• 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

Leftists and the Art of Their Mobs

Leftism: The Art of the Mob

by Christopher Chantrill  at American Thinker:

The last week has seen the usual suspects getting miffed when people called out the anti-Kavanaugh “peaceful protesters” as mobs.

Oh, come now, lefty friends.  You chaps are as bad as the First Apostle, whom the Son of God famously predicted would deny him three times.

Own up to your genius, which has been to turn the crude bronze implement of “the Mob” into a finely tempered sword of Japanese steel, the disciplined NPCs of the “peaceful protest.”  Talk about Darwinian evolution: what used to be a “riot” became a “march,” then a “demonstration.”  It has now, finally, reached its full potential as a “peaceful protest.”  Oh, except when confronting the conservative son of Susan Rice on the campus of Stanford University.  That is different.

Back when a mob was a mob, we had the example of Alexander Hamilton, who bravely kept the mob at bay at the front door of the house of Myles Cooper, Loyalist president of King’s College in New York City (now Columbia University), while Cooper escaped out the back door.

But by 1820, when the machine-breaking agricultural laborers in southeast England wanted farmers to destroy their job-killing threshing machines, the rioters all signed their non-negotiable demands with the moniker “Captain Swing.”  It’s almost as if someone were organizing their laborer community.

Nearly 20 years later, in 1848, the Chartists marched on London and held a meeting on Kennington Common that was planned as an attack on the Houses of Parliament on the other side of the River Thames.  But in the event, the leaders merely presented a petition to Parliament.

You can imagine that this sort of mob action caught the attention of young rich kids with a taste for political power, kids like Marx and Engels.  It was their genius to turn the genuine bottom-up working-class movements of the agricultural laborers and urban workers into a top-down politico-religious world movement led by Educated Youth.  The vanguard of educated rich scions would use the working class as their political foot-soldiers in a movement to prevent the bourgeoisie from immiserating the planet.

That is what left-wing politics has been about ever since: dressing up the naked fury of the turbulent mob into the decent drapery of the “peaceful protest” and pretending it is all about justice rather than the naked thrust for power.

So, by the 1960s, the protesters were not the wretched of the Earth, workers and peasants, but well born college kids,  the radical children of liberal parents, as Midge Decter called them in 1975.  Now, in 2018, we have the protesters as obviously well born Special Snowflakes taught their left-wing Catechism by government-paid gender studies professors and the diversity and inclusion bureaucrats of today’s university.  Hey, rich kids!  Don’t forget that this is all supposed to be for the victims!

The reason why our liberal friends are so upset about the accusations of their mob action is the outrage of lifting the decent drapery of “peaceful protest” to reveal the nakedness of their power-lust and the fashionable revolutionary politics underneath.

As the cartoonist points out, this lefty war on America has been busily demolishing the pillars of our society for years: freedom of religion, because traditional religions are not allowed to dissent from lefty orthodoxy on race and sex; freedom of speech, because anything the left disagrees with is hate speech; and now due process, because believe all women.

To refresh your memory: Our forefathers invented these freedoms and legal procedures as a way to limit the power of monarchs.  It turned out to be just the thing to cool the jets of overenthusiastic political activists and the left in general.

And really, what could be better than to have our lefty friends remind us, with their NPC “peaceful protests,” exactly why we have all these institutional safeguards?  The whole point of limited government has turned out to be precisely to keep the left from destroying everything we hold dear.

If the American people go out to vote on November 6, 2018, and deliver a sharp rebuke to the radical left Democratic Party, perhaps we can hope the Democrats will swerve to the center a lot quicker than they did after their last leftward lurch in the sixties.

The left is a reactionary movement that wants to return the world to the good old days of the agricultural age, when political power, defending your patch – or your empire – of food-growing land, was everything in life.  In those days, a few people were kings and lords and temple priests, but most of us were slaves.

What would it take to persuade the left that political power is a dead letter, the graveyard of hope?  I suppose that the only answer is defeat – agonizing, humiliating defeat.

I wish there were another way.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/leftism_the_art_of_the_mob.html

Lefty Rigging at Google….

Report: Google News’ Search Results Aren’t Rigged But They Are Biased

by John Sexton  at  HotAir:

A group called AllSides put out a report Tuesday which concludes that Google News’ search results are biased toward the left end of the political spectrum. However, the report also states that this bias seems to reflect the general bias of sites which are popular on the web and doesn’t represent evidence that Google is intentionally skewing results. In other words, Google’s results are biased but they aren’t rigged. From USA Today:

John Gable, CEO of AllSides and author of the study, said the bias is the result of “most news online and most news consumption online (being) from a left perspective.”

AllSides specializes in identifying media bias for the purpose of providing balanced perspectives. The group uses a media bias ratings based on popular opinion to rank media outlets as either left, right or center.

“If you look at where people get news online and you rate it, most of it is coming from the left,” Gable said.

He said Google search results come from what is largely a “popularity algorithm,” meaning that viewpoints more people have are more likely to be highlighted. As a result, viewpoints that are outside the majority don’t appear as high up in search results…

“If their role is just to reflect the internet, they’re doing a fine job,” he said. “… If they think their job is to empower people to decide for themselves, they actually need to make a change.”

So how does AllSides determine which news sources are left and right? The answer is that they don’t. As you can see on this page, the group asks people to rate their own bias (left or right) and then asks them to rate the bias of articles from various sites and averages how different groups (left, right, and center) respond to various articles. The result is a master list which rates various news sites from far left (HuffPost) to far right (Breitbart). Some sites fall in the center (CNBC) while others lean left (Buzzfeed) or lean right (Hot Air). Here’s a chart from the report showing a sample of results:

You can, of course, take issue with any of the conclusions in that graphic or the master list it is based on but the idea is that people on all sides are having a say about the spectrum. It’s not the opinion of one person or a small group of people. So starting from that foundation, the site looked at Google’s search results and found this:

This study completed 123 different measurements of the political bias of Google News and Google News search results over 14 days from August 23 to September 5, 2018. This produced three summary views of the political bias of Google News…

The aggregate result indicates that the overall bias of Google News is 65% left, 20% center, 16% right.

Because the majority of traffic goes to the very first links displayed on Google, with an estimated one-­third going to the first result, the position of a link on a page is extremely important.

While our overall analysis takes this into account by measuring the bias of just the top 5 results separately from the rest of the first page, it is also important to consider where the first result from a left, center or right source appears. Being in the very first position is extremely impactful.

Here is the average position of the first result from the left, center or right:

● Left: average 1.7 (one of the top 2 results)
● Center: 5.3 (averages to be in the top 5 or 6 results)
● Right: 12.2 (this is below “the fold” meaning that users have to scroll down the window on their computer screen before they see their first news article from the right)

The report concludes:

These results that show a strong bias for left media over right media are also consistent with past research and observations by AllSides. AllSides analyzes the news on a daily basis and have often found it difficult to find perspectives from the right when using Google News…

This apparent bias could easily be the natural and unintended consequence of its algorithms and the fact that most news outlets, as well as most journalists, have political views that represent the left side of the US political spectrum. Online news consumers are younger and lean farther Left than the average American, and that directly impacts which articles Google’s algorithm selects and how high it places them on the page.

This study does not suggest that there is intentional favoritism for media sources from the left, nor does this study suggest the opposite. It only demonstrates that the resulting choice of links that Google News provides do have a significant bias in favor of the left.

So there is strong evidence that Google’s search results favor left-wing news sources but this may be because that’s what online news readers are looking at the most on their own. To put it another way, Google may be reflecting a bias rather than directing one. The full report with a lot more detail on the methodology and findings is 39-pages long and can be found here.

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/10/16/report-googles-search-results-arent-rigged-biased/

The Disappearance of democrat Among Obama Democrats

 

Democrats vs. democrats

By Michael Widlanski  at American Thinker:

 

To be a Democrat is not the same as to be a “democrat.”

To be a Democrat means belonging to a party ruled by mood-swings and slogans: “I’m with her,” “Yes we can,” and “Me, too.”

To be a democrat means trusting the power of the people, but understanding that the power of the people is restrained by law, custom and due process.

A majority cannot vote to rape Joan or to rob John.  A majority — in Congress or on campus — cannot silence Jill or Jim, because it really hates them or what they’re saying.

To be a democrat demands maturity and emotional intelligence. It means knowing that not all problems quickly meet perfect solutions. A democrat understands less-than-perfect compromises must be made.

To be a Democrat means demanding the tools of power the way a child demands toys, then  throwing a tantrum when the toy arrives late or not at all.

Worse,  being a Democrat means to destroy the “toy” if it has to be shared with someone else. It does not matter if it’s the Presidency, the Senate, or the Supreme Court: “It’s mine, and you can’t have it!”

If it’s the presidency, “we’ll impeach it.” If it’s the Senate, “we’ll hound it.”  If it’s the Supreme Court, “we’ll  pack it.” If it’s voter base, “we’ll replace it.” (By illegal immigration.)

To be a democrat (small d) means to understand the limits of power, while to be a Democrat means seeking power by all means, to talk high while going low.

“Our motto is when they go low, we go high,” observed Michelle Obama at the last Democratic National Convention. That was only a few years after her Barack’s senate campaign managed to exploit particularly lowball tactics — intimate documents released about both his primary rival and his general election rival.

Low tactics are now the Democrats’ favorite tradition: Democrats systematically create unsubstantiated sexual allegations (like Senator Dianne Feinstein against Judge Brett Kavanaugh) or financial accusations (like Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid claiming Mitt Romney was a tax cheat).

After the lie is discovered, Democrats have a particular skill in showing no shame, no embarrassment, no blushing, particularly if the lie worked.

“They can call it whatever they want,” said a smiling Reid, after he was caught lying about Romney’s taxes. “Romney didn’t win, did he?” Getting the job for your guy and denying the job to their guy is the only test.

When Democrats get in trouble, first, they stall and evade investigation. Then they bury, shred, hammer and burn the evidence (not necessarily in that order), even if the evidence is under subpoena.

The story of the security failures that led to the murder of four Americans in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador, was covered up the Obama administration, just as it concealed the full extent of the security breaches in the use and misuse of Hillary Clinton’s emails. The FBI and State Department were so helpful.

We have had similar sagas in the cases of House Democrats’ computers penetrated by a Pakistani technician, Senator Feinstein’s in-house Chinese spy, former National Security advisor Sandy Berger stealing documents, or CIA director John Deutch, guilty of keeping classified material on his home computer. All were swept under the Democrat carpet of plea deals or pardons.

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Barack Obama have urged Democrats “to get into the faces” of political opponents. What a surprise: Democrat gangs have hounded, harassed and even assaulted Republican senators, representatives and cabinet members.  Sometimes worse: a backer of Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tried to murder several Republican Congressional representatives while they were playing baseball on June 17 last year.

The attacker, James Hodgkinson, was a volunteer in the presidential campaign of Senator Sanders.  Bernie’s supporter shot and nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise, the GOP deputy congressional leader. Scalise’s life was saved, along with others, by police who killed the Sanders volunteer.

“I am sickened by this despicable act,” said Sanders. He and other Democrats were “sickened” only briefly. They quickly recovered.

Sanders, Obama, and Hillary Clinton constantly urge backers to “resist.” It is an interesting choice of words. “To resist” is usually reserved for fighting dictators like Castro in Cuba or Chavez in Venezuela or totalitarian rulers like Saddam Hussein, Stalin, or Hitler.

“I am part of the Resistance,” declared Clinton even before Donald Trump, put his hand on a bible to swear to protect the law of the land. Trump won by law, but he triumphed over the predictions and hopes of the Democrats.

Real democrats would have acknowledged the Trump victory. Reeling Democrats could not.

This means politics played according to Coach Vince Lombardi’s dictum, without any other rules or referee: “Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.”

This is exactly what Obama’s alter-ego, ex-attorney general Eric Holder, meant when at a Democrat campaign stop in Georgia, he publicly redacted Michelle Obama’s high-sounding “we go high” remarks.  “No, no,” said Holder, ‘when they go low, we kick ‘em.”

It is time for all Americans who are democrats to take a page from Abraham Lincoln, the first great Republican, who lost patience with dithering generals who avoided a showdown with the South and its Democratic backers during America’s first Civil War. Lincoln knew he had to fight, and he needed to find a fighting general.

America — not just Trump — is in a different kind of civil war. It needs a fighting general, perhaps a fighting attorney general, who will apply the full legal options against “The Resistance.”

It is time for democrats of every party (or no party) to fight back against the Democrats.

To be a Democrat means demanding the tools of power the way a child demands toys, then  throwing a tantrum when the toy arrives late or not at all.

Worse,  being a Democrat means to destroy the “toy” if it has to be shared with someone else. It does not matter if it’s the Presidency, the Senate, or the Supreme Court: “It’s mine, and you can’t have it!”

If it’s the presidency, “we’ll impeach it.” If it’s the Senate, “we’ll hound it.”  If it’s the Supreme Court, “we’ll  pack it.” If it’s voter base, “we’ll replace it.” (By illegal immigration.)

To be a democrat (small d) means to understand the limits of power, while to be a Democrat means seeking power by all means, to talk high while going low.

“Our motto is when they go low, we go high,” observed Michelle Obama at the last Democratic National Convention. That was only a few years after her Barack’s senate campaign managed to exploit particularly lowball tactics — intimate documents released about both his primary rival and his general election rival.

Low tactics are now the Democrats’ favorite tradition: Democrats systematically create unsubstantiated sexual allegations (like Senator Dianne Feinstein against Judge Brett Kavanaugh) or financial accusations (like Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid claiming Mitt Romney was a tax cheat).

After the lie is discovered, Democrats have a particular skill in showing no shame, no embarrassment, no blushing, particularly if the lie worked.

“They can call it whatever they want,” said a smiling Reid, after he was caught lying about Romney’s taxes. “Romney didn’t win, did he?” Getting the job for your guy and denying the job to their guy is the only test.

When Democrats get in trouble, first, they stall and evade investigation. Then they bury, shred, hammer and burn the evidence (not necessarily in that order), even if the evidence is under subpoena.

The story of the security failures that led to the murder of four Americans in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador, was covered up the Obama administration, just as it concealed the full extent of the security breaches in the use and misuse of Hillary Clinton’s emails. The FBI and State Department were so helpful.

We have had similar sagas in the cases of House Democrats’ computers penetrated by a Pakistani technician, Senator Feinstein’s in-house Chinese spy, former National Security advisor Sandy Berger stealing documents, or CIA director John Deutch, guilty of keeping classified material on his home computer. All were swept under the Democrat carpet of plea deals or pardons.

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Barack Obama have urged Democrats “to get into the faces” of political opponents. What a surprise: Democrat gangs have hounded, harassed and even assaulted Republican senators, representatives and cabinet members.  Sometimes worse: a backer of Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tried to murder several Republican Congressional representatives while they were playing baseball on June 17 last year.

The attacker, James Hodgkinson, was a volunteer in the presidential campaign of Senator Sanders.  Bernie’s supporter shot and nearly killed Rep. Steve Scalise, the GOP deputy congressional leader. Scalise’s life was saved, along with others, by police who killed the Sanders volunteer.

“I am sickened by this despicable act,” said Sanders. He and other Democrats were “sickened” only briefly. They quickly recovered.

Sanders, Obama, and Hillary Clinton constantly urge backers to “resist.” It is an interesting choice of words. “To resist” is usually reserved for fighting dictators like Castro in Cuba or Chavez in Venezuela or totalitarian rulers like Saddam Hussein, Stalin, or Hitler.

“I am part of the Resistance,” declared Clinton even before Donald Trump, put his hand on a bible to swear to protect the law of the land. Trump won by law, but he triumphed over the predictions and hopes of the Democrats.

Real democrats would have acknowledged the Trump victory. Reeling Democrats could not.

This means politics played according to Coach Vince Lombardi’s dictum, without any other rules or referee: “Winning isn’t everything. It’s the only thing.”

This is exactly what Obama’s alter-ego, ex-attorney general Eric Holder, meant when at a Democrat campaign stop in Georgia, he publicly redacted Michelle Obama’s high-sounding “we go high” remarks.  “No, no,” said Holder, ‘when they go low, we kick ‘em.”

It is time for all Americans who are democrats to take a page from Abraham Lincoln, the first great Republican, who lost patience with dithering generals who avoided a showdown with the South and its Democratic backers during America’s first Civil War. Lincoln knew he had to fight, and he needed to find a fighting general.

America — not just Trump — is in a different kind of civil war. It needs a fighting general, perhaps a fighting attorney general, who will apply the full legal options against “The Resistance.”

It is time for democrats of every party (or no party) to fight back against the Democrats.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/democrats_vs_democrats.html

Lefty Fascists at Gopherland Minnesota Smear Free Speech Freely as Usual

FREE SPEECH ON CAMPUS? NOT FOR CONSERVATIVES

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

You know that, of course. This story is just a drop of water in the ocean of officially-sanctioned campus leftism.

At the University of Minnesota, there is a bridge over the Mississippi River on Washington Avenue. (BTW, it won’t be long before Minnesota Democrats demand that Washington Avenue be given a new name.) University organizations of all types are given space on the bridge to post signs. The college Republicans consistently do so, with this result:

For the third year in a row, the University of Minnesota chapter of College Republicans had its Washington Avenue Bridge panel vandalized.

The phrase “Queer Power” was spray painted in black over the three-panel painting sometime Friday evening or Saturday morning. The group’s panel features words such as “Make the U Great Again,” “Trump 2020” and “The proposed pronoun policy mocks real social issues” — a reference to a gender expression policy that is currently being considered by University administrators.

A Saturday afternoon tweet from the College Republicans’ account stated the vandalization is a “blatant attack” on the group’s First Amendment rights.

Three years in a row! Needless to say, the perpetrators have never been caught, nor has any serious effort been made to identify them. The Republicans’ signs were not controversial, and were notably inclusive:

This is what the signs looked like post-vandalism:

Other student groups’ signs are not vandalized, only the Republicans’. Three years in a row, and counting. But the university’s administration doesn’t mind the suppression of conservative speech. On the contrary: in 2016, when the Republicans’ sign “Build the Wall” was vandalized, the university’s president, Eric Kaler, said that college Republicans “should have been more inclusive about recognizing the pain it caused.” So a slogan voiced by the winning candidate for the Presidency of the United States isn’t entitled to First Amendment protection at the University of Minnesota.

Coincidentally, the Chairwoman of the Minnesota College Republicans, my daughter Kathryn, is home for the weekend, so I asked her to comment. Her response:

We are extremely disappointed that our College Republicans at the University of Minnesota were targeted once again for expressing their beliefs. The University of Minnesota has proven year after year that their campus is unsafe and unwelcoming for conservative students. We hope they act quickly in disciplining the students involved, and we plan to hold them accountable until they do.

When she says “unsafe,” she isn’t kidding. Last year’s University of Minnesota college Republican president had to be escorted around campus because of threats of violence, and I attended a speech at the University of Minnesota by Charlie Kirk, who needed numerous armed guards because he was so bold as to say that free enterprise is better than Communism.

Our universities are sick, and I am afraid the disease will prove fatal.

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/10/free-speech-on-campus-not-for-conservatives.php

Dems and Their 20,000,000 Mostly Illegal Immigrants Claim Our American Constitution is Unconstitutional!!

DEMOCRATS: THE CONSTITUTION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

A major theme on the Left these days is that any institution with elements other than pure, one-man-one-vote democracy is illegitimate. That would include, among others, the Electoral College and the Senate. This tweet by soon-to-be-Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is one example among many:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

US House candidate, NY-14

It is well past time we eliminate the Electoral College, a shadow of slavery’s power on America today that undermines our nation as a democratic republic.

Julia Ioffe

We are a country where two presidents who both lost the popular vote have now placed four justices on the Supreme Court. Democracy in action.

The Electoral College is a “shadow of slavery’s power”? Huh? The electoral college reflects that the United States is just that–a union of states. States are important.

It seems to have just dawned on liberals that our constitutional system is not a pure democracy. It is, rather, a system of checks and balances that is intended to require a degree of consensus, expressed in multiple ways, in order to implement major changes. Ocasio-Cortez and other liberals are indicting the Constitution. Their ultimate indictment, of course, is that the Constitution condoned slavery, which pre-existed it, until it didn’t. See the 13th Amendment. So what’s the point?

Like much the Left is doing these days, it is hard to see a coherent strategy or a plausible end game. Ocasio-Cortez wants to “eliminate the Electoral College.” That, of course, would require a constitutional amendment, and there is no chance of that happening. A constitutional amendment must be proposed either by a convention of the states–anathema to liberals–or two-thirds majorities in both the House and the Senate. In either case, it becomes effective only if ratified by 38 states. To repeat, there is no chance of that happening.

Law Professor Larry Tribe complains that four members of the current Supreme Court were appointed by presidents who “first took office after losing the popular vote.” That carefully-phrased formula is dishonest; George W. Bush’s Supreme Court appointments both came after he had won the popular vote. But, in any event, so what? The “popular vote” has no constitutional significance. If presidential elections were determined by a nationwide vote total, candidates would run entirely different campaigns. It is silly to hypothesize a different set of rules and re-cast elections, as if those rules had been in effect.

A reader adds:

Aside from the double talk and special pleading you can always count on from the Dems/left/MSM — the Supreme Court is now “unrepresentative,” but a liberal Supreme Court is good because it prevents majoritarianism, e.g., the bigoted populace preventing gay marriage — there is another truly radical implication to these predictable expressions of left outrage.

The issue of the Senate, the Electoral College and, perforce, SCOTUS being “unrepresentative” amount to an argument against having states at all other than simply as administrative units for a central government! One big House of Representatives, exactly proportional to the entire population completely irrespective of historical, arbitrary “states” and a president elected by 50% +1, or even a plurality, of the total “popular vote” is what their arguments imply — a plebiscitary democracy on a gigantic scale. It’s the constitution they are opposed to. And more fundamentally, “no states” at all is the obvious ultimate implication of complaints about the Senate and the election of the president.

The left argument simply assumes that the “popular vote” in the aggregate nationally is, or at least ought to be, the standard by which the presidential election is judged to be legitimate; anything else is illegitimate and “unrepresentative”, and the Senate inherently so. But there was never any intention to have “one man, one vote” be the appropriate standard of legitimacy on the national level as it was at more local levels. The founders wanted to force a widespread consensus across a whole collection of local majorities to balance different interests. This prevents ten or a dozen urban aggregations (NY, LA, SF, Chicago…) from dominating without having to balance other interests. The “popular vote” in the aggregate nationally is just a journalistic construct that is entirely extra-constitutional.

The Democrats’ pining for a different Constitution can only be a source of schadenfreude for the rest of us.

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/10/democrats-the-constitution-is-unconstitutional.php

The Tebow Treatment at ESPN

Article sent by Mark Waldeland:

Here we go again: ESPN.com trims J-word out of big Florida rite in Tim Tebow’s life

https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2018/10/9/espncom-trims-j-word-out-of-big-florida-rite-in-tim-tebows-life 

. . . Tebow was induced into the University of Florida football ring of honor the other day. As you would expect, ESPN did a story on this big day in the life of an SEC Network star. And, as you would expect, Tebow was asked to make a few remarks during the ceremony. And, as you would expect, Tebow did a shout-out to Jesus.

. . . The ESPN.com news report goes out of its way, at the very top, to quote Tebow’s “message to the fans.” But was this all that he said? Here is the overture:

GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Tim Tebow became the sixth player to join the Florida Ring of Honor on Saturday, as the crowd inside Ben Hill Griffin Stadium chanted, “Tebow! Tebow!”

Tebow, who won the Heisman Trophy and two national championships as Florida’s quarterback from 2006 to 2009, was honored after the first quarter in No. 22 Florida’s 27-19 home victory over No. 5 LSU.

A Tebow highlights package played on the video screens as he stood near the 20-yard line. When his name was unveiled, the crowd gave him a standing ovation and chanted his name. Tebow then took the microphone and had a message for the fans.

“I want to thank my mom and dad for making me a Gator on Day 1,” he said. “I want to thank all of my teammates and coaches for having my back through thick and thin. I love you guys. And Gator Nation, I love you guys. Thank you.

“I was born a Gator. I played as a Gator. And I’ll die a Gator.”

That sure sounds like Tebow. Sort of.

As it turns out, The Orlando Sentinel offered an unedited version of Tebow’s short message. See if you notice a difference between this and the ESPN text, right at the beginning:

Highlights of his four years in a Gator jersey flashed on the jumbotron in the south end zone. Cheers filled the air as the 2007 Heisman Trophy winner took a microphone and addressed the sellout crowd.

“First and foremost, I want to thank my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ. I want to thank my mom and dad for making me a Gator on Day 1,” he said.

The ESPN story includes some additional information about the Gator star and some colorful details about the LSU game. However, there isn’t a word in it about Tebow’s faith and the role it has played in his public life and controversies surrounding his career.

To be blunt: It’s rather strange to edit Jesus out of a story about Tim Tebow.

Harpies Now Own the Democrat Party?!

Dear readers….It is likely you will never be able to read the Fox article below from this site.    It appears Google Leftists have zapped  our ability to communicate with you from this day on.   I pray I am wrong!   It is becoming clear, however, that these neofascists of the left have become harpies in control of the once democratic Democrat Party.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dave-bossie-chaos-is-the-democrats-only-strategy-for-2018-and-beyond