• 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

Has Paul Mirengoff Ever Visited Rural Town Minnesota?

CARLSON’S COMPLAINT REVISITED

by Paul Mirengoff  at PowerLine:

Steve Hayward’s post about an upcoming event with Tucker Carlson, which Steve will moderate, refocused my attention on Carlson’s controversial monologue in early January. I wrote about it here .

I concluded my post, which praised Carlson for his “insights and plausible, thought-provoking claims” about the problems in rural America, by saying that he avoided the question of “personal responsibility.” I did not elaborate. I want to do so now.

Carlson said that “in many ways, rural America now looks a lot like Detroit.” This may be an exaggeration, but let us assume it to be true.

When conservatives discuss the plight of places like Detroit, we typically mention social pathology, as Carlson did in his monologue. Symptoms include kids leaving school early, girls having babies, fathers assuming little or no responsibility for these babies, youths choosing crime as a way of life, adults preferring welfare to work, and so forth.

Carlson blamed these problems on “big government” and conservatives agree that government policies have contributed to them. But each problem is founded on bad personal choices. Those who make these choices bear some responsibility for the adverse consequences they produce. Thus, conservatives typically insist that the concept of personal responsibility have a place in the discussion.

If we’re going to insist on personal responsibility in the context of Detroit, we should insist on it in the context of “rural America.” Arguably, we should be more insistent, since rural Americans were never subjected to systematic racial discrimination.

But the concept of personal responsibility didn’t make it into Carlson’s rant. Its absence became apparent to me when he complained that males in rural America are lagging behind their female counterparts. Carlson plausibly blamed the demoralization of the rural male population, and its inability to marry, on this phenomenon.

But why are white males lagging behind females? They attend the same schools. They come from the same families. In these families, I assume, parents expect their sons to achieve at least as much as their daughters.

Why aren’t they? Carlson notes that job opportunities in traditionally male jobs are shrinking in rural America, while jobs in traditionally female jobs are holding steady. But is that the entire story? Men are not barred from jobs in schools and hospitals. Nor are they barred from learning skills that will help them land jobs in other flourishing sectors.

Thus, to the extent that young males in rural and rust belt America aren’t doing as well as young females, I think it’s due in part to bad choices they make — e.g., using drugs, not taking school seriously, choosing leisure over work. J.D. Vance’s Hillbilly Elegy, a book that highlighted the crisis in parts of rural and rust belt America that Carlson picks up, is populated with folks who made such choices. But it also includes some, and not just Vance himself (a special case), who made better choices and thrived as a result.

Carlson blames the lack of thriving in rural America on market capitalism and greedy elites — mercenaries, he calls them. I believe that, just as with Detroit, some of the blame must reside with the people making choices that are inconsistent with success in life.

Is this point worth making or should we take the bad decisions people make as a given — something we must work around? The answer is that, philosophical concerns to one side, as a matter of policy making we can’t ignore, or work around, the concept of personal responsibility.

In the case of “Detroit,” we must decide how far to go in order to improve, in the short term, the material condition of the population. How much should we spend on welfare? How lenient should we be with criminals? Should there be monetary reparations? Should there be forced integration?

In the case of rural America, the policy questions prompted by Carlson are different. How much trade protection should certain American industries receive? To what extent should we limit legal immigration?

The answer in both cases depends in part on how much weight we place on the concept of personal responsibility. Those who take the concept seriously will be less inclined to transfer vast amounts of money, or to tolerate high risk associated with the early release of criminals, than those who don’t.

They will also be less inclined to think Americans should pay more for consumer goods as a result of trade barriers and restrictions on the number of people who can work in the U.S. They may ask how much more they should pay for cars because males in rural America are making irresponsible personal choices.

The best answer might well be “somewhat more.” Even for conservatives, the concept of personal responsibility isn’t absolute. We are willing to spend a considerable amount of money on welfare even though we know that if recipients made better choices, we would be able to spend considerably less.

Without some sense of empathy and national solidarity — some notion that we are all in this together — America is in big trouble. But we’re also in big trouble if we place the concept of personal responsibility off-limits in our policy discussions.

Dear Mr. Mirengoff ….I presume you cross the border into  Minnesota from time to time.  Or do you fly in to the Twin City airport from your flat on Manhattan or where ever?
Have you ever  been to, through  Ely,  Duluth,  Ada, Hill City,  Grand Rapids,  Willmar, Roseau,  Fulda, and nearly every other  forced learning places where Goopherland  lefty  fascism isn’t dictated  at “schools”?   Have you noticed the steady decay of small town MAIN STREET Minnesota since Billy Clinton sold NAFTA to the Western Hemisphere about 25 years ago?
How many farmsteads have the Soviets disappeared from our  Gopherland since then, Mr. Mirengoff?   How many shops?…..  locally owned restaurants, and garden centers?
Have you found a locally made cup of coffee at Minnesota small town Main Street cafe recently?  Ten years ago?   Twenty years ago?    How many locally owned clothing stores have disappeared during that span?
Capitalism has come to stink when small town folk are crushed when  BIG MONEY INVESTORS and PROFITEERING AMAZONS RULE THE WORLD AND DON’T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT UNCLE SAM’S RURAL MINNESOTAS.
CARSON IS CORRECT with his statement you’ve suggested below…  Where have you been?   Ditsy feminists and feminazis of all sexes, shapes, and sizes “own” our Minnesota schools these days.  Truth is of no matter to these modern  Dems.  FEELINGS, especially the femmy  ones are in vogue these days.
Carlson said that “in many ways, rural America now looks a lot like Detroit.” This may be an exaggeration, but let us assume it to be true.
Wake up Mr. Mirengoff at PowerLine!   The human male is bored when schools are run by morons.   Gals go whereever gals hangout.  Have you ever examined the k through 12th grade curriculum results in Minnesota schools lately ?
Mirengoff wonders:  “But why are white males lagging behind females? They attend the same schools. They come from the same families. In these families, I assume, parents expect their sons to achieve at least as much as their daughters.”
Mirengoff blames people making choices:  “Carlson blames the lack of thriving in rural America on market capitalism and greedy elites — mercenaries, he calls them. I believe that, just as with Detroit, some of the blame must reside with the people making choices that are inconsistent with success in life”.

Reviewing the Murder of Abortion

How Democrats’ Obsession With Abortion is Helping the Evangelical Church

by Michael Brown  at   the Stream:                   Article sent by Mark Waldeland.

It is a cycle dating back at least to the days of President Bill Clinton. Evangelical leaders call for urgent prayer because of a “godless” president. We cry out for revival. We hold special prayer rallies. We mobilize believers to vote. Then, when we win the next elections, we take our foot off the gas and we go back to complacency.

That has been a terrible and costly mistake for at least two reasons.

Sensing the Urgency of Prayer for Awakening

First, no president can do what the church is called to do. No president can bring spiritual renewal or moral transformation. Only the church can do that through the gospel.

Second, regardless of who is in office, America remains in desperate need of awakening, while much of the church remains in desperate need of revival.

We have no business taking our foot off the gas. The situation remains urgent.

Fast forward now to the Trump presidency.

Regardless of who is in office, America remains in desperate need of awakening, while much of the church remains in desperate need of revival.

In keeping with our pattern, we protested the policies of President Obama. We decried his pro-LGBT, pro-abortion activism (among other things). We bemoaned his Supreme Court appointees. And we said, “Revival is our only hope!”

Then, with the unlikely rise of Donald Trump (all the more unlikely as the champion of evangelicals), we once again shifted our focus and cut back on our fervent praying for awakening.

Looking to Political Leaders to Do Our Job?

Because of that, the battle is now over allegiance to Trump or opposition to Trump.

The emphasis is now on getting more conservatives on the courts. (To be sure, Trump’s court nominees are highly significant. But they can only accomplish so much.)

The focus is now on the 2020 elections, which will surely be heralded as the most important in our lifetimes (just as the last few elections were described).

Each of these has its place, but we have once again taken our foot off the gas, looking to the White House and Congress and the courts to do what only we can do. Until.

Until something major happened.

Evil Revealed

The Kavanaugh hearings revealed the fangs of the radical pro-abortionists.

The new abortion laws in New York and Vermont (along with one proposed in Virginia) reminded us of abortionists’ blood lust.

Pro-infanticide comments made by the governor of Virginia shocked the sensibilities of many moderate Americans.

And now, as reported by LifeNews, “House Republicans will bring up the request to vote on the Born Alive bill every day for the next 30 days,” thereby forcing Democrats to show their hand. (So far, Democrats have blocked the vote the first two days.)

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »

As Rep. Steve Scalise tweeted, “Before the entire House, I asked for immediate consideration of a bill that protects infants born alive during abortions. But Democrats rejected my motion and refused to consider it. Why won’t they go on record and tell the American people where they stand on infanticide?”

All this has freshly energized pro-life Christians across America, including many a pastor who had remained on the sidelines in the past.

Pro-life Christians Speaking Out

Pro-life Christians are speaking out openly and clearly, some of them for the first time in their lives.

They are recognizing the church’s complicity in the sin of abortion, primarily because of our silence and inactivity.

They are asking, “What can we do? How can we make a difference?”

They are even calling for days of repentance and prayer and mourning.

This is very important and represents a major step forward. If only we will learn to keep the pedal to the metal!

Now, More Than Ever, We Must Remain Energized to Repent and Pray

Now, more than ever, we need to seek God for genuine revival and awakening.

Now, more than ever, we need to take stock of our own lives, getting our own houses in order and turning away from disobedience.

Now, more than ever, both on our knees and in the streets, we need to push back against America’s culture of death and restore a culture of life.

Now, more than ever, we need to put our trust in the Lord rather than in politics (although we pray for our political leaders and remain politically involved).

Now, more than ever, we cannot be distracted from our mission and our calling.

To Seek God Is Urgent Now and Will Be for Years to Come

The hour truly is urgent, regardless of who is in the White House and who sits on the courts. And the hour will be urgent for years to come.

America is teetering on the edge of moral anarchy and spiritual confusion.

The pro-abortion, infanticide-endorsing militants are overplaying their hand, and millions of evangelicals (and others) are waking up.

The church must be renewed. The church must lead the way. Jesus must be central.

Otherwise, collapse is near.

Thankfully, what people mean for evil God can turn for good, and that’s exactly what is happening today.

The pro-abortion, infanticide-endorsing militants are overplaying their hand, and millions of evangelicals (and others) are waking up.

Let us be vigilant and diligent, staying alert, staying active and staying on guard.

We cannot afford to take our foot off the gas again, let alone fall asleep at the wheel.

 

 

https://stream.org/democrats-obsession-abortion-helping-evangelical-church/

The Battle Against Pelosi Fascistic SOCIALISM!

TRUMP: “THE TWILIGHT HOUR OF SOCIALISM”

by Scott Johnson  at PowerLine:

President Trump has rejected the status quo ante in American foreign policy. He has rededicated the United States to the support of Israel. He has withdrawn the United States from the disgraceful deal with Iran. He has tightened the sanctions regime with the intent of disabling the mullahs. He has shaken up matters with the North Korean regime in the interest of putting their nuclear weapons program on the path of termination. He has now come out for the removal of the socialist dictator of Venezuela. I could multiply the examples, but you can fill in the blanks. In each of these cases, Trump is right and Obama was wrong.

Yesterday President Trump went to Florida International University in Miami to give a speech on Venezuela before a friendly and raucous audience. I am unable to find either the text or the video on the White House site. I have posted a news video of the speech in its entirety below. It is a gloriously Reaganite speech; it is a great speech. In it Trump stands for freedom against the forces of socialism, tyranny and immiseration.

Trump notes in the course of the speech that National Security Advisor John Bolton is in the house. Readers of Surrender Is Not An Option will infer that he had a hand in the speech. He is an old-fashioned conservative.

Trump is forcing the issue in Venezuela. The United States is on the right side. It is leading in the push to get Maduro out of there. Events are coming to a head. This speech is part of the pressure intended to produce a constructive outcome. It merits your attention.

The New York Times has a good account of the speech here, FOX News here, CNN here

Quotable quote: “The twilight hour of socialism has arrived in our hemisphere and frankly in many many places around the world. The days of socialism and communism are numbered, not only in Venezuela, but in Nicaragua and in Cuba as well.”

One more: “America will never be a socialist country.”

 

 

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/02/trump-the-twilight-hour-of-socialism.php

Dem Feminazis Are Making Their Move to Destroy Our American Republic

The Green New Fascist Deal

by  Mark Musser   at  American Thinker:

 

The “Green New Deal” is a fascist utopian plan written by environmentalist lawyers that is purportedly designed to tackle the global warming apocalypse which capitalism, particularly of the American kind drunk on fossil fuels, has precipitated through economic recklessness and colonial racism. CO2, a trace gas measured in parts per million, is the primary culprit of a semi-apocalyptic global warming crisis that can only be averted through an all-wise cadre of Democratic green lawyers. That such utopianism, political legalism, and apocalypticism is presented as hard science demonstrates the general madness of the present time that is largely rooted in the Social Darwinian scientism of the 1800s, wherein German zoologist Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919) was peddling a racist political biology together with strong ecological values that he characterized as Monism — which speaks of a monistic oneness or holism with nature along totalitarian lines that modern science was supposedly offering the constituents of the Second Reich. While Haeckel coined the term “ecology” in 1866, he mixed racial eugenics with his environmentalism. Today, environmentalism proffers anti-humanism, population control, ecological totalitarianism, and indigenous multicultural tribal racism that “The New Green Deal” is chock full of.

Austrian Nazi forester Guenther Schwab (1904-2006) was one of the most successful original popularizers of apocalyptic environmentalism in the 1950s and 60s, which included the CO2 global warming scare. Thanks to the great success of Schwab’s writings, real green Nazis like Werner Haverbeck, August Haussleiter, and Werner Vogel, among others, helped him lay the foundations for the German Green Party in the late 1970s. Yet, it was German researcher Hermann Flohn (1912-97) who took the global warming theory that had been bandied around by earlier European researchers and gave it teeth to increasingly bite its way into the main storyline of the West as the 20th century drew to a close. Flohn is considered to be one of the most critically important climate scientists of the 20th century, whose research merited a number of prestigious awards.

Flohn’s very German odyssey actually began in 1941, when he published an article on global warming titled, “The Activity of Man as a Climate Factor” during the dizzying heights of Nazi rule. The Dust Bowl years of the 1930s on the American plains was an exceptionally warm period that prompted environmental discussion among many Nazis at the time, who deemed such an ecological disaster as a symptom of diseased industrial capitalism which had ruined the soil. While Flohn was not a Nazi Party member, he received his doctorate in 1934 and began work for the German Meteorological Service at a time when National Socialism was attempting to bring into line German universities within its ideological purview. Later, Flohn became the Luftwaffe’s chief meteorologist under green Nazi Hermann Goering’s watch. The great irony is that the global warming of the 1930s came to an abrupt halt (which lasted until 1975) just in time for the 1941 invasion of Russia when the Wehrmacht essentially froze to death just outside the gates of Moscow.

During the war, it stands to good reason that Flohn’s high atmospheric weather research would have not only placed him in close proximity with high-altitude Nazi human experiments, but probably also would have put him in regular contact with Werner von Braun and his SS rocket boys. After the war, Flohn continued to ratchet up the CO2 global warming scare as more dangerous than even nuclear energy. Such connections seem to suggest that the global warming apocalypse may have been originally introduced in a targeted way into American research labs through Operation Paperclip, when SS Nazi and German scientists were imported into the United States to help Uncle Sam build rockets to compete in the Cold War. The SS was the greenest arm of the swastika.

Even as early as 1935, Nazi Germany was the greenest regime on the planet. Their ecological projects worked hand in hand with their wild Social Darwinian biological programs connected to eugenics and scientific racial hygiene. Cleaning up the blood also included cleaning up the environment. Indeed, Nazi biologist Ernst Lehman defined fascism accordingly, “We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather life as a whole… This striving toward connectedness with the totality of life, with nature itself, a nature into which we are born, this is the deepest meaning and the true essence of National Socialist thought.”

Out of such a Nazi holistic nature-based worldview came a number of environmental laws that preceded their more overt racial laws. In 1933, the Nazis passed a strict animal rights law. In 1934 they passed a hunting law.  Along similar lines, the Nazis also introduced sustainable forestry practices, and essentially became the very originators of what is today called sustainable development that included a great concern for recycling. Even the Four-Year Nazi war plan was to be guided by sustainable development concerns. In 1935, the Nazis passed the totalitarian Reich Nature Protection Act which opened the door to ecological regulation over private property.

That same year, American deep ecologist Aldo Leopold visited Nazi Germany to witness their strong emphasis upon green programs they had just put in place. While Leopold had some criticism of the Nazi efforts, he was very complimentary as he said they were not just talking about environmental problems, but actually doing something. Leopold also dragged home the “Never cry wolf” cult to America as Nazi Germany was the first country in the world to protect wolves. In other words, the western bridge between postmodern socialism/fascism and environmentalism originally rooted in the early German green movement of the 1800s was built by National Socialism in the 1930s, long before Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring.

With no small irony, the present strong relationship that currently exists between modern environmentalism and left-wing labor unions was essentially born in Nazi Germany. In June of 1933, green Nazis Rudolf Hess and Walther Schoenichen absorbed many of the environmental groups of the Weimar Republic under Werner Haverbeck’sFolk-Race National Character and Landscape Bund that was a subdivision of the German Labor Front. The German Labor Front thus adopted the greens into their political organization. Nazi architect Albert Speer was proud of his environmental accomplishments as the green builder of the Third Reich who was also another leader of the German Labor Front.

After the war, while biding his time in Spandau prison, Hess often discussed the problems of the free market economy with Speer. Speer had worked under Hess as they were both essentially in charge of Nazi public works projects. Speer noted that Hess loved to critique American capitalism which he called liberal democracy as a form of sickness, “Again and again he comes to me with examples of overconsumption in the United States. He happily notes reports of misguided investments in the market economy, collects examples of land speculation, criminality, bad posture in children and health damage caused by canned foods.”

Hess even came up with a cockamamie sustainable development plan he shared with his fellow Nazi prisoners in 1951. Since highway lamps were being placed above roadways, Hess thought it would be unnecessary for cars to turn their headlights on at the same time. Energy could thus be saved by turning off the headlights when highway lamps were burning. Speer remarked, “This would save current he maintains, and the erection and maintenance of the floodlights could easily be financed out of the money thus saved. I object that the car’s generators would be running anyhow, to supply the current to the spark plugs. He dismisses that; the generator could shut off automatically as soon as the battery was charged. Thus, energy would be stored, fuel saved, and this saving could be spent on financing the illumination of highways.” Such a madness certainly presages the anti-car renewable energy sentiments that have become one of the trademarks of the modern green movement — that is also playing no small role in the Green New Deal as well. In short, to characterize the Green New Deal as fascist is no metaphor.

Mark Musser is a part-time missionary, pastor, author, and a farmer who lives in Olympia, Washington in the summers but spends most of his time on the mission field in the former Soviet Union. He is currently a doctoral candidate at Corban University in Salem, Oregon, and is a contributing Writer for the Cornwall Alliance.  His book Nazi Ecology provides a sobering history lesson on the philosophical foundations of the early German green movement, which was absorbed by National Socialism in the 1930s and proved to be a powerful undercurrent during the Holocaust.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/02/the_new_green_fascist_deal.html

Note:   Today’s American  Dem feminazi feminists don’t give a damn about freedom.  FREE MEN DO!  These  Fems, especially those who refuse children, by their Nature without God,   love mouth over brain to make them feel good and make noise.  Enter the ditsy Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez crowd.    They   demand blab, comfort, and security over TRUTH and FREEDOM.   They don’t invent, protect,  problem solve, seek or care about Truth.   Richer fems like Hillary  want maids, demand maids of all sexes shapes and sizes to handle her affairs, fair and foul.

 

DEM DITSIES present their NEW GREEN DEAL!! (reviewed by Jonah Goldberg)

Udder Madness

by Jonah Goldberg  at National Review:         Article sent by  Mark Waldeland:

You can come well short of the slaughter of the farting cows and still do profound damage to the country.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is Jonah Goldberg’s weekly “news”letter, the G-File. Subscribe here to get the G-File delivered to your inbox on Fridays.

Dear Reader (Including all of the Democrats who wore blackface but forgot to tell anybody),

Where is Gary Larson when you need him?

I loved Calvin and Hobbes, Peanuts, Dilbert, and Bloom County, but I was in awe of The Far Side. Larson could do more in one panel — daily — than the best often did in three. And he was weird, and I like weird (you’d know that if you could see what I’m wearing right now).
Anyway, I could write about Larson all day long, so long as the armadillo I have under my breastplate doesn’t need to go to the bathroom. But I should get to the point.

Larson loved cows, and he made them into cultural things like no one before. “I’ve always thought the word ‘cow’ was funny,” Larson once said. “And cows are sort of tragic figures. Cows blur the line between tragedy and humor.”

And that’s why we need him now.

Contained within the FAQ for the Green New Deal is one of the greatest sentences ever written with the intention of being taken very, very seriously:

We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.

I love this sentence so much I want to stand outside its house holding up a boom box blasting Peter Gabriel’s “In Your Eyes.”

I love the attempt to seem pragmatic. We’re not crazy radicals here, we’re just going for net-zero emissions rather than zero emissions in ten years because we are part of the reality-based community.

This is like the straight man in a comedy team saying something banal and serious to set up his partner for the punchline. “We just need a little more time to get rid of the farting cows and the airplanes.” It’s like Ben Franklin’s “Fart Proudly” essay, except they’re not really in on the joke.
And this is where we need Larson. The Green New Dealers don’t want to get rid all of the cows because bovine genocide is not part of the Commissar’s Ten-Year Plan. But fear not, we’ll get there one day. And even the farters have a little more than a decade to get their affairs in order. But make no mistake: We’re coming for you flatulators (shut up, I need that to be a word). We’re like Kurt Russell in Tombstone, and there’s gonna be a reckoning for you cud-chewing milk-beasts because while we like the cheese we get from you, you must be liquidated for the sin of cutting the cheese.

Leave aside that “Farting Cows and Airplanes” would make a great band name. Forget that it can be read in such way that the airplanes fart too. How many Far Side cartoons could we get out of the image of cows turning on each other for the sin of letting one rip? Remember, all cows fart. (I want to thank the Powers that Be for giving me the opportunity to write that sentence in the context of a serious public-policy debate.) So singling out just the “Farting Cows” as if they are a separate class of animals — the hooved climate kulaks of Al Gore’s Animal Farm remake — conjures images of cows throwing each other under the bus when the Green Commissars show up.

“It was Clarence!” Shouts a cross-legged cow.

“Shut up, Bessy! The Inspector knows that whoever smelt it dealt it!”

You know what you call the cows that successfully survive the purge? The laughing stock.

(On that note, as Dom DeLuise shouted from his trailer before coming out in a Speedo, let me apologize for what you’re about to see next.) It would be udder chaos as each cow tried to be neither seen nor herd because the steaks would be so high. I know I’m milking this by butchering a very serious topic. I don’t want to steer you wrong, and I understand why you might have beef with all of these puns that have moved pasture your lactose tolerance.

They Put It in Writing
Don’t have a cow — I know I am having too much fun with this. And, yes, I know that the methane from cattle is a serious issue. But come on. Just look at this whole thing from a hard-nosed political perspective and you have to see what an unbelievable gift this whole thing is to the very people whom believers in the Green New Deal hate the most.

If you tilt your head and squint, this whole thing looks a bit like Jerry Maguire.

If you’ve never seen the movie, you should. It’s good. But I’m going to assume you did and not recap the whole thing. The kid of a hockey-player client makes sports-agent Jerry Maguire feel guilty about how he exploited his dad. Combined with a bout of indigestion, Jerry writes a 25-page manifesto on why his firm should have fewer clients. He distributes the memo to all of his partners and they all applaud, knowing in their cynical hearts that he signed his own career death-warrant. Soon, he’s asked out to lunch by his Beta — excuse me, Beto O’Rourke-esque partner Bob Sugar to get the bad news. “You did this to yourself. You said ‘fewer clients.’ You put it all on paper,” Sugar explains.

Later, Jerry realizes the full scope of his screw-up and why he’s “cloaked in failure.”

They will teach my story to other agents on “do not do this” day in agent school. Why? Lets recap. Because a hockey player’s kid made me feel like a superficial jerk, I had two slices of bad pizza, went to bed, grew a conscience and wrote a 25-page Manifesto of Doom!

Now, I know some of you are thinking, “How’s that armadillo doing?” He’s fine. Don’t worry. I also know that others of you are thinking that I self-owned myself because Jerry Maguire has a happy ending. Well, here’s the thing: This isn’t a movie.

I’m not going to go over all of the reasons why anything like the Green New Deal will never happen — though I covered a couple in my column. All you have to do is contemplate the tens of millions of jobs — automotive, oil and gas, manufacturing, agricultural — that would be destroyed to understand why politically the Green New Deal, as proposed, might as well be a call to mandate that vegan unicorns crap iPhones. And you can promise to tackle farting cows and planes down the road all you like, it won’t sound any more reasonable to the voters who decide every election. I mean, it’s never a good sign when Nancy Pelosi — who considers climate change her defining issue — brushes you off like she’s a high school principal handed a student petition to abolish homework.

And yeah, I know, the Green New Dealers have an answer: Think of all the jobs we’d create building a new electric grid and high-speed rail system, retrofitting every building in the United States, not to mention the Great Round-Up of the Gassy Cows.

Even if one were to take all of that seriously — an if larger than Egon’s hypothetical Twinkie in Ghostbusters — you don’t have to be Mancur Olsen to understand that the interests invested in the economy as it is aren’t going to bite at your offer of magic beans, and not just because beans make you fart.

Stay Updated with The G-File
Jim Geraghty’s guided tour of the news and debates driving the day.
Email Address
Don’t Uncork the Champagne
Nancy Pelosi has many faults, but she understands the facts on the ground. It was Pelosi more than Obama who pulled off Obamacare because she understood that you have to co-opt the “stakeholders,” not declare war on them, to achieve anything significant. She knows that if she were to embrace the Green New Deal (or Medicare for All) it would be the greatest gift she could give to Donald Trump and the GOP, because the stakeholders would stampede, like a herd of cattle fleeing the fart police, to the party that promises to save them.

There’s a reason President Trump proclaimed in the State of the Union last year a few days ago, “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” If Trump is going to get reelected — another giant-Twinkie-sized if in my opinion — he needs to reignite the Flight 93 Binary Choice panic that allowed him to pull off his win in the Electoral College last time. (As of now, there’s almost zero chance he can win the popular vote.) The White House is reportedly — and understandably — giddy over the Dems’ lurch left. Kamala Harris recently told Jake Tapper that she would like to erase the insurance plans of more than 100 million Americans and destroy private insurance companies wholesale. Where will those voters and insurance PAC dollars go if they took her seriously?

Yet none of this means all is good with the world. Many conservatives — including yours truly — are having great fun watching leading Democrats embrace something that can so easily be turned against them.

It’s a quaint memory now, but the goal of the conservative movement was not to make the GOP more conservative. That was step one in a two-part plan. The real goal was to make the country more conservative. That requires moving the center of gravity in politics rightward. How does that project look today?

So while it may be good news in the short-term for Republican politicians for the Democrats to veer wildly to the left, it’s not good news for the country or our cause that conservatism has been redefined as Trumpism for millions of Americans (including millions of conservatives). When large swaths of young voters — the largest bloc of voters in America — look to someone like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as their spokesperson, the Overton window moves in a direction conservatives should not celebrate because it is likely to slam shut on our squishy bits. Many of the people spinning the largely frivolous Trump State of the Union as a masterstroke are implicitly endorsing his moves leftward on legal immigration, infrastructure, trade, paid family leave, and — I would argue — foreign policy.

The larger point is that when you ask for and get a “disruptor” in the Oval Office, you don’t necessarily get to choose the form of the disruptions you get. Conjure a Stay Puft Man or Godzilla all you like, there’s no guarantee that the behemoth will only smash the things you want smashed. Retaining walls that serve valuable purposes will likely get smashed, too.

The Democrats have become radicalized in no small part because of their hatred of Donald Trump. And because that is the defining mindset of the Left these days, it creates breathing room for other forms of radicalism. The people pushing Trump to declare a national emergency to build his wall will undoubtedly rationalize the move on the grounds that he was elected to be a disruptor and the fact that the Democrats are so “obstructionist.” Maybe he’ll get the wall, maybe he won’t. But he will leave in his path enough flattened barriers to executive power that the next Democrat will have no problem using the exact same talking points for her or his emergency declaration. (As I write in the new cover story for National Review, the Left is much better, and has a far richer history, at declaring national emergencies to justify its power grabs.)

More broadly, the Trump years may mark some significant policy and political victories, but culturally it has been a boon for the Left. Just in the last week or so, we’ve seen the Democrats come closer than ever to literally — not figuratively — endorsing infanticide and socialism. Again, that’s arguably good news for partisans looking at the next election, but it’s a nightmare in the larger context, in part because the Democrats could still win despite that baggage. And while the Unicorn Caucus will never get everything that it wants, you can come well short of the slaughter of the farting cows and still do profound damage to the country…….

https://www.nationalreview.com/g-file/green-new-deal-farting-cows/

Ditsy Dem-Warren Declares Aborting a Baby a Mere Tonsil Removal.

Elizabeth Warren Compares Abortion to “Getting Your Tonsils Out”

 by    Micaiah Bilger  at  LifeNews:        Article sent by Mark Waldeland:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren recycled age-old, debunked talking points on abortion this week to urge opposition to U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

A pro-abortion Democrat from Massachusetts, Warren even likened the killing of an unborn baby in an abortion to getting tonsils removed.

“We cannot go back to the time of back-alley abortions,” she wrote Wednesday. “But that could happen if Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court and helps overturn Roe v. Wade. We must #StopKavanaugh — the lives and futures of countless American women are at stake.”

Tens of millions of unborn women’s lives have been destroyed because of Roe v. Wade, but Warren ignored how an abortion kills an innocent, unique human life.

In a column for the women’s magazine Marie Claire, Warren said Kavanaugh could be the deciding vote to overturn Roe, and claimed women would suffer if that happens.

“When abortions are illegal, women don’t stop getting them— they just risk their lives to do it,” Warren wrote. “Today, thanks to Roe, getting an abortion is safer than getting your tonsils out. Before Roe v. Wade, many women turned to back-alley butchers to end their pregnancies.”

Warren is completely wrong on several points. First, an abortion is never a safe procedure, and it cannot be compared to any other common medical procedure, such as a tonsillectomy. Its very purpose is to kill a unique, living unborn baby, and about 60 million of them have been killed in abortions since Roe.

And, according to Planned Parenthood and the Guttmacher Institute, most women did not seek back alley abortions prior to Roe.

In 1960, Dr. Mary Calderone, the medical director of Planned Parenthood, wrote in the American Journal of Public Health:

“… about 90 percent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians…Whatever trouble arises usually arises from self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 percent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of non-medical abortionist…So remember…abortion, whether therapeutic or illegal, is in the main no longer dangerous, because it is being done well by physicians.”

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a former abortionist and co-founder of NARAL, also later admitted that their “statistics” about back alley abortions were false.

Nathanson said his organization often claimed between 5,000 and 10,000 women died every year from dangerous, back alley abortions and argued that legalizing abortions would protect women.

He wrote: “I confess that I knew that the figures were totally false and I suppose that others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted … The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible.”

Actual government statistic prior to the Roe decision show nowhere near 1.2 million women (or even 200,000) died in abortions. A 1972 Center for Disease Control report noted the maternal death rate from abortions was 39 in the United States, the year prior to Roe.

And legalizing Roe hasn’t made it safer. CDC reports indicate women still die from legal, supposedly “safe” abortions. As of 2008, the CDC reported more than 400 women died from legal abortions in the United States, including 12 that year. The most recent annual report from the CDC says four women died from abortion complications in 2013.

If Warren truly cared about women, she would fight against abortion, which destroys babies’ lives and often injures their mothers.

Fascism Arising with the Ditsy Dems

MSNBC Host Slapped Down For Saying Conservative Criticism Over Ocasio-Cortez’s New Green Deal Is A Right-Wing Obsession

by Matt Vespa at Townhall:

Perhaps the host just didn’t have enough coffee that day. Who knows? But last week Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Corte (D-NY) unveiled her Green New Deal. A far left economic prescription that will certainly end in the economic death of the U.S. It’s a massive government takeover of not just the economy, but also a gross intrusion into our private lives. It calls for the elimination of fossil fuels within a decade, the upgrading of all buildings to be more eco-friendly, and the destruction of cattle over their methane farts. No, that’s not a joke. It also called for job security for people who are unwilling or unable to work. Yeah, lazy people get subsided. This is la la land policy. It’s not realistic, but the ethos is progressivism after decades of maturation; George Will noted this in the past. All aspects of social life must be organized around the government.  And yes, the Ocasio-Cortez camp tried to say the job security for the lazy portion was a conservative lie. It wasn’t. Plenty of people took screenshots of her offices’ FAQ page before it was shut down (via Free Beacon):

The office of democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has deleted a supplemental document explaining how to implement her “Green New Deal” that called for a jobs guarantee even for those “unwilling to work” and the elimination of “farting cows” and airplanes.

Robert Hockett, a Cornell law professor and adviser to Ocasio-Cortez, appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Fox News on Friday and claimed Republicans doctored official documents that came directly from the congresswoman’s office.

Ocasio-Cortez’s 14-page resolution calls for the “economic transformation” of the United States through a “Green New Deal mobilization” that would phase the country off fossil fuels and nuclear energy in 10 years. Renewable energy accounts for just 17 percent of current electricity generation.

The deleted supplemental document explained the Green New Deal further, saying that the plan would “create economic prosperity” by planting “lots of trees.” But Ocasio-Cortez’s office was honest about the plans limitations to “fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes” in 10 years.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/02/11/msnbc-host-slapped-down-for-saying-conservative-criticism-over-ocasio-cortezs-ne-n2541050