Monday, August 28, 2017

Tourette Liberal Syndrome

Flopping Aces ^ | 08-27-17 | DrJohn 


Tourette Syndrome is a neurological disorder with which many are familiar:
Tourette syndrome (TS or simply Tourette's) is a common neuropsychiatric disorder with onset in childhood,[4]characterized by multiple motor tics and at least one vocal (phonic) tic.
It has several subsets. The one that affects liberals - Tourette Liberalis- includes something known as coprolalia, which is defined as "the utterance of obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory remarks." Although this subset is generally regarded as small, it affects many, if not most, liberals.
There are certain trigger words that cause liberals to blurt out those inappropriate and derogatory remarks. The word that most commonly elicits completely irrational responses is "Trump." There are two divisions to the Liberal tic.
The first: say "Trump" to a liberal and he or she is likely to scream "Hitler!"
Patrice Cullors, one of the founder of Black Live Matter, suffers from Liberal Tourette's.
“We wouldn’t as a movement take a seat at the table with Trump because we wouldn’t have done that with Hitler. Trump is literally the epitome of evil, all the evils of this country, be it racism, capitalism, sexism, homophobia and he has set out the most dangerous policies not just that impacts this country but that impacts the globe,” Patrisse Cullors, one of BLM’s three co-founders, told the Los Angeles Times in a Friday interview.
So does Joy Reid of PMSNBC:
https://twitter.com/JoyAnnReid/status/901419475215450112?
It affects educators in California:
A classroom conversation about President Donald Trump’s inauguration took a very ugly turn when a California high school teacher drew a caricature of the president as Adolf Hitler.It happened Friday when an English teacher at Verdugo Hills High School drew a Hitler mustache on President Trump’s face.
Kira Goldenberg of The Guardian is a sufferer:
People aren’t wrong to point out that Trump certainly appears similar to Hitler in some ways. The rhetoric used by the Republican smacks of fascism, with healthy doses of isolationism and grandiosity. Trump’s rallies, which pen the media like livestock and brook no dissent, evoke less orderly Third Reich affairs. And his sloganeering, with its nostalgia for an idyllic past that never existed, fabricates a history that excludes the majority of actual people in actual America, with disconcerting echoes of an Aryan ideal. Even the substance of Trump’s speeches is as inscrutable as watching Hitler’s manic lectern screeching – and I actually speak English.
Never mind that Trump's daughter and son-in-law are Jewish.
The media suffers broadly from the disorder. You can see several examples here.
It will surprise no one to learn that HuffPoo has an fulminant version of the affliction:

Hitler embraced the notion of white supremacy and racism. He perfected the concept of social engineering which culminated in millions of Jews being slaughtered stemming from his demented belief in a so-called master race.

The societal seeds of white supremacy and racism utilized by Hitler have been reinvigorated by President Trump during his brief tenure as president. He has stoked the racial coals in creating a climate of hate that is so severe that war, here and abroad, is inevitable once those seeds come full bloom.
Secondly, if they don't blurt out "Hitler!" in response to the word "Trump" the other outburst will consist of "racist!" This one affects most liberals.
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net ...

What Democrats Want

 vanity via twitter ^ | 8/28/2017 |  by alancarp

John Kasich threw out a line during Meet The Press that apparently required a response from a leading Democrat:

Now I wasn't familiar with Ronald Klain, so here's his quickie self-bio (also from twitter).
Klain left off several things from their playbook, but due to the 140 character limit, I'll both give him some deference and help him out. Omitted were...
• Gun control... ultimately no guns in hands of citizenry and the elimination of the 2nd amendment.
• Unfettered immigration
• Right to vote for anyone... and a later tweet made it clear that he wants the Federal Government to confer those voting rights
• Single-payer healthcare, with government making the decisions of what is allowed (trans-surgeries, abortion) and what isn't (see Charlie Gard, Terri Shiavo).
• Implement Climate Change policies universally.
• Raising taxes to confiscatory levels for the Middle Class and higher to pay for everything noted above
• Reducing the size and power of the US Military
• Reducing support for Israel, essentially leaving them to their own devices. The path they were on under Obama would have included sanctions... until Iran gets their bomb together to make that a moot point.

I could go further... elimination of private property, devastation of personal rights to religion, speech, private property, etc... use of police to enforce these policies, decriminalization of drug offenses, and more. But that wouldn't be said in public anyway.

So that's the Democrat platform in 2017, for those interested - from a guy who's in a position to know. In short, there are vast economic arguments to be made against it: this is a job-killing plan for fundamentally changing the country as we know it.

Chicago had 14,000 more votes than voters in 2016 general election (the Democrat stronghold)

The American Thinker ^ | 8-28-17 | Thomas Lifson 

President Trump continues to receive scorn over his assertion last year that vote fraud accounted for Hillary Clinton’s raw vote majority. Democrats and their shills are unanimous in denouncing the “false claims” ~snip~ When the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity was announced, it was denounced as a waste, an attempt to intimidate minorities, and a scheme to violate privacy, which has caused states to refuse to release public data requested by the commission. Its investigator, J. Christian Adams, is being vilified. Even Republicans expressed reluctance to Politico over the investigation.

Senator Chuck Schumer bizarrely linked vote fraud to Charlottesville.
In the wake of the confrontation in Charlottesville, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called for President Trump to disband the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity on Aug. 24. In a Medium post, Schumer said the actions of the commission were “wolves in sheep’s clothing” and a “ruse” designed to “revive the old playbook and disenfranchise minority voters.”
They really, really don’t want anyone looking closely at vote fraud. They claim there is none of any significance. That must be why this report from Chicago City Wire has been so thoroughly ignored by the mainstream media:
More than 14,000 votes were cast in Chicago during the 2016 general election than there were voters to cast them, based on separate figures released by the Chicago Board of Elections, the chairman of the Chicago Republican Party has reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

‘Texan’ Defined: ‘I’m Gonna Try to Save Some Lives,’ Says Volunteer Rescuer

Breitbart Texas ^ | 08/27/2017 | Bob Price 

An unidentified reporter approached a man as he began putting his boat into the flooded river that yesterday was an interstate highway. The Independent Journal Review reports he asked the man, “You guys here to help out?” The man responded “Yessir!”

He then asked the man what he “is about to do.” The man responded, “I’m gonna go try to save some lives.” He then went on about his business of doing good for the flood victims in the Houston area.
It appears the reporter was not from Houston, as a Texan would likely have asked, “What are you fixin to do?”

In another video shown on Fox News, a Good Samaritan waded into a flooded roadway to rescue three people in distress.

Former Dallas Quarterback “Dandy Don” Merideth reportedly once said, “Never ask a man if he is from Texas. If he is, he’ll tell you. If he isn’t, don’t embarrass him.”

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

Alan Dershowitz Calls Antifa Out for ‘Trying to Tear Down America’

Real Clear Life ^ | August 27, 2017 | Ethan Sacks 

Noted liberal Alan Dershowitz is coming under fire from detractors on the left over his criticism of the extremism espoused by the Antifa movement.
The Harvard Law School professor emeritus, a vocal Hillary Clinton supporter during the presidential campaign, has called out the far-left movement’s role in the violence that unfolded in Charlottsville — though continuing his criticism of President Trump’s decision not to call out the KKK and Neo-Nazis.
“Look, we’re both a nation of immigrants and a nation of discrimination against immigrants. That’s an important history for us to remember. And the other important thing is do not glorify the violent people who are now tearing down the statues,” Dershowitz told Fox & Friends last week of the Antifa.
“Many of these people, not all of them, many of these people are trying to tear down America. A radical American, anti-free market communist, socialist, hard-left organization that tries to stop speakers on campuses from speaking. They use violence and just because they’re opposed to fascism and to some of these monuments shouldn’t make them heroes of the liberals.”
Dershowitz’s condemnation of extremists on both sides of the political spectrum — which was echoed in an op-ed he wrote for The Algemeiner last week — sparked some anger on social media. Some suggested it echoed too closely Trump’s “many sides” comments in the wake of Charlottsville....
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearlife.com ...

What I Learned Standing in Line at a Trump Rally

The Prescott eNews ^ | August 28, 2017 | Katie Cornelius 

Trump came to Arizona. I went to see him speak.

The President was in town; being a historian I've long had a desire to at least see every president I possibly can. Thus far, Gerald Ford and George W. Bush are the only two I've seen...and that was my impetus for getting tickets to see President Donald Trump.
Politics. Ohhhhhhh how I love politics. I'm an unabashed Rush baby who admittedly leans very Libertarian. Fiscally I'm conservative, when it comes to judges I favor strict constitutionalist like Antonin Scalia (who is one of the men I've admired most during my life.) I've always voted for the candidate I believed represented my views best; that said, my very first vote was cast for Democrat Jim Berryman for mayor of Adrian when I was 18.
Those who know me know I believe the best of people and bestow love easily; I care not what you believe in (politically or personally) or whether it conflicts with my beliefs. I love learning about people in general; I enjoy listening to all sides with the intent of educating myself. As an American we have the privilege of dissent; our Founding Fathers themselves were often only united in their desire to be free from England, and rarely in how this new nation was to be formed. Yes, the two party system and having opposite beliefs is (if you will) an American tradition.
Until the last 17 or so years.
W's election divided the country with hanging chads and the birth of the Internet...suddenly political opponents had a soapbox and a captive audience (whether they were worthy of one or not.) The rise of social media fueled this growing divide between the right and the left; with the election of Obama and more fervent mainstream media bias it became clear things had changed like never before. As a news junkie I saw the shift from carefully unbiased reporting to reporting with an agenda; journalists used to take pains to keep their opinion out of the facts. Personally, I came to read my US news only from UK sources; while still biased, it was easier to see and clear a British perspective than a right or left leaning one.
So as I matured and my political beliefs molded into something uniquely mine, I found myself adrift from both major political parties the last three presidential elections. I am staunchly pro-life as well as fiscally conservative, so more often than not due to those two points alone, I vote Republican. However, I truly do not believe the government should dictate our personal lives and habits, which is strongly Libertarian (although many may confuse that with being a Democrat.) I hate bureaucracy, find regulations often unnecessarily restrictive, and think the arts and humanities should receive public funding as well as scientific research....within reason, of course. Whose reasoning? Well, that's the million dollar question, isn't it? Who decides? Ultimately the final decision on such matters comes down to our Supreme Court. Having heard Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy speak once I was extremely impressed by both men, but moreso by Scalia. My love for our constitution is unabashed; in my youth I often fiddled with the idea of becoming a constitutional lawyer.
And ultimately, that's why I vote. I love our American system, and have to do my part.
This last presidential election I was in a quandary. My man, Ben Carson, was out in an early round. I could not vote for a party establishment candidate like Rubio or Cruz, having watched them put constituents feelings aside and voting strictly on good ol' boy political lines. Hillary was out of the question; when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke I remember clearly hearing Rush state she was offered a deal: stay and support Bill and the senatorship of New York would be hers, and then the presidency in 2008. I never forgot that, and watched in horror as that's exactly what took place (with the minor hiccup of an Obama presidency and a stint as Secretary of State while she waited her turn.)
So Trump? Absolutely not.
My association with the man goes back to 1981, when Prince Charles married Diana. Every People magazine she appeared on the cover since had been in my hands...and often also in those pages? Donald Trump.
Quite honestly, I thought he did Ivana dirty, having an affair with Marla Mapes. Marla's wedding with a tiara was a bit too preposterous; I wasn't sad to see that marriage end (although I did feel bad for Tiffany.) I only occasionally watched The Apprentice, and found my distaste for him solidified with his multiple bankruptcy's and third marriage to a woman 20-some years his junior. Naming his youngest Barron? Pretentious.
And suddenly he was the Republican candidate for president.
I didn't like what I heard he said, and how easily it was misconstrued. I certainly didn't like him as a man; I had a thirty year history of not caring for him and knew way too much about him. I also truly believed him to be a Democrat in sheeps clothing; he not only had financially supported Hillary in her senatorial runs, he was a close enough friend to invite Bill and Hillary to his wedding to Melania. He also flip-flopped on abortion.
Stripping away all the hype in the media, and my own reservations about his past I knew too well, I delved into the candidate on paper. I looked at the Supreme Court. I looked at Don, Jr., Ivanka, Eric and now-grown Tiffany. I studied Melania, who I knew little about.
What I found was three highly successful children, with good marriages who were raising young families. Tiffany seemed pretty well adjusted (I admit I liked her choice of a B1G school.) Yes, they were like their dad, Democrat-hybrid-Republicans, but "good people" if you will. Melania highly impressed me once I got past her former career; her marriage and motherhood seemed to have brought huge stability to a powerful man used to getting his own way. Being a good dad and having a seemingly successful third marriage was not enough for me to vote for him, but at least he no longer was the lost cause as the media reported.
Politically I found him to be very libertarian in ways I did identify with; his business deregulations I liked a lot. Americans needed jobs, and his plan provided for them. It still wasn't enough for me to vote for him, and I ended up deep in prayer as to how my vote should be cast. In the end, I voted for him for one reason: the Supreme Court.
The death of my beloved Antonin Scalia left a huge hole in the court; I longed for his replacement to be a constitutional justice, as he had been. Throughout our decades as a country, the one guide that keeps us as a nation is our Constitution. Trump promised just that: a constitutional justice like Scalia. The court is where everything I hold dear is upheld or defended; with the knowledge up to five justices could be appointed in the next eight years, I voted for Trump.
Not because I'm a racist, bigoted ideologue. Not because I like him, or things he says. But because I believed he'd replace Scalia with a man like him.
And he did.
I might have a schoolgirl crush Neil Gorsuch; his nomination and approval confirmed in my heart that I had voted for the right person for president. As a political junkie it's been almost impossible to wash the putrid bias against the president off the actual news; I've taken to reading transcripts to find out what he actually says.
And I'm finding I agree with it.
"Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America. Two days ago, a young American woman, Heather Heyer, was tragically killed. Her death fills us with grief and we send her family our thoughts, our prayers and our love.
We also mourn the two Virginia state troopers who died in service to their community, their commonwealth and their country. Troopers Jay Cullen and Berke Bates exemplify the very best of America and our hearts go out to their families, their friends and every member of American law enforcement.
These three fallen Americans embody the goodness and decency of our nation. In times such as these, America has always shown its true character. Responding to hate with love, division with unity and violence with an unwavering resolve for justice.
As a candidate I promised to restore law and order to our country and our federal law enforcement agencies are following through on that pledge. We will spare no resource in fighting so that every American child can grow up free from violence and fear.
We will defend and protect the sacred rights of all Americans, and we will work together so that every citizen in this blessed land is free to follow their dreams, in their hearts, and to express the love and joy in their souls.
Thank you. God bless you, and God bless America. Thank you very much."
If Obama had spoken these words, would they not have been called unifying? Or had Hillary issued this statement? Yet these came from President Trump, of whom I had voted for while plugging my nose. I agree with them, and find them to be eloquent and nonprovocative. More and more, as I read official transcripts and not the opinions of journalists, I see myself agreeing with the president...which is quite the surprise for me.
Not so for the Buckeye, who listened to his actual words all along; or for the millions of Americans who put him into office.
We waited a total of two hours in a line over 6 blocks long in triple digit heat with over 20,000 people. No one complained, no one tried to cut the line. Everyone was pleasant, despite the temperature.
We got in line yesterday at 5pm, and quickly struck up instant friendships with those around us. A millennial took note of the Buckeye's Desert Storm hat, and thanked him for his service. Their resulting half-hour discussion about that war was animated; with a few around us chiming in on the political side. Our group of about a dozen or so included every age (the youngest was 12, a boy and his dad) and at least four different races. All around us we saw people from every walk of life; the common talk was how we wanted to be Americans, united again. Those around us in line didn't care about your race or lifestyle. All they cared about was the ability to work, provide a living for themselves and their families, and have the right to belief what they wished without impunity. How do I know this? Because for two hours, we all talked. Shared. And had our souls restored. What we saw on television was true; hate had showed up in Charlottesville. Were we, those who supported our president, racist and bigoted?
There were three spots in which the line snaked directly in front of protestors. When we stood at this corner, the Buckeye was hit several times by a protestor holding a large pink sign. A man in our group asked them to stop. The protestor continued, and two more joined in, accusing the defending man of being a sell out. Another woman and I linked arms, and placed ourselves between the protestors and the men, our backs to the protestors. It was effective, and the shouts silenced for that moment as we waited for the light to change. Arm-in-arm, we chuckled as we crossed the street; how times had changed that two women could defend two men!
Do I need to describe the races of the man and the woman in my story above? How about the identities of the protestors and what they looked like? Shall I recount the racial slurs being slung by the protestors, and the accusations they hurled? Or the fact we, as a group, decided to sing "God Bless America" the next time we had to walk by protestors as our own form of protest?
Our two hour wait was actually fun for the most part; both the Buckeye and I enjoyed getting to know people. It was refreshing to meet so many different people from all walks of life who thought as we did: that we did want America to be great again.
Let me put that in plain-speak, not spun by protestor speak: we want ALL Americans to have jobs, and to live life to the best of their ability.
That's what we all had in common.
Not racism.
Not bigotry.
That old American dream: to live as we want to live. To have the opportunity to succeed, no matter what our race, religion, sexuality or beliefs.
Many say the president is opposed to all that. The media and the protestors want you to believe that.
If you read what he's actually said as president?
400 feet from the door, we had to turn one last corner. The protestors were thickest there, and we saw many ditch signs and join our line. The mood turned dark quickly, as I heard things uttered as threats, not protests. For the first time, my concern became one of safety. I noted an increased alertness in the Buckeye, and we pointed out to each other behavior we felt threatening. As it became clear we'd have to directly skirt the protest line, and a true bottleneck was forming, we decided to leave. Five seconds later we heard from a police officer that the doors had been shut; we kept our mouths closed as we weaved quickly back through the crowd. I've never felt such a feeling... The hate from the protestors earlier was nothing compared to this.
Evil.
This was no longer a protest. This was darkness intent on destruction.
Politics weren't the motive. Destruction was.
Within a block we were free from the worst of it; the Buckeye steered me to a light rail station two blocks further away. As we waited for the "crush-loaded" cars to arrive, I heard a pop that made me jump. It was the first tear gas canisters being released.
We had escaped the melee by but five minutes.
Members of our informal group arrived at the train platform; our hasty departure had caught their notice and they had followed. We all smiled and waved in recognition, not yet knowing what we had narrowly avoided. As the packed train headed north, the Buckeye and I agreed the night had been worth our time, even though we had missed seeing the president.
We had instead seen that many Americans simply love America. That they'll support a president they might not entirely agree with, but support because he's president (much as the left supported Obama and ignored things they wished he did differently.) Mostly we had seen what the media is NOT showing you--that "Trump supporters" are of all walks of life, and comprised of all races and backgrounds . The ones we met were like us-they wanted a good life for themselves, but not at the expense of others. How we all get there? I don't know. I do know that what I saw in protest was NOT the answer. There was no inclusivity or reasoning with that crowd. As we drove home from the train station we learned of the scuffle and tear gas usage; realizing our timing was humbling. We had been within minutes of its deployment at the very location it had been set off...and I support the fact it was used. What we felt there was not protest, not hatred. It was the intent to commit violence, to punish those who dared disagree. The fact no one was seriously injured or killed was because this measure was taken. The mood on that corner was not one to be taken lightly; I'm thankful swift action to stop it was brought about.
This morning I've had some honest discussions with liberal and conservative friends about politics; it prompted me to break my rule of "no politics" on Facebook by writing this blog. My friends, we must start to act, and not in protest! We can no longer look to the news or social media for what to believe-we need to look to each other. Start talking. Start sharing our beliefs, and why we believe them. Our Founding Fathers had many, many polar opposite beliefs and still found consensus to write our constitution. They fought over individual words and what they meant. Their first attempt at governance actually failed (the Articles of Confederation came BEFORE the Constitution) but PUTTING ASIDE DIFFERENCES they focused on what they all believed in: a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
We all believe in this: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, basically the desire to live freely as we chose. What those choices are we differ in widely, but the commonality is the same. We need to get back to the basics of talking to each other and listening to understanding opposing beliefs. For it is then we see how much we have in common, and can find ways to work together.
May God bless America, and may we find peace once again.

Conservatism Is Not A Suicide Pact

Townhall.com ^ | August 28, 2017 | Kurt Schlichter 


The whiny wailing and rending of garments (mostly bow ties) by the True Cons over President Trump pardoning Sheriff Joe Arpaio brings to mind another president’s choice when a loyal supporter was the victim of a liberal witch hunt. President Bush was an honorable man, but the way he allowed Scooter Libby and the Libby family to be ruined and impoverished over what everyone knew was a skeevy liberal political vendetta before issuing a partial commutation is to W’s lasting shame. His excuse: the Rule of Law or something.
But, as anyone willing to see knows, today the Rule of Law is a unicorn and it has been for a long time. I like the Rule of Law, and I’ve been warning for years about what happens when it goes away. Yet we are where we are, whether we like it or not. We’re in a land where the law is only intermittently and selectively applicable. Allowing allies to suffer in an effort to pretend that all is well is not going to bring the Rule of Law back. Nostalgia for the Rule of Law no excuse for tolerating an injustice to an ally. Hell, undoing injustices is what the pardon power is for.
What will bring the Rule of Law back? How do we get to the Conserva-Eden we are expected to act like we already reside it? Perhaps another statement of principle? Maybe another post on some unread conservajournal? I know – how about more complaining about how frustrated conservatives are uncouth and should just sit there and take whatever fascist garbage the left dishes out?
I always thought it was conservative to punish wrongdoers. The other side abandoned the Rule of Law, so I would think that they might – maybe – learn a lesson by experiencing the consequences of their bad choice. But apparently punishing wrongdoers is now off the table because some other principle, of which I was unaware during nearly four decades inside conservatism, requires we never ever retaliate.
You know, I’m not sure that’s a thing. And I have to say – it’s tiresome getting Rule of Law lectures from people who are perfectly happy to have the president ignore immigration laws that they don’t dig.
So, my finger-wagging True Con friends, what’s your plan? How do we go from liberals abandoning the Rule of Law, and such ancillary and associated components of a society based on liberty like free speech and free enterprise, to a liberty-based society operating under the Rule of Law? “Elect more True Cons!” isn’t a plan; it’s an aspiration, and not much of one. I don’t need another cliché, or another citation to general principles, or some variant of my new favorite, all-purpose get-out-of-having-an-actual-plan-free card, the old “We’re better than this” line.
My plan is to cause the left so much pain by applying their new rules to them that they give up trying to grind their Birkenstocks into our faces forever. Yes, as a practical matter that means allying with President Trump, guy I formerly criticized in detail and without restraint, and who was my 16th of 17 choices in the primary (Jeb! was last because he’s an insufferable wuss and I won’t suffer him).
See, I reject the notion we are ever somehow morally obligated by conservative principles to lose to liberals. If I have to swallow something awful, I’ll take half a loaf any day over an entire loaf of liberal dung like Felonia von Pantsuit. I think the new rules are terrible, and they are antithetical to everything I’ve worked for since before many of my Fredocon critics were a tinge of regret growing in their mommies’ bellies the morning after. But I refuse to sit back and allow libs to be victorious because I won’t dirty my hands fighting fire with fire. If that makes me not conservative enough for some, I can live with that. I can’t live with leftist tyranny.
So, now you True Cons know my plan. It might work, it might not. But it’s a plan. Now, what’s your plan to achieve that conservative utopia you keep talking about? Let me lay out the situation straightforward from here in three steps:
  1. Liberals are attacking the foundations of a society based on the liberties enshrined in the Constitution.
  2. ?
  3. A society based on the liberties enshrined in the Constitution.
So, what’s Step Two?
Come on, lay it out. In detail. Feel free to tweet it to me! But I want a plan. No clichés, no citations to Burke, no airy statements of general principle. A plan. Lay it on me. Step Two - what’s your plan?


Hmmmm. See, I don’t think you True Cons really have a plan. 
Abstract principles are not a plan. A couple weeks ago I wrote about how, now that the tech companies that dominate the flow of information and discourse in our society have decided to insert their politics into their businesses, we should use our political power to ruthlessly regulate them back into neutrality if they persist. It’s an awful idea, in principle, and I’d like to avoid it. But I’d also like to avoid conservatives being utterly banished from the internet.
What was the True Con response? “Free enterprise, blah blah blah.” Yeah, okay, got it. I sure appreciate the 411 on this newfangled “free enterprise” thing. (I should totally learn about it – thanks, 22-year old marketing major with a subscription to The Weekly Standard!) Lots of cant, but no concrete, coherent solutions. My favorite was the guy who suggested the solution was to start my own Google in my garage, except my garage is full of junk. Oh, and by the time we collected a few billion in capital and built an entire new tech mega-corp that somehow escaped being smothered by Google as we grew, every search on Google would return a link to something approved by Hillary Clinton.
I think you want to rely on the power of conservative ideas and sort of hope they spontaneously erupt into a conservative paradise via a right wing Big Bang without you actually having to fight for them. After all, fighting is messy and unseemly, and you also have to ally yourselves with … those kind of people, if you know what I mean, and I think you do. It’s so embarrassing having to explain them to your liberal peers. Many of these misbegotten normals are baffled by fancy sandwiches and stuff.
Before you give me more grief for allying with the Republican in the White House – you know, that guy your party elected – I’m going to need your plan. See, we need real solutions, and my solution is fighting back hard and ruthlessly. I say make our enemies feel the pain they would inflict upon us because it might change their behavior – again, there was a time when conservatives believed in punishing wrongdoers. I also support fighting back because it denies them victory and dominance over us – do you have any illusions that Hillary Clinton and her pet Supreme Court would not be imposing/upholding “hate speech” bans that would silence anyone to the right of Angela Davis if we had not blocked her with Donald Trump? And I also support fighting back because you cannot simply sit back and allow yourself to be repeatedly beaten and humiliated without utterly destroying your side’s morale. Denying the enemy the head of Sheriff Joe had tangible value beyond its substantive justice (Jury? We don’t need no stinking juries to put an American citizen in prison!).
I’m looking for a plan, not another lecture, not another mournful dirge to my lack of True Conservativishness, not another spittle-flecked outburst from some nepotism-pumped hack whose influence has recently waned after years of ineffective “conservative leadership.” We have Trump, and at least he’s not Hillary. At least we aren’t actively losing, and we’re even winning occasionally. If you have a better idea, then stop sitting on the sidelines complaining and share your plan. The rest of us, the ones out on the field with dirt under our fingernails, are awaiting your insights.

In Case You Missed It Dept.


 Barcelona was targeted by an ISIS terrorist who ran over scores of pedestrians Thursday. Has anyone considered that Arab men are simply terrible behind the wheel? If there's anything we've learned from Barcelona, London Bridge and Paris, it's that perhaps Muslims should let women drive.

President Trump wondered out loud Tuesday if Jefferson and Washington monuments will be removed along with the Confederate monuments. There's the educational aspect to consider. After all the statues come down, where will school teachers take the children during White History Month?

The Sacramento Bee says California's secession petition is gaining steam statewide. Cal State schools are allowing separate dorms for black students, Long Beach is the symbol of free trade, and sanctuary city claims are based on states' rights. Between secession, segregation, free trade and states' rights, would someone please tell me again what Democrats have against Confederate statues?

Congressman Steve Cohen of Tennessee announced he will introduce articles of impeachment against President Trump over his recent remarks blaming both the far-left groups and the far-right groups in the Charlottesville riots. It gets worse. Mexico has just offered to pay for the impeachment.

Lexington, Kentucky, is bracing for another demonstration by White Nationalists and counter protests by leftists over Rebel monuments. Bloodshed is imminent. If there's one thing we've all learned, it's we should probably decide in advance what to do with the statues from the next civil war.

Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles had huge lines of people on Sunday just waiting in line to buy those specially-made sunglasses. People in L.A. are famous for not paying complete attention to the news. They're happy they can now can look directly at Confederate statues without going blind.

Microsoft founder Bill Gates was updated on Friday on the progress of his Clean India charity project. The charity is dedicated to building bathrooms with running water for everyone in the country. Last year India produced sixty-eight million tons of human waste, second only to cable news.

President Trump gave a televised speech on national security at Fort Myer Monday which was well received even by his critics. It left them shaking their heads. Even Democrats have to give Trump credit for being able to read a teleprompter just hours after staring directly into a solar eclipse.

ESPN removed an Asian-American announcer named Robert Lee from calling the University of Virginia's opening football game Saturday because he has the same name as the Confederate general. It's jaw-dropping. The mainstream media's hatred for the South now extends to South Korea.

The Secret Service reported Monday it's out of money and can't afford to pay the hundreds of agents it requires to protect the president's large family. Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi says President Trump has two choices. He can either step down from office or he can kill all his children.

President Trump called out John McCain in his Phoenix speech for casting the vote that cost the Obamacare repeal. All this a day after the U.S. Navy cruiser named after the senator rammed a cargo ship. Conservatives are sure it was McCain's slow turn to the left that caused the catastrophe.

President Trump ad-libbed a blistering attack on the mainstream media Tuesday in his speech in Phoenix. Their superior attitude can be a little rough on him. The mainstream media covers Donald Trump's presidency as if every day is a new episode of Keeping Up with the White-Trashians.

A Chicago pastor demanded the Chicago City Council remove a statue of George Washington atop a horse in a Southside public park. What a long week for Southern heroes. Vegetarians just staged an angry protest in Kentucky and demanded that the statue of Colonel Sanders be taken down.

-- Argus Hamilton

I'm Sorry

DIBuuwaXYAASvc2.jpg

QUEER Training

a6EygO9.jpg

World View

iToUWIo.jpg

This is ESPN

8EhaVCT.jpg

Revenge!

alg0In8.jpg

Corpus Rally

8rFsVtN.jpg

This is why...

W95kTui.jpg

I'll Wait...

JmOm6z7.jpg

Remember Me?

210923_image.jpg

When it suits them...

PeAmQrg.jpg

Luna-Tick

Gqkq2SQ.jpg

Liberal Think Tank

qWJ458X.jpg

Higher Education

Higher-Ed-600-LI.jpg

Seeing a pattern?

hduTaGI.jpg

I Give Up!

b8fzS0L.jpg

Republicans

Bhd54n1.jpg