right movement.”
(the right radical roots)

Rahm Emanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. What I mean by that is [its] an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”

This is not about conflict resolution this is about conflict proliferation.

It was always fairly clear what they were talking about when they said bottom up or top down – Van Jones said they needed the presidency. But it was always more vague what inside out really meant — maybe inside anger acting out, turmoil or chaos itself? Now we see more of what really “inside out” looks like within the government.

That is government turned inside out, against itself, when undesirable power to radicals is in control. Of course this wouldn’t happen under Obama. Where government is used against itself to bring down an opposed power. And it is rolling out of the left right now.

See all the obfuscation, obstruction to allow nominees to get through. You have all the Dems, in minority, functioning in lockstep to use any of their power to oppose and sabotage the majority. Now the radical remnant within is in rebellion.Then you have the phony grass roots AstroTurf acting in concert calling for obstruction.

The first thing liberals did post election was demand Dems obstruct and do anything possible to prohibit everything the new administration tried to do. Hence, resistance.

At the moment, all three parts seem to be fully activated with one added caveat, the media. It is nicely cooperating with their strategy. Money was never a problem with Soros, Dem orgs etc. Then all they need do, collectively, is project chaos everywhere they can.

So under those circumstances, the only way Repubs can get Dems to cooperate is to appease them somehow — what the left wants and expects. If the radical left cannot control government, they must at least exert force over those with levers of power.

And media is doing a marvelous job right now playing along. It’s almost too perfect for them. They have a former president now going back into politics, leading their movement. Democrat pols are all on board with the radical left’s agenda to disrupt, deny, and destroy anything opposing them. It’s basic radical ideology, and Dems are fully radicalized.

There is Move On, which was Clinton’s defense organization. Then there is Organizing for Action, Obama’s campaign organization. There is RevCom, a tool of Bernie’s. Along with other leftist groups, including the ACLU, BLM, environmentalists and the financiers like Soros glad to foot any bills. Couple it with Obama and his internal political machine of fellow travelers, and former staff. Eric Holder and then a crew of Obama’s lawyers challenging everything Trump is doing. Now it’s a strategy of inside out and upside down, too.

RightRing | Bullright