• 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

Bless Those Who Still Honor Our Civilized JudeoChristian World!

FASCIST CANADA IS DESTROYING CANADA!

February 18, 2022

Canada is destroying its banking system

By Andrea Widburg at American Thinker:

The problem with becoming a dictator is that madness often quickly follows.  Caligula is an example from the past, for he was genuinely insane and died as a result of that.  Closer to our time, so obsessive was Hitler’s effort to exterminate Europe’s Jews, he diverted resources from the Russian front, essentially assuring Germany’s military defeat.  And in Canada today, we have a ruling party that’s equally obsessive, this time in its determination to destroy all political opposition.  To that end, Canada’s ruling class is willing to bring down its entire banking system.

Canada’s truckers, who are more vaccinated than the average Canadian, nevertheless felt that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had gone too far when he required them to show a vaccine passport to enter their own country.  They launched a convoy that traveled across Canada’s frozen wastes to get to Ottawa to present their case to the government.

In a perfect world, the government, in the form of Justin Trudeau, would have met with them, heard their grievances, promised to work with them, and sent them home.  Had he done so, it’s likely that the truckers would meekly have departed, feeling that their voices had been heard.  That’s how things work when a true statesman occupies the top position in government.

But Trudeau is no statesman.  He promptly hid himself away and embarked upon a campaign of baselessly defaming the truckers as Nazis.  Because they were not being heard, the truckers stayed in Ottawa, honking their horns, shutting down traffic in the city center, and engaging cheerfully and peacefully with supporters.

As a reminder, because of his and other Canadian leaders’ insane COVID policies — for a virus with an average mortality rate of less than 1% — the entire Canadian economy was blighted, religious worship ended, international travel stopped, and the governments made every effort to coerce Canadian citizens to inject an experimental therapy into their bodies.

Slandering the truckers wasn’t enough.  Being called a “Nazi” didn’t make them go away.  Trudeau, therefore, declared martial law via Canada’s Emergencies Act.

In addition to the usual police powers to arrest people who offended Trudeau, Trudeau’s government announced that it would shut down all crowdfunding platforms, attack cryptocurrencies, and unilaterally seize the bank accounts of anyone protesting Trudeau’s COVID policies or supporting the protesters.

In the Brave New World that is Fortress Canada, you and your family will starve if you offend Trudeau.  You’ll also lose your children, and even your dogs and cats will be seized and, possibly, destroyed.  The Trudeau-ites are so lost in the madness of their suddenly unfettered power that the justice minister, David Lametti, says any Canadian who supports Trump must have his bank accounts seized.

Sundance makes an interesting point:

Notice how no one in Canadian government is even talking about the COVID restrictions and mandates?  No one is even talking about the virus as a problem or any issues with the pandemic as a justification for continued COVID mitigation efforts.

The only focus of the Canadian government is addressing the protests against them.
But why did I say Canada is on the verge of destroying its banking system?  Everything I’ve just described shows Canada destroying its opposition.  In some ways, doesn’t that strengthen Trudeau’s hand and make Canada a more stable place?
In a word, no.  Trudeau may feel that his throne is a bit more stable, but investors around the world are thinking there is no way they will entrust their money to a Canadian bank.

Image: ATM (edited) by fanjianhua.  Freepik license.
The financial world functions only if there is some element of trust.  I must believe that if I deposit my money with Bank X, that Bank X will return those funds to me when I demand them.  Moreover, I must believe that if the bank fails to do so because it doesn’t like me or my politics, the government will side with me, not the bank.
And if neither the bank nor the government likes me, I must have the minimal assurance that there is a neutral process to determine whether their dislike trumps my rights in my own money.  Without that trust, I’m going to keep my money under a mattress rather than deposit it with an arbitrary and capricious banking system.
Trudeau has just turned Canada’s entire banking system into one that utterly lacks due process.  It is, instead, arbitrary and capricious, depending entirely on the tyrant’s whims.  Even the money-launderers (and it turns out that Canada has been a money-laundering haven) will have no incentive to trust their ill-gotten gains to Canada’s banks.
What Trudeau and Co. are doing is complete madness.  Like many tyrants before them, their fanatical, unhinged efforts to protect their status and punish their enemies mean they are engaging in self-destructive acts that, sadly, will also destroy their country.

“JUST AS ORWELL PREDICTED!”

February 18, 2022

The Left’s Orwellian Newspeak: the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Delusion

By Adam Vicari at American Thinker:

Anyone who is familiar with the Dystopian (and alarmingly relevant) novel “1984” by George Orwell is familiar with the concept of ”Newspeak.”  In short, “Newspeak” is the language that the citizens of the autocratic future superstate “Oceania” speak, and it basically works by drastically reducing the number of words in an individual’s vocabulary or in the dictionary that the state deems “unnecessary.”  Of course, the real purpose of “Newspeak” is to eliminate words that might cause an individual to think about ideas contrary to the state’s agenda and authority and in turn act on those thoughts and undermine the power of the state or even overthrow it.  If words like “revolution” or “freedom” or “rights” don’t exist, then no one knows what the concepts behind them mean and no one is the wiser that they can have any of them, and the state still has loyal subjects. 

Well, the left has been engaging in their own kind of “Newspeak” by trying to eliminate words like “meritocracy” and “win,” “fail,” “superiority,” “earned,” and “liberty.”  The left wants to supplant these American concepts with a new form of tyranny: “equity,” “diversity,” and “inclusion.”

You will hear these three words uttered almost anywhere you go today.  You hear left-wing media pundits and talking heads bloviate endlessly about these ideas on television.  You hear major national and international corporations put out slogans like, “we are seeking to strengthen our business through equity, diversity, and inclusion.”  You see references to these three buzzwords incorporated into almost every syllabus, curriculum, in the mission statement of almost every college and university now, and you hear radicals scream endlessly about it through bullhorns on streets corners. 

Hell, the college I am attending right now, Rutgers University of New Brunswick, even has an Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity, whose mission statement reads, ”More than just words: We are called to integrate the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion into all aspects of our university.” 

Of course, conservatives know that this is all bull, but these three words seem to be a kind of spell that has gripped the nation and has polluted major institutions, from large businesses, to classrooms, and even to the text of legislation and bills passed through Congress, just look at Biden’s free crack pipe scheme.  The person we call our president is preparing to waste $30 million in taxpayer dollars to “advance racial equity,” by giving away free crack pipes to drug-abusing degenerates in the slums.

Many have become obsessed with these toxic concepts (whose toxicity I will explain shortly) and seem to have become fixated on them.  I wonder, however, how many people who are concerned about “equity” actually know what it is.  It seems a lot of average people are confusing “equity” with “equality.”  Merriam-Webster dictionary defines equity as, “fairness and justice in the way people are treated.”  This is where the confusion comes in for many: when the left uses the word “equity,” they do not mean equity in the traditional sense as described by the dictionary.  No, for the left, “equity” means “equality,” or the same outcomes for all.  When the left talks about “leveling the playing field,” they do not mean make it so that all individuals in a given scenario have an equal opportunity to achieve their goals, they mean they want all individuals to have equal outcomes.  Thus, a meritocracy allows everyone the same chance to succeed or fail and does not intervene when the latter looks more likely. 

As long as everyone has a chance, all is right.  However, in an “equity” based system, the left wants to force everyone to have the same exact outcome, regardless of how much effort or dedication they put into achieving the outcome they have.  In a meritocracy, competition is key and this competition drives people to do their best in order to one-up their competitors and to maximize the time and effort they exert to achieve these goals.  In an “equitable” situation, everyone is given the same outcome ahead of time and no one is allowed to exceed the constraints they were put in, which is why “equity,” which is really inequity in its worst and truest form, is so toxic. 

Imagine if your child was the fastest runner on the track team and would’ve gotten a gold medal, but the coach stepped in and gave gold medals to all the runners on the team, all the way down to the slowest because he didn’t want anyone to feel “left out.”  Wait, that is already happening, and it is the product of toxic notions like “equity.”  Thus, if everyone is dragged down to the same level (and it will be dragged down instead of raised up because that is how Marxist notions of equity work), then no one can advance and everyone is miserable and poor.  In the United States, a medical doctor, on average, makes $240,525 per year, while a fast-food worker, on average, makes $24,703 per year.  Now, can you imagine if we paid doctors, who save peoples’ lives every day and cure their illnesses or replace whole body parts, the same amount that we pay guys who flip hamburgers for a living? That would be obscene.  I can’t begin to imagine what the looks on the faces of the front-line doctors and nurses who manned hospitals during the COVID pandemic would be if the hospital they worked for announced they were going to get paid as much as the guy who made their lunch for them that day.  But, to the left, that twisted logic is “equity.” 

The left’s concept of “equity” doesn’t stop with economics, they want to apply it to everything from college admissions and hiring practices (with anti-white policies like “affirmative action” that should be illegal) to women in combat (who are not physically capable of doing the things required of their male counterparts most of the time), and they will deliberately lower standards in order to achieve “equity.” 

How about “inclusion,” and “diversity”?  Well, if that’s what all parties involved want, then I guess it’s fine.  However, the left doesn’t care about what individuals in a group want, they only care about their agenda, and their agenda is diversity and inclusion, which they will get at all costs.  If natural diversity and inclusion does not happen because of individual or group differences, and neither group seems receptive to the notions of being amongst each other in a specific scenario or situation, then the left feels compelled to force “diversity” and “inclusion” down everyone’s throat until their once harmonious group of like-minded people with similar interests looks like a photograph of the United Nations general assembly. 

These concepts are why so many colleges and some high schools are trying to force girls into STEM (science, technology engineering, and math) programs, and it is why Biden is specifically picking a black woman as a Supreme Court nominee.  The three buzzwords of the left are a sign of things to come if we aren’t careful, that is, the erasure of merit and true diversity (of thought) from the American vocabulary, and the institution of government-approved words like “equity,” “diversity,” and “inclusion,” instead, just as Orwell predicted.

TRUDEAU’S FASCIST POLICE In Ottawa TO CREEP THROUGHOUT CANADA?

Canadian police arrest convoy leaders, create fenced-in no-go zone in Ottawa

KAREN TOWNSEND Feb 18, 2022 12:41 PM ET

 Share  Tweet  

Photo by Arthur Mola/Invision/AP

Canadian police are beginning to detain and arrest the leaders of the trucker convoy in Ottawa. It began on Thursday as Prime Minister Trudeau fights to invoke power under the Emergency Act against the protesters, which includes freezing their bank accounts and confiscating their dogs.

Two convoy leaders who are named in a class-action lawsuit were the first to be arrested. Chris Barber was the first organizer to be arrested in Ottawa, followed hours later by Tamara Lich. Lich is seen as the main leader of the trucker protest. She expected to be arrested. Lich was there when Barber was arrested.

‘Hold the line,’ she shouted as she was escorted away.

A former fitness instructor who has sung and played guitar in a band called Blind Monday in Medicine Hat, Alberta, Lich was also a senior member of a separatist group that advocated for Canada’s Western provinces to secede from the country.

On Wednesday night, she had posted a tearful video to YouTube telling her supporters that she expected to be arrested imminently.

‘There’s a pretty good chance – I think it’s inevitable at this point – I’ll probably be going somewhere tomorrow where I’ll be getting three square meals a day,’ she said.

‘And that’s OK. I want you to know I’m OK with that.

‘I’ll probably get some sleep.

‘But please stay peaceful. And know that this too shall pass. There will be a tomorrow. And we will get through this.’

There were several arrests made Thursday. Barber was arrested a few blocks from Parliament and led away in handcuffs by two police officers. It was posted on Facebook.

https://653a52ff7620bb48424b5c512f103cbf.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

Barber, a truck driver for the last 28 years who led the Saskatchewan portion of the protest convoy that has been in Ottawa for the last three weeks, was walking down the street with several friends when police detained him.

Footage posted on social media showed him being detained. He could be seen smiling calmly as he was patted down and put in a patrol car.

‘Call my wife!’ he said, to a friend who was filming. ‘And put this on social media.’

Ottawa’s Interim Police Chief Steve Bell held a press conference Thursday and said that checkpoints are being established to lock down the city’s core. The no-go zone is being put in place to prevent additional protesters from joining those already there. The protesters who are there and camping out are encouraged to leave. Only people who can show proof of living or working within the zone will be allowed to enter the area. There are 100 checkpoints that circle the area.

Meanwhile, Trudeau continues to argue in support of invoking the Emergencies Act in Parliament. Conservative Party and Bloc Québécois are opposed to his use of Emergencies Act against the convoy. The Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party support Trudeau and have the numbers to approve the action.

Those being detained by police and/or arrested were put on notice that their animals would be confiscated. After an eight day period, any animals not claimed will be considered “relinquished”.

On the American side of the border there is some organizing being done to form a convoys that will travel to Washington, D.C. to protest COVID-19 mandates and federal government overreach. A PAC is partnering in the effort and helping to raise money.

The Great American Patriot Project sent out an email blast on Wednesday urging supporters to join, volunteer for, or donate to the American Truckers Freedom Fund. The email asserts the truckers “represent a movement of peaceful, non-violent Americans from all walks of life who are dissatisfied with the unscientific, unconstitutional government overreach in regards to mandates.”

“It’s time for #AmericanTruckers to stand with truckers all over the world. Don’t be afraid to #HonkHonk. Everybody loves #FreedomHonks,” the PAC proclaims on its website.

The convoy will have several starting points, including in Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio as well as Fresno, California. The trip will end in Washington, D.C. on March 6. There are plans for a congressional welcome committee to meet with them and discuss policy changes.

Donations made through the PAC will be able to avoid limitations that are in place on some crowdsourcing sites, like GoFundMe. That site shut down a fundraising page for the Canadian truckers. Some Facebook pages that promote convoys have been taken down. Facebook claims there are links to extremist groups and conspiracy theories. Did any of the groups raising money for other protesters like BLM during the Summer of Love, for example, receive such censorship? I know. That’s a rhetorical question.

That Dem War Against President Trump!

5 Media Lies About The Latest Special Counsel Revelations

BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND at the Federalist:

FEBRUARY 18, 2022

The Durham deniers’ talking points remain gibberish. They are furiously attempting to hand-wave away the facts the special counsel has found.

ne week ago today, Special Counsel John Durham filed a motion in the government’s criminal case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann. That motion, in requesting the court obtain Sussmann’s waiver of any conflicts of interest held by his lawyers on the record, provided in excruciating detail the factual basis for the purported conflicts.

In doing so, it revealed that “enemies of Donald Trump surveilled the internet traffic at Trump Tower, at his New York City apartment building, and later at the executive office of the president of the United States, then fed disinformation about that traffic to intelligence agencies hoping to frame Trump as a Russia-connected stooge.”

While earlier filings by Durham had revealed equally explosive facts, this time the special counsel’s motion generated enough attention that #Durham began to trend on Twitter. Not since the special counsel’s office indicted Sussmann in September 2021 for lying to the FBI’s former general counsel, James Baker, has the Durham investigation forced itself into the legacy press’ purview.

Rather than report on the latest developments, the corrupt media spun Friday’s filing as a big nothingburger, while parading several false narratives—just as it did when news of the indictment of the Clinton campaign’s lawyer broke.

Charlie Savage at the New York Times led the way in a Monday article headlined, “Court Filing Started a Furor in Right-Wing Outlets, but Their Narrative Is Off Track.” Amazingly, several of Savage’s talking points coincided with arguments presented by Sussmann’s attorneys in a document filed with the court that same day.

By Tuesday, Vanity Fair had joined in, quoting Savage’s “analysis.” That evening, Jimmy Kimmel turned the talking points into one-liners. Wednesday saw Brian Stelter at CNN further cribbing from the Savage’s initial take at the Times.

While the leftist press continues to fall in line to advance the unofficial defense of the Clinton campaign’s former attorney, the talking points the Durham deniers are pushing remain nothing but gibberish. Here they are and why they are wrong.

1. It’s Just Those Crazy Right-Wingers

In his opening salvo in the Sussmann counter-offensive, Savage began his New York Times column by noting that Durham’s Friday night filing “set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump.”

Framing the “furor” as right-wing proves a ready go-to for a corrupt media seeking to discount the substance of the reporting. Stelter likewise hit this talking point repeatedly over at CNN, in his article “Right-wing media said it was exposing a scandal. What it really revealed is how bad information spreads in MAGA world.”

Hillary Clinton likewise pushed the right-wingers angle, tweeting that “Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones.”

Of course, while casting coverage of Special Counsel Durham’s investigation as the cries of cray-cray conservatives might resonate with their readers, as a substantive counter to the most recent revelations in the Sussmann case it falls flat.

2. Pay No Attention to the Facts Behind the Filing

The second narrative pushed by Savage and then quickly parroted by his ilk is that the facts behind Durham’s most recent court filing are too dense for readers to bother using their brainpower to decipher. Yes, I am serious.

The facts “also tend to involve dense and obscure issues, so dissecting them requires asking readers to expend significant mental energy and time—raising the question of whether news outlets should even cover such claims,” Savage wrote in his Monday pro bono P.R. piece for Sussmann.

Amazingly, CNN quoted this passage in its coverage of the issue, demonstrating the utter lack of regard in which the leftist press holds its readers.

3. There Was No ‘Infiltration,’ So There Is No Story

A third counter pushed in response to Durham’s Friday court filing focused on Fox News’ coverage and its opener that read, “Lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to ‘infiltrate’ servers belonging to Trump Tower, and later the White House, in order to establish an ‘inference’ and ‘narrative’ to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, a filing from Special Counsel John Durham found.”

Durham never said “infiltrate,” however, came the rejoinder. At least on this point, the press members suffering from “media vapors” have a point: Durham did not say “infiltrate.” Rather, Kash Patel, a former chief investigator for Devin Nunes on the House Intelligence Committee, used that word in an interview with Fox News, as the article later explained.

Durham said the data Sussmann provided to the CIA came from data tech executive Rodney Joffe obtained when he “exploited” his access to sensitive data from the Executive Office of the President (EOP).

It is likewise true that the special counsel’s Friday filing did not claim that the “Clinton campaign paid to ‘infiltrate’ Trump Tower, White House servers to link Trump to Russia,” as Fox News headlined its coverage of the developments in the Sussmann case. Rather, it appears that Joffe voluntarily exploited his access to the data and received no compensation from Clinton for his forays into the EOP and other databases.

These criticisms by the Times, CNN, and others might hold more weight if the same outlets hadn’t pushed the Russia collusion hoax for five years. But, in any event, correcting those two points does nothing to counter the serious allegations revealed in Durham’s latest filing revealed.

In fact, he exposed so many significant details that it required two separate articles to adequately cover the developments. Notwithstanding the concerted pushback against the Fox News article, The Federalist’s in-depth coverage remains unblemished.

4. But Trump Wasn’t Even President Yet

The next narrative launched to minimize the significance of the revelations contained in Durham’s motion focused on the data Sussmann presented to the CIA purporting to show “that Russian-made smartphones, called YotaPhones, had been connecting to networks at Trump Tower and the White House, among other places.”

The data relating to the White House “came from Barack Obama’s presidency,” the Times reported, quoting two lawyers representing one of the researchers who aided Joffe. Rather, “to our knowledge,” the lawyers claimed, “all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office.”

This counter is nothing but lawyerly wordsmithing, however, and anyone who read the actual court filing—that dense document Savage believed beyond the grey matter of his readers—would know that fact. As the motion explained, in providing the DNS data to the CIA, Sussmann told the government agents “these lookups demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations.”

As a matter of pure logic, the data Sussmann presented to the CIA related to the White House must have somehow related to Trump or it would not “demonstrate” that “Trump and/or his associates were using” the Russian cell phones “in the vicinity of the White House.” Most likely, then, the data presented concerned the transition period. Further, there is nothing to say that after Trump took office Joffe stopped “exploiting” the data.

5. It’s Old News

The fifth response, which Savage again initiated, ran that the “news” was “old news.”

“But the entire narrative appeared to be mostly wrong or old news,” Savage wrote early in his Times coverage. He reiterated that point later: “for one, much of this was not new: The New York Times had reported in October what Mr. Sussmann had told the C.I.A. about data suggesting that Russian-made smartphones, called YotaPhones, had been connecting to networks at Trump Tower and the White House, among other places.”

Surprise, surprise: It was Savage himself who made passing reference to the YotaPhones in his October 1, 2021, Times article that focused primarily on the Alfa Bank aspect of the indictment. In retrospect, we should have foreseen Durham’s latest revelations because they were handed to the Sussmann-friendly reporters who penned the October article, in what is now an obvious attempt to get ahead of the bad news Sussmann’s legal team knew was coming.

What the Times did not report on October 1, 2021, however, was that Joffe’s internet company “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers for the [Executive Office of the Presidency] as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP.”

Nor did the Times report, as Durham alleged, that Joffe and his associates, “exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.” Also missing from the October 2021 coverage was the fact that DNS data compiled, but withheld, from the CIA showed the DNS lookups involving the EOP and the Russian cellphone provider “began at least as early as 2014 i.e., during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office.”

In other words, this was new news, and those claiming otherwise serve, not as journalists, but as pushers of propaganda.