• 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

Jonah Goldberg’s GOP War Against Our Donald

There definitely is a Jewish GOP hate war against Our Donald.   It has persisted for two years perhaps even to forever since the time Our Donald’s name first politically drifted the Republican way.  Jonah Goldberg, Bernie Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, and Ben Shapiro immediately come to mind as I write this critique.

I was raised in the late 1930s through the 1950s in a Jewish minority community in St. Paul, Minnesota.   If truth were allow to be told, this community was, in general, disdainful  of Christians, rude in and after  school regarding Christianity, and cold in general to anyone who wasn’t ‘kinfolk’.  They, my fellow students,  competed among each other for best grades which with some included cheat notes here and there during tests.    Despite Jewish competitiveness, learning knowledge and getting along in America were the primary goals of public schooling K through 8th grade in those days…..even before the War.

I was trained, programmed at home to be obedient, polite, honest, and well behaved by my parents as were those in school  related to me at that time.   Getting good grades was never mentioned by my parents.  Behavior trouble would be unthinkable.   My Mother who was exceptionally alert to anything in real life,  graduated 8th grade before entering the adult competitive world of life at age 12 in 1918.

I taught Russian and Senior Social Studies in high school for twelve years that  past century…..when the American school standards for civility and learning were already in decline.   Forced busing, black rioting and revolting in and out of school,  and  foul politics were becoming  popular rages.

Although terribly dyslexic, I was very well educated, K through College and Graduate school, not because of my parents or relatives,  because of my demanding teachers and the Jewish students with whom I mixed.  I was able to  LOVE LEARNING and still do to this very day.

I used to read newspapers until about fifteen years ago.  I followed feverishly  every presidential election since Harry Truman beat Thomas Dewey in 1948.   I learned to speak Russian quite fluently and visited the USSR prison for humanity on two occasions….1966 and 1990.

I have known Donald J. Trump from the newspapers  for at least a quarter of a century, but    I am not a tv guy.    I personally don’t know rich, competitive, urban in-ones-face people like him….and New York City is a different world from my interests and occupation.  (My daughter and her husband, my son-in-law….a good guy, even a typical New York lefty Jewish guy make a good pair and living there…God bless them.)   I am an outdoor guy where I still work for a living.   I love what I do.

It was August 6, 2015 I fell in love for Our Donald as President to be….and my respect and affection for him achieving what he has accomplished expands every day since that television performance at the first Fox News GOP presidential “debate”….that Rosie O’Donnell evening.    I spent much of the next month exploring the internet to learn more about him……special, brilliant, quick minded, proud, fanatic problem solver, respected by those who work for him, and like I, has a Jewish son-in-law whom he likes and respects.

It was meant to be….for Donald J. Trump LOVES HIS and MY AMERICA.  He is fully aware of the garbage dump it has come to be, AD2016-17….cultural, educational, moral, the violence, feminazism, black racism, fatherlessness, the greed, the drugs, the invasion of millions illegal and legal who are stashed in sanctuary cities where they learn to hate the country and vote Democrat.

Leftist American Jews don’t exist outdoors.   There is no money in farming, raising plants, creating landscapes.   Yet they believe in Global Warming is  caused by Americans.  It is a killer  unless one votes LEFTIST.  They own the New York Times and the Washington Post, etcetera, etcetera….and are well distributed throughout the nation, Democrat Party, law, and other worlds of communications.

I expected conservative Jews, only  20% to 30% of our American Jewish population to be more circumspect than their leftist fanatics.   Intelligent indoor Krauthammer carps against Our Donald consistently even regarding the totally insignificant….Shapiro and Bernie are viscious, for they have that fever….and then there is Jonah Goldberg, a normal appearing intelligent and otherwise tolerant, gentle, patient as well as learned one.

I adore Our Donald because with the Krauthammers, Goldbergs and all, the country is in a stage of collapse….imploding into chaos, ignorance, and such celebrated by the Left at universities, in newsprint, on  television everywhere including regular Fox, and the haters at MSNBC,  PBS, NBC, ABC, CBS and sanctuary city schools from coast to coast where fascism runs the shows.

Even my hero, Dennis Prager, prior to the Trump nomination celebrated a certain arrogant bravado-bigotry disdaining Our Donald without pause, without shame, never interviewing him personally, never once reviewing the countless winsome qualities the skilled problem solving, highly energetic  New Yorker has demonstrated again and again in his adult life…. a winner….an AMERICAN WINNER WHO HAPPENS TO BE CONSERVATIVE!!!!

Hero Prager, may GOD bless him, came through, however.   He knows his failing United States of America well.  He knows we cannot rely on the Republican Party of today to be American conservative….but there is a chance with TRUMP as leader….a man who does not like to fail!!!!  A man who loves his country and does know it is in disrepair.

I am an EVERTRUMPER.    I have researched Our Donald and have found him wonderful, bright, gutsy, direct,  not a politician, but a deal maker to get the country going again…….

Urban Jonah Goldberg writes about my MIND in his recent article in the National Review.   Please eventually read the entire article.   Ask yourself  why such a civil, rational person Jonah Goldberg certainly seems to be, still stands for Our Donald to disappear suggesting he has taken over the Party as a fascist.

Our Donald is NOT a leftist Obama  fascist interested in making America a one party dictatorship of forced equality run by the elite.     He is a traditional American business guy who loves his country and is deeply concerned about its future.

Please read the following Jonah Goldberg review of the MIND OF THE EVERTRUMPER…….and wonder whom he interviewed:

THE MIND OF THE EVERTRUMPER

I am not a big fan of psychologizing. But since I am subjected every day to a barrage of claims based upon what people think my thinking is, I feel compelled to turn the tables and offer a bit of mind-reading of my own. This Jeff Sessions conundrum is all part of a larger trend unfolding right before our eyes. I wrote about it a bit on the Corner earlier this week. The Grand Old Party, at least for some, is now a New Party of One. When conservatives criticize Trump, the common response is “support your party!” or “RINO!” But when the interests of the party and the personality diverge, the same people tend to lambaste the party on the “principle” that Trump demands the greater loyalty. I’ve been using the phrase “Cult of Personality” a lot because that’s what this dynamic often seems like. But, the more I think about it, a Cult of Personality is a far grander thing than what we have here. That concept enlists phrases like “divinization” and “secular religion,” and we could spend years talking about Marx and Weber and what they had to say, never mind all that Stalin stuff. People forget that the actual title of Khrushchev’s “secret speech” exposing Stalin was actually “On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences.” Moreover, contrary to what some of Trump’s biggest critics on the left and his biggest fans on the swampier right may think, Trump is no Stalin. While it’s certainly true that there are people sufficiently enthralled with Trump to open themselves up to the charge of being cultists, I don’t think the blind worship of “Cult 45” explains as much as it once did. I mean, sure, if you’re still convinced that everything Trump has done has been brilliant and farsighted, if you can read the president’s New York Times interview and push back from the table with the deep satisfaction that once again the master has out-thought his foes, if you still think his “I alone can fix it!” vow was anything other than the kind of bluster that traditionally leaves you with cider in your ear, then you might as well lead your herd of 50 bulls down to Trump Tower and sacrifice them to your Latter Day Baal. But let’s be honest, the chances that Donald Trump will be a great president — never mind capital-G Great in the historical sense — are now only slightly better than my chances of getting a Super Bowl ring. I say “slightly better” because he is president after all, and historical greatness shares some things in common with the real-estate business and show business: Location and simply showing up matter a lot. Who knows what events might bring? Perhaps we will be visited by orange-hued hostile aliens who speak the language of condo salesmen?

RATIONALIZATION BE MY GUIDE         Anyway, I think there’s a different dynamic at work, at least for some people. I wrote about it in a column last March, after Trump gave a good speech before a joint session of Congress. For those Republicans who are not sold on Trump the man and are nervous about all the distractions and unforced political errors of his first weeks in office, the address was a massive relief. Finally, one heard from nearly all quarters of the skeptical-but-hopeful right, he’s getting his act together. It’s a bit like when a loved one has a drinking problem or some other pathology. When they get their act together, even for a day or two, parents and siblings take heart and say, “This is the first day of the rest of his life.” Or “Now things are going to be different.” It’s an understandable response. But both the head-in-the-sand denial from the left and the “We’re cooking with gas now!” cheerleading from the right encourage people to ignore the substance. That I could have written the exact same thing in the wake of the president’s speeches in Warsaw or Riyadh simply underscores that this has become something of a permanent dynamic of the Trump presidency. But note: The father who doesn’t want to see his son’s faults or the wife who can’t bring herself to see that her husband’s abusiveness isn’t a bug but a feature aren’t worshipful. They’re guilt-ridden and in denial. And in the process, they rationalize vices into virtues. Rationalization, explains professor Wikipedia, encourages irrational or unacceptable behavior, motives, or feelings and often involves ad hoc hypothesizing. This process ranges from fully conscious (e.g. to present an external defense against ridicule from others) to mostly unconscious (e.g. to create a block against internal feelings of guilt or shame). People rationalize for various reasons — sometimes when we think we know ourselves better than we do. Put on your hip boots and wade into the swampier recesses of Twitter, Facebook, online comment sections, or Sean Hannity’s oeuvre and you’ll see riots of rationalization. Trump’s lying is celebrated. His petty vindictiveness is redefined as leadership. Cheating is strength. Ben Shapiro argues that Trump has liberated some people who deep down have felt this way all along: All of which suggests that Trump isn’t the engine, he’s the hood ornament for a certain movement that now feels liberated from traditional rules of decent behavior. Trump allows us to indulge our id and feel righteous while doing it. We grew up believing that decent behavior made you a decent person — but then we realized that breaking the rules not only makes victory easier, it’s more fun than having to struggle with the moral qualms of using moral means to achieve moral ends. So we’ve constructed a backwards logic to absolve ourselves of moral responsibility. The first premise: The other side, which wants bad things, cheats and lies and acts in egregious ways. I’m sure that’s true for some. But I think for many more the dynamic works the other way around. Otherwise — or formerly — decent people find it so unthinkable to admit that Trump is in over his head and not a good person that they simply engage in the fallacy of ad hoc hypothesizing. Again Dr. Wikipedia: In science and philosophy, an ad hoc hypothesis is a hypothesis added to a theory in order to save it from being falsified. Often, ad hoc hypothesizing is employed to compensate for anomalies not anticipated by the theory in its unmodified form. This trait is hardly unique to Trump. When it’s unseasonably cold in summer, when it rains too much or too little in California, never mind when satellite data refuse to cooperate, global-warming alarmists race to bend the facts to the theory by modifying the theory. When George W. Bush would butcher syntax like it was a wayward traveler in a Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie, his defenders — who once worshipped the Gipper’s skill as The Great Communicator — would leap to explain he was “speaking American.” And don’t even get me started with the rationalizations that sustained the Obama presidency. A year ago, Donald Trump was the only man who could beat the dishonest Left and the unfair media at their own game. A year ago, Donald Trump was the only man who could beat the dishonest Left and the unfair media at their own game because he was a media-master and genius dealmaker. He could appeal to Democrats and independents because his vaunted “flexibility” wasn’t locked into True Conservatism or Conservatism, Inc. Now his failures to make deals, his inability to break out of a base-only strategy that is only embraced by the very conservatives he scorned, and his Kelvin-range approval among independents and Democrats all invite a cascade of new hypotheses to place blame everywhere but on the man who, according to the original theory, was supposed to be the one leader capable of overcoming all that. Much of the writing at the blog American Greatness seems to be dedicated to the crafting of new hypotheses to keep the myth of the original theory alive. Even now, you can hear the wheels turning to explain that with poor Sean Spicer now securely under the bus, the true Trump will emerge.

YOU F’D UP, YOU TRUSTED HIM        It’s always hard to admit you were wrong about something in which you invested a lot of energy and emotion. And for some people, admitting that Mr. Only I Can Fix It really had no idea what he was talking about most of the time is too bitter a pill to swallow. It’s even harder when you were warned at the time that you were being conned. As Kevin Williamson wrote in May of 2016: Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this. Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one Clinton-supporting con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it. Of course, there are conventional political reasons why many people don’t want to admit the error of their ways. Pragmatically, what good would it do? You only have one president at a time. “Of course he’s a hot mess. But he is getting some important things done,” goes this argument, “and if Republicans and conservatives support him, he can get so many more important things done.” This is the argument I hear most from readers, congressmen, denizens of the Fox News green room, and fellow conservative journalists. And it has some merit, particularly when liberals screech that agreeing with Trump on conservative policies is a kind of appeasement. For instance, James Fallows heaps scorn on Senator Ben Sasse because “he leads all senators in his thoughtful, scholarly ‘concern’ about the norms Donald Trump is breaking — and then lines up and votes with Trump 95 percent of the time.” As Ramesh demonstrates with his typically Vulcan economy of language, this is absurd. Ramesh writes: Take that 95 percent figure mentioned by Fallows. Was Senator Lindsey Graham really supposed to vote to keep regulations he considered unwise on the books because he opposes Vladimir Putin? Was Senator John McCain really supposed to vote against confirming Alex Acosta as Labor secretary because the president tweets like a maladjusted 12-year-old? Fallows’s position is a mirror image of the Trump cultists. For the member of Cult 45, Trump is a demigod and whatever he says must be right. For the anti-Trump cultist, Trump is a demon, and whatever Trump does or says must be evil and wrong. Both positions are delusional. This points to why I have such admiration for National Review and other traditional conservative outlets which have managed to keep their heads. For instance, David French and Andy McCarthy have offered full-throated praise of Trump when they thought he deserved it and they have offered full-throated criticism when they felt it warranted. That this approach is denounced by the Manichean extremists on both sides tells you how deep the fever of tribalism has become.

TRUMP, PARTY OF ONE      I have few illusions about my ability to talk anyone out of their delusions, particularly liberals. But it is part of my job description to try, particularly with conservatives. To say I have failed — largely true — is not an argument against making the effort. If you’re a cultist, the only thing that will snap you out of it is Trump himself. At some point, he will do something that will cause the worshippers — or at least most of them — to recognize he was a false god all along. It will be like that scene in The Man Who Would be King, when the girl bites Sean Connery on the cheek. When he bleeds, the faithful realize he is but a mortal. But in the meantime, horrible damage is being done, because the rationalizations and tribalism are being institutionalized. Clicks-from-cultists media outlets strive to justify and rationalize every failure as a success and every setback as part of the master plan. If you don’t see it, you’re part of the establishment, a globalist, or an elitist. The RNC is reportedly refusing to support Republican candidates who criticized Donald Trump in the wake of the Access Hollywood video. “[The president] is unhappy with anyone who neglected him in his hour of need,” an anonymous RNC insider explained. Horrible damage is being done, because the rationalizations and tribalism are being institutionalized. This is sickening madness. If this is true, then the logical inference is that the GOP as a party believes that there was nothing wrong with the president’s conduct, even though he was a Democrat at the time. Or, perhaps, that there is nothing so wrong with what he said — and what he claimed he did — that it can justify breaking faith in the Leader. That is moral rot on an institutional scale and the people aiding and abetting it should be ashamed of themselves. The party needs to support the president, to be sure. But it must support other things — decency, principles, truth — even more. When it ceases to do that, it ceases to be the Grand Old Party and becomes a Venal New Party.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/g-file/449747/donald-trump-defenders-rationalizing-failure

Freedom of Speech?

July 4th and Freedom of Speech

By Elise Cooper at American Thinker:

“Americans should reflect on why July Fourth is such a special holiday. Apart from the birth of the U.S. as an independent nation they should not forget why the Bill of Rights was ratified as part of the Constitution in 1792. There is a reason why the Founders placed Freedom of Speech as the First Amendment.

In including that amendment, they had the utmost confidence that Americans would have common sense. Today, they would probably be turning over in their graves considering the rhetoric coming out of the leftists, celebrities, politicians, and the press mouths. No one is arguing that these people do not have their First Amendment rights to make these horrific comments, but where is the common sense?

After the four Republicans were shot on June 14th, there were calls to tone down the rhetoric, but it was just talk. While introducing his latest film in London, actor Johnny Depp asked the crowd how long has it been since “”an actor assassinated a president,” playing off the Lincoln murder while referring to President Donald Trump. Dan Weber, who founded a conservative alternative to AARP, is horrified that a standing senator, Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said, “I’ve read the Republican ‘health care’ bill. This is blood money. They’re paying for tax cuts with American lives.” He wondered “were there any consequences…? Absolutely not!”

Let’s not forget those who speak publicly, write critically, or satirize militant Islam. They are on the receiving end of violence, threats of violence, and/or lawsuits. Possibly because terrorists realize that freedom of speech is one of the greatest weapons to defeat them. Their response is to have those who challenge them fear for their lives. Recapping just a few instances: The firebombing of Charlie Hebdo‘s offices in Paris in 2011 after the magazine “invited” the Prophet Muhammad as its guest editor; Comedy Central, which airs “South Park,” censored a 2010 episode by excising a segment that originally had the Prophet Muhammad depicted in a bear costume and then turned him into Santa Claus; Theo van Gogh’s movie, Submission, was not aired in many venues; and the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy (or Muhammad cartoons crisis) began after 12 editorial cartoons that depicted Muhammad were self-censored from most Western publications, including Yale University Press. Van Gogh and the staff of Charlie Hebdo were, of course, later murdered by Muslim fanatics. The al-Qaeda hit list of eleven names with the heading “Wanted, Dead or Alive for Crimes Against Islam” is meant in dead earnest.

So why didn’t the Western governments defend these individual rights of freedom of speech? Was it political correctness? The hypocrisy is overwhelming. The explanation by the media is that they want to be “sensitive” and not be offensive. The New York Times explained in 2006 that it would not publish the Mohammad cartoons because of the symbols. Yet, one day later, they ran a picture of a painting that showed the Virgin Mary covered in elephant poop. Time magazine’s Bruce Crumley, the Paris Bureau Chief in 2011, wrote this about Charlie Hebdo, “Okay, so can we finally stop with the idiotic, divisive, and destructive efforts by “majority sections” of Western nations to bait Muslim members with petulant, futile demonstrations that “they” aren’t going to tell “us” what can and can’t be done in free societies?” And the Washington Post article commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Orlando shooting said nothing of Islamic extremism.

Another battlefront for the war against freedom of speech is on the college campuses. Alan Dershowitz brilliantly said, “What they stand for is the oldest notion, ‘free speech for me, but not for thee.’ Certain groups do not deserve more free speech than others.” Unfortunately, those attending U.S. colleges today do not appear to understand the First Amendment. According to a Pew Poll taken in November 2015, 40 percent of millennials are “OK with limiting free speech that is offensive to minorities.” When asked if they believe in free speech, a majority of Millennials say they believe in it except in cases of “hate speech.”

Most colleges look the other way as protesting mobs shout down speakers, depriving them and those who want to listen of their First Amendment rights. Freedom of speech does not give these people the right to prevent a speaker from being heard. Take for example UC Berkeley, which refused to provide security for conservative speakers, thus limiting freedom of speech. Yet, Berkeley has welcomed prominent radical Islamists, speakers who have openly called for violence and bigotry, because they fit within the accepted political framework.

Whether having a picnic or shooting off fireworks, Americans need to understand that one of its core values, freedom of speech, should never be suppressed. Yet, common sense needs to be considered when threatening someone else. After all, no one can yell fire in a public theater. The Founders would probably argue that when they wrote about freedom of speech they took into account the right to the First Amendment comes with some responsibility.”

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/06/july_4th_and_freedom_of_speech.html

Germans Just Another Tribe in Germany?

Before traditional Americans, the ones once civilized democratic  JudeoChristian, now determinedly LEFTIST, therefore religiously pagan at best, transfer America the Beautiful into Sanctuary City savage country  plotting to rue their way with revolution, perhaps they should think about what their like-minded are doing to destroy Germany as a civilized community.

Nazi atheist leftists  had their turn to begin poisoning  humanity shortly after World War I.  Following the holocaust of World War II, the eastern part, the Prussian one had the honor of being tortured by the Soviet Left, led at first by St. Leftist Joseph Stalin, himself.   Remember the wall?   That could have been built by today’s Charlie Schumer Democrats now in love with Sanctuary Cities and seceding California to Mexico…..a better, bitter  culture for ripping off the poor to sell Obama controls.

Lisa Rich of California sent the following colorful article:

Frankfurt Becomes First German City Where Natives Are Minority

For the first time, more than half of Frankfurt residents now have a migrant background, according to official data from the city’s Office of Statistics and Elections.

Presenting the figures, which show that 51.2 per cent of people living in Frankfurt have a migrant background, the city’s secretary of integration Sylvia Weber said: “We have minorities with relatively large numbers in Frankfurt but no group with a clear majority.”
Representing 13 per cent of the population, Turks are the city’s largest non-German minority, and 61 per cent of residents who were born abroad are citizens of other European Union (EU) countries.
Entitled Frankfurt Integration and Diversity Monitoring, the 200-page report is to provide a basis for the city to respond to inequalities, for example with regards to employment, education, or housing.
Economically, the report shows big disparities between foreigners and Germans, with the income of 49 per cent of people with roots outside Germany falling below the poverty line compared to 23 per cent amongst natives.
In terms of employment rates, 83 per cent of German men and 78 per cent of German women are in work, figures which drop to 73 per cent and 59 per cent amongst men and women with foreign backgrounds, respectively.
Weber hailed the rate of single motherhood amongst women of foreign origin, which the report showed was significantly higher than that of native Germans in the city, as “a possible sign that female migrants are emancipating themselves”, and called for more research into the subject.
A book published last year which predicted native Germans would soon be reduced to a minority in Frankfurt, Augsburg, and Stuttgart — joining other “majority minority” cities in Europe which include Amsterdam, London, Brussels, and Geneva  — celebrates the demographic transformations as providing greater opportunities for “social justice”.
Noting that two-thirds of young people in many of Western Europe’s major cities are of foreign origin, the authors of Super-Diversity: A New Perspective on Integrationslammed politicians’ calls for newcomers to assimilate, stating: “If there is no longer an ethnic majority group, everyone will have to adapt to everyone else. Diversity will become the new norm.”
Immigration researcher Jens Schneider and his co-authors Maurice Crul and Frans Lelie admit “this will require one of the largest psychological shifts of our time”. But the authors assert that “soon, everyone living in a large European city will belong to an ethnic minority group, just as they do in New York”, a city they describe as a “vibrant metropolitan melting pot”.
Glenn asks…..  “Wanna bet?”

Obama’s Criminal Enterprise Collapsing?

Eight years of Obama crimes have passed, at last.   The nation is in turmoil.  It was allowed, encouraged by Obama Washington  to be invaded for electoral purposes by establishing  sanctuary city foreign settlements protected from Federal law.

America has become  more criminal, more ignorant,  far less educated, more violent,  more on the dole with countless more illegal ‘voters’ to feed and clothe, who collectively have no or little  interest in becoming Americans with traditional American values.   They are to be served…..Move over and make room, you born Americans!  Democrats need votes to secure their leftist fascist empire.

Our American educational systems, K through college, the country’s  communications industries,  urban black plantation racists,  and feminists of all sexes, shapes, colors and sizes, even leftist controlled urban courts     united with sanctuary city illegals to tear the country apart by ignoring, opposing  its Constitutional foundations.   These leftist foreigners and programmed unAmerican Democrats  have destroyed  the once honorable Democratic  Party of President John F. Kennedy, at least for the time being, having  been temporarily  neutralized by Republican, Donald J. Trump’s remarkable victory this past November.

Our United States had never endured a criminal presidency until Communist-Socialist Barack Obama oiled his way into the White House with his suave language, arrogance, his protected  color and control of the nation’s mass media.

No one seemed to collect the courage to investigate his Communist ideological  and racist background in his college and Jeremiah Wright Church years, especially the hate America crowds he cherished, the twentieth century American  socialist rabble rouser, Saul Alinsky,  he adored, emulated,  and ‘adopted’ as himself.   No one seems to want to remember the Stalinist Soviet-like political ditties composed for urban black children to memorize and sing during the early Obama government years as if they lived along the Neva.

No one, especially in the press, wanted to be smeared  a “RACIST” in the New York Times and Washington Post by in any way criticizing the leftist, racist, Chicago charlatan democrat.

No one including Republicans dared investigate the spying, the political racist manipulating, protecting 20,000,000 illegal immigrants to become Obamaling voters forever, protected and financed in these sanctuaries urban zones paid  at  taxpayers’ expense!

HAS THE FASCIST STENCH OF THE  OBAMA ERA SWAMP FINALLY COME TO BE EXPOSED?    (Please read the following!)

Obama’s Criminal Enterprise Collapsing

By Daniel John Sobieski   at American Thinker:

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/06/obamas_criminal_enterprise_collapsing.html

 

A Kind Review of International Communist Democrat, Obama Funder George Soros

The major of all funders of things Socialist-Communist Left in our America’s now fascistic Democrat Party, is Hungarian immigrant billionaire, George Soros.

Please read the following rather gentle, cuddly  account of well known communist George  Soros’   record devoted to    destroy  democracy in America:

George Soros on His Open Society

By Paul Austin Murphy

“There is something to sympathise with when it comes to George Soros’ position on what he calls “the open society”. However, judging him by his political deeds, there are many reasons to be sceptical. Therefore, in loyalty to the ad hominem fallacy, can his words can stand despite his deeds? Having said that, many of his words (though taken at different times) are also self-contradictory.

Soros’s understanding of Karl Popper — from whom he got the idea of an open society — seems to be broadly correct in its largely unspecified and vague details. (As primarily expressed in Popper’s well-known book The Open Society and its Enemies.) It is that Popperian vision which people can have some sympathy with; not Soros’s own ill-defined take on it.

Here’s George Soros on the — or his — open society. He says:

“An open society such as ours is based on the recognition that our understanding of reality is inherently imperfect. Nobody is in possession of the ultimate truth. As the philosopher Karl Popper has shown, the ultimate truth is not attainable even in science. All theories are subject to testing and the process of replacing old theories with better ones never ends.”

No one can deny that “our understanding of reality is inherently imperfect”. It’s what the consequences of our accepting that are. It’s also the case that “nobody [not even George Soros] is in possession of the ultimate truth”. But so what? No one claimed otherwise outside of crazed fanatics and dictators.

In any case, what Soros says on the subject of open societies seems written into modern democracies regardless of the work of Karl Popper. It can even be said that Soros’s own version is vague; though it will still be anathema to any kind of totalitarian (whether Left or Right).

Why mention totalitarians? Because both Karl Popper and Soros experienced Nazi totalitarianism. Soros also experienced communist totalitarianism.

Soros (in his George Soros on Globalization and interviews) wrote:

“You know, I learned at a very early age that what kind of social system or political system prevails is very important. Not just for your well-being, but for your very survival. Because, you know, I could have been killed by the Nazis. I could have wasted my life under the Communists. So, that’s what led me to this idea of an open society. And that is the idea that is motivating me.”

The obvious point to make here is that Soros sees the open society in very personal terms. Perhaps that’s not a big deal. However, according to other people, and indeed Soros himself, his experiences with the Nazis were entirely positive.

Soros’s Politicised Open Societies

The interesting thing is, according to Soros, that the open society needn’t be instantiated by any particular political system. Not even exclusively by Western democracies. This is what Soros himself had to say (in 2003) on the matter:

“First, there is no single sustainable model for national success. Second, the American model, which has indeed been successful, is not available to others, because our success depends greatly on our dominant position at the center of the global capitalist system, and we are not willing to yield it.”

There may not be a “single sustainable model for national success.” Nevertheless, it surely must be the case that we can rule out certain models — even many models.

All this makes me think that if Soros’s open society is so flexible (or so obscure), then surely it can’t be much of a productive (or substantive) political concept. If it isn’t instantiated by Western democracies, then how much meat can there be to his theory of an open society? (We’ll see in a second that Soros’s theorising about an open society is very different from his practice in politics itself.)

Soros’s defence of the open society includes believing that “it’s possible to be opposed to the policies without being unpatriotic”. In full:

“The people currently in charge have forgotten the first principle of an open society, namely that we may be wrong and that there has to be free discussion. That it’s possible to be opposed to the policies without being unpatriotic.”…….Please read on:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/06/george_soros_on_his_open_society.html

Obama Crawls out of the Woodwork on “ObamaCare” Two

“Meanness afloat”, this noted American guru laments!  “Listen to me, your Papa Doc”….”You know from my legacy I know your finest goodies for  zoo America.   Poor babies!  My clan knows how to run the world and where you Americans belong!

Trust me!……your B.O.”

Obama slams ‘fundamental meanness’ of Senate healthcare bill

by Max Greenwood   at the Hill:

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/339035-obama-slams-fundamental-meanness-at-the-core-of-senate-healthcare-bill

WSJ: Anatomy of a Witch Hunt

Anatomy of a Witch Hunt

The Trump-Russia scare comes from the same playbook as fake cancer scares.

by Holman Jenkins   at the Wall Street Journal:

“Americans won’t be really good citizens until they read Timur Kuran and Cass Sunstein’s 1999 law review article about “availability cascades.”

Their launching point is the process by which we (i.e., human beings) decide to believe what others believe, and judge the truth of a proposition by how familiar it is. Such “availability cascades” drive government policy in good ways and bad, but usually bad. An example the authors analyze in detail is 1989’s fake “Alar” cancer scare that devastated U.S. apple growers.

Which brings us to today’s question: How did it become widely believed in the first half of 2017 that a U.S. president committed treason with Russia?

Consider what has passed for proof in the media. Tens of thousands of Americans have done business with Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union, not to mention before.

In 2009 President Obama made the first of his two trips to Russia with a gaggle of U.S. business leaders in tow.

Of these many thousands, four were associated with the Trump campaign, and now became evidence of Trump collusion with Russia.

Every president for 75 years has sought improved relations with Russia. That’s what those endless summits were about. Mr. Trump, in his typically bombastic way, also promoted improved relations with Russia. Now this was evidence of collusion.

Russian diplomats live in the U.S. and rub shoulders with countless Americans. Such shoulder-rubbing, if Trump associates were involved, now is proof of crime.

The Alar pesticide scare only took off when activists whom Messrs. Kuran and Sunstein label “availability entrepreneurs” peddled deceptive claims to a credulous “60 Minutes.” We would probably not be having this Russia discussion today if not for the so-called Trump dossier alleging improbable, lurid connections between Donald Trump and the Kremlin.

It had no provenance that anyone was bound to respect or rely upon. Its alleged author, a retired British agent named Christopher Steele, supposedly had Russian intelligence sources, but why would Russian intelligence blow the cover of their blackmail agent Mr. Trump whom they presumably so carefully and expensively cultivated? They wouldn’t.

Yet recall the litany of Rep. Adam Schiff, who declared in a House Intelligence Committee hearing: “Is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence?”

His litany actually consisted of innocuous, incidental and routine Trump associations interspersed with claims from the Trump dossier to make the innocuous, incidental and routine seem nefarious.

Maybe Mr. Schiff is a cynic, or maybe Harvard Law sent him back into the world with the same skull full of mush with which he arrived. But ever since, every faulty or incomplete recollection of a meeting with a Russian has been promoted in the media as proof of treason by Trump associates.

The president’s obvious irritation with being called a traitor is proof that he is a traitor.

Whether the Russia incubus did more harm to Mr. Trump’s vote or Hillary’s vote during the election is impossible to know. But Mr. Trump won, so under the hindsight fallacy his victory is now proof that he conspired with Russia.

The term “availability bias” originated in the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, whose Nobel Prize-winning research gave birth to the field of behavioral economics.

Mr. Kahneman went on to write 2011’s indispensable “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” and I’m here to tell you that journalists especially pride themselves on their fast thinking—the kind that mistakes randomness for pattern, confuses correlation with causation, and gives excessive rein to emotional and cognitive biases.

Notice I don’t say reporters and editors are so dumb they can’t free themselves from such errors. I say that such errors are their stock in trade.

The original allegory of fast thinking, of course, is the old folklore tale, “the emperor’s new clothes.” In his 1922 book “Public Opinion,” Walter Lippmann explained how journalists reduce complex, novel realities to off-the-shelf “stereotypes.”

Or as a colleague once said of Stalin, “[He] tries to force life into a ready-made framework. The more life resists . . . the more forcefully he mangles and breaks it.”

Come to think of it, that’s not a bad way of describing how the D.C. anthill has reacted to the unexpected, exotic, high-risk, possibly providential experiment of the Trump presidency.

We mean every descriptor. His very unsuitability, the mood of the American public that elected him, the obscure impasse of American politics that brought him to power—all these signs deserve more respect than they’re getting.

His Torquemadas don’t and can’t know whether our democracy, in the improbable Mr. Trump, found a lever to move us forward, but there’s something repugnant in their desire not to find out.”

Comment:   The above Wall Street Journal article is a foreign language to about 99.3% of today’s American “adults” under the age of 50.  Truth, words, places, people, actions have become foreign to their modern  leftist equalized fascistic Democrat Party propaganda to force upon America the most important right….to be equally ignorant and powerless to what today’s “Democrats” are cooking up for the nation’s future.