It’s Friday, December 2nd, 2016…but before we begin, a couple quick comments on a clip Rush featured Thursday:
First, Obama’s initial response to anything is to lie, be it about Islamic terror, America’s former energy dependence or the real reasons behind corporate flight; primarily because, as Bill Meisen noted, condescension and an overweening sense of self-importance coupled with utter ignorance about the subject at hand (because, as The Bossman observed, he’s always the guy at the table who knows the least!) is a dangerous mix.
But combining Barry’s first knee-jerk reaction with his second, more government, is a truly combustible compound. It’s not that The Dear Misleader isn’t open to his own crony-capitalist version of corporate welfare…
…but it struck us, listening to this dissimulating douche pump’s drivel regarding “government training”, more government…the most inefficient producer of anything…is his only answer…for anything and everything!!!
As Rush went on to observe:
“…if you lose your job, we’ve got a government training center for you. If you lose your job, we’ve got a government food stamp for you. If you lose your anything, we’ve got a government this for you. You lose that, we’ve got a government program. “Just give your life to us and stop worrying about things,” is what Obama’s message is, and people don’t want to do that.“
And Hillary offered only more of the same.
P.S. One more extraneous thought before we kick things off: as our sister-in-law Amy informed us, the Wisconsin recount…
Though we couldn’t successfully embed it here, it’s worth watching the video in the FOX News article linked above just to hear the DA describe the time in which officers have to analyze a shooting situation.
Next, the great Victor Davis Hanson provides an accurate assessment of Trump’s Dimocratic opposition as…
“After the Democratic equality-of-opportunity agenda was largely realized (Social Security, Medicare, overtime, a 40-hour work week, disability insurance, civil rights, etc.), the next-generation equality-of-result effort has largely failed.
What is left of Democratic ideology is identity politics and assorted dead-end green movements as conservation has become radical environmentalism and fairness under the law is now unapologetic redistributionism. The 2016 campaign and the frenzied reaction to the result are reminders that the Left is no longer serious about formulating and advancing a practical agenda.In sum, for now it is reduced to a party of teeth-gnashers.
Unfortunately, the one on the right wants to blow up the other two.
…Without an ideology that even remotely matched the life she led, Hillary Clinton could only run a campaign without consistent positions. She flipped on the Keystone pipeline and trade agreements. She refuted the entire 1990s Clinton economic and social agenda. Indeed, her positions of 2008 — anti–gay marriage, border enforcement, and rural populism — were the very positions that she smeared others for embracing in 2016. In 2008, Clinton damned Obama for his “clingers” speech; in 2016, she trumped him with her deplorables and irredeemables.
She both derided Wall Street and was enriched by it. Her 2008 brief flirtation with the white working classes as a modern Annie Oakley came full circle in 2016, with exultant promises to put coal miners out of work. In the end, Hillary had no ideology other than getting even richer by leveraging the office of secretary of state and pandering to identity politics in hopes that record numbers of women and minorities would vote for a 68-year-old white multimillionaire, much as they had voted for Barack Obama. The more she talked of the LGBT or Latino communities, apparently the more we were to think that the Clintons had subverted their offices and reputations to grift a $150 million personal fortune for the underprivileged.
One of the reasons Trump won without commensurate money, organization, ground game, big-name endorsements, establishment unity, conservative media encouragement, and despite a campaign of gaffes and opposition-planted IEDS, was that half the country felt it would not have survived four more years of the cynicism of left-wing politics. In other words, voters got tired of being accused of thought crimes from a party led by wealthy people who made them poorer while adding insult to injury.
Liberal hypocrisy continued well after the election. Those who had become lapdog journalists before the election promised to be even more bravely biased afterwards. So Washington Post pundit Dana Milbank preened: “Rather than cozying up to this new establishment, the media need to savor our traditional role as outsiders.”
“Outsiders?” “Cozying up”? What “traditional role” was Milbank himself ever trying to “savor” other than his own prior, predictable duty as an unethical insider?WikiLeaks had earlier revealed the Milbank apparently wrote the Clinton campaign begging for quick opposition research to help him write his column attacking Donald Trump.
When audiences heard liberal talking heads on television, in either brawling mode or rarified intellectual tones, they could assume that the Trump accuser (aside from being privileged) in many cases was either a plagiarist, fabulist, or ethnically compromised by previously weighing in with the Clinton campaign. Often the likes of Brian Williams, Fareed Zakaria, Doris Kearns Goodwin, or John Harwood proved such abject cynicism warranted when they damned Trump for failing ethical standards they themselves had earlier failed.
It was hard to know who was more cynical: the moralist DNC heads Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Donna Brazile, who conspired to rob Bernie Sanders of the nomination, or Bernie Sanders himself, who (after WikiLeaks confirmed his suspicions that Hillary Clinton was a shill for Wall Street, that the Democratic establishment had tried to rig the primaries, and that even the debate questions were compromised) ended up singing Hillary’s praises as he retreated to his new lakeside estate.
…Progressive outrage should not be taken too seriously because it is not intended to be serious. When Barack Obama invites rapper Kendrick Lamar into the White House and announces that his “To Pimp a Butterfly” is the president’s favorite song of the year — whose album cover shows the corpse of a murdered white judge, with Xs in place of eyes, on the White House lawn, as African-American youth toast his demise with drinks and cash — do we really assume that progressives like Obama believe in stopping hate speech and imagery, or perhaps even believe in anything at all?
Donald Trump, to progressives, supposedly harmed the Constitution and threatened our democracy because he would not say, after the WikiLeaks revelations, that he would accept the outcome of the election if he thought it was rigged. Yet after Clinton’s defeat, suddenly irate progressives have lodged conspiratorial charges that voting machines (miraculously only in swing states Hillary lost) were supposedly rigged, that the Electoral College should be dropped, and that electors should be bullied to ignore their pledges. Did anyone ever believe their original outrage at Trump’s suggestion that election results might be rigged? Are we now to have recounts in Nevada, Colorado, New Hampshire, and all the close states Trump lost, and then on into spring more recounts of recounts, until the last count achieves the desired result?
…The Democratic party for now is reduced to a loud racist/sexist/homophobe broken record that fewer and fewer are listening to — including many of the Democratic elites who continue to play it.“
Speaking of broken Progressive records, writing at NRO, Kevin Williamsonrelates what can only be described as…
“Texas has passed a regulation requiring that human corpses be disposed of in accordance with the state’s regulation for the disposal of human corpses.That this exercise in tautology was necessary — and that it is controversial — is a reminder that we live in the golden age of mass delusion.
The underlying question here, which properly understood isn’t a question at all, has to do with abortion, and what it is that an abortion does. The biological answer to that question is straightforward: An abortion is a procedure in which a physician or another party kills a living human organism, either prior to birth or in the course of inducing a birth. About the three relevant criteria — 1) living, 2) human, 3) organism — there is no serious question: The tissue is living tissue, not dead tissue; it is human tissue, not rutabaga or koala bear tissue; it is arranged into an individual organism rather than an organ or a tumor or an extension of the maternal body.
Because the biology is straightforward, maintaining the fiction that abortion is something other than the premeditated killing of a living human being requires a retreat into poorly wrought metaphysics. The same people who will lecture you about science eight days a week inexplicably embrace pre-modern superstitious notions of “ensoulment” and work up some fine angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin material about “personhood,” the legal construction one uses when one is trying one’s best not to notice that what happens in an abortion is killing and that what is killed is a distinct and individual human being.
The abortion ethic is based on a lie: that the procedure involves nothing more than the elimination of a meaningless clump of cells. That lie is bound up in a nest of lies of which it is one particularly poisonous constituent, all of which are aimed at denying the relationship between sex and procreation or at denying the deep and wide-ranging consequences of attempting to disrupt that relationship. And that larger tangle of lies is itself only a constituent of an even more sprawling mess of confusion and deceit holding that men and women are interchangeable social units, that motherhood and fatherhood are social fictions that were dreamt up rather than evolved, and that you, Sunshine, and your desires are the very center of this universe.
The dead baby in the surgical tray makes all that nonsense rather hard to sustain.
Texas governor Greg Abbott approved a proposal yesterday that would forbid treating the bodies of the dead like used bandages or other medical waste, instead requiring that they be cremated or buried…The rule does not apply to miscarriages or to “abortions that take place at home,” presumably a reference to pharmaceutically induced abortions.
…The abortion lobby is apoplectic, which is what it always is, which must get exhausting…”
As we related to TLJ earlier, The Left’s slavish subservience to the abortion lobby is THE reason we could not countenance ever supporting a Dimocratic candidate even for dog catcher.
Since we’re on the subject of mass delusion, we return to Liberals’ inexcusable support of the indefensible, and this from Jonah Goldberg, brought to us by NRO:
“Fidel Castro died as he lived: to the sound of useful idiots making allowances for his crimes. (That’s not my term: It was Lenin who called liberal apologists for Communism “useful idiots.”)
The gold medal in the Useful Idiot Olympics should probably go to Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada. In a statement, he expressed his “deep sorrow” upon learning that “Cuba’s longest serving president” had died.
…Trudeau’s expression of “deep sorrow” was typical of a whole genre of Castro eulogies. His apologists have tended to romanticize the “revolution” and parrot dubious Cuban state propaganda — Literacy rates! Free health care! — while dispensing antiseptic euphemisms for the brutal reality of what the revolution wrought. At least when people note that Hitler built the autobahn and Mussolini made the trains run on time, they’re usually being ironic. To listen to some Castro defenders, you’d think the scales of justice can balance out any load of horrors, so long as the substandard health care is free and the schools (allegedly) teach everyone to read.
Then again, Justin Trudeau has a history of making idiots look good by comparison.
As much of the American Left is openly mooting whether or not the American president-elect is a dictator-in-waiting, one has to wonder whether they would take that bargain: No more elections, no more free speech, no more civil liberties of any kind, but socialized medicine and literacy for everyone!American political dissidents, homosexuals, journalists, and the clergy, just like in Cuba, can languish in prison or internal exile, but at least they’ll be able to read the charges against them.
Such un-nuanced arguments always make leftist eyes roll. In a blog post titled “Castro: It’s Complicated!” University of Rhode Island professor Eric Loomis cautioned against thinking “in terms of simplistic moral judgments.” It seems to me that when people want to ban simplistic moral judgments, it’s usually because simple morality is not on their side.
Here’s my Fox News colleague Geraldo Rivera on Twitter: “Conservatives mocking nuanced view of #FidelCastro make me gag-What do they say about @realDonaldTrump? #RonaldReagan? RichardNixon? #Elvis?”
Orwell’s red pen is too good for such asininity. Lest there is something I don’t know about Elvis, none of these figures were brutal unelected despots responsible for the murder of their own people (ten times as many deaths as those credited to Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet).
One hint as to why Rivera and so many others were smitten with Castro: He was an international celebrity. Rivera even tweeted a picture of himself grinning broadly in “el Comandante’s” presence along with his condolences: “RIP #FidelCastro Yes, a despot who ruthlessly suppressed dissidents. But he defeated a dictator & was the premier revolutionary of his time.”
“Premier revolutionary of his time.” It’s as if Rivera thinks this title provides moral cover. This is the thinking that allows vacuous hipsters to unselfconsciously shrug when you tell them that the Che Guevara on their T-shirt was a sadistic murderer. “Yeah, but he was cool.”
Just so we’re clear on what kind of a perverted Progressive person and system we’re talking about when Castro’s the subject, consider the firsthand experience of Armando Valladares, courtesy of the WSJ:
I’m With Fidel
‘They did not keep me in jail for 22 years because my refusal to say three words meant nothing.’
When I was 23 years old I refused to do something that at the time seemed very small. I refused to say a few words, “I’m with Fidel.” First I refused the sign on my desk at the postal office that said that, and after years of torture and watching many fellow fighters die, either in body or in spirit, I still refused to say those words.
If I just said those three words, I would have been released from prison.
My story is proof that a small act of defiance can mean everything for the friends of liberty. They did not keep me in jail for 22 years because my refusal to say three words meant nothing.In reality those three words meant everything.
For me to say those words would have constituted a type of spiritual suicide. Even though my body was in prison and being tortured, my soul was free and it flourished. My jailers took everything away from me, but they could not take away my conscience or my faith.
Those who mourn this monster’s passing have neither conscience nor faith…at least in anything remotely resembling Christianity.
For those wondering why we continue to beat the dead Castro drum, an observation in our last edition offers the explanation:
“Nothing, and we mean nothing, bespeaks the utter moral bankruptcy and complete lack of discernment of The Left as much as their ceaseless celebration of Castro’s life and “legacy”. As if universal healthcare which doesn’t even offer aspirin and requires patients to provide their own blankets, or an increase of literacy from 80% to 100% somehow justifies over 60 years of unremitting poverty, repression, imprisonment, torture and state-sanctioned murder.”
By the way, anyone quick to dismiss Trump’s claims regarding illegal voting would do well to read Hans Von Spakovsky and John Fund (the latter certainly no disciple of Alex Jones) writing at the WSJ:
“Donald Trump’s claim that illegal voting may have cost him a popular-vote majority has touched off outrage. Widespread voter fraud, the media consensus suggests, isn’t possible. But there is a real chance that significant numbers of noncitizens and others are indeed voting illegally, perhaps enough to make up the margin in some elections.
There’s no way of knowing for sure. The voter-registration process in almost all states runs on the honor system.The Obama administration has done everything it can to keep the status quo in place.The Obama Justice Department has refused to file a single lawsuit to enforce the requirement of the National Voter Registration Act that states maintain the accuracy of their voter-registration lists. This despite a 2012 study from the Pew Center on the States estimating that one out of every eight voter registrations is inaccurate, out-of-date or duplicate. About 2.8 million people are registered in more than one state, according to the study, and 1.8 million registered voters are dead. In most places it’s easy to vote under the names of such people with little risk of detection.
“The Obama administration has done everything it can to keep the status quo in place”; any question whatsoever why?!?
An undercover video released in October by the citizen-journalist group Project Veritas shows a Democratic election commissioner in New York City saying at a party, “I think there is a lot of voter fraud.” A second video shows two Democratic operatives mulling how it would be possible to get away with voter fraud.
The Justice Department has opposed every effort by states—such as Kansas, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia—to verify the citizenship of those registering to vote. This despite evidence that noncitizens are indeed registering and casting ballots. In 2015 one Kansas county began offering voter registration at naturalization ceremonies. Election officials soon discovered about a dozen new Americans who were already registered—and who had voted as noncitizens in multiple elections.
How common is this? If only we knew. Political correctness has squelched probes of noncitizen voting, so most cases are discovered accidentally instead of through a systematic review of election records.
…How big is this problem nationally? One district-court administrator estimated in 2005 that up to 3% of the 30,000 people called for jury duty from voter-registration rolls over a two-year period were not U.S. citizens. A September report from the Public Interest Legal Foundation found more than 1,000 non-citizens who had been removed from the voter rolls in eight Virginia counties. Many of them had cast ballots in previous elections, but none was referred for possible prosecution…”
The math is rather simple: if we assume only 3% of the 40,000,000 legal and illegal aliens in the U.S. voted this past November, it would equate to some 1,200,000 illegal votes, almost all most assuredly cast for Hillary. Add to that the number of dead Americans casting ballots in Chicago, New York, Detroit, Baltimore and other urban enclaves, along with the number of Dimocratic operatives George Soros paid to vote more than once, one can easily surmise the plausibility of Trump’s premise.
Which brings us, appropriately enough, to The Lighter Side…
Next we turn to another titillating tale torn from the pages of The Crime Blotter, as the The Sun reports…
A spiritual healer tricked a woman into having sex with him to solve her marriage problems – and then made her pay £6,000. Syed Shah conned the 28-year-old mum into believing he could “purify” her relationship. Syed Shah told a vulnerable woman having sex with him would cure her marriage problems.
The court heard how the woman, who had been married for three years and had a young son, was having difficulties in her marriage. A friend introduced her to Shah in June last year, who offered to help “cure” her marriage. The ritual involved sacrificing a goat and getting her to perform daily readings.
…She later returned to tell Shah nothing had changed. He told her that there were more rituals to be carried out – and it involved having sex with him. The woman had sex with Shah twice, and also gave him £6,000.But she began to feel uncomfortable about what was going on and concerned that she was being unfaithful to her husband.
…Shah, 30, of Latelow Road, Stechford, was this week found guilty of two charges of rape and one of fraud following a trial at Birmingham Crown Court. Judge Patrick Thomas QC jailed him for 12 years – after it was revealed he had sexually assaulted another woman while performing a healing ritual…”
Anyone in whom this story didn’t evoke memories of Der Schlickmeister debauching Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Orifice wasn’t cognizant in the late 1980’s.
Finally, we’ll call it a week with the Food Section, courtesy today of the U.K.’s Independent, and this just in from the country so many Liberals want America to emulate:
“Insects, blood and faeces may not sound particularly appetitising, but they are among the produce we should consider eating if we want our food to be sustainable and healthy, according to a team of chefs and scientists in Denmark…”
For once, we can, in good conscience, wish someone would eat sh*t and die!
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.