Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Trump Considering Palin For VA Secretary: Will This Make Liberals Crazy? YOU BETCHA!

GP ^ | November 30,2016 | Aleister 

ABC News has the story:

Sarah Palin Under Consideration for VA Secretary
Sarah Palin is under consideration for secretary of veterans affairs, a close Palin aide and a top Donald Trump transition official tell ABC News.
The Palin aide tells ABC News that in “recent days,” Palin told Trump transition officials: “I feel as though the megaphone I have been provided can be used in a productive and positive way to help those desperately in need.”

The VA is the largest government agency with over 300,000 federal employees and a budget of $182 billion for 2017.

Palin’s son-in-law, Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer, posted a SarahPAC video to his Facebook page earlier this week that heavily focuses on her work with veterans and her specific connection to the community. Her eldest son, Track, is a veteran who served in Iraq in 2008. The video, which is not new, seems to clearly show her interest in the position, and in the speech, she hits the VA “bureaucracy,” saying it is “killing our vets.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...

Fear the Voting Dead

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Daniel J. Sobieski 

President-elect Donald J. Trump has been mocked for his tweeted claim that if it were not for illegal aliens voting, he might very well have won the popular as well as the electoral vote. Is his claim less credible than the one put forth by some of Trump’s opponents that Russian hackers got into voting machines that aren’t even connected to the Internet to switch votes around?
Trump puts the number at several million. Certainly the number is higher than one, considering the loosening of voting restrictions in recent years, from motor voter laws to same-day registration to handing out drivers licenses to illegal aliens. It is in no way implausible to picture an illegal alien getting his driver’s license and then marching to the polls to vote against a candidate who opposes such actions by government,
I would argue that in this context the efforts by Democrats to fight voting integrity efforts such as Voter ID requirements and purging the rolls of dead voters is designed to rig the system, as Trump might say, in their favor. As Investors Business Daily noted in 2014, dead voters casting votes, illegal aliens voting, and people being registered to vote in multiple states is a common and documented occurrence:

The fact that many people will do anything to get out of jury duty has exposed massive fraudulent voting in Frederick County, Md., that may have been going on for years…The Virginia Voters Alliance (VVA) cross-checked jury duty forms with individual voting records and found that hundreds of voters in that one Maryland county cast votes after reporting they were noncitizens. One in seven Maryland residents are noncitizens, so extrapolating the number of possibly illegal votes cast in recent elections over the entire state hints at possible election-changing fraud.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

The Green Party has disowned Dr. Jill Stein

americanthinker.com ^ | 11/30/2016 | Ethel C. Fenig 

Chaos reigns in the liberal/left alt universe following its defeat in the presidential elections with members turning on each other. While Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein is pushing forward with her online begging to fund her presidential recount campaign, encouraged by losing Democratic candidate Hillary R. Clinton, rank and file Green Party members are voicing their opposition.

Dr. Margaret Flowers, Green Party candidate for Senate from Maryland, released a letter on her campaign site complaining about the misuse of time and funds in the Green Party's name, suggesting their efforts be redirected to more important party causes.The letter was signed by over 200 Green Party members, candidates and party officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

The delusional melodrama of Jill Stein

The Week ^ | 11/30/2016 | Edward Morrissey 


Most people couldn't wait for the grueling, nasty, seemingly interminable 2016 election to end. Jill Stein wants to keep it going. And she's willing to waste a lot of money, time, and attention to do so. Like a bad actor that insists on one last curtain call after the audience has headed for the exits, the Green Party nominee seems to stubbornly believe in her relevance even after the election demonstrated its non-existence beyond any doubt.

Stein's demand for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania demonstrates arrogance bordering on parody. Stein didn't lose the election so much as she disappeared in it. More than 134 million ballots have been counted so far. Stein received fewer than 1.5 million of them. That's barely a percentage point of the overall popular vote. Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson garnered more than 4 million votes, while the two major-party nominees scored between 62 and 65 million votes each.

Legally, any candidate has standing to request a recount — as long as they pay the costs. Politically and morally, however, Stein utterly lacks any standing to claim she has been harmed by ballot irregularities and counting errors. Proper standing — at least in political and commonsense contexts — would go to the person who might have otherwise won an election without such alleged irregularities.

That means the one candidate who might have a decent argument for recounts in places like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan is Hillary Clinton. (And indeed, Stein's recount demands are surely intended to help Clinton.) So why hasn't the Democrat who sustained a shocking loss in the party's famed "Blue Wall" states pushed for recounts herself? For one thing, Clinton has already conceded the race to Donald Trump, reportedly urged by President Barack Obama to do so.

The optics would also be terrible. Clinton spent the last weeks of the election hyperventilating, along with the media, about Trump's refusal to commit to accepting Election Night results. She called it "horrifying" and repeatedly hit Trump's lack of respect for the electoral system. To suddenly demand recounts after those attacks would be a hypocrisy that might be beyond the reach of any politician.

Beyond that, though, there are many thousands of reasons not to demand a recount. Specifically, there are 10,700 reasons in Michigan, 22,000 in Wisconsin, and 68,000 in Pennsylvania. Those are the votes that Clinton would have to make up in a recount to change the outcome in each state, and she'd need to succeed in all three of those states to change the Electoral College outcome. No recount has ever produced a vote change of that magnitude; no recount has even come close to it. FiveThirtyEight's Carl Bialik, working off of data from FairVote, noted that only three of 27 statewide recounts since 2000 have succeeded in changing the outcome of an election — and only when the original totals were much closer than any of those seen in the 2016 race.

"The mean swing between the top two candidates in the 27 recounts was 282 votes, with a median of 219," Bialik explains. "The biggest swing came in Florida's 2000 presidential election recount, when Al Gore cut 1,247 votes off George W. Bush's lead, ultimately not enough to flip the state to his column."

What about the recounts that have succeeded? Well, I had a ringside seat for one in Minnesota, when Al Franken turned an Election Night defeat into a U.S. Senate seat seven months later. The recount turned into the most bruising, partisan, and contentious political fight the state had ever seen. After several months of recounting, ballot challenges, and numerous court appearances, the change in the gap between Franken and incumbent Norm Coleman was 527 votes — a miniscule amount of the 2.6 million votes cast. It was just enough to erase Coleman's 215-vote lead after the state-certified canvassing a week after the election and give Franken a 312-vote win in its place.

Stein continues to insist that she wants to pursue the recounts to demand change in voting infrastructure. But her recounts, like those 27 that have preceded them since 2000, would likely make the opposite point — that our vote-counting infrastructure actually gets accurate and reliable results. Even the Florida debacle in 2000 changed the results by 0.022 percent, just about the same percentage as in 2008's Minnesota recount. It would take 10 times that kind of scale to flip Michigan, and 30 times that scale to flip Wisconsin. Stein's recount demands envision vote swings on a patently ridiculous scale.

Small wonder that even Democrats like Joe Trippi have openly scorned Stein's effort. "It's a waste of time and effort," the Democratic strategist said. "I think it probably was the Stein people looking for a way to stay relevant, raise some money, and take the stink off of them" — a reference to accusations that Stein played a spoiler role in diverting enough Clinton votes in these states to give Trump the victory. Bob Shrum, another Democratic eminence grise, put it more bluntly — that there was "no chance" for these recounts to succeed.

Ballot integrity and voting infrastructure aren't the reason for Stein's stunts. Neither is the election outcome. Stein just wants to keep imposing herself on the national stage, eating up time and resources from state governments in order to raise money from suckers unhappy with Trump's victory and feed her own delusions of relevance. Shame on her, and shame on those egging her on.

Hillary's recount scheme exposes media double standard

Fox News ^ | 11/29/16 | Sean Hannity (opinion) 

Hillary Clinton's campaign is supporting recount efforts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that are led by Green Party candidate Jill Stein.
This is insanity. It's all about trying to undermine a democratic election, and of course, Donald Trump's decisive victory. The idea for challenging election results appears to come from a conspiracy theory that the alt-radical left is now pushing. They're claiming that voting machines in those states were hacked, and maybe by the Russians!
It wasn't that long ago that Hillary Clinton was slamming Donald Trump for saying at the third debate that he would wait until after the election to decide if he accepted the results. Remember how angry she was?
“That is not the way our democracy works,” she said on Oct. 19. “We've been around for 240 years. We've had free and fair elections. We've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them, and that is what must be expected of anyone standing on a debate stage during a general election.”
A few days later, Clinton said it was “really painful to see” Trump refusing to pledge ahead of time to accept results. Then, she said Trump “had said something truly horrifying,” and that the statement was aimed at his “final target, our democracy itself.”
During her concession speech, Hillary Clinton said that the country should accept the results and support President-elect Trump. Let's take a look.
“We must accept this result and then look to the future,” she said a day after losing. “Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead. Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power, and we don't just respect that, we cherish it.”
.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

Loretta uncovered!



Go Fuck Yourself, Whitey!

Soros, Democracy Alliance, Dark Money, and Violence

The New American ^ | 29 November 2016 | William F. Jasper 

In the days and weeks since Donald Trump’s historic upset victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Big Money establishment globalists have been in hyper-drive, colluding and scheming to launch a multi-pronged effort to undo the election. Their plan involves multiple operations providing simultaneous “pressure from above and below,” utilizing legal challenges, petitions, media campaigns, and “direct action” street violence.
On November 22, two weeks after Donald Trump was declared to have been elected the 45th president of the United States, the Open Society Foundations (OSF) revealed one of its new political initiatives: funding a $10 million program to “confront hate” in the new Trump era. The OSF, of course, is one of the main conduits through which hedge fund billionaire George Soros, for decades, has been funneling his rivers of dark money to rent-a-mob rioters in dozens of countries.
In announcing its new effort to condemn “hateful words and deeds,” the Soros “philanthropy” did not direct any of its condemnation toward the #NotMyPresident rioters, who had just wound up a prolonged campaign of violence and mayhem that included attacking police, burning buildings, smashing cars and windows, defacing public property and monuments, beating opponents and bystanders, threatening to kill the president-elect, and urging rape of First Lady-elect Melania Trump.
No, those actual, documented “hateful words and deeds,” carried out by anti-Trump/pro-Clinton partisans, are not the concern of Soros and his huge funding network. Instead, the santimonious philanthropists are targeting the alleged hateful words and deeds of Trump supporters compiled by the thoroughly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, a vicious smear bund that poses as an impartial defender of American values while promoting a radical anti-American, anti-Christian agenda.
“In response to the national wave of hate incidents, the threat of forcible removal of undocumented immigrants, and the fear pervading communities across the country, the Open Society Foundations today announced a $10 million initiative to support and protect those targeted by hateful acts,” the OSF press releasestated. The OSF statement continues:

Harsh rhetoric and policy proposals during the 2016 presidential campaign that drew on racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-LGBTI, and other forms of hate have encouraged a wave of physical and verbal attacks nationwide. The Southern Poverty Law Center has received over 700 reports of “hateful harassment and intimidation” since November 8.

The Open Society Foundations initiative is an effort to move swiftly to address this urgent problem, providing support designed to encourage and empower communities to resist the spread of hate and strengthen services and protections for their most vulnerable neighbors.

“We stand in solidarity with the tens of millions of Americans of all political preferences who condemn these hateful words and deeds and embrace inclusion, tolerance, and hope,” the Soros operation declares. “We applaud the many communities, organizations, advocates, and concerned families who are rising to meet this challenge, and invite others in the philanthropic community to join this fight to reaffirm core American values.”
“Top-down and Bottom-up” — Pressure from Above and Below
“Through this initiative, a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches, we join with the millions of Americans around the country who disavow hateful rhetoric and acts,” Christopher Stone, president of the Open Society Foundations, stated in the OSF press release.
Stone’s endorsement of a “combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches” is an important restatement of the long-used strategy of the funding elites (think Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, and Gates foundations) for coordinated action between the suites and the streets, between the corporatist one-worlders and their faux “grassroots” controlled opposition. And that coordinated action has ever been utilized by these globalist forces with the object of undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances, eroding our national sovereignty, and (eventually) submerging the United States under an all-powerful world government.
The Stone/Soros/OSF statement should be viewed as a bow to one of the seminal essays outlining the globalist agenda, entitled “The Hard Road to World Order,” which appeared in the April 1974 issue of Foreign Affairs, the official house organ of the organized one-worlders at the Council on Foreign Relations, or CFR. Time magazine once called Foreign Affairs “the most influential periodical in print.” It can be viewed as the vehicle by which the intellectual upper tier of the globalist elite deliver the Party Line to the Party faithful.
Written by CFR member Richard Gardner, “The Hard Road to World Order” recognized that, despite the massive efforts of the organized internationalists (Gardner included) since World War II, “instant world government” had still eluded them. He acknowledged the hard truth that popular resistance to the goal of a global superstate — the globalists’ vaunted New World Order — necessitated a long-term, gradualist approach. He wrote:

In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “booming, buzzing confusion,” to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

Much of the social chaos we see happening around us does indeed “look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’” as Gardner said, but there are globalist hands behind the activist bands agitating in the streets. The Astroturf “bottom up” efforts of the Left invariably are  directed from the top down. And the top-down directions invariably flow through CFR Central, which some critics have aptly dubbed the “Imperial Brain Trust.”
The street mobilizers from MoveOn.org and #BlackLivesMatter are some of the most notable Soros-funded chaos agents. George Soros is a leading member and funder of the Council on Foreign Relations. His son, Jonathan Soros, is also a member, as are key individuals who are (or have been) operatives in OSF and other Soros-funded activist organizations. Aryeh Neier, who served as president of the Open Society Foundations for nearly a decade, from its founding in 1993 to 2012, is also a CFR member. (Incidentally, and worthy of note, Neier was one of the ‘60s radicals who founded the violent Students for a Democratic Society, SDS. He subsequently went on to lead the ACLU, which, like the SDS, invokes “democracy” while doing everything possible to undermine our constitutional republic.) Which brings us to the Democracy Alliance, another major Soros operation, run by CFR member Gara LeMarche. Like Aryeh Neier, LeMarche was also a professional rabble rouser/revolutionary for the ACLU before being promoted to director of U.S. programs for the Open Society Foundations. He then got bumped up to CEO of the Atlantic Philanthropies, where he oversaw the foundation’s grantmaking avalanche of funds to “social justice” activists.
Democracy Alliance Billionaires Huddle Against Trump
George Soros and his fellow deep-pocket funders of the Democratic Party and left-wing causes wasted no time after the election to plan their counteroffensives. The millionaires and billionaires of the Democracy Alliance gathered with a lineup of party activists and luminaries from Hollywood and Wall Street for a three-day “investment conference” (November 15-17) at the luxurious Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C., which ran under the headline, “2016-2018-2020: Seizing Opportunity & Building Power.”
The agenda for the closed meeting described President-elect Trump’s 100-Day Plan as “a terrifying assault on President Obama’s achievements — and our progressive vision for an equitable and just nation.” Speakers, presenters, and panelists at the Democracy Alliance (DA) soiree included such standard fixtures of the establishment Left as Gara LaMarche, Van Jones, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Rep. Keith Ellison, as well as leaders of the AFL-CIO, SEIU, AFSME, and other labor unions. But the A-List of attendees, around 100 DA “Partners,” are those that can write the big checks, and have been known for giving millions to fund radical “progressive” causes. Although a complete list of this year’s attendees has not been made available, the DA Partners includes such financial heavyweights as Donald Sussman, Herb and Marian Sandler, Tom Steyer, Norman Lear, Rob McKay, Amy Goldman, Philip Munger, Adam Abram — and, of course, the Soros family (George and sons Jonathan and Alex). Not surprisingly, a number of the activist foundations were also listed on the DA agenda as “hosts”: Rockefeller Family Fund, Surdna Foundation, Solidago Foundation, Tides Foundation, JK Irwin Foundation, Arca Foundation, and Wyss Foundation.
Between the time of its founding in 2005 and the 2014 election cycle, Democracy Alliance reportedly had funneled $500 million into “progressive” Left-wing organizations. (The Capital Research Center and DiscoverTheNetworks.org have produced extensive reports on the DA’s donors and the group’s funding activities.) The highly secretive Democracy Alliance serves as a “pass through” conduit that allows high-end donors to contribute anonymously to a variety of leftist causes — in addition to what these same donors give directly to political campaigns. In the latest election cycle, the DA Partners comprise not only an important subset of Hillary Clinton’s prominent donors, but also key funders of virtually every port-side political activist contingent concerning hot-button issues from abortion, gun control, and global warming to LBGTQ rights, Muslim refugee resettlement, and amnesty for illegal aliens. The DA’s intertwining relationships with the Surdna Foundation, Tides Foundation, EMILY’s List, and other “pass through” groups allows the DA funders additional opportunities to double-launder their dark money contributions.
A spokesman for Soros has denied that the magnate’s Open Society Foundations have funded the #NotMyPresident protests and riots. “George Soros is not funding these (anti Trump) protests,” Soros spokesperson Michael Vachon said in an interview with Value Walk. “This is a fiction promoted by the alt-right.” Of course, Soros also denied funding the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement. But, financial records showed that he had provided millions of dollar to the Tides Foundation, which had then passed through funding to the OWS activists. He has also been a major funder of MoveOn.org and #BlackLivesMatter, two of the organizations fielding cadres for #NotMyPresident mayhem.
The $10 million initiative mentioned above that the OSF claims is going to “confront hate” is not a large amount compared to the billions of dollars that Soros and his DA Partners have lavished on the perpetual protesters and malcontents of the Left, but it is serious seed money that is, undoubtedly being matched many times over through ther ubiquitous funding founts that oil the activist machine. And it is likely safe to assume that much of it will work its way into coffers that will be bankrolling the organizing and transporting of the rent-a-mob rioters who will be materializing in Washington, D.C., and in cities nationwide, to disrupt the Trump inauguration.
“We will begin soliciting applications via our website next week, and plan to make funding decisions on an expedited basis, directing grants to organizations that are well positioned to provide support, services, technical assistance, outreach, and public education in the face of acts of hate,” declares the November 22 OSF press release.
The acts of hate carried out in recent post-election riots may have been only a foretaste of what is to come. The same forces responsible for that havoc are calling for even larger “protests” on Inauguration Day. The funders of this chaos must be held accountable. Only a few days before the Democracy Alliance convention, the Internal Revenue Service denied non-profit status to Tea Party groups, after stringing them along, tying them up in expensive court fights, and delaying a decision for nearly seven years. Meanwhile, the IRS looks the other way as non-profits such as Democracy Alliance and tax-exempt foundations such as Soros’ fraudulent Open Society network sluice their dark money to armies of Marxist misfits. Putting an end to this tax-exempt tide of corruption and subversion should be a top priority of President-elect Trump — if the "top-down and bottom-up" co-conspirators do not prevent him from taking office.

Related articles:
Trump "Protests" Manufactured by Leftist Elites and Manned by Professional Protesters
Hacked Documents: Soros Funded Black Lives Matter
IRS Denies Tea Party Groups Tax Exempt Status After Lengthy Wait
Soros Spends Millions to Unseat Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Globalists Admit Trump Election Is Serious Challenge
Vote Fraud Monitoring Group Says Three Million Noncitizens Voted in Presidential Election
Trump vs. the Establishment
Bilderberg Elites: Stop Trump, Boost Hillary; Stop Brexit, Boost Migration

CNN host suggests Americans wear hijabs to show solidarity with fearful Muslims (PUKE)

Washington Times ^ | 11/29/16 | Douglas Ernst 

A CNN host used a segment on Islamophobia on Monday to suggest American non-Muslims may want to start wearing hijabs.

“New Day” with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota featured a piece titled “The Trump transition: Fearful Muslim women take steps to be safe” just hours before Abdul Razak Ali Artan, 20, attempted to use a vehicle and a butcher knife to kill Ohio State University students. The ill-timed story ended with Ms. Camerota discussing ways to ease the fears of Muslim Americans.

“Maybe there will be a movement where people wear the head scarf in solidarity. You know, even if you’re not Muslim,” Ms. Camerota said, The Daily Caller reported Tuesday. “Maybe it’s the way people shave their heads, you know, sometimes in solidarity with somebody who is going through something.”

Mr. Cuomo took a breath and responded, “I think self-defense training is good for everyone.”
“Yes, I know you’re a big proponent of that,” Ms. Camerota replied.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...

Justin Trudeau: Baby-Faced Commie Apologist Unmasked

Townhall.com ^ | November 30, 2016 | Michelle Malkin 


Wasn't one vapid pretty boy named Justin from Canada enough?
At least Justin Bieber is eye candy without the heartburn. Justin Trudeau, on the other hand, is the twinkly-eyed boy toy who makes informed adults wanna hurl.
For more than a year, the liberal Canadian prime minister enjoyed drool-stained global press coverage as the "hot hipster" and "dreamy sex symbol" with great hair and a tribal Haida tattoo. He basked in Ryan Gosling-esque memes about his commitment to feminism and touched off "Trudeau-mania" with a series of shirtless selfies and photobombs.
But this weekend, the sane world saw the baby-faced Commie apologist for the naked twit he truly is.
Mourning the death of repressive dictator Fidel Castro, Trudeau hailed his longtime family friend as a "larger than life leader" who "served his people for almost half a century." Actually, El Comandante ruled with an iron fist and firing squads -- serving himself to all of the island's land, private businesses and media, along with his own private yacht, private island, 20 homes, fleet of Mercedes limos and bevy of mistresses.
Trudeau's ridiculous mash note to the "legendary revolutionary and orator" caused the social media backlash of the year. The hashtag #TrudeauEulogies erupted to mock Trudeau's soft-soaping of tyranny.
"As we mourn Emperor Caligula, let us always remember his steadfast devotion to Senate reform," one Twitter user jibed in Trudeau-speak. "Although flawed Hitler was a vegetarian who loved animals, was a contributor to the arts & proud advocate for Germany," another joked. "Kim Jong Il will always be remembered fondly for his leadership and contributions on climate change," another chimed in.
Stung, the Canadian tundra hunk's office announced Monday that he will not attend services for his beloved Uncle Fidel, who had served as a pallbearer at his former Canadian PM father's funeral. But if Trudeau thinks the damage to his celebrity brand is temporary, he has another think coming.
Our neighbors to the north are now discovering what disillusioned Barack Obama worshipers realized too late: Beneath the shiny packaging of supermodel progressivism lies the same old decrepit culture of corruption.
Political watchdogs have been buzzing about Trudeau's shady fundraising ties to Chinese communist moguls. Like Obama, Trudeau promised unprecedented transparency in government -- "sunny ways" that would shed open light on how the Liberal Party was conducting the people's business. Dudley Do-Right's party declared there would be "no preferential access, or appearance of preferential access" in exchange for campaign cash and purported to ban favor-seekers with direct business before the government from attending political fundraisers.
Behind closed doors, however, Trudeau was selling out to wealthy Chinese-Canadians and Chinese nationals seeking government green lights for their business deals. According to his conservative critics, Trudeau and the Liberal Party have held 80 such cash-for-access fundraisers crawling with lobbyists and access traders over the past year.
The Globe and Mail newspaper revealed last week that Trudeau and his Liberal Party fundraisers had secretly organized one tony $1,500-per-head private residential gala in May attended by Chinese billionaires and bankers gunning for federal approval of projects. Echoing the operations of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play money machine, the nonprofit Trudeau Foundation and the University of Montreal raked in $1 million from a wealthy Chinese businessman a few weeks after the fundraiser. The donation includes funding for a statue of Pierre Trudeau, who once wrote a book hailing Chairman Mao.
The self-aggrandizing Commie fanboy apple doesn't fall far from his cultural Marxist tree.

Why the Democrats Can't Stop Calling the GOP Racists

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Karin McQuillan 


President Obama, Democrat politicians and the mainstream media are still calling Trump KKK.  They’re tarring his team as anti-Semites and racists.  The electoral map would stop any normal politicians in their tracks, but Democrat hate speech is only getting louder and more hysterical.  A major course correction is not going to happen for three reasons:

1. Democrat leadership;



2. Democrat donors;

3.  Democrat voting blocks.

There is no force in the party that wants to change.

Democrats don’t debate Trump on the issues, because their agenda is a turn-off.  Under the leadership of Alinskyite Barack Obama, the Democratic Party has degenerated from liberalism to progressivism.  It has not been pretty.   A focus on preferential treatment for blacks has given way to a war on cops.  Caring about Hispanic Americans suddenly means America shouldn’t have borders and should have sanctuary for rapists and killers -- as long as they are here illegally.

Browbeating college kids by empowerring feminists and black activists with Title IX money has turned college campuses against freedom of thought and speech.  Women’s issues have bizarrely turned into a war on masculinity.  Gay rights has morphed into men in women’s bathrooms.  Pro-choice turned into third-trimester infanticide and lawsuits against the Little Sisters of the Poor.  Physical violence against Republicans is encouraged by President Obama and Clinton under the euphemism ‘protest.’

Democrat progressive politics is weird and ugly and dangerous, and people across the country have recoiled from it.  As Marc Thiessen says with his usual eloquence, “You can drive some 3,000 miles across the entire continental United States — from sea to shining sea — without driving through a single county that voted for Hillary Clinton.”
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Mr. Trump: Put New Media in the White House Press Room!

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Henry Percy 

While approximately 750 reporters hold White House credentials, the briefing room holds 49 seats, and they are occupied overwhelmingly by mainstream media reporters, with barely any assigned to the new dot-com world.”

The TV networks are in front, behind them roost NYT, WaPo, NPR, and so on. “The White House press secretary used to decide who got what seats, but this authority was given to the White House Correspondents Association in the middle of the George W. Bush administration.”

It is always astonishing to discover a new instance of the fecklessness of Bush 43. By granting that power to the White House Correspondents Association, he must have been requited with their undying gratitude, yes? One is reminded of something erroneously attributed to Albert Einstein: “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.” Oops, that is way harsh. Consider it deleted.


President-elect Trump, if your’re reading this, here’s an idea to help with your swamp reclamation project: Decertify a number of the fossil organizations ensconced in their named chairs and replace with dot-coms. I would nominate American ThinkerMark Steyn, and Fred on Everything for starters. Then assign seats once a month through a lottery. The weeping and gnashing of teeth would be audible here in flyover country—how sweet the sound.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Even in Death, Castro Still has 'Useful Idiots'

Townhall.com ^ | November 30, 2016 | Jonah Goldberg 

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.
One can only imagine what George Orwell could do with that one word, "serving." Castro did not serve; he ruled a nation of servants, often cruelly, while making obscene profits for himself and his family.
"Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century," Trudeau continued, repeating that word. "While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro's supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for 'el Comandante.'"
Again, where is Orwell's red pen?
"El Comandante": The term drips with affection, doesn't it? Castro's "detractors"? Would those be the families of the thousands he had executed? The survivors of Castro's Caribbean gulag? Those who didn't drown trying to escape?
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.
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 (10 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."
But among serious leftists, Castro's radical chic is secondary. For them, Fidel's revolution provided the slender hope that America was on the wrong side of history. It was a symbol of resistance -- intellectual, political and spiritual -- to Western yanqui hegemony. They loved Cuba for many of the reasons they hate Israel (despite its exemplary literacy rate and universal health care system). They think -- wrongly -- that Israel is an extension of Western colonialism while Cuba was a rejection of it.
Castro understood this better than anyone, which is why he was able to "serve" his people for so long.

Coverage

I1JP7ic.png

The Party

WRe7c1V.jpg

SAFE?

8jFVEOD.jpg

Trophy

Y9I3uX7.jpg

Never too big!

0UvhdJs.jpg

AFRAID

Relax-guys-600-LA.jpg

Voter Fraud

OQrTryv.jpg

Priceless!

lKnASMq.jpg

The Electorial College

SFG3Gsv.jpg

You're Fired

qliDIbU.jpg

Lingering Smell

Fidel-Castro-dies.png