• 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

The Ditzier Among the Dems Continue Their Fascist War Against Freedom Loving Americans

Dems’ Rejection of Mueller’s Exoneration of Trump Endangers our Republic

by Karin McQuillan   at American Thinker:

.

Old pols like Pelosi and Schumer and Biden surely knew the accusations that President Trump was a traitor, working hand in glove with Putin, were absurd and unfounded.  In throwing their lot in with those accusing Donald Trump of being a traitor, they betrayed their country, their voters, the rule of law, and the foundations of our republican form of government.

Their rejection of the Mueller exoneration was fore-ordained.  They cannot and will not return to normal politics.

The information that the Russia collusion investigation was based on Team Hillary’s oppo research was soon known.  We quickly learned that Comey hid that vital information from the FISA court.  We learned that the Obama DOJ and intelligence agencies went beyond eavesdropping, to blatant entrapment efforts.   Revelations on the dirty work of Susan Rice, Clapper and Brennan, Rosenstein, followed swiftly.

Mark Levin, in a must-see take-down of Mueller on Fox and Friends, asks “How can you talk about Russia interfering in our election and ignore the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the DNC, and the senior level FBI that’s been wiped out by their own conduct? How in the world can you do that and not interview Barack Obama and Susan Rice and all the rest of them?”

Levin’s question, of course, answers itself:  the entire Resistance and Mueller investigation has been a cover-up for Barack Obama’s role in the under-handed campaign to take down President Trump with dirty tricks.

Any person of ordinary intelligence could see that spying on Trump and pretending he was a traitor was a multi-faceted project of the Obama administration.  The leaks purporting to tag Trump as a traitor are a very crude, very wide trail leading straight to Obama’s highest appointees.

That is not to underestimate the power of self-delusion.  Some Democrat politicians, the Democrat media, and masses of Democrat voters were true hysterics.  They sincerely believed the deplorables had elected a Putin stooge.  Mass hysteria is a real and dangerous phenomenon.  It has been abused throughout history by unscrupulous demagogues to gain power and destroy the innocent.

Why did the Democrats do it?  A sufficient answer is one word: Obama.  Obama must be protected at all costs, even if the cost is the rule of law, fair elections, democracy itself.  We saw this play out over and over during Obama’s two terms.  His fellow Dems never uttered a word of correction, and the press worked over-time to cover up one illegal action after another, of this worst of American presidents.  The use of the IRS to silence the rising mass movement of Tea Party political opponents was an abuse of federal power to turn an election that presaged the Russian frame-up of Trump.  Obama, like other Marxists, believes his side must win.  The goal of social justice justifies every injustice.

But this is not all about Obama.  Obama set it off, but then all he had to do is keep out of sight.  Every single Democrat who led the Russian witch-hunt gained status, power, money, and fame.  The foot soldiers had fun.  The fellow travelers won safety from attack by their peers.  They did it for themselves.  This includes journalists, politicians, celebrities, academics.  It also includes ordinary Democrats, willing to follow their leaders into the moral abyss because they were willing to pay any price to undo their electoral defeat.  They sold their souls to the devil to win power they had lost at the ballot box.  They were not willing to wait four years and try again.

Democrat leaders in DC and the press did it because power corrupts.  Obama’s crooked frame up of Trump carried the irresistible promise of permanent power to sleazy politicians.   For journalists, the inept and transparent attempt to frame President Trump was bringing personal fame and fortune.

It is easy to go with hypocrisy and tell yourself you are fighting for truth when you are lying and lynching.  It is the rare person cynical enough to admit their own corruption.  They were never confronted with a mirror as long as they stayed within the world of their equally corrupt peers.    With a payoff of real power, real money and real fame, people of weak character will easily choose to believe their bull doesn’t stink.

At first, Democrats were dreaming of breaking President Trump’s spirit and hounding him out of office, without having to prove a thing.  They underestimated President Trump’s strength of character.

Some were aiming for impeachment.  Others were content with hounding, harassing and hobbling his administration by investigating him non-stop — first by Comey, then Mueller, now by power-hungry members of Congress.

The Democrats’ party from top to bottom has been running wild on the promised revelations of the Mueller report.  Mueller and his team of Democrat partisans, supported by the propaganda press, strung out the accusations for two long years.  There is no question they threw the 2018 mid-terms to the Democrats.

Mueller tried his hardest, but he came up with zero on Russia collusion.  He came up with zero on obstruction of justice and could not recommend prosecution.  So instead, he in effect recommended Congressional persecution.

Mueller set the witch-hunt spinning again with 200 pages of innuendo and the extra-legal declaration that his team could not ‘exonerate’ the President of wanting at times to scuttle the investigation.  It’s appears a weak reed, but the whole partisan witch-hunt had no more substance from the very start.  It’s worked rather well for them so far.

If the Democrat leadership had an ounce of patriotic or civic virtue in their veins, they would announce publicly that the accusations that our sitting President is a traitor with Russia – the most serious accusation against a President in American history – were blessedly proven utterly baseless.  They would allow their Republican opponent to play out his presidential term normally, blocking his legislative efforts with their votes and filibusters, fighting his ideas and actions in the press, and hoping to win voters to their superior leaders and platform.

Their fundamental problem is they don’t have superior leaders or ideas.  They have increasingly weird, radical leaders who appeal only to a slice of the electorate.  Their candidates have gone all-in on open borders, highly unpopular with even their own voters.  It’s hard to find any politico who thinks banning cars, legalizing infanticide, insisting there are more than two sexes, or ending freedom of speech and religion are winning policies outside of Democrat elitist circles.

The Democrats’ one proven strategy – it works very well indeed with their voters — is the emotional manipulation of their voters into identity groups united by hating Trump and his voters.  They need to paint Trump as a racist and traitor, his supporters are all-round bigots, and excite envy and resentment of white privilege.  Malice to the highest degree follows naturally.

The Democrats’ emotional high and the electoral success that follows, explain why Democrats cannot drop the radical partisanship that President Obama fed to the party.  They are hooked on identity politics’ hate, as strongly as an addict to his opioids.

They can’t return to the normal levels of political lying that enables the center to hold.  They don’t want a center to the country.  They don’t want respectful and honest competition.  They are undercutting the norms that have sustained our republican system for our entire history.

American individualism, unity, and optimism are in the way and must be destroyed.

Democrats rode to victory in the House in 2018 on the Mueller investigation.  They still need the demonization of Trump as a traitor and rejection of America as a country of haters.  It is their only ticket to ride to the White House.  They are not going to give it up.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/dems_rejection_of_muellers_exoneration_of_trump_endangers_our_republic.html

But Dems Led by Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Washington Post Have Become TRUTHLESS FASCISTS!

Release of Mueller report finally sets Trump — and America — free

by Michael Goodwin at New York Post:

Good God, free at last, free at last.

Donald Trump is now free to be president without the cloud that hovered over him since his election. No president ever faced, let alone survived, a probe as fierce and determined as this one.

Cleared of false charges that threatened to end his presidency, Trump can be forgiven for gloating and rubbing a little salt into the wounds of his tormentors with a jab about serving another “10 to 14 years.”

Naturally, the hysterics are hysterical over that one. They can’t even take a joke.

Yet Trump’s great victory is not his alone. The release of the special counsel report marks a day of freedom for all of America and sends shock waves around the world.

As Attorney General William Barr said, the finding by special counsel Robert Mueller that nobody in the United States knowingly helped Russia interfere in the 2016 presidential campaign “is something that all Americans can and should be grateful to have confirmed.”

Take that, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. Deal with it, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler. You should be celebrating the outcome, not denouncing it.

The reality was that, while Russia dangled the bait, no one from the Trump campaign or anyone else took it. Those findings stand as a refreshing testament to the character of our people and the sanctity of the election.

So hide your head in shame, Hillary Clinton. You started the false charge of collusion because you couldn’t accept defeat, and now your name will be synonymous with the most destructive hoax in American history.

But reaching this uplifting conclusion took 23 months and held the entire nation hostage for half a presidential term over the possibility that the president had conspired with a foreign power to steal the election, then illegally sought to hide the evidence.

The unprecedented accusations carried the horrifying possibility that the president was a traitor, a finding that would have been catastrophic for our country and its standing in the world.

Had any of the charges been true, the president would have been impeached, convicted and removed from office. He likely then would have faced criminal charges as a private citizen. There would be no pardon to a man of historic venality.

Such a traumatic experience could have driven a stake through the heart of American exceptionalism and killed the image of a shining city on a hill. The beacon to the world would have been seen as just another corrupt country, a laughingstock worthy of contempt.

On many days, fears of that outcome dominated the headlines, as when the media reported this or that development suggesting Trump’s goose was cooked. We now know those reports, nearly all based on anonymous sources, were wrong either in their facts or import.

Take that, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC.

By abandoning their standards, Big Media got the biggest story wrong and misled their readers and viewers — yet refuse to admit it. They are the true dead-enders, still searching for a thread to justify their jihad against Trump.

There were other ramifications, too. Members of Congress of both parties surely calculated the odds of Trump’s survival in deciding how to vote on tax cuts, the border and other matters.

Perhaps last year’s midterm election would have turned out differently if voters knew then what they know now.

Think how much of the stark polarization we see every day is ­owing to the lingering possibility that Trump might be an illegitimate president. Think how families and friendships have been torn asunder, how many heated arguments took place in offices and factory floors and classrooms over the prospect that a puppet of Vladimir Putin sits behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office.

To this day, many people who despise Trump can’t articulate why, other than that they believe the election was somehow tainted. They were 100 percent wrong.

The decent, fair-minded people among them will now concede their error.

And what of international affairs? There can be little doubt that both friends and adversaries gave consideration to the investigation when determining their relationship with the United States. They would be fools not to.

Did the probe affect China’s position on trade, or North Korea’s on nukes? You can be sure that Iran is not happy that Trump has been cleared. That tells us something.

We can’t know all the possible ramifications, but we don’t need to know them. The bottom line is ­settled.

The Mueller report, like the investigation itself, is exhaustive in chasing down every possibility that somebody, anybody, linked to the Trump campaign sold out America.

The probers put the screws, often unfairly, to tangential players on the chance that they would give up the president in exchange for leniency.

None did because they had nothing to give up.

Certainly Michael Cohen tried. Trump’s former lawyer and fixer made it his mission to bring down the man he had sworn to take a bullet for. Cohen, in a bid to save himself, switched sides and fired all his bullets at Trump, to no great effect.

Even Thursday he was still trying to sell his soul, but there were no takers. He begins his prison sentence next month.

In fairness, Trump does not escape the Mueller report unscathed. He apparently did lie to the press about whether he helped draft a statement on behalf of Donald Trump Jr., and media reports were correct that he wanted to fire Mueller and searched for ways to make it happen.

Yet the president who is notorious for churning through staff was lucky that some aides were brave enough to ignore disastrous orders. Former White House counsel Don McGahn refused to fire Mueller, and Trump was unsuccessful in getting others to do it, too.

Lucky for him. Had he gotten his way, Trump might be facing an ­obstruction charge.

Yet it must also be noted that not only was Trump innocent of collusion, and so had no corrupt reason to obstruct justice, but also fully cooperated with Mueller.

Not once did he assert executive privilege or try to stop anyone from testifying. Indeed, McGahn spent a remarkable 30 hours with Mueller’s team, with Trump’s approval. Clearly, the president believed he had done nothing wrong and had nothing to hide.

This is not the end of Russia, Russia, Russia. Democrats in Congress can’t let go because they have put all their eggs in the rotten basket. They will do all they can to delay the inevitable, but eventually must get back to governing instead of fetishizing impeachment — or they will find themselves in the ­political wilderness.

More important is the hope that the other side of the story will be investigated with the same intense scrutiny. America needs to know whether law enforcement and intelligence agencies under Barack Obama tried to tip the election to Clinton, then undermine Trump’s presidency.

Get a good lawyer, Jim Comey. You, too, John Brennan and James Clapper.

Much evidence already gathered says they are guilty, but we are far from a certain conclusion. Thankfully, Barr has pledged himself to the painstaking task of investigating the investigators.

So it matters not whether we are at the end of the beginning, or the beginning of the end. All that matters is that, sooner or later, somehow or another, America gets the full, unbiased truth of what happened in 2016.

In this season of holidays, pray for that.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/release-of-mueller-report-finally-sets-trump-and-america-free/

The Fascist Disappearance of Kate Smith!

GOD BLESS AMERICA? NO, PLEASE DON’T!

We live in a world that is almost too stupid for words. Here is the latest: the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Flyers have stopped playing Kate Smith’s iconic recording of “God Bless America.” Why? Because Smith recorded a couple of other songs, during the 1930s, that some liberals now consider objectionable. The Washington Post takes this idiocy seriously:

The voice of singer Kate Smith is rapidly disappearing from the world of professional sports. The New York Yankees reportedly confirmed Thursday that they were no longer playing Smith’s version of “God Bless America” during the seventh inning of home games, after the team learned of a Depression-era song she’d recorded that raised questions of possible racism. The Philadelphia Flyers followed suit Friday, distancing themselves from Smith by taking her famed rendition of “God Bless America” out of their playlist and covering a bronze statue of the singer near their arena as they investigate the matter.

Years ago, Kate Smith’s “God Bless America” was the Flyers’ good luck charm. Hence the statue of her, which has been weirdly covered:

The Yankees have been playing Smith’s “God Bless America” since 2001, but no longer. What’s the problem? Smith recorded a song in 1931 called “That’s Why Darkies Were Born.” Is that a racist song? Apparently not, since the Communist black activist Paul Robeson also recorded it. Here are the lyrics:

Someone had to pick the cotton
Someone had to plant the corn,
Someone had to slave and be able to sing
That’s why darkies were born.
Someone had to laugh at trouble
Though he was tired and worn,
Had to be contented with any old thing
That’s why darkies were born.

How racist can you get?

The whole controversy is, obviously, idiotic. Even if it were true that Kate Smith recorded a “racist” song by the standards of 80 years later–the other “questionable” song was part of a 1933 movie–that is an absurd reason to ban “God Bless America.” Who cares what other songs Smith sang?

The real objection, I think, is not to Kate Smith. It is to both God and America. Any time liberals can suppress references to either or both, they try to do so.

 

 

 

 

Note:  I, ghr, was almost eleven when World War II finally came to an end.  I couldn’t read books, but I could read newspaper articles, maps, cutlines, encyclopedias, National Geographics from 1920s to 1940, and any news items that covered the war or history.   I had two cousins from the  German part of my mother’s family in the Navy on the Japanese front.   Both survived the War.

During the war I heard Kate Smith’s “God Bless America” on radio every day as I recall.    Often at the movies on Sundays this Kate Smith  recording would be played before the main movie immediately after Wartime Movietone News had shown the slaughters at Guadalcanal in the Pacific and/or the boot of Italy.   Mother made certain I had a nickel available for the cause….The movie itself cost a dime….which  was only five cents short of a vital loaf of bread I used to buy at Mrs. Sandy’s Bakery in St. Paul’s Highland Village…..Certain foods, especially meats and  gasoline were heavily rationed.

My dad had bought a second hand 1941 Plymouth four door in September that year…replacing a 1936 four door Ford sedan with shades on the back side windows.  The Plymouth sat in the garage throughout the war.

No one was fat in those days.  The fattest person I ever saw during the war was Kate Smith when she sang our Nation’s song “God Bless America” prelude to the movie!

THE AMERICAN DITSY DEMOCRAT  LEFT, ITS FASCISTIC SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES, NEWS CONTROL,  AND FEMINIST HORDES OF NOISE WITHOUT BRAIN ARE MAKING AMERICA FASCISTIC THESE DAYS…..THEY’VE BECOME  UNCHURCHED AND SO, GODLESS AND GOODLESS…..SO WHAT DO YOU EXPECT, FOLKS?

HAPPY EASTER!

 

The Dem’s Wave of Political Correct Fascism Now Sweeping Across America

 

GOD BLESS AMERICA? NO, PLEASE DON’T!

by John Hinderaker at PowerLine:

We live in a world that is almost too stupid for words. Here is the latest: the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Flyers have stopped playing Kate Smith’s iconic recording of “God Bless America.” Why? Because Smith recorded a couple of other songs, during the 1930s, that some liberals now consider objectionable. The Washington Post takes this idiocy seriously:

The voice of singer Kate Smith is rapidly disappearing from the world of professional sports. The New York Yankees reportedly confirmed Thursday that they were no longer playing Smith’s version of “God Bless America” during the seventh inning of home games, after the team learned of a Depression-era song she’d recorded that raised questions of possible racism. The Philadelphia Flyers followed suit Friday, distancing themselves from Smith by taking her famed rendition of “God Bless America” out of their playlist and covering a bronze statue of the singer near their arena as they investigate the matter.

Years ago, Kate Smith’s “God Bless America” was the Flyers’ good luck charm. Hence the statue of her, which has been weirdly covered:

The Yankees have been playing Smith’s “God Bless America” since 2001, but no longer. What’s the problem? Smith recorded a song in 1931 called “That’s Why Darkies Were Born.” Is that a racist song? Apparently not, since the Communist black activist Paul Robeson also recorded it. Here are the lyrics:

Someone had to pick the cotton
Someone had to plant the corn,
Someone had to slave and be able to sing
That’s why darkies were born.
Someone had to laugh at trouble
Though he was tired and worn,
Had to be contented with any old thing
That’s why darkies were born.

How racist can you get?

The whole controversy is, obviously, idiotic. Even if it were true that Kate Smith recorded a “racist” song by the standards of 80 years later–the other “questionable” song was part of a 1933 movie–that is an absurd reason to ban “God Bless America.” Who cares what other songs Smith sang?

The real objection, I think, is not to Kate Smith. It is to both God and America. Any time liberals can suppress references to either or both, they try to do so.

 

 

 

God Bless America? No, Please Don’t!

 

 

Note:  I, ghr, was almost eleven when World War II finally came to an end.  I couldn’t read books, but I could read newspaper articles, maps, cutlines, encyclopedias, National Geographics from 1920s to 1940, and any news items that covered the war or history.   I had two cousins from the  German part of my mother’s family in the Navy on the Japanese front.   Both survived the War.

During the war I heard Kate Smith’s “God Bless America” on radio every day as I recall.    Often at the movies on Sundays this Kate Smith  recording would be played before the main movie immediately after Wartime Movietone News had shown the slaughters at Guadalcanal in the Pacific and/or the boot of Italy.   Mother made certain I had a nickel available for the cause….The movie itself cost a dime….which  was only five cents short of a vital loaf of bread I used to buy at Mrs. Sandy’s Bakery in St. Paul’s Highland Village…..Certain foods, especially meats and  gasoline were heavily rationed.

My dad had bought a second hand 1941 Plymouth four door in September that year…replacing a 1936 four door Ford sedan with shades on the back side windows.  The Plymouth sat in the garage throughout the war.

No one was fat in those days.  The fattest person I ever saw during the war was Kate Smith when she sang our Nation’s song “God Bless America” prelude to the movie!

THE AMERICAN DITSY DEMOCRAT  LEFT, ITS FASCISTIC SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES, NEWS CONTROL,  AND FEMINIST HORDES OF NOISE WITHOUT BRAIN ARE MAKING AMERICA FASCISTIC THESE DAYS…..THEY’VE BECOME  UNCHURCHED AND SO, GODLESS AND GOODLESS…..SO WHAT DO YOU EXPECT, FOLKS?

HAPPY EASTER!

The Dem Leftists Collect Their Crowd to Socialize Our American Republic

The Democrats’ Crowded Clown Car

by Anna L. Stark  at American Thinker:

 

“Overwhelming” is the only word which properly describes the growing list of 2020 Presidential candidates vying to unseat Donald Trump. To date, there are the officially declared, the yet to declare, and a handful of teetering outliers. The outliers aren’t in the running per se, but in the event no Democrat is able to garner the party nomination, one of them might be persuaded to step up to the podium.

The Declared Candidates: Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Robert O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Corey Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Andrew Yang, Julian Castro, Kirsten Gillibrand, Jay Inslee, Tulsi Gabbard, John Hickenlooper, John Delaney, Eric Swalwell, Tim Ryan, Wayne Messam, and Marianne Williamson.

So far, it’s a very crowded field of 18 people; some of whom have no national name recognition but are pandering for votes and shilling for campaign donations in unison.  And therein lies the problem. While there is no clear frontrunner, there is a defined chasm of ideological differences: Socialism versus traditional Democrats. A far left sociopolitical demographic of the Democrat party has emerged and they are fierce. Furthermore, the once shared universal message for liberal voters has been set aside in favor of identity politics, giving rise to single-issue factions. And while the Democratic party’s preeminent goal is removing Donald Trump from the Oval Office, unification of liberals will remain elusive and perhaps, philosophically impossible. Centrist Democrats have fled in numbers which can’t be ignored and should one of the declared far-left candidates get the nomination for 2020, it will be challenging to lure moderate liberals back into the fold; especially in a time of economic prosperity and phenomenal job growth.

The Undeclared candidates: Joe Biden, Steve Bullock, Stacey Abrams, Michael Bennet, Terry McAuliffe, Seth Moulton, and Howard Schultz.

This group of seven holdouts, having made public claims of Presidential aspirations, have yet to make it official.  Howard Schultz has declared himself a potential challenger for the White House but pledged not to run under the Democrat banner. He says he’ll run as an independent; throwing the proverbial monkey wrench into the process. There is no doubt Schultz will divide the Democrat vote; most likely appealing to moderates who won’t support avowed Socialist Bernie Sanders. Joe Biden’s foray back into the public square has been less than stellar, due to the “Me, Too” movement backlash and the swirling controversy about his (and his son’s) part in Ukrainian business deals. Abrams, Bullock, Bennet, McAuliffe, and Moulton are stymied as 2nd -tier candidates lacking campaign staff and having no big donors nor war chests of money to kickstart a campaign. Which leaves the outliers, a motley mix of malcontents and miscreants.

The Outliers:  Bill de Blasio, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, and Tom Steyer.

Each of these five people have announced they are not in the running, but if chaos ensues at the Democrat National Convention in July 2020 and no clear victor is determined, it isn’t inconceivable for an outlier candidate to volunteer in an attempt to quell the confusion. With the exception of Tom Steyer, who has never run for public office but has led a doggedly determined, well-funded, yet unsuccessful effort to impeach Donald Trump, it’s possible that either de Blasio, Kerry, Clinton, or Holder could be called up for duty. Never rule out the improbable, despite the fact that each of these misfits is shackled by notorious political malfeasance. That didn’t stop Hillary Clinton from her White House quest in 2014 and it won’t stop her a third time; if the opportune moment arose.

Finally, there’s an outside possibility that someone yet to be named is lurking in the weeds. Maybe it’s Michelle Obama? Don’t scoff — it’s foolish to automatically dismiss her candidacy. Despite her protests on more than one occasion; stating she has no desire to return to the political arena, the former first lady hasn’t fled the media spotlight since departing the White House. She’s well liked, she has name recognition, and she’s able to check off two important boxes: she’s a woman and she’s black. Michelle Obama also has moxie, political campaign experience, and most importantly, she would absolutely and without a doubt rally the Democrat party at a critical time when there are a plethora of candidate to choose from, but not one of them is a shining star.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/the_democrats_crowded_clown_car_.html

When Will This Dem Fascist Invasion End?

Are There Any Limits to Illegal Immigration?

by Victor Davis Hanson   at AMERICAN GREATNESS:

The U.S.-Mexican border is essentially wide open.

Why? Because there is a general expectation in Mexico and Latin America that American immigration law is unenforced. Or it is so bizarre that simple illegal entry almost always ensures temporary legal residence, pending an asylum hearing.

A scheduled asylum hearing, in turn, is seen by border crossers as a mere formality to be ignored. The popular perception on the border, then, is to stick one foot illegally onto U.S. soil, and, presto, win permanent residence for you and any family members who wish to follow.

In an age of 500 sanctuary city and county jurisdictions, few illegal aliens believe they will ever be deported permanently, even if they have been apprehended committing serious crimes. There is also a general perception among would-be illegal entrants that prominent Democrats and progressives welcome their massive influxes as useful and will do their best to ensure illegal immigration continues unabated.

There is also the assumption that the greater the chaos at the border, the less likely Congress will take bipartisan action to end it. After all, 2020 is an election year and progressives are in no mood to hand Trump the semblance of a legislative victory. This fact is also known to would-be border crossers.

Illegal alien families sense that they are vital to progressive agendas of fundamentally transforming the country by importing first-generation, loyal constituents—a sentiment that is slowly replacing the prior idea of mostly young men coming to work off the books. In an increasingly tribal America, they expect on arrival to be recalibrated instantly from Mexican nationals without any experience of America into “Latinos” and “Hispanics” with historical grievances against the majority population of United States, to be remedied by reparatory hiring and admission, and facilitated by ethnic operatives.

Some polls in the past have suggested that a third of Mexico’s population would immigrate to the United States if possible. The percentages of would-be immigrants from Central America are likely to be even higher. In theory, 50 million could cross the border in the next two decades, which poses the question: what are the theoretical limits on illegal immigration?

When would it cease? When 50 million or 60 million or maybe 80 million foreign nationals entered illegally, without meritocratic criteria or much diversity?

Historically massive influxes of migrants from one nation to another are reflections of imbalances in fertility and demography, and radical political, economic, and cultural asymmetries. People vote en masse with their feet to escape violence, oppression and poverty to flee to a different, indeed antithetical, system that promises them greater security, freedom, and economic opportunity.

Think in the past of mainland China versus Hong Kong, East versus West Germany, North versus South Korea, or Europe versus North Africa and the Middle East. Or consider why indigenous residents of Oaxaca would give up their homeland to travel 2,000 miles to a quite foreign country whose traditions, language, culture, history, and values were often antithetical to their own.

Saturation Nowhere in Sight
Mass population movements end (or never start) if there is border symmetry, in the fashion that Canadian and American immigrants roughly balance each other out.

The promise that Mexico and Central America in the early 21th century would obtain rough economic parity with the United States has not happened, despite progress there and lower birth rates in the United States. But what has transpired is a radical increase in cartel and gang violence, endemic corruption and general lowering of the quality of life south of the border.

Under such conditions, the logical limits of immigration can be calibrated not so much by whether countries south of the border reach parity with American standards of living, freedom, security, and quality of life. But rather the current issue is whether regions of America, especially the American Southwest become roughly indistinguishable from Latin America and Mexico, and therefore in terms of economic opportunity, safety, and quality of life do not offer that much of an improvement—or at least not such a radical margin of enhancement to justify abandoning one’s homeland.

In such an equation, the more that illegal aliens arrive, swamp social services and tax law enforcement, the more that they create ethnic enclaves that resist rapid assimilation and the more that they sense that their hosts see them most useful as an identity politics constituency, then the more parts of the southwestern United States will seem more like Mexico, and perhaps to the point of eventually diminishing illegal immigration.

No one knows what the saturation point might be of illegal and unassimilated immigration, but influxes are now approximating each month a mid-sized American city. In theory, we may already be nearing a point where many immigrants are starting to see their new homes as not all that different from Mexico—although in general far more expensive.

How Illegal Immigration Changes Us
Illegal immigration and its effects on a community are incremental but steady. This past week, two miles from my home, an illegal alien fled the scene of an accident that he had caused, which killed a pregnant Mexican-American and critically injured her 11-year-old daughter. He is still at large. Within a 100-mile radius of central California, at least five citizens were killed by illegal alien gunmen in the last four months. When I go to town to drop off dry cleaning, I rarely hear English spoken. Almost all the stores in the shopping center (where I have gone for 50 years) have Spanish names. Few English signs are apparent or needed.

The formerly rich diverse community of Japanese-, Armenian-, Basque-, Portuguese-, Mexican- and Scandinavian-Americans have long since vanished. I stopped riding a bike in my rural environs four years ago, given the packs of unlicensed and unvaccinated dogs, and the owners indifference to their attacks on passersby.From experience of driving each week across the Central Valley to the California coast, I assume that about one of every 20 cars at rural intersections will run the stop sign. I make the further assumption that if I am hit, the driver of the other car may well flee the scene and has no license, insurance or registration—and has never felt any real need to obtain them.

In my immediate rural environs, there is now the following: 1) an illegal dump of various junk, wrecked cars, and discarded household items; 2) a strange open-air vacant storage lot dotted with porta potties, trailers and assorted junk spread over five acres; 3) a bizarre sort of camp, in which lean-tos, shacks, and tents are hidden among an old persimmon orchard, where no one quite knows how many such structures are hidden inside the mysterious grove; 4) a permanent hanging gardens of Babylon-type of yard sale where a home’s trees and bushes are littered with hanging clothing and flotsam and jetsam, some of them rotting from the recent rains; 5) a former backyard that is now a small goat mart; 6) an unlicensed, ad hoc outdoor barber shop; 7) an unlicensed, ad hoc outdoor daycare center.

I’ll stop there, but the avenue where I have lived for 65 years in terms of the fundamental metrics of civilization—sanitation, single-family zoning, building codes, mosquito abatement, dog licensing and registration, and sanctions for illicit activity—has regressed a half-century or more.

Officials apparently assume that visiting these places can become a lose-lose-lose situation: the miscreant will not comply with citations, the bureaucratic costs of enforcement are not offset by collectable fines, and the touchy subject of illegal immigration may earn either unfavorable press coverage or censure from politically sensitive county and local officials. In other words, we are a world away from Nancy Pelosi’s gated Napa estate, or Dianne Feinstein’s $40 million hilltop Pacific Heights mansion but not from the results of their ideology.

Future Without Law
Life down the street is conducted mostly on the premises of rural Mexico, where one does what one pleases or must in terms of water, power, sanitation, business, commerce, leisure, and pets, without audit from authorities.

If one reads either the local or regional papers, it is composed of stories about one of three themes.

One, the disturbing litany of DUIs, gang stabbings and shootings, fatal hit-and-run accidents, police shootings of armed suspects, high-speed chases, robberies, and drug busts.

Two, there are also many human interest inspirational stories of illegal aliens from Mexico who are running successful businesses, whose children are star athletes or students. The subtext is not that they are doing the exceptional things other Americans are not doing, but that they merit special attention and approbation because of their immigrant status and the obstacles they have overcome.

Three, the grievance or victimization meme: the lawsuit against law enforcement, the filing of a bias claim against the county, the firing of an official for some alleged insensitivity, or the injustice of some agency that has curtailed support from, tried to deport, or was somehow biased against, an illegal alien.

The point is, that unlike the past, almost every new story is grounded in some sort of overt ethnic context, and ultimately related to illegal immigration and its effects.

Latino and Hispanic citizens, to the extent that they identify as such, may in the American Southwest be the key to the future of illegal immigration. So far, they have put up with higher taxes, swamped social services, gang activity, hit and run accidents and subpar schools that are the wages of illegal immigration, on the theory of ethnic solidarity and of general sympathy with the underclass of which many now in the middle class were once a part.

But no one wishes to have a neighbor who is an MS-13 member, or schools where non-English speakers hold back collective learning, or to be hit by an unlicensed driver who flees the scene. For successfully assimilated Hispanics there is a growing resentment that they are being used to support political agendas that are not conducive to improving the quality of life in their own backyards.

Translated that means, for example, that California’s high income, sales, and gas taxes, along with sky-high housing, electricity, and gasoline costs, do not make one sympathetic to millions who arrive illegally and without English skills or a high school diploma but with plenty of instant needs for state services.

In sum, either when Mexico resembles California, Texas, Arizona, or New Mexico, or when these border states resemble Mexico, then illegal immigration will likely cease. Conventional wisdom has always postulated that declining birth rates, economic reforms, and globalization south of the border will discourage Mexicans and Central Americans from coming north as rough parity is achieved.

But it may be that as so many have already come north—and they are coming in increasing numbers—and as so few feel a need to assimilate, that an impoverished “north” is no longer a promised land and thus not necessarily a place for which it is worth abandoning one’s homeland.

The other day I noticed for the first time that I have a lot more fear of an oncoming car in rural California than I had of intersections in Libya; a lot more worries about a wild stray dog wandering into my yard than I did while living in Greece; a lot more anxiety of being shot or robbed than I did when visiting the current Middle East; and a lot less hope of being treated promptly in extremis at the local emergency room than I would have expected in Eastern Europe.

In that strange sense, I guess I have some hope that illegal immigration will soon taper off.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/04/14/are-there-any-limits-to-illegal-immigration/

Liberalism, Atheism, Feminism, Fascism worship the gods they invent!

Liberalism as Religion

The Culture War Is Between Religious Believers on Both Sides

by Howard P. Kainz        (Article sent by Mark Waldeland!)
https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=19-04-022-f

Many Christians view the “culture war” as a clash between religious believers and secularist “liberals.” But there are liberals . . . and there are liberals. Most of the heat of battle occurs where traditional religious believers clash with certain liberals who are religiously committed to secular liberalism.

This explains why talking about abortion or same-sex “marriage,” for example, with certain liberals is usually futile. It is like trying to persuade a committed Muslim to accept Christ. Because his religion forbids it, he can only do so by converting from Islam to Christianity; he cannot accept Christ as long as he remains firmly committed to Islam. So it is with firmly committed liberals: Their “religion” forbids any concessions to the “conservative” agenda, and as long as they remain committed to their secular ideology, it is futile to hope for such concessions from them.

But can a secular ideology fairly be classified as a religion?

[ . . . ]

. . . It is important that discussions between liberals and conservatives take place, but these are usually only possible with moderate liberals. A conservative can bring up a religiously charged topic with a moderate liberal, with the result that reasonable, multi-sided representations of the topic will be aired in the public square.

But with a religiously committed liberal, calm intellectual debates are rarely possible. For example, the elegant arguments against abortion presented by Hadley Arkes in his 2002 book, Natural Rights and the Right to Choose, will invite thoughtful responses from moderate liberals, but religiously committed liberals will dismiss the arguments unread, considering them on par with the doctrines contained in the tracts handed out by Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormon missionaries. In other words, their motivation is a faith-commitment, the abjuring of which will necessarily result in personal guilt, infidelity to their spiritual community, and possible ostracism if they prove to be embarrassments to liberal believers.

There are no professional cult-breakers to rescue victims from this recent and already widespread religious movement. It is ironic that those who most strongly denounce fundamentalism should prove to be such fundamentalists themselves. While they may constitute a minority of all contemporary liberals, theirs may be the dominant liberal voice in the public square. Therefore, for the advancement of family and pro-life values, and rational sexual norms, it is important for Christians to be able to distinguish the moderate liberal from his religiously committed counterpart. Among the former, allies may be found; among the latter, only firm opponents. •