SOTUS causes a planetary threat

Well, planet Librtard had a brief brush with our atmosphere last night, beginning at approximately 9:00 pm. The encounter lasted about an hour and 15 minutes. No response was issued from NORAD but they were obviously keeping an eye on developments.

Yes, Trump gave his first SOTUS and as you might expect some were not happy about it. Not that he could have said anything that would have quieted their phobia(s).

Daily Caller:

MSNBC host Joy Ann Reid found Trump’s appeals to patriotism quite terrifying. “Church … family … police … military … the national anthem … Trump trying to call on all the tropes of 1950s-era nationalism. The goal of this speech appears to be to force the normalization of Trump on the terms of the bygone era his supporters are nostalgic for,” Reid tweeted during the speech.

The American Civil Liberties Union bemoaned Trump said “America” too many times and that it was done in an “exclusionary” way.

Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Congress’ number one immigration booster, walked out of the speech after Republicans began chanting “U.S.A.” Gutierrez later issued a statement claiming the president’s speech was translated from Russian and that his remarks were “explicitly racist.”

Those USA chants must have set their hair on fire. Gutierrez had to walk out because he was so offended. Ah, don’t let the door hit you. But it was not just at the SOTUS, it began before Trump even left the White House.

Listening to CNN, Congressman Clyburn framed it in clear Nazi terms, comparing Trump to the earlier years of Hitler’s rise – “what was going on in Germany around 1934.”. When asked if he was directly comparing him to Hitler, he was undeterred. He said if he was making a direct comparison he would say Trump was Mussolini and Putin was Hitler. Nice. Make sure people know what you mean. He also said some of them were going to go to the SOTUS to ‘stare down’ Trump.

Right after the speech, Jake Tapper said Trump “had one hand out and one fist in the air.” From the network with both fists in the air.

Ref see: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/01/rep_clyburn_trumps_america_like_hitlers_1934_germany_.html
Advertisements

Mueller intervenes in Text probe

It seems Mueller has jumped into the fray between DOJ and Capitol Hill investigators in the battle over texts. He wants to censor or redact information in them.

We elected Congress not Robert Mueller as some gatekeeper.

Washington Examiner — Byron York – 1/27/18

The Justice Department has given Congress less than 15 percent of the texts between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page – and that is all Congress is likely to get, at least until department experts finish an effort to recover an unknown number of previously lost texts that were sent and received during a key five-month period during the Trump-Russia investigation.

Finally – and this could be significant or not – Boyd said that “in a few instances,” the Justice Department consulted with the office of Trump-Russia special prosecutor Robert Mueller and made some redactions “related to the structure, operation, and substance of the [Special Counsel’s Office]’s investigation because it is ongoing.” Hill investigators don’t really know what that covers. (The letter said if Congress has questions about redactions in a particular text, the department would “work with” Congress to further describe or reveal redacted information “in a closed setting.”)

The bottom line is that the Justice Department has turned over a fairly small percentage of the Strzok-Page texts. Even assuming many of the texts would be personal – the two were having an extramarital affair, after all – some Hill investigators wonder whether roughly 43,000 of the 50,000 known texts were wholly personal.

Read more> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-justice-department-withholds-majority-of-fbi-texts/article/2647289

Note to Mueller: you need to delete your account.
No one made you Czar of corruption and stonewalling.

Chuck’s Governmental Chaos

Welcome to Chucky Cheese’s Governmental Chaos

Brought to you by lying, sniveling Chucky Schumer.

https://www.schumershutdown.com/

Would be? So much for questioning his motives or resistance bona fides.

Now Chuck says “I made what I thought was a generous offer” to keep our government open, to pay our military — the people that honor their oath who aren’t being paid.

Nice of you, Sleazeball. That’s called blackmail, Chuck. It is now hostage negotiation.

Oprahitis

Media has got it. Let me be the first to coin the term Oprahitis. They went from Trump Derangement Syndrome straight to Oprahitis in a day.

They contracted the disease within just twenty-four hours and I don’t think there is a cure. The strain media got is particularly contagious. Then Stedman gives her a little boost by saying if the people wanted her to she would do it.

But I do hate to rain on the left’s little parade — no I don’t. The big fly in that dream is that the Left has all these pre-postured candidates. They are zealous of political turf.

They don’t just hand off to someone out of the political loop. They have so many others with vested interests. That could cause backlash and resentment among progressives.

Still, it is fun to watch them all contemplate the possibilities. But the entire Left from Hollywood to DC and media is in a frenzy about it at the moment.

Right Ring | Bullright

Dancing with the horns

Word of the day is ‘don’t mess with the horns.’ It seems Steve Bannon has now found himself the direct target of the horns. What he’ll do now is not clear.

What is clear though is not just his recieved blowback from his case of flap jaw about the Trump administration, but he also found himself distanced from the table at Breitbart and the financiers, the Mercer family.

The daughter, who now controls the stock in Brietbart, has severed ties with Bannon. The jury is out on the board and final decisions on Bannon’s fate there.

He is courting new investors for other ventures but Bannon’s bright days at Breitbart may be over. Funny what a national, public and personal feud with Trump will do. He and Roy Moore may be the big losers of the year.

What is the Bannon brand worth now, after getting a lesson on the subject from the brand master? Also not clear is if, like Comey, there is much shelf life without access to leak?

I’d say Steve has some rebuilding of his own to do.

Right Ring | Bullright

Rice the evil spewer

In Obama’s second term, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach argued why Rice should be kept from Sec of State, but because of Rwanda.

“But what is not arguable is that she deserves to be denied the post for a different reason [than Benghazi] altogether: Rwanda. What emerges when taken together — Rice’s weak response in Benghazi, blaming the murder of four Americans on a stupid video, and her shameful lack of action in the Rwandan genocide — is a career diplomat of singular weakness, lacking the spine or muscularity to assert American moral influence in the world.

Rice was part of Bill Clinton’s National Security Team that in 1994 refused any involvement whatsoever in the Rwanda genocide, leaving more than 800,000 men, women, and children to be hacked to death by machete in the fastest genocide ever recorded.”

Both events argue against any noble-good notion, when she was involved in both.

Rice now writes in a NYT op-ed article: “Susan Rice: When America No Longer Is a Global Force for Good

“President Trump’s National Security Strategy marks a dramatic departure from the plans of his Republican and Democratic predecessors, painting a dark, almost dystopian portrait of an “extraordinarily dangerous” world characterized by hostile states and lurking threats. There is scant mention of America’s unrivaled political, military, technological and economic strength, or the opportunities to expand prosperity, freedom and security through principled leadership — the foundation of American foreign policy since World War II.

In Mr. Trump’s estimation, we live in a world where America wins only at others’ expense. There is no common good, no international community, no universal values, only American values. America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy, or a “shining city on a hill,” as in President Reagan’s vision. The new strategy enshrines a zero-sum mentality: “Protecting American interests requires that we compete continuously within and across these contests, which are being played out in regions around the world.” This is the hallmark of Mr. Trump’s nationalistic, black-and-white “America First” strategy.”#

America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy. So she claims Obama’s strategy, or policy, was “a global force for good.” Fancy that when it was exactly the opposite in action. It consistently stood in the face of a good legacy.

The ME and their Muslim Brotherhood obsession, then the anti-Israel platform, the Benghazi debacle — with or without the gun running — botched with mistakes and denials from the beginning, the Syrian issue of mixed messages and disappearing red lines, Russian influence throughout, the bad Iranian deal at all costs to us, ignorance on N Korea, and ISIS sprouting an official Caliphate in Syria and Iraq, reactionary spiteful withdrawal from Iraq, depleting our military, politicizing military intell and rules of engagement, not enforcing laws here in this country and politicizing the DOJ and intelligence.

Add to it the radicalization of government at home, with a war on energy, and lies about current events that were impossible to ignore. (the media really tried their best) I won’t even get into the racism for lack of space.

So we’re to infer all that was part of a “global force for good. If it was, then I’d like to know what a global force of empowering evil would look like? So all the above were part of the force for good? But now she has the arrogance and audacity to call Trump basically a force for bad. Here fellow comrades like Rhodes and Pfeiffer were on social media calling for the obituaries of current leadership. I hate to rain on her parade — or march — but the last 8 years was no picnic or vacation from evil. In fact, it was awash in it and corruption. Yet hearing her call it a force for good is hilarious.

This week we confirmed that Obama’s administration was so eager to get an Iran deal at any cost that they stood down on actions against Hezbollah’s international crime and terrorism operation. Let’s forget the Uranium deal for the moment. Politicizing and weaponizing government made it a force for good?

Now that all the skeletons are falling out of the closets (there aren’t enough closets) she is pointing fingers at the Trump administration, like her comrades. That rapid, immediate withdrawal from Iraq set off a chain of events. At home, Obama was so worried about his scummy legacy that he couldn’t have events called terrorism.

But all of that was part of some “global force for good.” What’s her definition of good?

Then back up a moment. She also called Trump’s policies a zero sum game that requires everyone else lose in order for us to win. We haven’t seen anything like that. Trump hasn’t called for that. Actually, he holds that they are winning while we are winning. But contrast that with Obama where we constantly lost on the deals and the world, or others, always won. That was more the zero-sum game. We weren’t really meant to win in Obama’s view.

She then goes for “enshrining Mr. Trump’s harsh anti-immigration policies, from the border wall to ending family preferences and limiting refugee admissions.” Again, contrast that with Obama’s mixed signals about border control, catch and release, and unconstitutional DACA program, and opening us to external threats in wartime. Refugees that were at least partly created by his own policies of complicit ignorance.

The perpetual do-gooder also made a policy of ignoring Christian persecutions while favoring Muslim refugees. He could only point to one major accomplishment of getting Osama bin Laden, but allowed a caliphate to form and spread, referring to it as JV. Yet he didn’t really take on that JV squad. Instead, he simply said it was not Islamic. Imagine that, a caliphate that is not Islamic? Oh, he banned using accurate terms to describe that caliphate of terrorism.

Enough contradictions in there to show she is shoveling more bullshit? What’s worse is they know, but have a constant need to deceive, try to control the narrative and revise Obama’s entire legacy. The people didn’t see it his way either, which showed in the election. Again, argue against the results and legitimacy of the election. Now…. they are going to lecture us on being a do-gooder? How about people just do what is right, and forget this false do-good narrative? Although I used to think that doing the right thing was being a force for good!

Right Ring | Bullright

I smell another DOJ, FBI rat

Rats are not jumping ship, they own the ship — embedded deep as they are. AG Chris Wray’s testimony talked about an IG investigation on the Clinton investigation.

Golly gee, there is one. A new deep state probe. Hopefully, it won’t get the same response another IG got over his report. It seems to me, they put a specific qualifier on this new IG investigation into if political bias played any roll in it, for a reason.

Why is it looking just for a political bias? “Improper political considerations.”

The setup seems clear to set a narrow scope to then say we looked and can’t verify any political bias influence. (they are professional snakes after all) Just saying. How about basing it on right and wrong, fairness, based on law, bias — not only verifiable political bias? These are the games Comey played, too.

They can clearly skew or deliberately blow an investigation without just leaving trails of political influence. It would be just as screwed up. Corruption doesn’t need a political marker. But dog and pony shows can be fun to watch.

People can be influenced by money, power, or their careers. Or they can be incompetent or intentionally incompetent. Corruption doesn’t have to be only motivated and biased by politics. And political bias could be harder to show. (Though this batch of scum does wear their politics on their sleeves and backsides)

Geesh, haven’t we seen or learned enough from the IRS targeting scandal? Even there they covered up and glossed over the political biases pretty well. How long did that take to come out? Just set the dial for expected outcome. Move along now.

Right Ring | Bullright

Meat — toxic masculinity

Eating meat promotes toxic masculinity, academic journal says

Fox News

An academic journal has published an article by a Ph.D. candidate at Pennsylvania State University that argues eating meat maintains a society where “hegemonic masculinity” is the norm.

Anne DeLessio-Parson, whose article was published in Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, based her research on Argentina’s “meat-centric” culture.

“I contend that in such a context, we cannot separate the ways people ‘do vegetarianism’ from how they ‘do gender,’” Anne DeLessio-Parson wrote. “Doing vegetarianism in interactions drives social change, contributing to the de-linking of meat from gender hegemony and revealing the resisting and reworking of gender in food spaces.”

MORE: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/12/05/eating-meat-promotes-toxic-masculinity-academic-journal-says.html

[Giant Eye-roll]
They will absolutely go to any lengths to promote their political agenda, which now does not stop at food. But it seemed to be working all those years for us. Hmmmph.

Speaking of FBI and penalties

Someone touched a nerve.

Matt Drudge zings Mueller probe: ‘What is the punishment when the FBI lies to us?’

by Daniel Chaitin | Dec 2, 2017 | Washington Examiner

Matt Drudge, editor and founder of the Internet news powerhouse Drudge Report, put the special counsel probe on notice Saturday.

In a flurry of tweets, stark against an otherwise empty Twitter page (Drudge has a habit of deleting his prior tweets), the influential but reclusive conservative figure painted Robert Mueller and his Russia inquiry team as a farce.

“Mueller’s secretive grand jury made up of residen[ts] from DC, where 91% voted for Hillary…,” he began, referring to the grand jury Mueller put together to investigate possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

His tweet came a day after Mike Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty in federal court to lying to the FBI about his talks with Russian officials. In the run-up to Friday’s bombshell, prosecutors had canceled scheduled grand jury testimony related to Flynn. The grand jury in Washington already had indicted former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and his former associate for crimes related to their lobbying work abroad…./

“We know what happens when one lies to the FBI,” Drudge said. “But what is the punishment when the FBI lies to us?”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/matt-drudge-zings-mueller-probe-what-is-the-punishment-when-the-fbi-lies-to-us/article/2642391

Well, that is the trillion -dollar question, isn’t it?  But I won’t wait for any answers. IOW, “we lie when we want to or need to, and we make a habit of not being accountable for it.” Penalty? Actually, I think it is rewarded. Why else would they need to?

UK upset with Trump tweets

What’s all the rage here and in UK? What’s all this dust up about Trump retweeting a few videos? Never seen them all so vocal in a tizzy over something on Twitter before.

Why British MPs chose Islam over Trump

Ezra Levant Rebel Commander

On last night’s show, I explained the true motives of the British MPs blasting Trump over his re-tweets about Islamic violence.

Unlike establishment politicians, Trump is willing to call out the Islamic migrants who travel illegally to Europe to commit acts of violence and terror.

Read more here.
Watch his video here


See https://www.therebel.media/why_british_mps_chose_islam_over_trump

He says the real message though is to Brits, don’t you share videos like these. Good point, but the message is clear, and so are their real concerns. Free speech be damned.

All that intimidation and political correctness (wrongness) might have worked well with Obama. After all, he operated the same way. But it doesn’t seem to work now and that is their problem. Forget what is done in the jihad, we are supposed to pretend it doesn’t happen. Ignore it — not that it will go away, just block it out. Never mind Obama’s religious bigotry toward Christians, or the persecution we saw time and again.

Message received. Interesting who they blame is the bad guy, isn’t it?

Food and Taxes cookoff

I anticipate that aroma wafting ahead. Every time you want to count on Congress doing something, inevitably it seems to end in disappointment. Why is that?

The trick in cooking some foods is the seasoning. Now we find key in cooking up a tax reform plan is the use of SALT. (state and local taxes) It is also what causes the most argument among chefs. Some prefer salt free and others don’t want to change habits.

How this plays out across America is the largest debate we’ve seen so far. Yes, there are always class warfare warriors. They’ll use anything they can to make the rich vs poor paradigm the whole issue. And they’ll be those who only look at it from the corporate or wealthy side — not particularly concerned about lower or middle income. (as if government is not doing plenty already) The fair people’s minds look at the whole reality.

Taking away something, we see, creates a reality unto itself. The same applies on taxes. Take away and someone surely complains. It is someone’s bread ticket. And we are taught to think and act out of our own self-interest, whether that is on voting or on policy. We are supposed to stay in our lanes, which mostly is how we got into this predicament.

The fight and debate goes on.

You heard much of the debate about taking away SALT deductions; or keeping them in place to protect people in high-taxed states. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground. Now I’m no moderate, but there is no position to please both sides. Or so we are told.

There are creative things they can do like capping that deduction. Maybe halve the amount one can claim? Or how about cut it off by income so the wealthy do not get the deduction? No, do away with it all at once is a tough pill for some to swallow. But why, at last report, will corporations still get to claim SALT deductions?

Except for one thing: if these states are exorbitantly high taxed, then they have been that way for some years and didn’t suddenly become high. That means those people have been reaping the rewards of high-tax deductions for years and years. While low tax states, or no tax states, have not had that big deduction — meaning they kept more of their income out of state coffers. This is the difference in the states, they say. Right, on one hand many people make more in those states while more is taken in taxes, then deduct it on their federal income taxes.

If you look at the whole picture it is a dramatic difference in policy. We have catered to the high taxed states. I think Ron Paul says what government subsidizes it gets more of.

The good news is that taking away the SALT deductions from high-taxed states puts incredible pressure on those states. What we need. Already they are moaning about it. It could be the biggest lever against higher taxes.Their raising taxes gig would be up.

So the point to remember is that the high-tax states have been benefiting on that paradigm for years. They get government to reimburse or subsidize their tax policy. Taking that away sends shutters up their liberal elitist spines. Yet they have benefited for years on that spending, by offloading their costs to the federal government.

Now the truth has hit the fan

But to start with it is a pill to swallow, doing away with that deduction. It does take something away from some people, who are already paying a lot of taxes. Obviously, I never liked what legislators and liberals used to call targeted taxes. Why don’t they call it ‘targeted-voter tax cuts?’ Those were canards meant to apply to a narrow populace. Little bang for the buck. And the I got mine’s cheered it. No one ever cared to address the mass imbalance on taxpayers. So if you are making a lot of money, why shouldn’t you get relief? Sure people at the bottom need some help as well. Loosening the chains on the economy also helps that.

I suppose it is still up for debate and people can have different positions, based on their factors. If we are honest conservatives, we should not want those deductions — or the high taxes for that matter. Both are real. Pull out the rug and the panic begins in state capitols. Good you say. But some people do get hurt. Leave then im place and the game never changes, does it? The elitists and establishment crooks continue on their road, unabated. No, change needs an appropriate force or resistance. Could this be it?

Now if the object was to strike some balance, there could be ways of doing that. So far, it appears there is no list of options.

Also missing in all the highlights of both tax plans is the issue of carried interest loophole, or the infamous hedge fund loophole. When it was such a prominent part of the debate and campaign, even on the left, its absence speaks volumes. People want to see that and loopholes closed. Now that is popular. Why make it all about SALT when they aren’t yanking hedge fund loopholes? Seems money talks and so do interests of donors. Republicans have barely mentioned it. They still need better P/R to cut the clutter.

Its a smorgasbord of interests.

Right Ring | Bullright

McCain boot conspiracy

So McCain’s walking boot switches legs. Something like his politics. Nothing like another conspiracy for Turkey Day.

The walking boot that Sen. John McCain has worn since receiving treatment for a recent injury appears to have swapped feet.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/john-mccains-walking-boot-mysteriously-appears-to-swap-feet-in-latest-photo/article/2641581

Icky Joe Biden

Exclusive: Former Joe Biden Secret Service Agent: We Had to Protect Women From Him, ‘Weinstein Level Stuff’

November 14, 2017 by Jim Hoft | Gateway Pundit

A former Secret Service agent assigned to the Vice President Joe Biden residence claims that the Service often had to protect female agents from him.

Not like we didn’t know that. But hey, there is an honest SS confirmation. Busy job.

The political marketplace: weaponizing business

Check out this foundation article included which seems a bit misleading – to be kind. It is about the Hannity advertising scheme going on. Let the dis-ingenuousness begin.

You know the routine: libs feign outrage over something in conservative media and turn it into a war on sponsors. Or war against them as the case may be. It is all too common. Even worse is the will of businesses to comply to demands. See full article:

(Marketwatch) – “E-Trade, TripAdvisor and Conagra are among the companies that say they will stop advertising on ‘Hannity’ in the wake of Roy Moore allegations.”

“Stop” being the operative word. Just keep that in mind and decide if that is misleading. Some companies make statements who were not currently advertising anyway. But it makes for good fodder for Media Matters extortionists. See what you notice in it.

Back to the M/O

But even the left’s outrage is disingenuous because the offense is not the real objective, the voice of the person is. Libs don’t want to watch the content regardless of the offense. They want the person or show canceled via their protest causing sponsors to abandon it, thereby hopefully getting it removed. The offending material is only an excuse to attack the show/host. The left has a pattern of these attack campaigns. And none other than Media Matters specializes in attacks on anyone or media that doesn’t cow-tow to their agenda.

It has had some success I won’t bother to list.

So it is all routine to the radical left but claiming it is about this or that issue is very deceptive. It is about silencing opposition, simple as that. We all know it but it is important. If they can only shut up their opposition they can railroad their agenda. Only one thing stands in their way, the 1st amendment — free speech and freedom of press. Actions of leftists don’t support either. Sure, they talk a good game when convenient.

Again, we know that. However, nothing stops them from pushing the envelope of their agenda further and further. As is the case when they go down their extensive ‘targets’ list to silence; or down their list of advertisers to the program.

First of all, when someone advertises, it does not mean they are endorsing all the opinions or content of the program. It is not a political endorsement either. It is, in fact, an advertisement to reach eyeballs or certain people. Their objective is sales or exposure to viewers. Again, it is not an endorsement of content or politics. Consumers know this.

You cannot hold the advertisers responsible for what the show does, and you cannot hold the network responsible for what the advertiser says. The network is not the customer service center for the company. And consumers shouldn’t be calling the company because they don’t like the programming. Each are independent with their own interests.

However, advertisers turn into political fodder when they are manipulated by activists like Media Matters and used in a silencing campaign against their targets. Companies are objects of extortion or intimidation in an effort to politicize, and then weaponize them.

Yes, they can go along willingly, but they can be threatened to go along as well. When they comply, they allow their brand and its recognition to be used for specious political motives. So political activists hijack and freely use brands toward their own political objectives.

Normally the problem or damage comes when companies do not give in to the threats. Then they are smeared just as the original target is. Some businesses take what they think is the “easy route” by complying to the demands. It is like the old mob protection racket, where they promise not to break your windows if you just pay the protection. In this case the payment of protection is dropping your ads from a certain target. So, in effect, they are asking the store owner to go break one of his own windows, with the promise they’ll help with the damage. The store owner then, consciously or not, enters into a cozy alliance with the villain racketeers. As long as you support their agenda with your own business practices, they will not cause you further injury.

Does enslavement enter your mind? What about the concept of private property? Something radicals do not have personally invested in it.

Just think about turning over your brand, or proprietary info, to activists for safekeeping? All the years of building your company and brand mean nothing to these extortionists. They only care about what you do with it, or more like how they can use your brand for their political objectives. The definition of Terrorism is threatening or harming people for political motives. Would you turn your car or house over to someone to use to further their own political agenda? I don’t think so.

Now we conservatives don’t sit around and say I don’t like this media or this person and take note of their sponsors to harass them into pulling their ads. It’s not something we do. We don’t hate watch them to track sponsors. And we know that those sponsors are not endorsing the content or opinions, only advertising to eyeballs or ears.

Fast forward to this latest attempt to weaponize Hannity’s sponsors over an interview he did with Roy Moore. The content was not the issue. The statements of Hannity was not the issue. Shutting Hannity down is the only issue. Another priority is the election in Alabama. (or elections is now a priority to Media Matters) And this plays to both ends, the election and silencing Hannity. In the left’s sponsor shakedown they solicit statements from advertisers to not advertise on the show. Keurig was one such company — whether sucked in naively or not.

Only this time the viewers, conservatives and free speech advocates intervened. They promptly told Keurig it had earned a boycott for their trouble. It wasn’t for Hannity but the principle. Over a few days, Keurig realized they tripped over people’s wrath by complying with the fascist left, Media Matters. A boycott was off to a bang but was criticized by MM as dumb for Sean to do.(it wasn’t him) The CEO then apologized to its employees — not the public — that it did not intend to take sides. Ha, too late. They were now involved and had their company held hostage to the left’s demands. Apologizing to the employees does not help that.

Videos popped up of former customers ejecting their coffee makers. This time was different. They may have been threatened with a boycott by Media Matters’ goons, but now they got an actual protest….anyway. See what you get playing games, trying to appease the left? Then came the oops to employees. A funny thing happened on the way to appeasing the fascists: they realized they will get a protest even if they appease the left, and very possibly a boycott too.

Then Libs didn’t realize we we were 6 weeks from Christmas and this puts their season at some risk. Well, that is the cost of getting into bed with the left. Do they care about your business? Do they care about your bottom line? Do they care about your employees? No, and they don’t care about your name or brand either since they are putting that at risk with their political campaigns. Does that mean anything to them? Not a cent, they are only using, abusing, politicizing, and weaponizing these companies.

By Wednesday, NYT had this piece saying advertisers were walking back tweets.

But by Tuesday, those companies were clarifying — or even deleting — statements they had made on the platform that indicated they had pulled ads from Mr. Hannity’s show because of comments he made about Roy S. Moore, the embattled Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama. Those moves followed a backlash against Keurig that included fans of Mr. Hannity posting videos of themselves destroying the company’s coffee makers.

“It’s pretty unusual to see companies like this handling an issue so poorly,” said Kara Alaimo, an assistant professor of public relations at Hofstra University. She said it was especially surprising to see companies like Realtor.com and Volvo delete widely circulated tweets.

The problem is that in the case of Hannity, he has a following including free speech advocates. In Media Matters’ corner, you have radical political hacks and their trolls attacking anything it disagrees with. An actual product or show has a consumer base, where MM does not — it operates on opposition. So fans and advocates or speech spoke up. I guess MM did not anticipate that. Then advertisers realized they could incur as much wrath from taking a stand against Hannity. (which shouldn’t be a compan’s role) They may have figured it is better to appeal to someone’s loyal base, rather than just oppose it. See the dynamics? Interesting that the left has always operated with free reign, where the default position was usually to side with it. But all you need is that big crack in the wall.

From the company point of view, who would want to be brow beaten into doing something or told by others how to spend their ad dollars? Then who wants their company dragged through the mud of politics? Their business model is the bottom line not politics. To add even more damage, MM hacks have also taken the liberty to start speaking for companies, if they are with them or if they are against them. And they usurp a certain power (liberty) over companies in the process. Then they have the nerve to act or even say they represent the best interests of the businesses. No they don’t. Remember the protection racket?

That stand and attitude should bother anyone in business. The idea that a company you built or run is suddenly turned over to whims of a political agenda should be concerning. That a brand you have a proprietary value in is being toyed with by political activists, is equivalent to squatting on your corporate name. It should be seen as an infringement. I think it is time someone send a cease and desist letter to the Media Matters protestors to stop using their name as part of political campaigns. That might send some chills into the corporate extortionists.

Until that happens, when companies and their ad money stand up on their own, independent of political hijackers and extortionists, they can be sucked into a whole lot of bad karma for appeasement policies. It can be a bigger liability than dealing with the protection racketeers.

My opinion is that when companies participate in these campaigns they become tools, weaponized by organizers, little more. I know some may think they are taking a stand but any short-term gains might not be worth the long-term damage and pain it can cause. Not to mention sort of losing control of your business. The issue is bigger than this though. This is a market model.(I don’t believe in it but it is) When companies are activated like this it has an effect on the economy. It turns them into cheap political interests like every other political organ. But actually they become more; they are radicalized and expended as mere political tools. Why would corporations allow themselves to be reduced to that?

I know some companies still take a stand on their special political issues, but they don’t have to morph into special interests or lobbyists. Using a company that way is careless.

Right Ring | Bullright

McCain planning a hit job on tax cuts

John McCain Planning on Killing Tax Reform

Katrina Pierson | November 8, 2017

Here we go again. John McCain is apparently working hard on cementing his legacy as President Trump’s chief obstructionist.

It’s no wonder that McCain is now more popular with Democrats than Republicans.

As reported in the Hill, Forty-four percent of Republicans surveyed in the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Wednesday hold a negative view of McCain, while only 35 percent have a positive view of him.

Meanwhile, 52 percent of Democrats surveyed now see him in a positive light.

It’s official: The Republican tax reform bill is dead on arrival in the Senate now that John McCain has become the third Republican senator to confirm that he plans to vote against it.

What’s worse for the Trump administration, McCain reportedly wants the bill to receive input from both parties – a criticism that he cited as his reason for voting against the Trump administration’s plan to repeal and replace Obamacare.

More: https://katrinapierson.com/john-mccain-planning-killing-tax-reform/

Now John McCain is the the head of the resistance. First he goes against people’s healthcare, then he opposes their tax cuts. Both for selfish, bureaucratic reasons. And all that in only a year after getting reelected on the pro-repeal, pro-tax cut agenda. But you knew what he was.

Earth Prophecy from Hawking

Stephen Hawking says the Earth will be a fireball by 2600

By Margi Murphy, original – The Sun

Mastermind Stephen Hawking has warned that the human race will perish on Earth after we turn it into a sizzling fireball in less than 600 years.

He declared that humans must “boldly go where no one has gone before” if we fancy continuing our species for another million years.

If we don’t, the world will become overcrowded and increased energy consumption will turn the planet into a ball of fire because of our soaring energy consumption as the population rises.

Making a video appearance at the Tencent WE Summit in Beijing on Sunday, Hawking appealed to investors to back his plans to travel to the closest star outside of our solar system, with the hope that a livable planet might be orbiting it. …/

Continue: https://nypost.com/2017/11/06/stephen-hawking-says-the-earth-will-be-a-fireball-by-2600/

So that’s all she rode. Unless they figure out the next star. And when Loyd’s of London figure that out and confirm it, everything will be set to end.

Good old Uncle Joe and Commie revival

Millennials Are Clueless About Communism. Here’s Why That’s a Problem.

Jarrett Stepman / November 03, 2017 | Daily Signal

The collapse of the Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union ended the Cold War, but it didn’t end the ongoing battle of ideas between liberty and collectivism.

A recently released survey by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation revealed some disturbing facts about what millennials think of communism and socialism.

Some of the results are a little disturbing and could have big implications for the future of our country.

For instance, the poll found that about half of millennials said they would rather live under socialism or communism than capitalism.

The poll also found that nearly 1 in 5 millennials think Josef Stalin was a “hero.”

“Millennials now make up the largest generation in America, and we’re seeing some deeply worrisome trends,” said Marion Smith, executive director for the Victims of Communism, according to MarketWatch. “Millennials are increasingly turning away from capitalism and toward socialism and even communism as a viable alternative.”

The findings of this study should be a wake-up call to those who think that communism is no longer a threat to the United States and the West. Young people, who had little personal experience with the half-century battle between Soviet tyranny and American freedom.

It is a sad indictment on a generation that grew up with more prosperity than any in human history would turn on the system that brought them there. Alas, socialism appears to be the opiate of prosperous utopians.

Perhaps in the decades of unchallenged international supremacy, Americans let their guards down to real threats to our way of life. We were lulled into a false sense of security about our future and have now fallen into the trap of bringing back dangerous doctrines that we have had the good fortune to escape.

Yet, apologies and even wistful nostalgia for the high tide of communist revolution are being peddled in the pages of mainstream liberal outlets like The New York Times.

…./

Read on http://dailysignal.com/2017/11/03/millennials-clueless-communism-heres-thats-problem/

And weep for this country. Then pray, pray and pray some more that we never fall for this opiate of the past — only to have to kill it again. Here is some food for thought.

Many years back I engaged leftists who would mock any talk of the idea that Marxism and communism was living large among the left. They would scoff saying that is long gone and that we are fighting an ancient war that ended years ago. To believe that is like denying Obamacare passed. You cannot believe them even when trying to lecture you about communism. A Democrat socialist nearly won the nomination. Who are you going to believe? All just to get you to put your guard down.