• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Interviewing Trump’s Bright Ann Coulter at the Socialist CBC

Advertisements

January 14, 2018 Highlights

What Are The Childless Fascist Fems at the Nation up to These Days?

We Are Living Through the Moment When Women Unleash Decades of Pent-Up Anger

Let’s hope there’s no going back.

(Please continue reading more from the Nation below:”

https://www.thenation.com/article/we-are-living-through-the-moment-when-women-unleash-decades-of-pent-up-anger/

Time to Repeal Disastrous 1965 Immigration Act!

Time to Repeal the Disastrous 1965 Immigration Act

by Selwyn Duke  at American Thinker:

Question: If someone sells you on something with false advertising and it does the exact opposite of what was promised, are you not entitled to return the product and get a refund?  In fact, if the product caused you harm, should you not in addition be compensated for damages?

Consider that when Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) was pushing the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 (S.500) on the Senate floor, he said, “First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually.”

Actually, he was right.  We now absorb more than a million immigrants annually.

Kennedy next stated, “Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.”

The average yearly number of immigrants prior to ’65 was 250,000.  Even with Common Core math, that’s still less than one million-plus.

Kennedy also claimed, “Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.”  His brother, Senator Robert Kennedy (D-N.Y.), chimed in, “In fact, the distribution of limited quota immigration can have no significant effect on the ethnic balance of the United States.”

Yet as the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) wrote in 2015, “[i]n 1965, whites of European descent [constituted] 84 percent of the U.S. population, while [h]ispanics accounted for 4 percent and Asians for less than 1 percent.  Fifty years on, 62 percent of the U.S. population is white, 18 percent is [h]ispanic, and 6 percent is Asian.  By 2065, just 46 percent of the U.S. population will be white, the [h]ispanic share will rise to 24 percent, Asians will [constitute] 14 percent – and the country will be home to 78 million foreign[-]born, according to Pew projections.”

Kennedy again: “Contrary to the charges in some quarters, S.500 will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and economically deprived nations of Africa and Asia.  In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.”

Since the 1965 act took effect, 85 to 90 percent of our immigrants have hailed from the Third World.  Moreover, the MPI tells us, “Compared to almost entirely European immigration under the national-origins system [prior to ’65], flows since 1965 have been more than half Latin American and one[] quarter Asian.”

Kennedy summed up, saying the charges he was refuting above were “highly emotional, irrational, and with little foundation in fact.  They are out of line with the obligations of responsible citizenship.”

They were actually something else: true.

In fact, it’s hard to imagine a short statement containing more untruths than what the real Lyin’ Ted packed into his immigration bill defense.  It’s not just that he was wrong – it’s that the outcomes were the precise opposite of what he’d promised.  If Kennedy had been a doctor performing a medical procedure, he’d have been sued out of the business.  If he’d been an auto-manufacturer and his pet bill a car model, he’d have had to issue a recall.

So can we finally recall this horrible 1965 immigration act?  Note that even Kennedy tacitly admitted that the act’s ultimate outcomes are undesirable.  He didn’t say, “Flooding the country with one million people per year from economically deprived areas and radically changing the ethnic mix of the U.S. is great.  Let’s do it!”  He passionately claimed that those things wouldn’t happen.

By the way, Kennedy punctuated his prevaricative defense by saying that the charges against the immigration bill “breed hate of our heritage.”  Of course, the balkanization the immigration bill bred is part of the reason our heritage is now so hated.

Speaking of hatred, much is currently directed at President Trump because on Thursday he questioned why we have so much immigration from impoverished nations such as Haiti, as opposed to more newcomers from Norway.  Since this raised many leftists’ ire and with my being the reasonable man I am, I propose a compromise: no immigrants from the Third World or the Old World.  In other words, no immigration, period.

With a population 330 million strong, we have enough people.  With 95 million not in the labor force and robots taking over low-skilled jobs, we don’t need more workers.  With America being balkanized, we don’t need more diversity.  So what does today’s immigration provide?

Oh, yeah – Democrat voters.

Depending on the group, 70 to 90 percent of third-world immigrants vote Democrat after being naturalized.  Leftists don’t in principle love immigrants or immigration, but they do love electoral domination – and importing foreigners to achieve it suits them fine.

In fact, if 70 to 90 percent of third-world immigrants voted GOP, the Democrats would be clamoring to admit those reliably socialistic Norwegians.

What Happened on that Final Saints-Vikings Play Last Sunday?

According the HotAir of the Political World?

The guy who posted that now claims it was a joke, but watch the final play below if you missed it last night. Throwing the TV off the balcony was a perfectly reasonable reaction. To set the stage, the Vikings had blown a 17-0 halftime lead at home, with Drew Brees driving the Saints down the field for a go-ahead field goal with less than a minute remaining. With 10 seconds left, the Vikings still needed ~30 yards to get into field-goal range themselves. They had no timeouts. And the man under center, Case Keenum, was a career back-up QB before taking over this year for an injured Sam Bradford. Realistic worst-case scenario for the Saints: Keenum completes a long pass and the Vikings are still forced to make a field goal of 50+ yards to win — assuming they had enough time left after the play was over to get to the line of scrimmage and get the kick off.

Keenum did throw a long pass to the sidelines and completed it but it was high enough that wide receiver Stefon Diggs had to jump to catch it, leaving him vulnerable to a tackle in-bounds. If that had happened, time might have expired before they got set for the field goal try.

But it didn’t happen.”      Please review the matters below!

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/01/15/hell-happened-final-saintsvikings-play/

The Reverend Martin Luther King

CNN: SOCIALISM IS COOL!

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

CNN might have surpassed MSNBC as the dumbest media outlet on the planet. This is how CNN commemorated Martin Luther King, Jr’s birthday:

CNN

– He’s an environmental hero

– He was a socialist before it was cool

– He never let a political disagreement turn nasty

Many Americans have turned MLK into a safe holiday mascot, but some say King still speaks in ways that go beyond civil rights. 

King had some serous faults. But, unlike CNN, he wasn’t an idiot. I am pretty sure that if King had witnessed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Iron Curtain, the decline of Cuba, the renaissance of Eastern Europe, the bizarre disaster of North Korea, the ongoing tragedy in Venezuela, where people have eaten their pets, zoos have been raided for food, currency is so debased that it is scarcely worth printing, infants die in hospitals and children leave home so they can improve their diets by foraging in dumpsters, he would have been smart enough to realize that socialism is the worst disaster ever inflicted on the human race. Unlike CNN, which after all of this, tells us that socialism is “cool.”

DEM Dick Durbin, Saboteur….Not the First Time

S***HOLE OR NO S***HOLE?

by John Hinderaker   at PowerLine

Today on ABC’s This Week, Senator David Perdue, who was present, flatly denied that President Trump referred to any countries as “s***holes” during a meeting with a small group of legislators:

Republican Sen. David Perdue (Ga.) on Sunday said President Trump did not use the word “shithole” to refer to African nations, Haiti and El Salvador during a White House meeting with lawmakers.
***
“I’m telling you he did not use that word, George. And I’m telling you it’s a gross misrepresentation. How many times do you want me to say that?” Perdue said after host George Stephanopoulos pressed him for an answer.
***
“The gross misrepresentation was that language was used in there that was not used and also that the tone of that meeting was not contributory and not constructive,” the Georgia Republican said.

The Hill adds this, seeking to undercut Perdue’s denial:

The White House last week did not deny that Trump made the comment.

That, I think, is just wrong. President Trump tweeted:

Never said anything derogatory about Haitians other than Haiti is, obviously, a very poor and troubled country. Never said “take them out.” Made up by Dems. I have a wonderful relationship with Haitians. Probably should record future meetings – unfortunately, no trust.    

Paul made the most relevant point on Friday. Even if you assume Trump used the word that he and Senator Perdue deny, the villain in this story is Dick Durbin:

I don’t know whether President Trump called any countries “s***holes” yesterday. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if he disparaged certain countries, as is his wont, and he may well have done so profanely.

If he did, and if doing so hurt America, then Sen. Durbin and others in the room should have kept Trump’s statement to themselves. No patriotic American would hurt this country’s international standing just to embarrass the president or in the hope of gaining a little leverage in negotiations (which, I’m pretty sure, Durbin has failed to do).

But patriotism has never been Dick Durbin’s long suit.

This story is a good illustration of the bizarre times in which we live. Trump made a good point in a private meeting with a small number of legislators. He may have used profanity while doing so, but he wasn’t making a speech. His political enemy, Dick Durbin, then ran to the press to damage Trump by quoting–probably misquoting–his private comments. The press jumped on the story eagerly, assuming Durbin’s account was correct and happily damaging America’s interests, as Democrats and Democratic reporters smugly told us was happening. Lost in the shuffle was the fact that Trump is right about immigration–chain migration and the lottery are crazy and need to go, in favor of a merit-based system–and a large majority of Americans agree with him.

Years ago, some of the lawyers in my office had a series of cases around the country in which they were opposed by another Twin Cities law firm. The lawyers in that law firm were so dishonest, and so given to misrepresenting their conversations with my partners in various courts, that eventually my partners refused to have any telephone conversations with them unless a court reporter was on the line, and a transcript was prepared. President Trump is perhaps at the point where he should take similar measures to prevent Democrats (and perhaps some Republicans) from lying about his conversations with him.