A cue from Britain right on time

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dan Hannan is a British Conservative MEP.

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

A Democrat message in a bottle to anyone listening

Welcome to the Left — I mean the new reality. (oops even ‘reality’ is a pun now.)

I heard interesting conversations from libs in the last few days, after the Alexandria shooting. It was “one nut,” “one crazy guy.” So you point out that it is more than one guy out there with the DNC. They scoff. Then you point to tweets and Libs’ blame of Trump for even shooting Reublicans. Nice. They deny it has anything to do with partisan politics.

They tell you how they condemn all forms of violence by anyone. “It is not a left vs right thing,” they claim, “we support peaceful action.” Why can’t we all get along, why the bitterness? We point out the Left’s problem and propensity for violence, so they claim they haven’t seen or known anyone like that. You can only play dumb for so long. (below)

Actually it looks and feels a lot like arguments about Islam and terrorists. The same tactics and strategy in both. If it is one thing I concluded over the years, it is that violence is the Left’s plan-B when it can’t get its way.

To the rescue: Pat Buchanan has ‘Exhibit-A’ chronicling the long, bitter history of the Left with hatred and the violence accompanying it. Hey, they don’t call it Hard Left for nothing.

By Patrick J. Buchanan

James T. Hodgkinson of Belleville, Illinois, who aspired to end his life as a mass murderer of Republican Congressmen, was a Donald Trump hater and a Bernie Sanders backer.

Like many before him, Hodgkinson was a malevolent man of the hating and hard left.

His planned atrocity failed because two Capitol Hill cops were at that Alexandria baseball field, providing security for House Whip Steve Scalise. Had those cops not been there, a massacre would have ensued with many more dead than the gunman.

More at: http://buchanan.org/blog/long-history-leftist-hatred-127223

But we have an evolving view playing out in front of us. Here is an exchange.

Excuse number one:(from a Dem strategist)

Sigh or high-five, who can be sure?

Of course it is only a sampling, there are too many to mention. It is cool to talk up their hatred insisting that somehow the Left’s violence could be justified because of Republicans’ agenda or what we did. Blame the victims as if Repubs should have expected this.

And then there is the class war argument. How long have libs been running on class warfare? Yet the idiots have that figured out too. Dems class warfare is our fault too — even though it is about all they have to run on. Their strategy is blamed on Repubs.

Have you ever witnessed a bunch of people more averse to taking any responsibility than the liberal left? Republicans and conservatives aren’t even in the same race.

One Incident Away From Mayhem

I don’t have to even write this piece to make the point. It’s all too true.

Society meltdown is just an incident away. How sad that our system cannot withstand any more than that? We’ve seen it over and over again.(Ferguson) One shooting or incident now triggers instant, almost endless anarchy. We are told this is in the name of peace and social justice. If this is social justice then who votes in favor of it?

No, it’s more of a means to some of their ends. The event, whatever it is, is just a means to another agenda. It erupts on a moments notice, anywhere, as if it were planned. Only the results look like it was anything but planned.

Problems with it are too numerous to mention. I’ve heard enough about the so-called “peaceful demonstration” BS. Peaceful it isn’t and any semblance of a demonstration is MIA. We get phrases like “otherwise peaceful protest.” Right, other than the violence and looting, and sheer anarchy, it is a peaceful protest. It doesn’t match the script.

Anarchy is not included in the first amendment protections.

“This is not who we are.” — Apparently it now is. Welcome to new Obamasized America.

I watch reality unfold in front of me live on TV. Reporters flood to the scene and protestors turn their violence on media as if they are the problem. Reporters are assaulted and blamed. So this is the new demonstration protest? Soon everything sucked into the violence of the red zone is fair game.

Then clergy are sucked into the whole “epicenter” as they call it. A word to clergy: do you realize you are also being played for tools? To what grand achievement?

Charlotte NC is now the latest in a long list of cities fallen to this new protest protocol. I’m sickened by what I see. So I have a simple idea.

First of all, to all the media, I know you have hours of the events from start to finish. The unedited footage should be strung together. Take that complete film to schools of junior high students. (for openers) Don’t narrate or describe the events in advance. Just show them the real footage without the opinions of news anchors etc.

After the film, ask them if anyone advocates for and wants to live in a society like that? Any student who does should be able to write an essay defending why. Students who don’t can write one, too. But I want to see advocates for that society explain their reasoning. Though I bet schools could not do that without injecting their opinion.

RightRing | Bullright

Prof of gun rant goes to Washington, as Obama’s guest

Check out this university professor in Nebraska who apparently is in love with the “F” bomb but hates guns with a similar passion. In case you wonder English is her subject.

Amanda-Gailey-Rant-Edited

The woman, Amanda Gailey, an English professor, is also the director of a group known as Nebraskans Against Gun Violence, according to her Facebook profile.

Source: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/01/14/fk-police-officers-fk-laws-professor-gets-personal-invite-to-meet-obama-after-this-rant-294264?hvid=2ZZYR4

This is why we need a license and background check on the first amendment. Yet this gets a personal invitation to the WH.

Unpopular Prez on Unpopular Issue

Obmaa travels to the Roseburg area to politicize the shooting for his gun control. He’s already pointed to examples of gun control like UK and Australia. Those are examples of banning and confiscation. Is that the control he has in mind? Is that the message he wants to send? It is the message the Lefitist Democrats want to hear — full on gun control.

Is there anything resembling compassion in Obama’s agenda? No. Does he really care about the needs of the people, or their security and defense? Hardly. He totally missed his opportunity to lecture or politicize the one place that embraces all gun control, Chicago.

NY Times reports ahead of Obama’s scheduled Roseburg visit.

NYT: “Common Response After Killings in Oregon: ‘I Want to Have a Gun’

Mr. Obama plans to visit Roseburg on Friday to meet the grieving families of yet another gun rampage, but many people here are bristling at his renewed call for stricter gun laws. In some ways, the rampage at the college by a 26-year-old student, Christopher Harper-Mercer, has actually tightened the embrace of guns in a rural town where shots at rifle ranges echo off the hills and hunters shoot deer and elk through the fall.

Some families touched by the violence and students who fled gunfire said they now feared that the kind of bloodshed seen inside Classroom 15 of Snyder Hall at Umpqua Community College could happen anywhere. Some said they were planning to buy guns. Others said they would seek concealed-weapons permits. Others, echoing gun advocates’ calls for more weapons on campus, said the college should allow its security guards to carry guns. A few said they thought that stricter gun control laws could have averted the massacre.

“That’s why we have guns: We don’t have the government dictating when to get on our knees,” said Ms. Kellim, 86.

Continue reading the main story:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/us/oregon-roseburg-shooting-umpqua-community-college.html

The majority consensus in Roseburg seems to be Obama should butt out and definitely not politicize the issue. (he’ll do neither) But at the very beginning, before details were known, Obama defiantly said he would politicize the issue that it called for it. He predicted some would accuse him of politicizing the shootings.

“Well, this is something we should politicize,” Obama said. “It is relevant to our common life together, to the body politic.”

Relevant to his body politic, more like. He added:

“I hope and pray that I don’t have to come out again during my tenure as president to offer my condolences to families in these circumstances.”

No, he did not “have to come out again” and was not asked to. However, he does not come out at the many shootings in Chicago, or on Kate’s murder in San Francisco. In fact he could not be coerced to come out then, when asked. He refused to even acknowledge it or the egregious circumstances leading to her murder. And he does not shepherd the current Kate’s law making its way through Congress. (something he could do) So no one said he had to offer anything, including condolences, to the families in Roseburg. It was all his idea, all part of his politicization of the event. (…fundraiser in Seattle)

Charleston dynamics and race agenda

As a reference, I made a list of inter-related issues after the Charleston shooting.
A little lengthy and in no specific order.

· Freedom of Religion
· Freedom of Speech
· 1st amendment
· Gun control – agenda and otherwise
· 2nd Amendment
· Location location location – Charleston
· Southern hospitality or Southern racism
· Racism issues
· Hate speech
· Hate crimes
· Legislation and hate legislation
· Flags and symbols
· Pride
· History
· Revisionism
· Civil Rights
· Civil war
· North South tensions
· Political Correctness
· States Rights (or 10th amendment issues)
· Crime culture
· Morality and values in community
· Politics – like it or not injected especially presidential campaigns.
· Christianity
· Terrorism
· Presidential pronouncements, actions, responses
· Dep of Justice
· Monuments and cultural heritage
· Media – biases and coverage.
· Protests
· Death penalty
· Constitution
· Bill of rights
· Legal processes
· Christian persecution throughout the world.
· Tenants of Christianity – i.e. forgiveness etc.
· Security of Churches or religious buildings.
· Social Justice – as in the current Leftist dialogue and definition.
· Moral relativism
· Hypocrisy
· Love and understanding
· Evil
· Mental illness, mental heath problems
· Structural racism — as in the lefts’ new buzzword and definition
· White Supremacy
· Black racism or prejudice
· Race-baiting — Al Sharpton, activists
· Academia and advocacy groups, southern poverty law center

I’ll skip commentary, except the shootings were disturbing. Having all this around the killing of 9 people seems an awful lot to have on the plate at one time.

Not to get the intended reaction is a little divine justice. But we have come to a surreal point where not to riot is a surprise, where rioting and civil unrest is the norm.

Look where they’ve taken it, from shootings to a flag and creeping racism. Those who use racism now have more in common with the shooter’s motives than with victims.

RightRing | Bullright

Fly the friendly skies of racism…. circa forever

…but no flag is necessary.

Forget the Confederate Flag…Ban Democrats

By Peter Heck – June 29, 2015 | American Thinker

In any sane culture, the reaction to the recent massacre at the Charleston Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal church would have been a racially and ethnically unified demand to try, convict, and swiftly execute the monster who perpetrated the evil attack.

But we don’t live in a sane culture. So instead, we are chasing a 150-year-old battle flag from the 1860s, pretending that by abolishing it from public sight, we are striking some kind of historic blow for racial healing. What foolishness.

To make things worse, the liberal politicians and media elites promoting this meaningless distraction as some kind of substantive objective are doing so not because they are truly interested in providing a lasting peace to those who have suffered loss in this South Carolina bloodbath. No, they are despicably consumed with advancing their political agenda.

Less than a week after the slaughter, the national Democratic Party was shamelessly trying to raise funds over the Confederate battle flag issue. And faithfully fulfilling their role as mouthpieces of the Democrat left, the Washington Post followed up with an article titled “The GOP’s uneasy relationship with the Confederate flag.” Yes, that would be the Confederate flag designed by a Democrat for a country full of Democrats and warred against by Republicans. Good heavens. […/]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/06/forget_the_confederate_flagban_democrats.html#ixzz3eTRAUWMZ

But only now that they can use minorities as slaves to vote for them in mass do they pretend to care about them. (as far as the ballot door)

After all, Dylann Roof was a probable socialist with anti-Christian sentiments. Well, if he were Christian or pro-Christian he’d have had a real hard time with planning this whole attack in/on a church. Gee, he could have had a DNC bumper sticker on his car. Now they have honed the skill of race-baiting as a diversion. They put down the fire hoses for the big-labor poll taxes, boycotts, and name calling. So ban the racists not a symbol.

Universal symbol of racism

Universal symbol of racism

Talk from the radicals

Tweets from Farrakhan

He uses the hashtag Justice or Else.

Anyone who thinks this about love and peace, what are they drinking?

But then you can hear the fmr Black Panther leader making the case.
Breitbart: Black Panther Ex-Chairman: ‘Complete’ Charleston’s Slave Rebellion’s Plan to Kill All Slave Masters

CHARLESTON, South Carolina — In an angry call to arms just a block away from the site of the Charleston massacre, former New Black Panther Party chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz told a group of about 200 African American Charlestonians that they need to “finish the mission” of killing “slave masters” and their families.

He made the incendiary comments at the Save the Black Church rally held Tuesday night in Marian Square, close to the Mother Emanuel AME Church, where white racist Dylann Roof allegedly murdered nine black churchgoers.

Shabazz’s comments began with the story of Denmark Vesey, who planned an unsuccessful slave revolt and helped found the Mother Emanuel Church.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/06/24/black-panther-chairman-complete-charlestons-slave-rebellions-plan-to-kill-all-the-slave-masters/

“We come to change the order here,” Shabazz told the crowd.

“We got to complete what Denmark didn’t finish,” he insisted.

Yes, remember the reports on Baltimore riots when he was on the cable shows presented as a mediator that had reformed into some moderate voice?  (like  Al Sharpton was the example) I believe  CNN interviewed him.  Obama will be making a statement about that… any day now.(ha ha) That was Tuesday.

Shooting….Chicago park

12 people, including 3-year-old, shot at South Side park

By Peter Nickeas and Jeremy Gorner [Chicago]Tribune reporters

September 20, 2013

Twelve people, including a 3-year-old child, were shot at a Chicago park in the Back of the Yards neighborhood Thursday night, authorities said.

Ten adults and the 3-year-old were transported by Fire Department ambulances after in the attack in the 1800 block of West 51st Street in the Back of the Yards neighborhood, said Fire Department Deputy District Chief James Mungovan. A 12th victim was believed to have driven himself to Little Company of Mary Hospital in Evergreen Park, a source said, citing preliminary information.

A total of at least 11 people were shot, including the 3-year-old, who was shot in the face, according to a source.

The shootings appeared to have taken place on a basketball court on the 51st Street side of Cornell Square Park near Wood Street.

More: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-multiple-people-including-3yearold-shot-in-south-side-attack-20130919,0,352520.story

Let’s see if this makes it onto Obama’s radar or the mainstream news-a-rama.

18 shot in 4 hours in attacks across city

 

    Staff report [Chicago Tribune]

12:11 a.m. CDT, September 20, 2013

At least 18 people were shot, one fatally, in less than four hours in attacks in Chicago Thursday evening, police said.

In attack in Back of the Yards, 12 people, including a 3-year-old boy, were shot at Cornell Square Park, authorities said.

A 36-year-old man was shot near 77th Street and Sangamon Avenue about 6:56 p.m., said Chicago Police News Affairs Officer Daniel O’Brien. The man suffered multiple gunshot wounds to his upper body and was taken to John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital in critical condition.

The man was later declared dead, according to the Cook County medical examiner’s office. […/]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-chicago-shootings-violence-sept-19-to-20-4-shot-on-south-side-20130919,0,3683126.story

Opportunism run amuck

This is a rant about the gun control non-debate. I heard this commercial several times. It is from a lobby affiliated with the anti-gun campaign but doesn’t matter.

They talk about gun control saying because of the events, this is the best “opportunity” to push through gun control they have had. Maybe I get offended whenever the word opportunity is used in politics? But that certainly touched my nerve, never have they had such a great opportunity to pass gun control.

Is that what this is a great “opportunity”? We also have Rahm Emanuel’s doctrine, “never let a crisis go to waste”. It is all the same thing. Opportunity? Is the murder of the kids in Newtown now reduced to an opportunity? I am not surprised.

That’s what the Left is all about, opportunity. The shooting in Colorado or the  shooting in Newtown, is just the greatest opportunity they’ve had. Note how cavalier they say it.

That’s why I relate politics to extortion, and extortion to terrorism. They extort the events for political gain. Politicians are out to get as much as they can from the circumstances. With progressives it is a jihad. They are opportunists. And what do terrorist do? Take advantage of circumstances to serve a political agenda.

I am so sick of their opportunism. No matter how horrible the event or circumstance, opportunists run to take full advantage of it. Hello, Barney Frank on Boston.

Like the death of a wealthy person, family members come out of the woodwork looking for a piece of the pie. When a disaster happens, people try to take advantage of victims. Opportunistis et al. Politicians looked at the banking/economic collapse the same way, “how can we use this?”

It is professional extortion, and all of us are the victims. There can be no doubt the Left is declaring jihad on guns, the second amendment, and gun owners. They tell us. They issued a fatwa to the American people that they want our second amendment rights. At the same time they will not defend the right to life. All part of the same fatwa.

But Liberals and pols will tell you that is just the way our system works.

Now the Boston bombing presents serious national security concerns while they push illegal immigration legislation and amnesty. But all of a sudden the Left cries foul and claims the bombing should not be “used” to deter their illegal immigration agenda. A legitimate national security issue is not relevant to illegal immigration? Beam me up!

There must be a bylaw for the left: when opportunity presents itself, bust down the door. Use a battering ram if possible.’…’when opportunity knocks, beat the hell out of victims.’

In fact, I heard political strategists/pundits talking about illegal immigration “reform” – whatever the hell they call the current concoction. The MSM loons complained that for the right to use the bombing in Boston against “immigration reform” is absurd. “Off sides…personal foul..95 yard penalty. “They can’t understand any remote connection. Say what?

They then accused the Republicans of playing politics and trying to use the illegal alien issue for political gain. Is that a hoot, using the issue for political gain? The gods of opportunism cry foul.

Obama and his cohorts already denounced Rand Paul and others for accusing Obama and the Left of standing on the graves of victims, playing politics with the second amendment, and using family members as “Props” in their anti-gun “campaign”. Oh no, attack the messengers, even if they happen to be right.