War Hero Status: hands off McCain

Last night, again, CNN trotted out their venom for this president. Not presidents in general, just this president in particular. The subject, of course, was John McCain. The media never seems to tire of defending McCain. It was over comments Trump made.

@realDonaldTrump

Spreading the fake and totally discredited Dossier “is unfortunately a very dark stain against John McCain.” Ken Starr, Former Independent Counsel. He had far worse “stains” than this, including thumbs down on repeal and replace after years of campaigning to repeal and replace!
4:46 PM – 16 Mar 2019

@MeghanMcCain

Meghan McCain Retweeted Donald J. Trump

“No one will ever love you the way they loved my father…. I wish I had been given more Saturday’s with him. Maybe spend yours with your family instead of on twitter obsessing over mine?”
5:28 PM – 16 Mar 2019

In this episode of this long running series, Craig Shields opined that whenever people feel compelled to mention the Nazis or slavery in a conversation, they should stop right there. Don’t do it, he said, it will not go well. (never stopped Democrats from mentioning it)

To that firmly made point, Don Lemon chimed in with a remark adding war heroes to it, meaning like McCain. Just don’t do it, Don repeated. April Ryan was sitting there nodding in agreement to Lemon, rolling her eyes a few times shrugging as to why anyone should try to criticize or talk about McCain. Got the message.

But that brings up the point. We cannot mention John McCain in less than glowing terms. He is a war hero, after all, Lemon kept saying. So he was, and that makes him supposedly off limits to any criticism of him or his record.

Shields already said he had major disagreements with McCain because of the McCain-Fiengold Bill on campaign finance reform that attacked free speech. To the suggestion of disagreement, April Ryan rolled her eyes and shook her head back and forth. Nope, apparently one cannot even disagree on policy. No place for that.

Then Don Lemon added like your mother always told you, “don’t speak ill of the dead.” Now that is two reasons you cannot criticize McCain. First, he is a war hero and second, he is now dead. Yep that definitely puts him off the table. Bite your tongue.

So that sets up the scenario, those are the rules! But think about that a minute. Are we not now a generation that is taking issue with all kinds of people for what they did, especially even if they are also war heroes? Yes, we are. We have seen a string of it, tearing down statues and taking names off buildings all because they contributed to an intolerable policy. That means their war record status as a hero is post-facto expunged now.

I thought, you don’t have to look very far. A few examples popped into my head of Robert E Lee, Andrew Jackson and Benedict Arnold. Do they have something in common? (you could pick others too) They were heroes in their own right. Even Benedict Arnold had hero status before going to West Point and then selling out to become a traitor. He’s probably the most stellar example. But we do criticize him. I mean his name is forever smeared as a traitor. Yet he was a formidable soldier who Washington commended.

The point is all these are thoroughly critiqued today as villains of some type. But they were heroes too. Any statues of them would be removed. Whatever good they may have done is now undone by what we know about their actions or tangential support for policies. It doesn’t bother these McCain defenders one bit to bash or condemn those one-time heroes. In fact, it is good to make people aware of their wrongs and associated sins.

Look, I know no one is perfect. That is not my point. Actually, we are all flawed people. We may do great things and still have bad in our lifetime. These days though it is permissible to throw the man’s whole legacy out because of a stain. They are erasing our history the same way. But they will not find anyone perfect. We had founders that owned slaves. Does that blot them out of history? Should we sanitize history with only approved people?

They take the Jefferson Davis statue down and others. All that is good to these people; they endorse more of that cleansing. Except leave John McCain alone. “Leave him alone!”

There is another thing about McCain. Sure there is lots to criticize there. Lucky he never did become president because we know how they are treated — from Nixon to Obama. What about that? They were all still presidents. Yet they are routinely criticized all the time. (especially Republicans) They say but this man, McCain, must be exempt from any criticism. Is that fair? If he would have become president, he would have had criticism from both sides picking on his legacy, much worse than this.

I am getting very sick of how every time someone criticizes McCain, out come his preening guards calling you disrespectful, to remind everyone he is a war hero – End! No one can say a negative word about him. Trump does not follow their special McCain exempt rule.

Right Ring | Bullright

Fox Goes All Out

On the crazy side, it seems all the left has to do is get the DNC to say it will not allow Fox News to have any debates in the primaries. That causes Fox to do all sorts of pandering stunts, presumably to get on the good graces of DNC and Democrats. Fools gold.

They come out and publicly flog Judge Jeanine for “anti-Islamic” statements. Then they hire Donna Brazile as a contributor. What, Hillary wasn’t available? Doesn’t Fox learn?

So that’s all Democrats have to do to bait Fox? But peeing in the wind is usually risky.

Thinking Aloud: Parallels

I read things and some things really bother me. So then is the answer to just stop reading?

I’d like to think not. Though it is frustrating to see what you must to inform yourself, while not being able to control your blood pressure. That frustration is real and I know a lot of people feel it. I suppose there is some desperation too.

I haven’t found a way to turn it into a comic game yet. Nor do I want to. It’s been a long time but I have read lots of pieces from the Socialists, Marxists and commies. That alone is an effort, with the way they speak about it. I researched much of it in the 90’s seeing what is out there and I have to say, not a whole lot as changed. Even the same graphics they use.

It is almost like peering into a timeless vault where no current events have really affected it, not their thinking anyway. Of course much of it goes back to what Marx and Engels wrote so it really doesn’t change. And their mindsets haven’t changed either.

What I can say to try to sum it up is they are persistent and bold. They believe in this ideology. These are hardliners who, whatever name they prefer to use at present, are actually commies. Most are very aware of it. Some are just rationalizing commies that only think it has not been implemented correctly yet. But the ideology stands as justifiable to them today as it was when Marxism was rolled out. Deaths and failures be damned.

They will not change. The question is how many adherents can they gather to follow along or become their useful idiots? Today should provide some optimism. You know, years ago I used to raise it to liberals and they would mock the mere fact I brought it up. They would claim that is all dead, like Nazism, and for the sake of discussion socialism is an old relic. Or that is what they said.

Today, they proudly boast of socialism and it is adopted by the mainstream Democrat Party. Though old Marxists have told us the only destination for Socialism is Communism. That is where it all leads. But that is not popular to a lot of people, so they would prefer telling people that they have found the right mix, good socialism.

Backup to what I have concluded from what I learned. The important thing is that Marxism or Socialism is both an economic and political system. It combines the two. And you really can’t separate them, as planned. If we don’t keep banging the gong about the evils of socialism, we allow it to continue. Remember the old “Gong Show” where a panelist bangs the gong to stop the act, to end the agony of enduring it? Even when we see those real workd examples in Venezuela, the left ignores the message. Then they tell you that was an outlier. How many outliers do you need?

 

Another thing on my mind lately is the Brexit situation in the EU. It seems to keep going on and on. Now with a hard date approaching, they are trying to pass a bill to delay it until the end of June. You see them dragging their knuckles in Britain doing everything they can to stop it. But people voted on it, they made their decision. Now it is up to leaders to enact the will of the people. But they just can’t do that. So they stall and complain.

Isn’t it amazing how much in common the USA has with Britain at this time? I notice all the parallels. The same thing applies here. The establishment is kicking and screaming to any major change. They certainly do not like rolling back their power. In both places people made their will known and the establishment promptly ignores or defies it. As if we hadn’t decided. Do you see that timeline running in parallel? In 2016 we had an election, and UK voted for Brexit. The powers of government have been in resistance ever since.

Look at the spread of antisemitism in Europe. The same thing is happening here. But those who stand up against it are called names. We are the problem. Call out or talk about the Islamists and you are the problem, not radical Islamists. Yet that is only a hint of what’s to come. Radicals have infiltrated European countries by immigration, and we now have radical illegal immigration threatening every part of our US border. Organized invasion. They all claim it is a peaceful and beautiful thing to be praised and celebrated. Only it isn’t. There are real costs and consequences. However, we the people should ignore those. In Britain, they tell the people the same thing, “just ignore it, don’t make waves.”

See how much we have in common with the political agendas in both countries?

One would also think that lawmakers in both places would take note of this frustration and stand of the people. But they don’t and dig in their heels instead. They want to wait us out or defy our will. They claim to know better than the pesky people what is good for them. It is amazing the similarities running in parallel.

In Israel, they are trying to route Netanyahu. The same thing applies in the US on a greater scale. Give us more time, they say, and we will get rid of him. We will change things in the next election, they claim. But what about the election in 2016? That didn’t count. They want a mulligan on that. Its the next election, roll out the polls. The Left does not want to solve any of these problems. Actually, it wants to exacerbate and agitate them. They want more friction until they get their way.

When I see the parallels in Britain with ours, I am astonished. The same attitude exists in the people. They are so fed up. The last straw was over two years ago and no one noticed. They call us names, we are the problem not what they are trying to do. Now they want another election to fix things. Fix it? No way.

Here was a statement by an old time rock and roller from the Who. It stunned me. Frontman Roger Daltrey wieghed in on Brexit in 2017:

“We are getting out, and when the dust settles I think that it’ll be seen that it’s the right thing for this country to have done, that’s for sure.”

“It’s got nothing to do with any of the immigration issues or any of that for me. It was to do with much more. The majority of this country felt that their voices weren’t being heard. It would have been nice to do a deal with Europe but they didn’t want to do a deal, and they sent Cameron back with a bag. (More)”

Now in 2019 he spoke up again saying the EU is like being governed by the Mafi. Not a big fan. Yet they keep trying to find a way to drag out Brexit, or stop it altogether. Seems like the whole world has huge denial issues. No wonder the people are sick of it. Elections mean nothing, referendums mean nothing, the will of the people means nothing.

 

Along comes California. The new Governor, Gavin Newsom decided to up and end capital punishment. Well, just a year or so ago the people voted to keep capital punishment and speed up the appeal process. Sure, that sounded a lot like ending the the death penalty. But Newsom doesn’t care about what voters say. In fact, he promised when he ran that he would not let his views influence law or the death penalty. But no, he overturns it all by himself. Will of the people be damned, once again. Promises mean nothing, especially when made on the campaign trail to get elected.

Contrast that with President Trump who is actually trying everything possible to keep his promises and deliver for the people. Oh, can’t have that now, can we? But Newsom will be praised and Trump will be condemned. Every roadblock imaginable is thrown out in front of Trump to stop him. Or even stop his presidency altogether. The will of the people meant nothing when we elected him, it means nothing to them now.

So shift all the emphasis onto the next election. They didn’t accept the results of the last one. Now they want an election to nullify the 2016 election. Meanwhile, obstruct and defy the voice of the people. The people cannot be allowed to make decisions.

The people don’t want impeachment and don’t like the effects of socialism. But force both on the people. Tell us we have no choice. But our choice was never respected.

Right Ring | Bullright

Chelsea Takes It On The Chin

Introduction: you must have heard Chelsea Clinton went to a vigil for victims of the attack in New Zealand. There she was confronted, no attacked by activists. Made some news.

Well, now they have put out an article explaining why they attacked her. Here is an excerpt from Buzzfeed, you can go read it yourself. It’s a doozy. Put it this way, it barely mentions the victims in New Zealand. This is personal, about Ilhan Omar the victim.

Buzzfeed: Opinion: Why We Confronted Chelsea Clinton

“We went to the vigil for one reason: to grieve the loss of innocent lives that were stolen from this world by vile hatred. We wanted to join our friends and colleagues in a time of heartbreak and agony, to remember the 49 Muslims who were murdered for being Muslim. As a Jewish American-Israeli and a Palestinian Muslim, we understand far too well the consequences of anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim bigotry, and white supremacy. And as activists who are unafraid to speak the truth, we know we have a duty to call out any bigotry wherever it exists.

“We did a double take when we first noticed Chelsea Clinton was at the vigil. Just weeks before this tragedy, we bore witness to a bigoted, anti-Muslim mob coming after Rep. Ilhan Omar for speaking the truth about the massive influence of the Israel lobby in this country. As people in unwavering solidarity with Palestinians in their struggle for freedom and human rights, we were profoundly disappointed when Chelsea Clinton used her platform to fan those flames. We believe that Ilhan Omar did nothing wrong except challenge the status quo, but the way many people chose to criticize Omar made her vulnerable to anti-Muslim hatred and death threats.

“We were shocked when Clinton arrived at the vigil, given that she had not yet apologized to Rep. Omar for the public vilification against her. …./”

Read https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leendweik/why-we-confronted-chelsea-clinton/

The lesson intended: don’t cross the Muslim coalition. They sucked up all the oxygen for Omar. Apology?

They also claimed their duty is to speak truth to power. I guess no one told them Chelsea is not in power. They don’t care. We have tried to tell people their M/O.

Now that Rep Ilhan Omar is a congressperson, representing a district, she should get used to comments about her since that goes with the turf as a public official servant. I notice how she freely castigates others but people also have rights and their freedoms.

For a reminder, though it has only been weeks, here is the oath of office.

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Trust Dictionaries

I am going to leave this one up to Webster’s who seems to understand the nuances of Socialism and Communism vs. Capitalism.

The gripe I have is with Leftists who state a simple definition of Socialism as government owning production or the means of production. Some in media also use this definition. This has long been used as a blanket denial of socialism. One can say that definition is the hurdle and they are not advocating that. Thus, they blame you for misstating their position. It becomes a semantics argument. I reject that — and the approach.

That is why I believe Dem0ocrats are some of the most disingenuous or dishonest people there are. And why it is often pointless talking with them. They’ll throw these simple or deceptive meanings out there and expect you to comply with it. What is the point?

It is better to say government controls the means of production. Even that is a little flawed in today’s definitions of Socialism. They’ve been working at creating vagueness for years.

So here is the definition of Socialism and I encourage people to see this page for more information. Webster’s claims communism is one of their most looked up words.

Socialism

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Socialism vs. Social Democracy: Usage Guide

In the many years since socialism entered English around 1830, it has acquired several different meanings. It refers to a system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control, but the conception of that control has varied, and the term has been interpreted in widely diverging ways, ranging from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. In the modern era, “pure” socialism has been seen only rarely and usually briefly in a few Communist regimes. Far more common are systems of social democracy, now often referred to as democratic socialism, in which extensive state regulation, with limited state ownership, has been employed by democratically elected governments (as in Sweden and Denmark) in the belief that it produces a fair distribution of income without impairing economic growth.

Then we come to the basic Hitler description of Socialism. Asked prior to WWII about abolishing private property, he wanted people to keep their private property just as long as they understand that they are agents of the state. In this way, government does not need to own production or private property, merely control it. While you may own it, you and the property are virtually controlled by the state. All they need is control.

That same philosophical distinction can apply to production. All the state needs is control, which can be achieved by regulations or other arms of the state. So that is the dirty thing Leftisits don’t want to talk about or you to know, as long as you accept their definitions.

Omar Spins Congress Like A Top

For what it is worth. Ilhan Omar can talk and complain but she can’t hide.

She spins the entire thing to about her and her plight She spins antisemitism.

But she gets some push back

What part of antisemitism doesn’t she get? All of it. That’s who she is.

Why is her voice any more important than all the others?

Jihadist Review, years later

Here is an old article from 2015 as a reminder of the previous president and his administration, policies, agenda, and their talking points. It was well done though I’m sure not enough people saw it then.

But the first point is that the article would even have to be written at all and in the 6th year of Obama’s presidency, says a lot about him. The second point is that this was all so blatantly obvious to everyone but Obamafiles. Or that media would try to dispute there was a sympathetic propensity toward terrorists and Islam in particular.

Remember all the denials? How they mocked us for even mentioning his sympathies? And a mainstream media that was too stupefied to even ask the serious questions of Obama. And where were all the hearings on this serious subject of national security?

They never cared enough to discuss it.

Yet this article should have been exhibit A in a long list of grievances against the former president, who was so compromised he was incapable of representing the US or defending our sovereignty. Excuse Congress now as it feigns concern. Here is part of it.

Obama’s religious blindness aids Islamic State: Column

by James S. Robbins — Feb. 19, 2015 | USA Today

Refusing to acknowledge theological motivations will sabotage efforts to stop jihadism.

At this week’s White House summit on combating violent extremism on social media, all topics are fair game except Islamist extremism. From the administration’s point of view, it may as well not even exist, despite the fact that the first I in ISIS and ISIL stands for “Islamic”, as in Islamic State.

The White House has consistently downplayed, if not outright ignored, the religious dimension of the war on terrorism. This has much to do with President Obama’s apparent belief that any mention of Islam in the context of terrorism will reinforce negative views of the United States abroad, and supposed American prejudices against Muslims.

Even during the George W. Bush administration, officials consistently stressed that the United States is not at war with the whole of the Islamic world or with Muslim beliefs. It has been repeated thousands of times. We get it. However, avoiding the religious dimension of the struggle against violent extremism is a mistake. The White House may not like it, but for the jihadists, this conflict is all about Islam.

Attempts to avoid touching on religious dimension of the struggle has led to several recent high-profile administration gaffes. President Obama strangely tried to deflect the issue at the National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 5 by mentioning the Crusades as an example of Christian excess. Unfortunately, that example is also a key jihadist talking point.

In an interview published days later, Obama downplayed the religious aspect of a terrorist attack on a kosher deli in Paris that specifically targeted French Jews, saying the perpetrator “randomly (shot) a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.” Administration spokespeople compounded the problem by reinforcing the idea that this was not an anti-Semitic attack, before later backtracking by tweet.

The White House made a similar blunder in a statement condemning last week’s ISIL beaheading of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians in Libya, referring to them only as “Egyptian citizens” and stressing that ISIL attacks are “unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity.” In fact, this act of slaughter was very specifically focused on faith; the title of the ISIL video showing the atrocity was, “A message signed with blood to the nation of the cross.”

The latest slip was when State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf suggested that the key root cause driving people into terrorism was “lack of opportunity for jobs.” Her recommendation that economic development programs could win the war on terrorism was reminiscent of Lyndon Johnson’s belief that the troubles in Vietnam could be brought to an end with a Tennessee Valley Authority-style project in the Mekong Delta. But Harf — a former Mideast analyst for the CIA — should know that there is no evidence to suggest a relationship between economic deprivation and a propensity to commit terrorist violence. A 2012 study in Pakistan found that members of the middle class were more likely to support extremists than the poor. Case studies of individual terrorists show that they are more likely to be well educated and from middle-class backgrounds, or in the case of Osama bin Laden, children of extreme wealth.

Continua reading at USA Today opinion columns.

There is one caveat needed though, there is no comparison. What George Bush did out of apparent political correctness, Obama did out of loyalties to rabid anti-American bias out of favor to his sympathies for Islam and Islamists. It does show where p/c can lead.

There was a massive, strategic political silence as team Obama tried desperately to pull the handle and flush American exceptionalism and its reputation down the toilet. But no one could utter a word about it. One would be tared and feathered for mentioning it in public.

To this day, we should have hearings as to what went on in Obama’s un-American administration and right on through the transition, even to now. Those same radicals who are now engaged in sedition against this president and his administration. If a psychiatrist would examine this schizophrenia he/she would be at a loss for words. So many people went along with it.

Dems’ Snake Oil Resolution

The Democrats and media allies are going for a 4-cushion bank shot. We saw Omar using her classic antisemitism. Democrats now claim antisemitism is criticizing George Soros or Michael Bloomberg, because they are Jewish. Even anti-globalism. That doesn’t work.

It’s a wacky attempt to gain from Democrats being antisemitic, or condoning it.

But we don’t criticize Soros for being Jewish. He doesn’t seem to have an affinity for Israel or Jews himself. He’s a puppet master of the left, funding the far left. His disdain for the USA and our sovereignty is an issue, with his obsessive globalism loyalties. It has nothing to do with being Jewish. They would love to take Soros off the table.

This idea came floating out of CNN about a week ago. They said since Omar’s statements, now conservatives will have to drop all their complaining against Soros and, before he announced he was not running, even Bloomberg. But being Jewish was never at issue with either of them. That is not the criticism — globalism resistance is not antisemitism.

However, when Obamar uses her screeds it is against Jews and Israel — or those who support it — that is at the center of her arguments. What nonsense. And for media, especially CNN, carrying this attack is ridiculous. Anyway they can minimize Democrats’ anti-Jewish platform. Then on Fox, Jessica Tarlov spewed that same talking point.

It doesn’t work and I refuse to take Soros off the table for their convenience.

Then they turn around to pass a resolution watered down to condemn all forms of hatred, including toward Muslims. What tripe. The whole purpose of this was antisemitism of the Left and their failure to say or do anything about it. What do you expect from the left?

They know it is an endemic problem of the Left. Only last December, 2018, CNN was forced to fire Marc Lamont Hill for broad slurs at the UN against Israel. Hill tried to claim he spent his life fighting against antisemitism. Then three months later here we are.

As Trump said at CPAC last week, “these people are sick!”

Right Ring | Bullright

The Dem Vote Is In

Democrats’ vote is in, at least from a CNN focus group. And guess what the results are? Indeed, AOC-Snake Charmer is Democrats’ candidate of the future. Cue the celebration.

I don’t know if this is really CNN News or a Mardi Gras hangover?

Washington (CNN)A group of Democratic voters praised Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez during a discussion of the New York Democrat, citing her boldness and regarding her as the future of their party.

“She is the candidate of the future. She has got this down pat. And she has also nailed it as a woman in a male-dominated field,” said Christian Tamte, one of six Democrats who spoke on a range of issues with CNN’s Alisyn Camerota on “New Day” this week. [see link and video]

Tells you almost all you need to know about the future of Democrats or the DNC. I rest my case — or theirs. … Nailed, that’s kind of the way I saw it too. Yep, “badass” AOC.

All right then. Any questions?

Climate Of Religion

What we have seen is the overt politicization, weaponization and religiosity of the climate, or climate change, and the propagandizing of it. It should be no surprise that they politicized it to the max. That’s why so many people are outraged. But that was only the first step. Then they weaponize the climate, against the people of course.

Then they use the climate as the apocalyptic fear-mongering vehicle

When even the former head of Green Peace has to go on Hannity and call out the apocalypse hysteria of the Left, we are in a strange place.

He actually said that if we do the fossil full elimination they are calling for, it would decimate civilization. Or maybe that is what they want? He also said that our coal fired consumption is about 90% cleaner than it was decades ago.

But he said that today we still rely on fossil fuels for 80% of our electricity. Apparently they didn’t realize that when they tell us they want to switch to electric cars. Imagine the reaction when they all plug them in.

But they are telling us something with these Big Green Plans. They show us it is a religious movement now, full stop. The former Green Peace guy said what they are doing in incorporating kids into their message is equal to child abuse. Well, it should be criminal. The same person also said that the direction they are taking it, including using children (and emotions), is just to push their radical socialism or social justice platform.

I guess they don’t realize that we see exactly what they are doing. They turned it into a political issue, weaponized it, then made it a religious one. And they now feel comfortable turning that weapon on anyone they need to propel their political agenda.

Wouldn’t you think using and scaring kids would be a bit over the top? Not for them. In fact, it is right up their alley. The same way they have been using kids in their socialized healthcare schemes. Just roll out the children. What’s next, having children lobby and protest for late term abortion rights? Don’t be surprised.

As I said some time ago: is there anything too radical and extreme even for Democrats? Not anymore. Remember Claire McKaskill let the dirty secret out of the bag in the campaign, before she lost? She said those are the crazy Democrats and she was not one of them. But now that the election is over and AOC has taken over the party, with an assist from Bernie Sanders, it looks like they are telling us loud and clear that really all Dems are crazy Democrats. That’s the way it works.

We used to hear them say on the campaign that they would not be a lockstep vote, and they were independent minded, and that they would represent the people. Remember Trump called them out at rallies and said if they get in, they will only be Pelosi puppets and vote in lockstep. Rubber stamps. Again, Trump was completely right. But it only took a few short weeks for that to happen and prove it.

Bottom line is these people are not at all about preventing a catastrophe, they are all about creating one. And the faster they get there, the better. Have kids believe that the world is going to incinerate. We used to hide under desks in schools, remember. Now just tell them it is over. So we might as well blow through a hundred trillion dollars trying because it’s a lost cause unless. Unless they can save planet earth from destruction. Well, I wonder what kept planet earth from destruction years ago before they came along? They sort of sound like a revised version of Heaven’s Gate people over the Hale-Bopp Comet.

It does show us something. That the climate change and socialists, besides getting in bed with each other, are reading from the same script. It is all about belief. It is only based on that. Throw in a few anecdotes and current events to make your case, then round up the kids and give them their lines. Send them out to the public and watch people get sucked in. Or so goes the plan. However, what it really is based on is belief.(echoes of Obama) Have enough people to believe it and you can even summon a Hale-Bopp comet to come and rescue them. And they are betting all their marbles, and our money, on it.

Right Ring | Bullright

AOC’s Dream Campaign Cash

AOC’s Dream appears to have a few problems. Slushy season.

AOC’s chief of staff ran $1M slush fund by diverting campaign cash to his own companies

by Alana Goodman | March 04, 2019 | Washington Examiner

Two political action committees founded by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s top aide funneled over $1 million in political donations into two of his own private companies, according to a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission on Monday.

The cash transfers from the PACs — overseen by Saikat Chakrabarti, the freshman socialist Democrat’s chief of staff — run counter to her pledges to increase transparency and reduce the influence of “dark money” in politics.

Chakrabarti’s companies appear to have been set up for the sole purpose of obscuring how the political donations were used.

The arrangement skirted reporting requirements and may have violated the $5,000 limit on contributions from federal PACs to candidates, according to the complaint filed by the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group.

Campaign finance attorneys described the arrangement as “really weird” and an indication “there’s something amiss.” They said there was no way of telling where the political donations went — meaning they could have been pocketed or used by the company to pay for off-the-books campaign operations. ,,,/

Bradley A Smith – former FEC Chairman: “You might say from a campaign finance angle that the LLC was essentially operating as an unregistered committee.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ocasio-cortezs-chief-of-staff-ran-1m-slush-fund-by-diverting-campaign-cash-to-his-own-companies

Weird, uh? Let’s see if media can ignore the campaign cash dreams because they cannot ignore her Big Green Dream.

Two Views Of Two Things

Two subjects front and center today are walls and nationalism. But lets look at them first from the Left’s “mainstream” perspective.

Nationalism is a dirty word to progressives and Democrats. You know why. It is now sufficient to state that as a fact. The left already does, they will tell you all the reasons they detest it. They’ve tried to rub it out or stigmatize it.

Well, except when the issue is about nationalism in a foreign country, then it turns to loftier, respectable terms. But for us it is a nasty concept.

The wall
hardly needs any explanation now either. They hate it, and have no problems telling you that either. It’s a nasty thing that should be forbidden. It’s been called immoral. Yes, an object saddled with the symbolism of immorality. One prospective candidate said it kills people, and existing walls should come down. The stigma created is gigantic.

But before we put the two of them together, let’s look at the real view in the context of the US. Because, after all, we are talking about this country not some other place.

Nationalism is a pride in the country we live in. It is a sense of loyalty to this country –which I think one would get if one reads the oath of office. A love for the flag and simple pledge and anthem. Patriotism. Appreciation not apathy. Not supranationalism.

Walls are another welcome thing for a lot of reasons. They define boundaries and protect what is in them. The old saying was good fences make great neighbors. Walls haven’t always been bad. In fact, they are used for so many reasons that a wall-less world would seem pretty intimidating. And the walls we are talking about are not to keep people in, as has been suggested by critics. But then borders are another good thing too. Just saying.

Then we need to see it again from the same perspective what Leftists are doing with these two things – as much as they claim to hate them both.

Progressives are all about nationalizing everything. They want nationalized healthcare, nationalized programs and environmental policies on everything. They want nationalized policies that supercede state and local ones. And they want your obligatory pride in that.

They also want to nationalize us under the rubric of servants and serfs of the national government. It is hard to think of something the Left doesn’t want national government to control. All nationalized in one government. Finally, they want that national government controlled by progressives with the same ideological view. That includes the courts, where one court can intervene and control any national policy not satisfactory to the Left.

Basically, they believe in nationalizing everything from roads to healthcare, to diet, to mandates on ponds on your property And, as we saw with the Kelo decision, they want those property owners subservient to the national government authority for what it deems common use – even for more tax revenue.

The bill of rights should also be read only from the national government perspective, along with the notion that our rights are bestowed by the national government, which trumps everything. In fact, think about who is more the nationalist here. Just that they need to control it all. And, as we know, it really is all about control. Nationalized elections too.

But they want people then loyal to that government and more importantly under its nationalized thumb. They want a government, by government, for government. That is the nationalism they seek at all costs.

That wall they hate is a material, physical boundary. But they have plenty of walls that are not material, nevertheless they believe in these walls. These are walls to keep people in. They need walls around the Democrat party to keep people from leaving. They need walls to contain free speech zones, or walls behind which we can practice our faith – like prayer closets. And they want a thick wall of separation preventing people of faith from having any influence in that government. They want walls around Planned Parenthoods. Finally, they like real walls to protect them from other people and to preserve their private utopia, while they force others to live below standards set by their big-government dreams.

What a nationalist wants

Now I want walls to keep criminal elements and invaders out that we have no control over. I want the border to be real, not an imaginary thing. And not just some fictional boundary dishonored from both sides.

I want boundaries determined by geology not ideology. Not some borderless area of lawlessness. I also want laws that protect the nation’s borders, not open them up to meaningless interpretation defined by cartels, smugglers, invasions and radical groups.

I want a nationalism of individual people who are in control of their government, not vice versa. Not mobs that hijack government from everyone else, for their own agendas. I want a Republic not a Mobocracy. And I prefer to keep it as long as possible.

Right Ring | Bullright

Follow The Corruption: Clintons

Gateway Pundit has this expose. It ain’t over yet. It was a multi-part series.

MEDIA SILENT: Clinton Foundation Connected AGT Forwarded Top Secret US Intel to RUSSIA – FBI/DOJ Covered It Up – PART V

by Jim Hoft March 2, 2019 | Gateway Pundit

A 2016 DOJ criminal investigation was suppressed and buried by the DOJ/FBI that involved a major NY Democratic power broker and the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation.

The investigation revolved around the illegal sale of controlled US Homeland Security technology to Russia and China in the years before the 2016 election by a company named AGT. …./

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/media-silent-clinton-foundation-connected-agt-forwarded-top-secret-us-intel-to-russia-fbi-doj-covered-it-up-part-v/

Not Just A Conspiracy Theory

In an interview with Sean Hannity, Trump thanks himself for exposing all the corruptness that has gone on in Washington. And he is right.

Much has now been exposed about how big the swamp really is. It is incredible. But for Trump, would we have confirmed all that? I don’t believe so. They were so good at hiding and covering it that they must have laughed at what they were able to do. They could operate almost openly, in front of us, right below the surface with impunity and yet we could not know or prove the extent.

Of course we knew of the Deep State and would find tidbits later but still never knowing the corruption. We were mocked as nuts. We also knew of Hillary’s plans of a shadow government but that too was dismissed for years as conspiracy.

However, this real incestuous apparatus could then be used on anyone. It happened to be Trump but could have been whoever challenged or exposed it. We were at the tip of the iceberg with Hillary’s server. So close.

Not only were we lied to for years and ridiculed as tin-foil conspiracy nuts but in reality it was bigger, more interconnected even worse than we suggested. (if that was possible)

We had a cabal of government within our government. Still do to some extent though now exposed for the network it is. Wouldn’t anyone rather know that there is such an apparatus than denying one exists?

The politicization and radicalism of government was more less complete with Obama. Then he opened and spread access to all the information in their 17 agencies. It would be hard or impossible to stop such a beast once it was in motion. And using its own power, would be capable of defending itself as a whole. This would not require direct orders from one quarter to another, as it was all of the same radical mindset. Preserving itself and protecting its own would be a top priority. Who could challenge it?

Now we have come full circle. How so? Since Trump became president, the left has asserted all kinds of conspiracies starting right from the election. Funny how as long as Democrats controlled the executive branch, even it alone, they posited that this whole cabal within it was only a figment of imagination. On top of that the Congressional allies concealing and covering it. That didn’t require a majority. The left did not have to control Congress once it was all in place. It operated as designed, with impunity.

The idea Trump had or controlled such an apparatus – a part of the resistance – is ludicrous and complete fantasy. It was aimed at him rather than a tool for him. Though how many times did we hear the Left postulate that Trump was now President and disagrees with his own administration? What nonsense.

When Trump came in he probably had no idea to the extent of the tentacles. Rooting it out would not be easy. The key part of radicalization within the justice department had an essential role. Even as a new administration would take over, DOJ could operate as a rogue resistance to cover for the entire cabal. Some of us saw that dilemma from the beginning. What could be done about it? Enter Jeff Sessions as caretaker for it. He did enough to appear to be working while basically not making waves to disrupt it. So did we really have an Attorney General? No we didn’t. We had Deep State as the default AG running the show. They proved to be a formidable force. Even better if no one threatened its consolidated power or existence.

Of course any Republican president would face such an apparatus. And the Left would continue to deny one exists. How much could it be exposed under any other Republican? We may not know but my guess is not to this level. And the longer it could be denied and ignored, the more power it had.

The elements may still be there but diminished in their stealth capabilities. Now it is forced to operate more in the open. It has all become more transparent than it would have been, not a good thing for it. Their only recourse and defense to this overexposure is to investigate Trump and try to turn any of its power against the president.

So far at least, Trump is winning for having exposed it as what it is. But defeating it is yet another matter. Only it’s not just a conspiracy theory anymore.

Right Ring | Bullright

HRC Is Back With Hoof in Mouth

Back by unpopular demand, Hillary is out Monday-morning quarterbacking the investigation report and piling on Trump. Smell the revenge!

She just can’t sit down and shut up having inflicted the nation with scandals and injustice.

Hillary Clinton urges public hearings on Mueller report

By Liam Quinn | Fox News

Hillary Clinton is calling for public hearings on Robert Mueller’s Russia report while slamming Congress for not taking stronger action based on already-known information.

The defeated 2016 presidential candidate gave a wide-ranging interview on Wondery’s “TBD with Tina Brown” in which she discussed Mueller’s Russia investigation, President Trump’s North Korea talks, and the unique challenges facing women running in 2020.

Speaking about the Russia investigation, Clinton said: “There hasn’t really been that kind of solemn, somber laying of facts and information before the public and the press that should happen in our democracy.

“There is enough grounds in what has already been made public for the government for Congress, in particular, to be doing more with [the Mueller report]. I’m pleased that under Speaker Pelosi, the Democrats are beginning to hold hearings and try to connect some of these dots.”

The former secretary of state also offered up some insight into her campaign, describing it as “kind of Obama 2.0,” and pointed the finger at Trump and the Russians for that campaign ultimately coming up short.

“I mean I obviously had hired a lot of Obama’s people. They were incredibly able, they did a great job, but Trump, the Russians, Cambridge Analytica, all of his assorted allies, were running a campaign in an entirely different arena,” Clinton told Tina Brown.

“I don’t think I or my people understood that, you know, we would see a little pop-up story that some idiot says that Pope Francis endorsed Donald Trump. Who is going to believe that, how ridiculous.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hillary-clinton-hearings-mueller-report

So says the woman who started it all with her scandals. Why are they not investigating her? Why is she not indicted? Oops, I know, because she lost the election. Duh. Ha ha ha

Hillary, you have the problem as coming off not likeable because, in the words of AOC,  “’cause you’re not!”

Seduction of Sedition

What have we learned? That politics over country is status quo, and party politics is all there is for the Left. It has been this way for some time.

When people have no priority to their country, party is everything. The sedition movement consumes everything. Where was resistance when we really needed it?

I think we learned this thing engulfing the left, this sedition, is very seductive. It draws people into its vortex and keeps churning them into anti-American parasites.

The latest example was Michael Cohen. It’s hard to believe he was an attorney and Trump’s attorney. Of course they must use sedition to atack and destroy the grassroots trying to save and preserve the country. They claim to be trying to save democracy while destroying it. Party before country or anything else. Now it is party loyalty to take down a sitting president, everything else be damned. Nothing but politics matters.

And that politics is a radical leftist ideology, fomenting a coup and revolution in one.

Another seductive force of the Left is socialism. It operates the same way as sedition, consuming people like a wild fire. But many of us see it as communism on the rise. Their objective is to imitate the ’68 French model commonly known as a rise from below (or rise from under), sought for years. The left combined it with sedition to drive the model.

The design of which is to create an appearance of common folks rising up, in a revolution style, to demand and push the socialism they desire. A grassroots appearance is their goal and means. (Anarcho-commies, Marxists, socialists, Leftists) Bernie gave them the vehicle. Now they have this movement with its perceived momentum. That is nirvana to Leftists.

It is a revolution and coup by other means. Bringing us right up to Bernie’s call for economic and political transformation — sans the term revolution.

What we have generally with the progressive Left is what we have in Bernie Sanders: one whose loyalty is only to political ideology. A dangerous condition.

Right Ring | Bullright

Disaster Empire

I tried to think of common denominators between the Covington story and the Jussie Smollett story and I found one.

Media. Yeah, I know typical. But the story of fake media doing what they do is a little deeper. The MSM does it for reaction, yes, but to illicit instant reaction.

They want an immediate reaction to their coverage. I think that is their entire angle. Their whole fake news model depends on their need of an instinctive response without delay, making people nothing more than their puppets.

I don’t think they want people to think about it, just react as soon as they see it. Like Ferguson or countless others. They are the clickbators of news. We used to call it sensationalizing but it is worse, they want instant response. So they can always count on it from the left. No thinking needed; just pure emotional reaction.

Bernie Explosion

As expected, Bernie announces that he is once again running for president. Of course he is, did anyone doubt it? He could not “resist.”

Skip his other statements, the one I care about is when he said he wants to radically transform America “economically and politically.” No kidding?

While we may have figured that, he is now boldly telling us in case we weren’t sure or living under a rock. And he expects that to be a selling point to rally the base.

This is not a good thing. I am way past the laughing and mockery stage. It is serious.

I will cut to the chase of my conclusion to save anyone the agony. I am not being glib or pessimistic here. The downfall of the US will be entirely the fault of the Left — or whatever name you want to call them. You know what that means? They can cause it by themselves.

Why that matters? Because I mean they can single-handedly destroy America even regardless of what we do, not withstanding extreme measures that might come about.

Sorry, that means something to me. I don’t know about anyone else. That would make us merely passengers on a train. That may not be fair or right but this is the way I see it. I like to think I gave it some thought to reach that conclusion.

Here is a fair question to ponder: will there ever be a point when the Left is too extreme or radical even for Democrats? I don’t like the answer. There are a couple different ways you can ask that question with the same inevitable answer. No.

Imagine JFK reading this news in the newspaper.

Right Ring | Bullright

Music And Politics Sitting In A Tree

But let me start off with a made to order joke. Bless their little young hearts.

Sometimes I get a kick out of young people today, their naiveté still intrigues me. Even though they often seem ignorant of basic history. That is not all their fault.

So one day I was in a fast food place. The employees were having this discussion about the upcoming 50th anniversary of Woodstock. I couldn’t help listening because I was not doing anything except standing there waiting for my order.

All three of the guys were fairly young, and the only women was about middle-aged. She appeared to be schooling them on Woodstock, odd as that seemed to me at the time.

Then the one young guy ask her impatiently “well, was Hip Hop going on then, too, were they doing that?” I couldn’t resist cutting in to say, “they hadn’t even put those two words together yet” and I chuckled. They all looked at me with their upper wheels turning.

I looked at the guy who asked and said “ Man, they barely knew what rock and roll was back then. They were still breaking it in.” But then I saw his big eyes and knew that went right over his knowledge base and sailed into the deep. I smiled and walked away.

Dummy me, I thought maybe a joke would illustrate the point and further their discussion. But instead it ended it and left me wondering if it was my delivery that failed? And if it was some generational thing I crossed? At least I thought it was funny, they will probably never know if it was true, funny… or both?

Joined At The Hip

Say what you will about the original Woodstock which stole headlines some 5 decades ago this year. Those discussions are still going on, as I can testify. Organizers are planning a 50th anniversary to the Woodstock concert this year. But déjà vu all over again.

The original site in Bethel, NY has plans for an anniversary to memorialize the Max Yasgur Farm concert in ’69 and has already booked one top headliner, Carlos Santana.

But Michael Lang, one of the original promoters, has planned what he claims is the only original sanctioned anniversary celebration, which he announced will be in Watkins Glen, NY. In that one, political activism and sustainability will be a central theme for the event. And no doubt for the “woke” as well.

Not only is he drafting top talent, but also encouraging their political activism for the event too. So is this where Farm Aide and Woodstock exchange vows and officially tie the knot, joined in a river of political activism? No matter what the location, it will be billed as Utopia. Who knows if the National Anthem will even be allowed in this one? (old reference to Jimmie Hendrix) Or if maybe the Black Bloc and Antifa will do security for the event?

Take it from Lang himself: (CBS News January 11, 2019)

The festival will also evoke its predecessor through activism, with sustainability efforts and screenings, panels and art installations by non-profit organizations. “The Woodstock 50th Anniversary will be about sharing an experience with great artists and encouraging people to get educated and involved in the social issues impacting everyone on the planet,” said Lang.

“”We want this to be more than just coming to a concert,” Lang told The New York Times. “And hopefully a lot of the bands will become part of this effort to get people to stand up and make themselves heard, to get out [and] vote. And if they don’t have a candidate that represents their feelings, to find one — or to run themselves.”

From coming to sexual awareness to coming to political wokeness. Is that where mud baths come in? Is it where the white rabbit has a coup over the enchanted forest?

Okay, so music, history, or anniversary may not be the real motivation here. Political priorities, you know. No word whether any of the up and comers in presidential candidates are booking the event. They could have hours of speeches to a captive audience if they go all out. How nostalgic would that be? I don’t recall that was the message of Woodstock but that was then and this is now. What better place to grease the skids for socialism?

And now, being the radicalized leftist culture it is, supposedly on the rise, I can see it “and now a word from our movement icon, Bernie Sanders.” To which the crowd roars to their feet and gives him a fifteen minute standing ovation.

That could only be followed by another speech from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez bringing home the Socialism message. And Michael Moore applauding waiting in the wings.

If you were one of the headliner bands, how on earth could you follow that bad acid trip? It also has me wondering what would be the definition of “success” for such a grand event? I guess you measure it in political success and, of course, by fundraising totals.

So Woodstock….you are finally 50, now how about growing the f*** up?

Right Ring | Bullright

Borderless Democrats At Your Service

Once again, it is time for one of those rantoramas. At times one cannot control the frustration or disdain even to write a persuasive piece. So instead, I get to say just what I think. And someone really wants us to feel helpless about our circumstances.

I am so sick and tired of this issue of illegal invasion. It has been on the stove for now thirteen plus years. That means it is under the third different administration. Words may escape me in how wrong this all is. At least I know I am not alone in my frustration.

Another thing has become crystal clear. That is if we the people, I mean the sane ones, all know what should be done to stem this problem, then why can’t our illustrious Reps and Senators in Washington do it. I mean this is what we pay them and elect them for, to handle the business of the country. Why is that so difficult for them to do? Back up, their job is not to just tell us what we cannot do or shouldn’t. And many of them are the ones who broke the system in the first and second place.

Excuse me, I must concentrate on these lily liberal, progressive dirtbags here. Yes, I have had it up to my neck too with people saying but it is both sides that are culpable. Stop with that, we know where the real problems come from. Sure there are a few stragglers in the Republican ranks with their own selfish agendas. I’ve talked about that before. But can we finally admit and concentrate on the real problem here?

We may have questioned progressives’ agenda before and called them this or that. We may have even called them UN-American. Now they have upped that in case we missed it.They are plainly Anti-American now. Yes, they have destruction of America as we know it in their sights. Yes, they realize it. And never have they been closer to that goal than at this moment in history, to carry out the demise of our Republic and they are firing from all points. We actually do have a civil war raging on in the country, just by other means, only we aren’t calling it that. These perennial post-American pols antagonize it.

There can be no doubt now about their goal. They’ve told us as much and admitted it. They don’t bother trying to hide or deny it anymore. And that replacement of our entire system is the vehicle by which they will carry out their plans. It was all set up by Obama. We knew it at the time. But all our complaints for eight years that they tried like hell to deny are all being validated in spades. Now it is more like if you like your country you cannot keep your country. It’s called screw America 101.

There are dirtbags and detours every where you look. I like metaphors as much as the next guy to really drive a point home but in this case we don’t need metaphors anymore. Reality is quite bad enough. No, we are not going to play Democrats’ other parlor game of ‘blame Trump because he is president now, so it must be his fault!’ That is as bad as the “both sides” nonsense. He is the one constant fighting it.

I am wondering when it is time for amnesty for Americans, well, just because we if anyone deserve it? We are now last on the list of considerations, it is obviously clear. The ruling class has other matters on their minds, frankly, anything other than us. No, you cannot say that about most Republicans. But you can say it about Democrats. They don’t care about us. In fact, it seems like we are being penalized while everyone else is being rewarded or promoted. Is that their real dream? That seems to be part of their grand justice platform.

And don’t even start me with their social justice bullshit. It’s not social and it sure isn’t justice they want. It is revenge and selective retribution and redistribution they want.

Our priorities are at the very bottom of their list, from securing the border to having a fair justice system, to having respect for law and order. Nope, those things are the antithesis to what they want. So we lose, too bad. The least one needs to do is acknowledge who his/her real enemies are. And they are right there. In fact, they are in our faces almost everyday running to their media appearances and making their declarations from on high. Or they are in hearing rooms representing their own selfish interests, in front of cameras rubbing it in our faces. There is a certain honesty about it all, at least we know they don’t care. And they are proud of it. We are back where we were in 2010, but even worse off.

They will trot out to the campaign trail because they have decided that the only thing of utmost importance is elections. So many of the Reps and Senators are running now, They are part timers. Their real gig is just running for office, sort of like Hillary’s always was. The job itself? They get to decide that, too, not the Constitution or rules. But we are last on their long list of self-serving priorities. Illegal aliens, even those on their way here, somehow get top billing on their considerations. Come one come all.

They’ve given up, long ago, on the idea that they stand up for the working guy. He’s at the bottom of their list, too. Actually, he is much the problem because he is inconvenient to all their other pipe dreams of a Green Economy and a workless society. One where government is in control of everything… and yet responsible for nothing at the same time. They say they are not interested in corporate businesses but they are. Boy are they. They are in their pockets and have their hand out in front of them. It is like old Jesse Jackson’s routine of a shakedown city. Corporate greed is only the means to grease their palms and fleece their campaign coffers. You are an enemy to the state unless you prove otherwise.

The fact that all of this is so blatantly obvious now to us means nothing to them. So it creates contention between us and our representatives. You think they care? They just want to be the permanent ruling class elites. Your value as a pawn in that scheme matters not in the least. They will tell you what is important to them, and they’ll demonstrate it right it front of you. Those principles to you — securing the border, protecting sovereignty, doing the people’s business, honoring an oath of office — are toilet tissue to them.

The next election is all that matters. Always the next election. One thing unimportant during the perpetual campaign cycle, to Democrats, is the will of the people. That is fungible. It is whatever they declare it is. See how the working guy would definitely be at odds with that agenda? These things, common principles, used to be important but that is so 50 years ago. Gone is any illusion of integrity or responsibility.

But I was only getting started.

Right Ring | Bullright