A Word From Alternate Reality

In an alternate reality, there is room for this story.

It is so ridiculously Orwellian. Why the whole thing seems like a mindless projection.

So the tagline for this fiction is that somehow Democrats are not “ruthless” enough. Therefore, they lack something of a serious radical strategy. Can you imagine?

People that continually engage in behavior that threatens to shut down the very government they love to control, are not ruthless enough.

Politico has the scoop. (consensus according to the leftbots)

“They [Republicans] are more ruthless,” said Jennifer Palmieri, who over a quarter-century has served as a top aide to Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. “And I don’t want to be like them. … The answer can’t be for Democrats to be just as cynical.”

Finally, it did admit that: “Whatever factors fueled Kavanaugh’s victory, it was hardly that Democrats were too nice to attack him personally.” — Surely not the problem!

But never mind all that. It contends Republicans just stick together better.

Begala said part of the explanation for this divide lies in Democratic psychology, citing Bill Clinton’s saying that, “Democrats want to fall in love; Republicans want to fall in line.”

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/07/kavanaugh-confirmation-democrats-anger-221089

Really? Anyone buy that blather? Then they launch into the popular vote in presidential elections should be the gold standard mantra. Where do they think we are, Disney Land?

I’m not going to blame Politico because it is the message Dems desperately want to send. But it is nonsensical how anyone could take it seriously…..i.e. the Alinsky-ite Dems just aren’t tough enough. The radical party of Lockstep Is Us, whatever the issue.

And the second part that Repubs are the stronger with staying in line and fighting. Beam me up. Projection. Well, until now Republicans hadn’t even shown a unified spine. Democrats have institutionalized the word fight into every campaign and message.

I now return you to the gravitational planet, where physics still applies anyway.

Advertisements

The Stocking was hung, with a new spine intact

…in hopes that the GOP could make good use of it.

The formerly spineless Republican Party rebounds

By Bobby Eberle – – Monday, October 8, 2018 | Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:
If there is one word — one defining, all-encompassing word — that has summed up the state of the Republican Party for years (if not decades), it’s “spineless.” Whether the issue has been illegal immigration, the budget, standing up to Planned Parenthood, or even the wildly unpopular and disastrous Obamacare, Republican “leaders” have tucked their collective tails between their legs rather than stand up and fight. But something remarkable seems to be in the air, and there’s no doubt that the change in resolve has been brought about by Donald J. Trump.

Remember all the rhetoric concerning Obamacare? Analysts said it would fail. Obama officials even admitted they lied about terms. No, you can’t keep your own doctor. No, you can’t keep your own plan. No, prices will not be lower. Republican legislators said they would repeal it. They voted to repeal it. Oh, but wait. Barack Obama was still president, and the Republican votes were simply a side show next to Mr. Obama’s veto. When Donald Trump first came on the scene, he said he would sign legislation repealing Obamacare, but the GOP couldn’t get it done. They showed their complete lack of fortitude and rolled over.

That’s just one example of many, many other issues. …/

More: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/8/trump-delivers-the-gop-an-early-christmas-present-/

Times…they are a changing.

Lesson to Republicans now seems to be:

You see how you are treated when Republicans do fight back. So tell me again why you would ever want to appease and capitulate to these dishonest radicals?

Any questions?

Little Miss Profit

Update: “selfless…courage” is now valued at over $800,000 dollars.

Follow the money. Remember all the myths about Christine Blasey Ford being courageous and selfless for coming forward? And “she has absolutely nothing to gain by doing this”?

Those ain’t banana peels and it is still going. Right, her main GoFundme said last week that they were officially turning off that Christine Blasey Ford campaign — recommending people also look for other progressive causes to donate to.

But on second thought, now they have recalculated and discovered that no, in fact, it was not enough. So it is back on. The statement reads:

“The costs for security, housing, transportation and other related expenses are much higher than we anticipated and they do not show signs of letting up. Funds received via this account will be used to help us pay for these mounting expenses.”[emphasis mine]

But, you know, they will let you know when/if they do reach that level of enough. Courage is now valued in the high six figures.

Too bad the people can’t send her a bill… just for all the expenses incurred.

Right Ring | Bullright

Customer Appreciation: people helping people

This is sort of a customer appreciation piece. But not that type business to consumer. More like consumer to consumer. Everyone is a consumer at some point.

There is an incredible resource out there. It is not armed with gadgetry or 800 numbers, or high tech customer service centers — though many companies may have them.

No, I’m talking about the power in consumers, a knowledge base as a source for information. Face it, these days it is all about information. And with do it yourselfers it is no different. They need information too.

So the thing works like this: something breaks or you run into a problem and where is the first place everyone goes? That’s right, it all starts with a search on-line. Some people have gotten really good at it by putting the problem they are having into the search, or some people just put the product or thing in the search, and away they go on a mini-adventure. Sometimes it takes minutes, sometimes hours of research on a problem device or product.

But the great thing is there is a small army out there of people who help other people. It sort of restores your belief that there are good people out there who care and who aren’t taking advantage of people And it proves there are still plenty of honest people. The thing is these people often don’t have any ulterior interest other than helping other people solve or avoid a problem. All one has to do is access it, stumble on it or find it.

It is a resource within the resource of the internet. No the internet itself cannot answer all your questions, but people can and do all the time. For instance, product reviews are a helpful place for particular products. There is also an increasingly mountain of information besides that out there. All you have to do is find it, tap into it and read.

Okay, am I over glorifying the whole thing? I don’t think so. I only know what I have come across. So the real information is often not on store or manufacturer’s pages but from people out there like users and consumers. They more often than not have also been through a similar experience as yours and feel compelled to help you shorten an unpleasant experience, turning their bad into your good.

Funny how all the credit seems to be given to the wild, endless internet when in reality it is often the people behind or on the internet that make the difference. No, the internet cannot solve problems all by itself. That ability relies on people putting information on it. The internet is only as good as what is put on it.

For instance, you want to do an ancestor search. There are no guarantees the information you want is on the internet or available. It all depends (or mostly) on what other people such as professionals and users have decided to put on the internet. So the function and utility of the internet depends on people to make it useful.

I used to mock people when Twitter first started. They would put the most mundane stuff out there about what they were doing or where they were going. I said who are these people and who are they talking to? Almost like they were creating a diary on line.

I thought what a strange concept in culture. People wanted to publicize everything for whatever reasons those were, and some of those could require psychological analysis. Things settled down the more it was used. Emphasis shifted to the tool it can be, rather than simply a digital public diary.

Like every new technology, Twitter evolved into an entity of its own. Businesses use it, people use it and political activists and politicians use it. But when Donald Trump used it, “Holy cow, Houston we have a problem!!!”

They said, “whoa, maybe this is too much, how about we back off on Twitter? He needs to put the Twitter down.” It was only too much when Trump used it to his advantage. But Obama used My Space and Facebook. It turns out to be a highly personal thing; it’s how you use it that matters. You want some sense of consensus on something, look on Twitter.

Elementary my dear Watson.

It is not so different in all other areas of the internet. It is not about the apps though they are helpful. It is also about the people out there using the internet, and they will find lots of creative ways to use it because, after all, that is what we do. So the people are the engine of innovation. It is not just happening in tech laboratories.

Remember how Microsoft used to just dump its operating systems out there, every so often? Then let all the bugs and issues be found and put out patches and updates. Maybe that was not their intention but what happened. Imagine if you put a car out like that or a washing machine? “We will fix the issues and problems later as we find them.” They took advantage of the massive public rollout and their vast number of users out there.

Then when Microsoft decides to render something obsolete, they stop updating anything and say they no longer are supporting this system. Well, but you made it. They tell you we cannot possibly keep updating every old system. Enter the masses of consumers that through networking and other routes find fixes or work arounds for issues. Oh, those under appreciated consumers.

Those are some examples of the internet. There are plenty in other areas, almost in every category there are users and consumers who go the extra step. Someone does something because it needs to be done. Necessity is the mother of invention.

The same holds among DIYers. People do and then share that information. If one person was helped by it then technically it is a success and worth the effort someone made. And it is not really all about likes or views. From appliance repairs to Youtube help videos.

You are not alone either at home or online. There is information to be had sometimes a click away. All done because people care. Hats off to the underappreciated consumers.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Threat Within America

In their own words:

“We oftentimes had these debates and discussions about ‘out of the streets and into the suites’ — that was the term that was used to describe the swan song of the civil rights movement. … He made a decision and thought he could make a difference by being on the inside.” [emphasis added] — Socialist Workers Party member and University of Minnesota Professor August Nimtz on long time friend Keith Ellison.

See: https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Ellilson_Burn_This_Book.pdf

Of course Ellison thought he could make a difference by being on the inside. We know that is what he is there for. Most radical leftists start by believing they can make a difference. Then position themselves or act accordingly to carry it out.

Radicalism is not a spectator sport.

H/T to The United West

From the foreword of “Burn This Book” by Trevor Loudon:

“On July 17, 2018, Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota wrote Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos, demanding that his company censor books and other products by those deemed to be “hate groups” by the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. He called for such materials still in Amazon warehouses to be “destroyed” over the next three months and an end to the company’s publication of similar “physical and digital materials.”

There is reason to believe that you are reading the impetus behind Keith Ellison’s call for book burning. In the course of a July 3rd interview with author Diana West on our nationally syndicated “Secure Freedom Radio” program, I mentioned that we would shortly publish a book about the Congressman’s ominous past and present ties to Marxist and Islamist groups and their agendas.

Since the hard left monitors our show assiduously, word of this publication may well have reached Mr. Ellison before the 17th. And, as the Center for Security Policy Press uses Amazon’s CreateSpace service to publish its many monographs and books, censoring such works – past, as well as future – could prevent readers from seeing this one. That is because the Center for Security Policy is one of the organizations the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has falsely characterized as a “hate group.” By pressing Amazon’s Bezos to use the SPLC as the arbiter of what content can be published or maintained in inventory, Rep. Ellison could achieve the censorship of CSP’s products without spedifying us as the target.

As this book by Trevor Loudon amply demonstrates, such stealthy subversiveness is the stock-in-trade of Keith Ellison. His associations dating back to his involvement with the Nation Islam as a student at Wayne State University and continuing to his present —and ongoing —involvement with Muslim Brotherhood fronts and his role as chairman of the radical House Progressive Caucus, Keith Ellison’s record is one of unbroken ties to extremists committed to subverting our country.“

This insight is all the more alarming in light of a dangerously mistaken, but widespread assumption: When an elected official in the United States swears an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, they are presumed to be truthfully saying they are able and willing to do that. Consequently, such representatives of the American people in the U.S. Congress are not subjected to the sort of background investigations aimed at confirming that assumption that is required of, for example, postal employees, securities personnel and school bus drivers.

Unfortunately, as author, filmmaker and national security expert Trevor Loudon documents exhaustively in this volume, Rep. Keith Ellison’s many and longstanding personal associations with groups openly hostile to the principles and even the existence of the U.S. Constitution, would likely make it impossible for him to to pass even the most cursory of security checks.”

Wow, I can think of nothing to add to that. Book is here in PDF form.

Also: Keith Ellison, who does NOT have a MN license to practice law, yet is running for MN Attorney General.

News, email, and this and that

Has Twitter suddenly made email obsolete? You might think so. If you think that the public form of twitter is a substitute for private email, then you don’t understand technology, culture or the dynamic of it all.

It seems the trend is on using Twitter. But until recently it was so limited by character count that it would render it worthless for serious communications. Yet that is probably what some people would like about it, being limited.

But of course it could be an excuse to eliminate email which some people do not want to bother with anymore. I’d like to add that Twitter never will be a replacement for email. And email has not gone the way of the dinosaurs, yet. Too bad if people don’t like to use it or read them. It’s so old fashioned since the social media explosion. Poof, you don’t need email.

Isn’t it interesting that the major news or media centers all prefer everyone use Twitter as a contact method? But these and other businesses are also the same ones who like to use email for news letters and updates — for your convenience of course. But if you want to get in touch with them, they want it on Twitter.

What’s up with the contradiction, Fox and all the rest?

BTW: Fox will be launching its Fox Nation project later in the year. They want you to sign up on the email list for updates. It will be a new subscription service for their viewers. Oh dandy, another avenue of access to their content from most of the same people. But it is subscription-based.

“Fox Nation reveal: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson among stars on streaming platform ….Content you love, voices that matter.”

Now if your voice mattered to them at all, why scrub the email option?

Okay, if they really have a new product, why don’t they complete that newness by having some new faces? One of the headliner newbies showcased is Tomi Lahren. How new is she and what expertise does she bring? Born in 1992, maybe that’s what they mean.

I sort of thought having a new format they should have some regular folks. I don’t know, like everyday conservatives or viewers of their content over the years. People that have an opinion and view. There are plenty out there. I see people all over the internet and social media who would add spark to an otherwise recycled format. Fresher than Lahren.

While I think of it, I also remember when Town Hall was rolling out its new model that would shake the earth to its core. It was all hype. Indeed, that was about having a forum of conservative, like minded people writing their own stuff and their collective friends it would bring, along with other news centered content.

Well, it lasted a while and morphed into what you see as Town Hall today. (some here remember those days) Why is it that it is always the everyday normal people that are the problem? No, we need mouthpieces like famous spouters of conservative opinion to tell us what really matters. Sure we do watch because there is nothing else to watch.

“Tweet me, text me, hit me on Instagram,” they say, “or find me on FaceBook.” What if I don’t want to? I just want to email you. Well, it has become a problem. Right about now I am starting to feel like Andy Rooney. Oh, few people would remember who he was.

Maybe I am finally just old or old fashioned?

Still, if you listen now, you can hear the same undercurrent of criticism about Twitter among those same on air personalities starting all over again. ‘The scourge of contacts and feedback.’ The same things you used to hear about bothersome emails.

Someone else doesn’t like or appreciate getting our emails. Congress. Funny that liberals never seem to have that problem. They shout into an elevator and voilà, instant reaction.

Right Ring | Bullright

Christine Ford’s Morning After Pill

As of post morning after the hearing, Christine Blasey Ford has raised $473,622 on her personal page. There was $210,000 raised as initial security related funds for her family.(more later if needed)

You know, at the hearing she said she doesn’t know anything about how to manage a Go Fund me or how to access those funds.

Yet I heard Democrat after Democrat, like Crhis Coons, saying but she has ‘absolutely’ nothing to gain from doing this. What about the $684,000 just so far?

She can buy a lot of front doors with that. And it continues.

So if that is really the case, then why don’t they ask her to pledge not to accept any monetary gains from this whole thing? Will she pledge that? It should be very simple.

This is one heck of a morning after pill.

While pretty much ruining the life of Judge Kavanaugh, it seems to me Dr. Blasey Ford has only upside. Where is the permanent damage to Christine Blasey Ford?

But when is enough enough?

Here was the last update on her Go Fund Me page. First it mentions other Go Fund projects to also consider contributing to, then states:

PLEASE consider donations to these fabulous organizations rather than this campaign, although we will keep the campaign open if you really want to donate to the Ford family.

They’ll keep it open for people just in case they “really want to donate to the Ford family.” They need the front doors, lots of them. “We’ll leave the light on for you.”

Update 10:30 pm — Grand total of $738,315.00 (10 days)

Right Ring | Bullright

Avenutti King for the Day

So it is almost official, creepy porn lawyer really wants to run for president to be Democrats’ designated “fighter”. He’s already visited Iowa to listen to the grievance list.

Business Insider

“I think the party has yearned for a fighter — a fighter for good, if you will — for a significant period of time,” Avenatti said.

“And for many, I’m probably seen as that individual.”

Well, the only problem with that is he will have to fight off the dozens of other Democrat “fighters” Democrats all claim to be. Like Cory Booker with his imaginary drug dealer friend, T-Bone that just had his Spartacus moment. The guy in the pocket of big pharma.

Like Elizabeth Warren, who told us “you didn’t build that” the big government built it for you. Like Joe Biden who called us all Dreggs and said we are going to put black people back in chains, as a couple of his favorites. The anti-Me Too guy who freely gropes women and young girls publicly because he thinks they like it. Both designated Democrat “fighters.”

Or like Bernie Sanders, the king of socialism. Compete with that ‘fighter Avenutti.’ If you can’t promise people free stuff, how can people vote for you? Because you fight for them? Ha, all that Fighting is really for their free shit. Try an original line like “Two Americas.”

Like wannabe president, wing man Eric Holder who has a record of radicalism, contempt and fighting public interest behind him.

Does this mean Michael Avenutti is getting out of the Creepy Porn Lawyer business?

Right Ring | Bullright

City’s Muddy Asset Forfeiture

The number of filings in Philadelphia is absurd. That is a racket much bigger than the Nigerian email scam. Only in this you don’t have to do anything to get cheated.

City Forced to Abolish Civil Asset Forfeiture and Pay Back Victims the Millions It Stole from Them

The innocent family that had their home seized by police through civil asset forfeiture fought back, and their victory will affect other residents for years to come.
Freedom Outpost

Philadelphia, PA – The city that has gained a reputation for the egregious civil asset forfeiture practices committed by its police department, will now be forced to dismantle the program altogether, as a result of a lawsuit filed by a family who had their home seized by police after their son was accused of a minor drug crime.

Residents who have been harmed by the Philadelphia Police department’s civil asset forfeiture practices could also receive part of $3 million in compensation. Markela and Chris Sourovelis initially filed a lawsuit in 2014 after their son was caught trying to sell $40 in heroin on the street.

The parents complied with the judge and took their son to a court-ordered rehabilitation treatment. But when they returned home, they found that police had locked them out of their house.

More: https://freedomoutpost.com/city-forced-to-abolish-civil-asset-forfeiture-and-pay-back-victims-the-millions-it-stole-from-them/

Dem’s SCOTUS Conspiracy

From their own mouths, Dem conference call in July.

Strategy session in July
GOP War Room

In July, Ricki Seidman – a Democratic operative, former Clinton White House official and current advisor to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford – laid out a strategy to defeat the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Be sure to like, subscribe, and comment below to share your thoughts on the video.

“Over the coming days and weeks, there will be a strategy that will emerge. I think its possible that strategy might ultimately defeat the nominee.”

Straight from the up-talking source. She knew then as one of Ford’s advisers.

Plus it’s a rally the vote campaign. She seemed to forget a fundraiser for Ford and the Democrats. All dirty election politics all the time.

H/T to Gateway Pundit see here

The tactics now unfold still before our eyes. It’s a cooked up ‘by any means’ conspiracy.
Let’s not forget Kennedy chose to retire then to have Trump pick the nominee.

Proper Apathy: a case for it

Inevitably in every recent election, one word always seems to pop up usually close to the election. That word is apathy. There is almost an obsession.

Always mentioned as a negative and normally connotes a warning about bout being complacent. Not caring or not caring enough to vote, along with not caring who to vote for. It sets off a red flare about priorities. It is meant to shame and even inflame citizens.

So let’s take a look at the definition. According to Merriam-Webster:

1 : lack of feeling or emotion : impassiveness drug abuse leading to apathy and depression

2 : lack of interest or concern : indifference
i.e. political apathy

First if all, I empathize with the passion or appropriateness of using the word. But again, it is always considered a negative. Is there a positive use for it? Maybe there should be.

For a change, I wondered about using some of that righteous apathy toward our allies and European friends. What could be wrong with that? Now just hold on there, lilly liberals.

So take the textbook definition of apathy (#2) and apply a good healthy dose of it toward them, basically the whole lot, allies included. Lack of interest or concern, indifference to them. But wait, isn’t that treatment what we already receive from them and have for a long time? I mean they do treat us that way. When was the last time they made domestic or foreign policy based on what we Americans or the US thinks, or will think of it?

Get it? It seems to work fine for them.

I see a good apathy, liberally applied. Why should it always be a negative? Why not put it to good use? It is not like we get something different than that from them. If people have practiced their apathy, then why not sharpen it a little to where it is appropriate?

I can hear the liberals screaming on both sides of the Atlantic now. Except can they give a valid reason why not? I don’t think they can. Yes, I know all the standard talking points about allies and treatment of how we want to be treated. And all that gimmichery about what’s in our interest is what is in their interest too. Sure we have common desires. But this is only a one-sided thing, you do realize. Each of those countries gives us no consideration on what actions they take. They look out for themselves.

Yes, we share some values and technology and security issues. But where is the reciprocation, as Trump calls it, from them? We’ve certainly been doing this for a long time now. When was the last time they took our advice? Oh, right, we restrain our advice. Though they freely give us unsolicited advice, don’t they?

Here’s one illustration: CNN regularly has pundits, academics or intellectuals, commenting and lobbying our policies and politics from Birmingham (UK), London and Belgium. They are some of the biggest critics of Trump and the administration. But we have enough of those critics right here. Do we tell them what they should do at home? We don’t need their pontifications. What should we care what they think, let alone provide a platform for it.

Sure we just want to show them we care. Again, what does that matter when it comes down to it? What do we get in return? Maybe it hasn’t been such a great idea to consider the impact on them in our every move. I mean they have leaders and governments to represent their interests, and they do. In most cases quite well.

Why are we always thinking about sensitivities of others? It baffles me. Was this in the founding of America? No, we had our hands full thinking for ourselves about ourselves, looking after our interests because no one else on earth will. Do we now think all these countries look out for our interests? Hell no. They expect us to do that ourselves.

What happened to “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none?” We’ve self entangled our dream with their selfish realities.

Washington instructed in his Farewell Address:

” In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.
…/
“As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
…/
“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns.”

…“Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation [as ours is]? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?”

The other sweet spot factor liberals always point to is human rights. We need to influence that or this. But we don’t need to make our decisions based on our desires for them.

What I’m saying is that the reality is more stark. We have gone so far over to the international, globalist, bent over backward (and forward too) for people who generally 1) don’t appreciate it, or in some cases don’t want our help and; 2) aren’t considerate at all of us. And we don’t expect it. Shouldn’t the latter have changed if it was going to change?

What I am also saying is that it was never started out this way. Now I do hear critics of America’s every policy about a big footprint of US imperialism. I don’t agree with much of their emphasis but there is something to this one sided, lopsided, foreign policy (if that is what it is). The problem is it is not just in foreign policy but in domestic policy too, that we are influenced by their concerns.

No, I don’t buy the America is the big bully and aggressor argument. We bend over trying to make our policy based on their whims and desires, for or about us. We have to stop empowering those who never had our best interests. You know the Obama lesson on being an appeaser or slave to our enemies, empowering them and weakening ourselves.

However, we never see any signs of this consideration returned from abroad. They only have their hand out to receive not respond in kind.

This is not a case for protectionism or “isolationism”. But the affect may be protectionist.

I’m not sure what an official policy of apathy would look like or what it would do. But I dang sure know what our default doctrine has left us with. What did we get?

I wouldn’t mind being accused of it from across the globe. I might consider it a compliment. And maybe they would stop dishing out their helpful advice to us, too? Incidentally, applying some indifferent apathy to our friends and allies might also decrease the popular use of it in our election process. Apathy gets a pretty bad rap.

Whether consciously or not, we haven’t been making decisions on our own merits for our interests. They’ve been parsed down to p/c and sensitivities about what others think. Others have become proxies in our decisions. We could be a little apathetic, even rude.

Or in other words: quite frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!

Right Ring | Bullright

Accusations Fly, Money Close Behind

Let’s tally up the week so far, shall we? For all the talk of going public, Christine Blasey Ford seemed to go private again. Out, then in, and public again.

And with that she has claimed to have gotten death threats etc. That so happens to be the basis for the fundraiser started in her name by a Georgetown professor. Initial goal was 175,000 for security and expenses, but then says:

” If we raise more than Dr. Blasey needs, extra funds will go to women’s organizations and/or into an account to cover similar costs incurred in comparable situations.”

https://www.gofundme.com/to-cover-dr-fords-security-costs

So far that has raised over $209,000 in two days. 3 am 9/20 closed out the campaign to transfer its funds to them.

But that isn’t all. Now the Cristine Blasey Ford family has their own Go Fund me page, set up for them by friends and supporters — Team Christine Blasey Ford — with only her family as a beneficiary. It says husband will access the funds.

https://www.gofundme.com/help-christine-blasey-ford

That one is up to $89,915 $93,080. Not shabby. A 100k goal.

Then there is another Go Fund me page set up by women in support of Ford. (and against Kavanaugh) That one is steaming along with $22,192 $23,407. It states the following:

“In Defense of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Dr. Anita Hill, and Ourselves”

“This will be just the beginning of the reckoning for Kavanaugh. Thank you Tayari Jones for donating your hard earned $25 to support Dr. Anita Hill. Let’s do the same for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. “

https://www.gofundme.com/women-support-christine-blasey-ford

What good is a high profile accusation if you don’t get some big ad time with? They certainly go together. No?

That one is aimed at buying ad space and getting ad sponsors or partners. I don’t know what it will benefit Ford personally? Still unclear.

I’d say it’s been a pretty good week in all for the Christine Blasey Ford name. It cashed in a total of $321,107 $325,487 donations so far (in days) and the week is not near over. That’s $298,915 $302,080 for the family of Ford, personally, so far.

Oh, those cash cow death threats! Thank goodness for crowd-funded solutions.

Well, on the same week as the hurricane is still waging its toll over the people in the Carolinas. At least these leftists put their priorities on this cause. Not ready to testify but she’s public enough to rake in the cash from the public. Cha-ching!

Right Ring | Bullright

US Largest Global Crude Producer

Now here is something the left probably never wanted to be number one at.

San Antonio Business Journal

Sep 12, 2018, 2:46pm CDT Updated 2 days ago Production in the nation’s shale basins has helped the U.S. surpass Russia and Saudi Arabia to become the world’s largest crude oil producer, preliminary figures from the Energy Information Administration show.

American exploration and production companies are now producing an estimated 10.9 million barrels of crude oil per day, according to the EIA’s latest Short-Term Energy Outlook report released on Wednesday. Based on preliminary data, EIA officials believe that crude oil production in the U.S. surpassed Saudi Arabia in February and surpassed Russia twice — once in June and again in August.

The figures mark the first time that domestic crude oil production has surpassed Saudi Arabia in more than two decades. Although the EIA does not publish crude oil production forecasts for Russia and Saudi Arabia, the agency expects that U.S. crude oil production will continue to exceed that of Russia and Saudi Arabia through 2019.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2018/09/12/united-states-now-the-largest-global-crude-oil.html

Oops, the energy denier crowd is not going to like that. The second part of the oil issue is why the rise in gas prices? Now that sanctions will be back on Iran, it will be another excuse for higher oil prices. Though when they dropped Iran sanctions, the only beneficiary was Iran and a few of its trading partners. Of course on the left they would enjoy sky high gas and energy prices. At least for the time being congrats to US anyway.

Serving News for Fools Daily

Serving up the news of the day, dishonesty is the media and journalists’ modus operandi. Dishonesty is their specialty, they work very hard at it. Increasingly fooling no one.

Remember when it was always common perception that media-journalists were just looking for the truth and want to report it, no matter on which side the axe falls? No more, their purpose is deception. It’s their objective.

See how they work in concert with progressive politicians and other allies, in unison.

And when they find someone who is a problem for them and their political narrative, or political allies, then ‘by any means’ becomes their mission theme.

In reality, the MSM don’t really value their readers much — you know, the one’s they claim they “are doing all this for?” They might do it for their diehard progressive groupies that also spread it, who don’t really care about the truth anyway. Not for us.

Two great current examples are, the story I just mentioned on Steve Emerson, the terrorism expert; the other is the Russian collusion narrative they just can’t let go. Because it is central to their mission. Regardless of their reasons to deceive the public viewers or readers, and drive their political narrative, people have not accepted it at face value.

Hard as they try to ruin Emerson’s reputation as a expert terrorism analyst people know where the real lies, bias and hate are coming from. Where they have been coming from the last eight years under Obama.

Now there is hard evidence mounting that the people also know the truth about the Russia collusion narrative. A new Gallup poll shows how the people feel about the narrative being foisted on them from MSM and the Democrat echo chamber, hour by miserable hour.

“A lot of Americans have kind of dismissed the idea that [Trump] colluded to the extent that he did something illegal,” summarized Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport during an interview with The Hill.

The numbers back him up. A poll released last week showed that a relatively small percentage of people — 29 percent — think that Trump illegally teamed up with Russia to influence the presidential election. [CT]

If inquiring minds want to know, anything, then MSM wants to force feed them what it wants people to know – or believe they know. Now deception is business as usual.

It is all clear by looking at that poll. But the jig is up, I don’t think anyone can really deny it anymore, unless they are one of the proud card carrying disinformation believers and truth deniers. Not that they just don’t want to know the truth, they just plain don’t care. The leftists believe what they want. Damn the truth or evidence to the contrary. They can’t be bothered with that, the narrative is too important to be shattered by anything.

Here’s another served up on a hotbed of lies, media reports Trump is happy about victims of Hurricane Florence. Imagine? That one is reverberating in media the way you would expect a great lie to do. They love a fictional story, especially on Trump. Who sticks around for the truth? No one reads corrections. Sensational headlines are never retracted.

For a bonus, even Ruth Bader Ginsburg is sick of Democrats’ grandstanding on Kavanaugh hearings, admitting the circus has gone too far. You know the saying when you’ve lost RBG, you’ve lost the country. No, I say that. LOL Dems are burning their bridges.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Art of Media’s Character Assasination

H/T to Emerson, for pointing out the article. Notice how media follow and repeat the original assertions.

Character Assassinations by New Jersey’s Star-Ledger

by Noah BeckThis article originally appeared in The Algemeiner.
September 13, 2018

The Star-Ledger’s smear of terrorism expert Steve Emerson and Arab-American Emilio Karim Dabul is a textbook case of journalistic malpractice, providing the quintessential example of what honest journalism should avoid.

On August 5, the Star-Ledger called for the removal of Dabul, a New Jersey US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office spokesperson, in part by attacking Emerson with a variety of false or misleading claims. At least three other NJ papers then published similar stories about Emerson and Dabul: WNYC (which incredibly sought comment from the Council on American-Islamic Relations — CAIR — but neither Emerson nor Dabul), NorthJersey.com, and MSN.com. Adding to the damage, La Opinion ran a similar piece in Spanish. The Hill also ran an article inspired by Star-Ledger’s August 5 article, but promptly removed it after hearing Emerson’s objections.

The Star-Ledger’s attack was severe enough for Emerson to involve his attorney, Richard Horowitz, who, on August 9, demanded that Emerson be afforded “an opportunity to respond” and submitted a letter to the editor by Emerson. The Star-Ledger published Emerson’s response on August 24.

In the interim, six New Jersey members of Congress, all Democrats, wrote a letter to ICE, demanding that Dabul be fired, claiming that he “edited and wrote for anti-Muslim hate groups,” as alleged in the Star-Ledger’s op-ed trashing Emerson.

Furthermore, the paper’s editors refused to publish Emerson’s response unless he agreed to the removal of key details.

Emerson asserted that the Star-Ledger’s editors made no attempt to contact him or verify any of the facts assumed by the paper’s allegations, but those important points were deleted from Emerson’s response by the Star-Ledger’s editors, presumably to avoid exposing their unprofessionalism.

Similarly, Emerson’s response tried to set the record straight about the Star-Ledger’s materially false suggestion that Emerson blamed Muslims for the 1993 Oklahoma City bombing — an allegation that he says has been “manufactured and peddled by radical Islamic groups” — but the editors deleted that as well.

Thus, the edited version of Emerson’s defense produced by the Star-Ledger’s editors effectively extended Emerson’s character assassination, while whitewashing the paper’s journalistic malfeasance.

For the sake of setting the record straight and exposing the extent of Star-Ledger’s journalistic negligence, it’s worth reviewing the many problems with the paper’s August 5 op-ed. [Please see the rest at the IPT]

https://www.investigativeproject.org/7619/character-assassinations-by-new-jersey-star-ledger

Sure there are reasons for this hit and there is an agenda behind it. More on that later. Or as Alinsky said, personalize the attacks. In this case, smear one expert that says things they don’t like. But what a concerted effort. They don’t smear, they do character assassination hits. Then they put it into their media echo chamber to drive it home.

Who are these hatchet men. You all know the Muslims have many working at all levels in media and within government (something Obama excelled at placing) Then they have their allies of SPLC as the designated smear merchants. By the time it’s back washed in a few days in media, it is hard to know exactly where it came from, which is the point.

Do you think anyone out there is saying, “let me read today’s corrections and clarifications in today’s paper”? No, they do the drive by and screw even cleaning up the mess. The mess just makes their message that much harder to ignore.

Celeb Marriage Headed for Annulment?

No, not one of those juicy, personal stories. Celebrity endorsement of Nike and Kap off to a rocky start? They barely said their vows. Well, let’s hope they were both smart enough to get a prenup before rushing off — just in case it is not what each hoped it would be.

How about media and the Left’s wannabe darling of protest, Colin Kaepernick. This one is just the truth about the left, media and their unwillingness to acknowledge reality. The latest Kaepernick caper with Nike lit the tentacles of their radical flames. It was a love story, too powerful to break. A jilted one turned protestor gets handsomely rewarded with a contract from a major sports sponsor. Cha ching. What could be wrong with that?

Loyalty…

We now learn Colin Kaepernick is putting out his own line of shirts and Kaepernick gear that directly competes with his major merchandise contract with Nike. Great going on that agreement, Nike. The “Just do it and lose your ass” campaign.” Well, there’s a story media will have to put on its ignore list. Why?

Because the Nike marriage was such a powerful voice for perpetual protestors on the left. A romantic relationship supporting “social justice” and radicals, with a little shout to cop killing thrown in. Now a little something for himself on the side, too? Maybe it’s one of those open marriages. Since he screwed them over in short order for his own gain, proving how disloyal he is to anyone, that is something of no importance.

Come to think of it, he screwed the 49ers over too. Loyalty is so overrated.

“So what?” they will say, he is not into commitments.

Shows what the kind of Social Justice Kap supports — the screw you and love me justice league. But he seemed so committed. Say it isn’t so! Who cares?

Character only matters when Leftist media are attacking and smearing the character of someone on the right, even when they have to lie about it. They like open marriages.

Nike’s new logo — “Just Do It and Lose It.” Hey, what does the Kap do for you?

Ref: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/kaepernick-got-wanted-nike-now-stabbing-back/

Tweet of the Day

Some things are just said better in Tweet form

You know how they are blaming Trump for Hurricane Florence and then called him complicit when it was miles from shore?

So why not give him extra credit now for the downgrade? How about it, CNN?

Apology to the Left

 

I’m sorry that you interpret my love for country as hate.

I’m sorry that you characterize patriotism as bigotry.

I’m sorry your bitterness toward America cannot be contained.

I’m sorry you see racism everywhere.

I’m sorry you believe America is a structurally racist country.

I’m sorry that you don’t see America as exceptional.

I’m sorry that you believe America caused or deserved the 9-11 attacks.

I’m sorry that you thought Benghazi was a conspiracy theory.
(But Obama created a conspiracy to cover it up, though.)

I’m sorry that you believe Mueller’s investigation is legitimate.

I’m sorry you think socialism is the answer to disunity.

I’m sorry that you despise pride in America – as repulsive.

I’m sorry you are offended by borders and law enforcement officers

I’m sorry you chose to side with illegal aliens over US citizens’ safety.

I’m sorry if the National Anthem offends you.

I’m sorry that you are so misguided.

 

I didn’t cause that. Just saying….

Right Ring | Bullright

Thought on NYT OP-Ed

A few thoughts on the op-ed story floating around in the media.

Seems the author, by choice or not, was 1) redefining the Resistance; 2) redefining the Deep State. Also the author seemed fond of John McCain.

In both cases (1+2) into more appealing and friendly sounding terms. One can only wonder why someone would want to do that? Who benefits? I’d like to know that part.

Update, as of WH briefing: they are now polling the op-ed letter, or polling an anonymous letter for how many people agree with it. Incredible. So add one more why?

Democrat Campaign Rhetoric

I scanned a few “up and coming” Democrat candidates for Congress and here is what I find. Caution: it is a murky picture. Very entertaining though.

As background, you’ve heard about new Democrats being recruited to run in largely Republcan held districts. Many of them touting military careers and many of them women.

In the last few weeks, districts who were Republican are considered “toss ups”. More recently, some are being relabeled now “leaning Democrat.” Right, I believe that.

When you look at their social media campaign statements you see similarities.

Well, one after another their statements read like a book of platitudes. No, not about current hot button issues but glowing terms. My sampling were not heavily campaigning. They did not seem to have layers of popularity and comments on their posts.

But those posts themselves, claiming the reason they were running, read eerily similar too. They didn’t tell you about their stand on issues. But like this one, it was personal. Well like this: “I’m running for Congress so that our children will have a brighter future and so that all our daughters will know that they can grow up to be and do whatever they dream.”

‘Hello’…. I mean your children had no hopes or dreams without you running? Wait, children have had those ideals and goals as long as I remember. Glad yours now have a brighter future only because you are running! What does that say? Well, kids have had those rosy ideals until 2009, when dreams took a nose dive. Now they are back?

They talk about about “shared values” and “moving the country forward.” What does that mean? I prefer an ash heap, myself. All undefined, vague terms to try to appeal to voters’ emotions and inspirations without much thought to what the words mean. You are supposed to know if you are a left wing progressive Democrat. And you do: against tax cuts, raising taxes, growing spending, cutting military spending. All of which is like caviar on a cracker to Democrats. “Come get it”. Free college, socialized medicine, single payer, Medicare for all, opening up the borders. Who can be against all that?

Another lofty word they are for, “equality”. So like we Republicans are for inequality, the more unequal the better. They want “affordable” things; like we want everything unaffordable. They actually support policies that make things less affordable. “Together, we’ll bring a sea change to Congress.” What kind of change, doing what? What will be different with you in Congress? Right, your children will finally have a bright future. “We know how vital our educators are to our communities.” (pandering to teachers – unions) We don’t even like teachers or value them. In fact, we see no use for them.

“We are fighting to keep dark money out of politics.” That’s popular. Naturally, a reference to Citizens United and reversing the Supreme Court decision. Hillary touted that in her campaign along with overturning the Heller decision. They use a complete script of progressive code words for which only Dems have a decoder. Dog whistles like their talk about hatred or hate speech. We are racists while they are, well, the good racists.

No election is complete today without sympathy for illegals. Say nothing about the crimes committed by illegals which impact Americans from coast to coast. Then there is the animus for law enforcement, ICE or border control. But of course they use the right statements to frame it. So they want people afraid of law enforcement and unsympathetic to cops being killed. They want to dehumanize law enforcement, along with anyone who works for the Trump administration. Amnesty is the bomb, “a path to citizenship” is the rage, from people who don’t much value US citizenship. And we are not exceptional. In fact, NY Governor Cuomo led the charge saying “America never was that great.”

Give a shout out for “justice,” especially the more radical candidates. The rest of us must want injustice. Except that we have a lot of injustice going on coming right from the Dep of Justice, but Dems see none of it nor do they care. As long as Deep State is in control Dems are happy. And as long as they are in control of Deep State. But “justice” talk is usually the segue for Resistance — sedition. That subversive obstruction is always a good thing for Dems to run on and support, for justice’s sake, when they do not control government.

Another popular favorite is ____ is against women… “”who stand to lose access to affordable birth control.” I wish I had a nickel every time I heard that bumper sticker phrase. It was popular against Kavanaugh, too. No one is losing access. “Affordable” is now a code word for free or almost free. Losing access, a guaranteed right, to free this or that. Like I’m losing access to a Mercedes 450 SL. I declare such access a “right.” Still, loosing access to something free is a popular notion. Affordable just translates to what they think they should not pay for.

Then there is the golden altar or calf of abortion, Planned Parenthood. Useful against Kavanaugh and campaigning. But I see nothing threatening Planned Parenthood’s status or Roe v. Wade. Nothing. Yet the great scare is on to “protect women’s reproductive health, rights” from invisible harm.” Personally, I’m opposed to women’s reproductive health.

They tell us “stay out of women’s sex organs” yet march in the streets with vagina costumes, condoms and protest wearing pussy hats. They live and breathe in women’s reproductive organs, at least in campaigns, and want them exhaustively legislated. How can killing babies be a stand for women’s reproductive health, or for healthcare? Just do not not legislate that. They yell about preserving lives by preserving abortion and planned parenthood. Planned Parenthoods are saving lots of lives, aren’t they?

Another habit Dems seem to have in common, these up and coming pretenders, is that they make the entire campaign about them not the people they are running to represent. Is that telling? It is not about the issues. And the kicker is the Democrats seem to eat it up. They could not care less, only that he/she is a card carrying socialism-pushing progressive. In fact, whatever he/she says is fine, as long as they are progressive. They will vote with the Marxist left anyway, so what does it matter what they do or say?

So which is worse: the platitudes of vague ideals or what they do say about the issues? San Fran Nan called MS-13 members a spark of divinity. It contradicts her staunch support and protection for abortion. Does a spark of divinity only apply to gang-bangers? Aborted lives must be much lower on the chain than even MS-13 gang members.

But this is getting long, the hour is getting late. The contradictions and vague platitudes remain, popular only to the Left. What outcome can we expect from this soup for fools?

Right Ring | Bullright