It’s Monday, April 2nd, 2018,…but before we begin, the idiocy indicated by our Quote of the Day above actually began gripping Great Britain some time ago, as the featured photo was taken at a march back in late 2014.
But this quote by Robert Gehl from the article linked above at DownTrend.com emphasizes the parallels which prevail across the pond:
“When liberals talk about making the United States more like Europe, this insanity is precisely what they’re talking about.“
It’s the same brand of P.C.-induced derangement which allowed this Muslim Miss to feel justified in complaining the only thing wrong with her adopted country…
…was its overabundance of native inhabitants. Can it really be lost on this benighted Bedouin a continued influx of her fellow Islamists would simply turn Finland into a third-world sh*thole identical to that which she fled in the first place?!?
Wake up and smell the inevitable result of open borders, America.
By the way, we’re about to find out how serious The Donald really is about halting the flow of illegal immigrants into our country:
If there was ever an argument decisively demonstrating why we need The Wall, THIS, quite literally, is it!!!
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, writing at NRO, Jonah Goldberg offers an astute observation regarding John Paul Stevens Ode Against the 2nd Amendment, suggesting…
“…Let me say it up front: I don’t think we should repeal the Second Amendment. But I applaud retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens for arguing that we should.
…I applaud Stevens’ essay for several reasons, but chiefly because it is honest. Gun-control proponents often say they favor “reasonable” or “commonsense” measures. And sometimes that’s true. (Though we would maintain the vast majority of the time it’s not.)But gun-rights proponents have a reasonable and commonsense suspicion that the real goal is to do away with most or all gun rights.
…Stevens’s argument cuts through all of the fictions and double-talk…
…and says plainly what millions of Americans and lots of politicians and journalists truly believe: Law-abiding citizens shouldn’t be able to buy guns easily, or at all,if it makes it easier or even possible for non-law-abiding citizens to get their hands on them. (?!?)
But there’s another reason why I applaud Stevens’s position. He seeks to change the meaning of the Constitution the way the founders intended: through the amendment process.
…Now, I should say that trying to repeal the Second Amendment would be politically disastrous for Democrats, at least in the short run, for the simple reason that gun rights are popular, particularly in red states. But that’s been true of other issues.
Changing the Constitution is supposed to be hard. The process gives the changes legitimacy and forces advocates to hone their arguments and persuade their fellow citizens. Difficulty is a feature, not a bug.
Of course it would be easier to just convince five unelected and unaccountable justices on the Supreme Court to negate the text and do what you want.But that’s not the system we have, nor the system anyone should want.“
Unless one is a Progressive totalitarian-in-sheep’s-clothing looking to subvert the Law of the Land through judicial fiat due to your inability via Constitutional means.
As Aaron Blake noted at The WaPo in his commentary appropriately entitled…
“…One of the biggest threats to the recovery of the Democratic Party these days is overreach. (Can you say, “Objecting to the census asking if you’re a citizen?!?)…But rarely do we see such an unhelpful, untimely and fanciful idea as the one put forward by retired Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens.
…Stevens calls for a repeal of the Second Amendment. The move might as well be considered an in-kind contribution to the National Rifle Association, to Republicans’ efforts to keep the House and Senate in 2018, and to President Trump’s 2020 reelection bid.In one fell swoop, Stevens has lent credence to the talking point that the left really just wants to get rid of gun ownership. (Note, he says “lent credence” to a pro-2nd Amendment “talking point”, not “confirmed The Left’s ultimate aim”!)
…This is exactly the kind of thing that motivates the right and signals to working-class swing voters that perhaps the Democratic Party and the political left doesn’t really get them…”
“Doesn’t really get them”? Try, “is out to get them”! Two thoughts come to mind: first, are 2nd Amendment supporters paranoid about Progressive plans when The Left’s truly out to get their guns? Second, what does it say about one’s position or argument when honesty about it is harmful?!?
But hey, as Liberals are so fond of saying, if they can save just one life,…right?!? Unfortunately, as this next item…and the fate of Kate Steinle…
…detail, Progressives have rather perverse priorities when it comes to deciding which lives are worth saving, as BuzzFeed reports:
“…The Bosworth memo, which stresses the extent to which Facebook was built on “growth tactics,” reads as a statement of corporate principles, including phrases like “what we do” and “what we believe” and speaking of “our work” and “our imperative.” In the memo, he argued that Facebook believes its mission of connecting people is so important that anything it does in support of it is “*de facto* good” — even if it allows some to do true, even catastrophic, harm to others.
“The ugly truth is that we believe in connecting people so deeply that anything that allows us to connect more people more often is *de facto* good. It is perhaps the only area where the metrics do tell the true story as far as we are concerned,” he wrote. “That isn’t something we are doing for ourselves. Or for our stock price (ha!). It is literally just what we do. We connect people.Period.”
“So we connect more people,” he wrote in another section of the memo. “That can be bad if they make it negative. Maybe it costs someone a life by exposing someone to bullies. “Maybe someone dies in a terrorist attack coordinated on our tools.”
The explosive internal memo is titled “The Ugly,” and has not been previously circulated outside the Silicon Valley social media giant.
The Bosworth memo reveals the extent to which Facebook’s leadership understood the physical and social risks the platform’s products carried — even as the company downplayed those risks in public. It suggests that senior executives had deep qualms about conduct that they are now seeking to defend.And as the company reels amid a scandal over improper outside data collection on its users, the memo shows that one senior executive — one of Zuckerberg’s longest-serving deputies — prioritized all-encompassing growth over all else, a view that has led to questionable data collection and manipulative treatment of its users…”
So much for worrying about saving lives, whether it be just one or a multitude. Further proof when it comes to Progressives, their ends always justify their means; and if they can enrich themselves in the process…
…all the better.
Speaking of power/profit hungry Progressives, in the Health Section, Michelle Malkin informs on the informers, as she details…
“…Parents who decide, for whatever reason, that they don’t like their children’s oral-care provider should be forewarned. Empowered by government “mandatory reporter” laws, dental offices are now using their authority to threaten families with child-abuse charges if they don’t comply with the cavity police.
Mom Trey Hoyumpa shared a letter last week on Facebook from a dental office called Smiles 4 Keeps in Bartonsville, Pa. It informed her that if she did not make a dental appointment for “regular professional cleanings” for her child, she could be charged with “dental neglect.” Citing a law called “Pennsylvania Act 31,” on child-abuse recognition and reporting, the dental office threatened to report the mom to state authorities if she did not schedule an appointment.
…This is a menacing threat to have hanging over customers of dental practices, or any medical providers for that matter: If you leave, you better tell us where you are going or we could report you to government child-welfare agencies for suspected abuse.
One Twitter, commenter wondered: “Is this fake?” Unfortunately, it’s all too real, and the dental office is championing an intrusive practice that is likely to spread.
Smiles 4 Keeps replied to parental criticism on Facebook by quoting the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry definition of “dental neglect” as the “willful failure of parent or guardian to seek and follow through with treatment necessary to ensure a level of oral health essential for adequate function and freedom from pain and infection.” The dental office also defended its intimidation letter to the mom by explaining that physicians and dentists are “mandated reporters” who are “required to report suspected cases of abuse and neglect to social service or law enforcement agencies in order to prevent such tragedy.”
But as investigative reporter Terri LaPoint at MedicalKidnap.com points out, nowhere has Smiles 4 Keeps provided any evidence that Trey Hoyumpa was neglectful or abusive in any way. Moreover, Smiles 4 Keeps insists that parents provide the name of a new dentist if the family chooses to find a new provider. Hoyumpa was just one of 17 recipients of the threatening Smiles 4 Keeps salvos.
Dr. Ross Wezmar of Smiles 4 Keeps actually boasted to local news station WNEP about the snitch letters’ ability “to jar the parent to realize that with a child comes responsibility.” Benevolent Dr. Marcus Welby he is not. Wezmar claimed his bully notes are the first in the nation to be dispatched. With the encroachment of socialized medicine in America, they certainly won’t be the last…”
Without approving, let alone advocating any violence towards Dr. Wezmar, we hope before his ultimate demise someone gives him a taste of his own medicine…er,…dentistry. After all, it’s not like dentists…
FYI, we researched any number of articles on this subject via the web, including items from History.com and the Polynesian Resource Center, neither considered bastions of Conservatism; and nowhere, except in a link to Kristof’s Fake History, could we find corroboration of his claims.
What a surprise.
Which brings us to The Lighter Side:
Finally, we’ll call it a day with another sordid story straight from the pages of The Crime Blotter, and a truly distressing tale made all the more sorrowful by the authorities’ continued refusal to call it what it is:
“The speedometer of a Washington state family’s SUV was “pinned” at 90 mph when the vehicle was found Monday afternoon, crushed along the rocks of a Northern California shoreline, court documents say.
Authorities included the information in an affidavit for a search warrant for the home of Jennifer and Sarah Hart, adoptive parents of six children — all of whom are believed to have perished when the vehicle plunged off the Pacific Coast Highway, Fox 12 Oregon reported.
…Meanwhile, law enforcement officers believe “a felony has been committed” in the case, the court documents say. The exact nature of the suspected felony was not known, but according to the documents, “Based upon the California Highway Patrol investigation, it is their belief ‘a felony has been committed,’” Fox 12 Oregon reported. However, authorities maintain there’s no evidence to suggest the crash was intentional, the Oregonian reported.
However,…
…According to accounts of the family’s neighbors in Washington state, one child had shown up at a neighbor’s doorstep alleging abuse while another had asked neighbors for food because it was supposedly being withheld as punishment.
Another child reportedly told police that Sarah Hart had hit her repeatedly with a closed fist and put her in a cold bath.According to the Oregonian, Hart pleaded guilty to the abuse in April 2011 and was sentenced to a year of probation.In another July 2013 incident, authorities responded to a call at the family’s residence.
Days before the fatal crash, the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services opened a case into the family because the children had been identified as “potential victims of alleged abuse or neglect,” the Oregonian reported.The agency had attempted to contact the family but they had reportedly left home that day.“
Yet “authorities maintain there’s no evidence to suggest the crash was intentional“. Holy murder-suicide, Batman! Are these the same “authorities” who managed to miss the clear and present danger presented by the mass killers in Parkland and Orlando, FL, Sutherland Springs, TX and San Bernardino, CA (just to name a few)?
Howon earth was a woman who pleaded guilty to child abuse allowed to maintain custody of six adopted children?!?
We’re gonna go out on a limb here and suggest it was primarily due to Mrs. & Mrs. Hart being lesbians, and thus a protected class under Progressive policies. Which makes it all the more heart-wrenching to realize six more young lives were sacrificed on the altar of Political Correctness…and this immediately upon the heels of the seventeen at Majorie Stoneman Douglas High.
Sleep well, Progressive Princes and Princesses!
Magoo
P.S. If you haven’t already viewed it, please visit the Archives section at the top of the page to see our special Easter Sunday edition of The Gouge.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.