• 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

Saul Alinsky, the Obama and Hillary Tutor for their Skill and Quickness at Lying


by Scott Johnson at PowerLine: EXTENDING ALINSKY’S RULE 6

“One of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals must support tactical lying, or lying on principle. Perhaps it is a variant of Alinsky Rule 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” I infer that the left loves it. Lying is one of their greatest hits.

I will formulate Alinsky Rule 6(a): “Lie when you have to, the worse the better. Your supporters will enjoy it, while others will be fooled by it and be reluctant to conclude that they were hoodwinked. Still others will remain sufficiently inattentive to suit your purposes.”

Think of Obamacare, peddled to the American people by the president of the United States without the utterance of a true word over a period of years. Alinksy would be proud.

Or think of the Iran agreement in process. Charles Krauthammer measures it against its professed objective and judges it to be founded entirely on the things which are not (to borrow the Houyhnhnms’ expression in Gulliver’s Travels). Krauthammer calls it “The worst agreement in diplomatic history.”

Please continue: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/07/extending-alinsky-rule-6.php

Allen West Pushes for Think Tank Status for NCPA

New CEO Wants to Make NCPA America’s Think Tank

Allen West, the new CEO of the National Center for Policy Analysis, has a simple idea for reshaping the conservative Dallas-based think tank: he wants to brand the NCPA as “America’s Think Tank” by making their research and opinions understandable to the Waffle House crowd.

Dennis McCuistion, who had stepped in as interim CEO, believes that West’s experience, particularly in national security, will broaden the center’s reputation beyond health care.

West’s three-year goals are:

Build a donor base of $8 million.
Ask for 10,000 people to donate $25 to $50 a month.
Raise $1.5 million in the next year.
West, 54, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and former Republican congressman from Florida, hit the ground running. In six weeks West has accomplished years of work:

Given more than 50 speeches.
Increased social media outreach.
Stepped up newsletter frequency.
Implemented a weekly video recap of the going-ons at the NCPA.
West became a second lieutenant in college and spent 22 years in the military. After retiring in 2004, he was a civilian military adviser training Afghan troops. In 2010, Allen was persuaded to run for Congress and won.

“I’m not from the Dallas area, so I had no clue about what went on previously, and I really didn’t care,” he says. “There are people saying, ‘Ah, let’s see what the new coach will do before I start being a booster again.’ I thoroughly understand that. I look forward to that challenge.”

Source: Cheryl Hall, “New CEO Wants to Make NCPA America’s Think Tank,” Dallas Morning News, June 28, 2015

A Truth at Politico: “Hillary Wins Again”…..”It’ll take more than these emails…. (all those lies)….to knock Clinton out”

HILLARY WINS AGAIN It’ll take more than these emails to knock Clinton out.

by JACK SHAFER at Politico:

“Mindful of all things Hillary Clinton as we are, shall we take the occasion of her latest email dump to recalibrate the mental instruments we use to measure fatal political damage?
The nation’s newsrooms—overflowing as they do with reporters chasing newsworthy revelations that will usher politicians to their permanent reward—might be a good place to begin the fine-tuning. In recent years, the press has broken stories and aired scandals that have helped to drive out of office or off the campaign trail such politicians as John Walsh, Herman Cain, Anthony Weiner, Aaron Schock, John Kitzhaber, Kwame Kilpatrick, Mark Foley and others. But as long as a politician retains the support of his party, avoids provable financial crimes and makes sure his sexual adventures aren’t abusive or too quirky, no brigade of journalists bearing witness can expel him from public life for very long.

Just four months ago, when news broke that Clinton had used…..”


Feminist Hillary’s Inability to be Truthful


by Brit Hume at realclearpolitics

“BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS: Nearly 20 years ago, the late columnist William Safire of The New York Times described Hillary Clinton as a “congenital liar.” The list of her whoppers was long then and it has been growing ever since. She claimed that as a novice investor in Arkansas she made a 10,000% killing trading cattle futures by reading The Wall Street Journal. Something one observer said was akin to “driving to Hawaii.”

She said she came under sniper fire in Bosnia in 1996. She didn’t.

She said her daughter was jogging around the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001. She wasn’t.

She even once claimed that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary after he became the first man to climb Mount Everest. But that didn’t happen until five years after she was born.

More recently she claimed she’d turned over all her job-related e-mails from her days as Secretary of State. But more work-related e-mails have since turned turned up that the State Department didn’t have. And she claimed the notorious Sidney Blumenthal was just an old friend with whom she kept in touch and who sent her unsolicited e-mails. Turns out as we’ve heard she was reaching out to him in the dark of night during the first year of the Obama administration and her e-mails make clear she welcomed and encouraged his advice. With such a record of mendacity, and there are numerous other examples, one thing is clear, it’s a good thing for Hillary Clinton that she’s not a Republican.”



HILLARY’S EMAIL STORY UNRAVELS by Kimberley A. Strassel at the Wall Street Journal:

Clinton scandals have a way of bumping and rolling along to a point where nobody can remember why there was any outrage to begin with. So in the interest of clarity, let’s take the latest news in the Hillary email escapade, and distill it into its basic pieces:

• Nothing Mrs. Clinton has said so far on the subject is correct. The Democratic presidential aspirant on March 10 held a press conference pitched as her first and last word on the revelation that she’d used a private email server while secretary of state. She told reporters that she’d turned over to the State Department “all my emails that could possibly be work-related.” And she insisted that she “did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

Opinion Journal Video
Main Street Columnist Bill McGurn discusses the latest revelations about the former Secretary of State’s private emails. Photo credit: Associated Press.
Not true and not true. The State Department has now admitted that it is aware of at least 15 work-related emails that Mrs. Clinton fully or partially withheld. We know this only because congressional Republicans, as part of their Benghazi probe, required longtime Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal to turn over his correspondence with her. It revealed work-related emails that had not been disclosed.

These don’t appear to be random oversights, but rather emails that Mrs. Clinton would likely have had an interest in keeping from the public. Most appear to be instances of her telling Mr. Blumenthal about State Department business, even though he was a private citizen and was advising a business seeking contracts from the Libyan government. Others appear to contain discussions that might undermine Mrs. Clinton’s or the administration’s public position on the Libyan conflict.

We also know that the State Department has now upgraded at least 25 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails to “classified” status. State is suggesting this is no big deal, noting that it is “routine” to upgrade material during the public-disclosure process. But that’s beside the point. This isn’t about after-the-fact disclosure. It’s about security at the time—whether Mrs. Clinton was sending and storing sensitive government information on a hackable private email system. Turns out, she was. For the record, it is a federal crime to “knowingly” house classified information at an “unauthorized location.”

A quick correction: At least one thing Mrs. Clinton said in March was true. She deleted email. A lot of it.

• Nothing Mrs. Clinton has supplied to the State Department can now be trusted as legitimate. The real bombshell news was the State Department’s admission that, in at least six instances, the Clinton team altered the emails before handing them over. Sentences or entire paragraphs—which, by the way, were work-related—were removed. State was able to confirm this because it could double-check against Mr. Blumenthal’s documents.

But how many more of the 30,000 emails Mrs. Clinton provided have also been edited? The State Department has archives for its other employees, whom Mrs. Clinton often emailed, so in those cases it has the ability to check Mrs. Clinton’s version. It should now be obliged to do so, and then to produce a final tally of emails that can’t be verified as authentic because they were sent to people outside government, for whom there is no corresponding record.

• Mrs. Clinton is still playing games. Team Clinton says it doesn’t recognize much of the material Mr. Blumenthal supplied, and insists that all the emails from him were turned over. So: Either Mr. Blumenthal fabricated emails; Mrs. Clinton was deleting emails as she went along (and so didn’t have them at the final sorting process); or she’s not being truthful now. Every one of these scenarios is of concern, and deserves inquiry.

• The State Department is itself now part of this scandal. In addition to the 15 emails that Republicans discovered Mrs. Clinton did not turn over, they found another 45 that were withheld from Congress by State. All of those Blumenthal emails have now been released, and it is clear that all were Libya-related, and all fell under Congress’s subpoena. How many more have investigators not been given? The State Department meanwhile continues to play down Mrs. Clinton’s failure to produce, and her mishandling of classified information. This should be seen exactly for what it is: the Obama administration covering for the likely Democratic presidential nominee.

• The White House also needs to answer questions. This week State released the first batch of the Clinton emails to the public, nearly 2,000 in all. In them, we find that in 2009, David Axelrod, then an Obama adviser, requested and received Mrs. Clinton’s private email address. And he emailed her on it. Yet in mid-June Mr. Axelrod said on national TV that he “didn’t know” about her private server. How many other people in the administration knew about, sanctioned, and made use of the Clinton arrangement to shelter information?

As it is unlikely the press corps will begin this investigation anew, or with any fervor, the best chance of getting answers from Mrs. Clinton probably rests in her Democratic rivals for the nomination. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley have so far avoided touching the Clinton scandals, unwilling to risk blowback accusing them of undermining the likely nominee. But if those men truly believe themselves better fit for the presidency, they could do the country no bigger favor than to start pressing Mrs. Clinton to explain her actions. Somebody has to.

With the Disappearance of Learning Knowledge from today’s American Education, Does Anyone under Age 50 Bother to Think?

With the absence of teaching, and therefore learning knowledge, now in its 60th year or more of education programming and production throughout American grade school, junior high, high school and university social science studies at college and university, what replacement for sharing adult knowledge now pervades our nation’s educational world’s command over student life in school and college these days? Well…..

….FEELINGS, of course!! Feel good stuff. Learning how to ‘feel’ good about yourself, a feminizing specialty to propagandize Americans of all sexes, shapes and sizes to ‘feel’ great, equally superior, free of the difficulties of amassing and learning knowledge developed from the past, the past recorded and ‘established’ by dead white males.

It is likely David Harsanyi, the author of the article below, is an honorable American, for he seems to confess the truth at the very onset: “I’ve supported same-sex marriage ever since I first heard the idea,” and now ponders a second thought or two…after the alteration has been dictated.

To create an adult society, one would think one would be or have been trained to amass information, develop knowledge, facts, possible pluses and negatives, personal, family, cultural, religious, on and on regarding so gargantuan a change in the institution of marriage throughout the millenia of human development. One would think.

But then, teaching knowledge to others cannot occur from teachers, professors, who themselves know little if any knowledge at all in a time when learnings as a cultural goal have been replaced by pumping up “feeling good”.

Harsanyi’s article, WAS I WRONG TO SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE? appeared in The Federalist:

“If same-sex marriage is used to pummel religious Americans into submission, it will be a disaster.

I’ve supported same-sex marriage ever since I first heard the idea. And when I became a political columnist in the early 2000s—despite being the “conservative” at a good-sized newspaper—I was the only one at the paper (as far as I can recall) who unequivocally backed gay marriage publicly. Though I wasn’t gullible enough to believe I’d be persuading many readers, I was gullible enough to believe that my allies in the cause were merely concerned with “equality.”

As we dig out from the avalanche of half-baked platitudes about “love being love” and watch alleged news organizations and the White House adorn themselves in cheerful rainbows, we can look forward to the self-righteous mobs that will be defaming anyone who is reluctant to embrace the state’s new definition of marriage. Love is love, except when a person loves their God and follows the principles of their faith, evidently…..” Do read on: http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/30/was-i-wrong-to-support-gay-marriage/

Obama’s State Department Refuses to Provide Documents about Hillary’s Benghazi Deceit to House Committee

State Department asserts privilege against Benghazi committee

by Byron York at the Washington Examiner:

“The State Department has informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi that it is withholding “a small number” of documents from investigators on the basis of “important executive branch institutional interests.” The statement, made in a letter from Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield to committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, amounts to a de facto claim of some form of executive branch privilege.

Frifield made the claim in a letter turning over 3,600 pages of Benghazi-related documents from three current and former administration officials: Susan Rice, Jake Sullivan, and Cheryl Mills. Rice, a former United Nations ambassador, is now national security adviser, while Sullivan and Mills are close aides to Hillary Clinton who worked at the department when she was secretary of state…..”

There’s more: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-asserts-privilege-against-benghazi-panel/article/2567400


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 415 other followers