• 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

Schumer’s Con-artist Democrats Have Nothing to Offer by Lies and Leftism

Victor Davis Hanson: Whole Trump-Russia-Collusion Story Is A “Big Lie”

“Citing a term coined by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf, Hoover Institution scholar Victor Davis Hanson explains that the allegations that President Trump worked with the Russians in any way are a “big lie” created by the Democrats with no evidence.

TUCKER CARLSON: Professor, you’re saying that this whole thing is basically nonsense, is that what you’re saying?………”   Please continue below:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/05/20/victor_davis_hanson_whole_trump-russia-collusion_story_is_a_big_lie.html

Time for America to Confront the Democrat Party Fascist Left and Its Strangle Hold on Communication

It is certainly understandable that the American atheist, fascist Obamaling Democrat  savage Left is enjoying its total control over the nation’s press and indoctrination institutions called courts, school, and university.

There is a lot rotten in America’s “State of Denmark” in the left wing of the recently beaten Obama fascist, racist, sexist Democrat Party determined  to continue control the Presidency……feminist fangs, black racists and gangsters, the smug Hollywood millionaires and friends, 20 million or more illegal immigrants hidden and protected by taxpayer money in political cells called “Sanctuary Cities”  weren’t quite enough to con enough Americans to send that oily, noisy,  political slimy criminal, “Crooked” Hillary to the White House.   She should be sent to jail for her crimes against the State.

She’s free, however.   She’s a feminist, leftist Democrat…an Untouchable?

Our Donald was fairly, cleanly, honestly, Constitutionally elected to become the Nation’s 45th President…..and BEST yet, he is not a crooked Democrat, or sleazy Republican….but a businessman skilled at solving problems to build matter.

Over 90% of the American communications empire is grease-mouthed by the Charles Blows,  nearly all of television “news” at the level of Rachel Maddow, the Washington Post’s billionaire,  and the  Jake Tapper “boys” at CNN……folks of the same bath tub oils.    Then there are CBS, NBC, PBS, ABC,  and the Ninth District Courts politically, educationally crippled enough to make certain TRUTH AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH ARE LOST IN THE PAST to make room for the goons of their religion, their gods of feelings over Truth!

Will these Obama fascists join the NeverTrumpers…the Bushes et alia to sabotage our refreshing, America-loving, America built, Donald Trump…..or will one party fascism finally kill the United States of America?

OUR AMERICA IS IN TROUBLE, FOLKS.   The Charlie Schumer people of Communist George Soros land are leading our nation  to a Venezuela future!    PAY ATTENTION….AWAKE!  Please read the following article by Newt Gingrich!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/18/gingrich-surrender-or-fight-our-country-is-at-stake.html

When Did America Haters Barack Obama and Bill Ayers First Meet?

So When Exactly Did Bill Ayers and Barack Obama Meet?

by Jack Cashill   at American Thinker:

“In his massive new biography about Barack Obama’s pre-presidential years, Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, Pulitzer Prize-winner David Garrow makes hash out of the lie that preserved Obama’s candidacy in 2008.  That said, he pulls back from the implications of his own revelations to protect what remains of Obama’s literary reputation.

In the way of background, during an April 2008 presidential primary debate on ABC, George Stephanopoulos said about Bill Ayers and pals, “They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and other buildings.  He’s never apologized for that.”  He then asked Obama, “Can you explain that relationship for the voters and explain to Democrats why it won’t be a problem?”

“This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood,” said Obama dismissively of Ayers.  “He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from [sic] on a regular basis.”

The question fueled what the L.A. Times called a “storm of criticism.”  The rage was directed not at Obama for his dissembling, but at Stephanopoulos for his effrontery.  How dare he ask Obama about an “obscure sixties radical”? asked Michael Grunwald of Time.  The media chose not to follow up.  If they had, Hillary Clinton would have won the nomination.

Garrow has come along nine years too late to do Clinton any good.  But after ten years researching this book and interviewing a thousand people, he reveals just how strong was the relationship between Ayers and Obama and how deep was the lie that protected it.  Unfortunately, there is an element of that lie Garrow himself insists on protecting.

Garrow sticks to the story that state senator Alice Palmer asked Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn to host a fundraiser for state Senate candidate Obama in the fall of 1995 – as if they needed to be asked.

Then Garrow begins adding information.  “After that gathering, Barack and Michelle began to see a great deal more of not only Bill and Bernardine but also their three closest friends, Rashid and Mona Khalidi and Carole Travis.”  Rashid Khalidi was a Palestinian native of radical bent then living in Chicago.

According to Garrow, Obama did the following during the next eight years.  He organized a panel on juvenile justice based on a new book by Ayers.  He served on the Woods Fund board with Ayers.  He joined Ayers for a panel discussion, “Intellectuals, Who Need Them.”  Up until the time of his 2004 Senate run, he and Michelle attended “the almost nightly dinners” held with Ayers, Dohrn, and the Khalidis.

Ayers obviously meant a whole lot more to Obama than “a guy who lives in the neighborhood” might be expected to.  But how much more?  Khalidi did not shy from giving credit where it was due.   He began the acknowledgment section of his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire, with a tribute to his own literary muse: “First, chronologically and in other ways comes Bill Ayers.”  Khalidi had no reason to be coy about this relationship.  Obama obviously did.

Garrow obliges him.  Although he concedes that Ayers and Obama both dated the same woman, Genevieve Cook, in New York City in 1984, he does not try to connect the dots.  Nor does Garrow try to connect dots when Ayers follows Obama to Chicago and both work on educational reform with the same people during the years 1987-1988.

No, Garrow specifically traces the first meeting of Ayers and Obama to a time in 1995 immediately after pre-publication galleys for Obama’s book Dreams from My Father arrived in Chicago – in other words, too late for Ayers to have helped at all with the book’s writing.  This is way too convenient.

For all his research, Garrow refuses to ask what Bill Ayers saw in Obama.  The answer may well be found in a 1994 essay that Ayers co-authored, whose title befits a former merchant seaman: “Navigating a restless sea: The continuing struggle to achieve a decent education for African American youngsters in Chicago.”

In “Navigating,” Ayers and his nominal co-author, former New Communist Movement leader Michael Klonsky, offer a detailed analysis of the Chicago school system and a discussion of potential reforms.

Garrow cites “Navigating” twice but chooses not to see the obvious – namely, that Obama offers a nearly identical analysis in Dreams.  This analysis was completed in the same year, 1994, as “Navigating.”  The particular value Obama brought to the relationship can be found not in the many points on which Ayers and the Obama of Dreams agree, but rather on the one point on which they at least seem to differ.

First, the areas of agreement.  Dreams tells us that Chicago’s schools “remained in a state of perpetual crisis.”  In “Navigating,” the situation is described as a “perpetual state of conflict, paralysis, and stagnation.”

Dreams describes a “bloated bureaucracy” as one source of the problem and “a teachers’ union that went out on strike at least once every two years” as another.  “Navigating” affirms that the “bureaucracy has grown steadily in the past decade” and confirms Dreams‘ math, citing a “ninth walkout in 18 years.”

“Self-interest” is at the heart of the bureaucratic mess described in Dreams.  “Navigating” clarifies that “survivalist bureaucracies” struggle for power “to protect their narrow, self-interested positions against any common, public purpose.”

In Dreams, educators “defend the status quo” and blame problems on “impossible” children and their “bad parents.”  In “Navigating,” an educator serves as “apologist for the status quo” and “place[s] the blame for school failure on children and families.”

Another challenge cited in Dreams is “an indifferent state legislature.”  Ayers cites an “unwillingness on [the legislature’s] part to adequately fund Chicago schools.”

In Dreams, “school reform” is the only solution Obama envisions.  In “Navigating,” Ayers has no greater passion than “reforming Chicago’s schools.”  In fact, in that same year this article was written, 1994, the ambitious Ayers co-authored the proposal that would win for Chicago a $49.2-million Annenberg Challenge grant.  Obama would later be made its chair.

In Dreams, the thoughts on educational reform are channeled through the soulful voice of two older black Americans.  The first, Moran, a composite, tells Obama, “The public school system is not about educating black children.  Never has been.  Inner-city schools are about social control.  Period.”

“Social control” is an Ayers obsession.  “The message to Black people was that at any moment and for any reason whatsoever your life or the lives of your loved ones could be randomly snuffed out,” he writes in his memoir, Fugitive Days.  “The intention was social control through random intimidation and unpredictable violence.”

In Dreams, Moran elaborates on the fate of the black student: “From day one, what’s he learning about? Someone else’s history. Someone else’s culture. Not only that, this culture he’s supposed to learn is the same culture that’s systematically rejected him, denied his humanity.”

Precociously Afrocentric, Ayers has been making the same case since he first got involved in education.  “The public schools’ idea of integration is racist,” he said early in his career.  “They put Negro children into school and demand that they give up their Negro culture. Negro children are forced to speak, behave, and react according to middle-class standards.”

The second of Obama’s educational mentors is “Frank,” Obama’s mentor in Hawaii, the Communist Frank Marshall Davis.  Frank tells the college-bound Obama, “You’re not going to college to get educated. You’re going there to get trained. They’ll train you to forget what it is that you already know.”

Ayers makes the identical distinction in his 1993 book To Teach.  “Education is for self-activating explorers of life, for those who would challenge fate, for doers and activists, for citizens. Training is for slaves, for loyal subjects, for tractable employees, for willing consumers, for obedient soldiers.”

By 1994, Ayers had been preaching educational reform for nearly thirty years, but one major force still intimidated him: Chicago’s sluggish and self-interested educational bureaucracy.  Over the years, this bureaucracy had morphed, as Ayers notes in “Navigating,” from being a bastion of “[w]hite political patronage and racism” to being “a source of Black professional jobs, contracts, and, yes, patronage.”  For reasons both ideological and practical, Ayers wilted in the face of this bureaucracy.

On this racially tender issue, not so strangely, Dreams tells a different story.  Obama openly chides the black “teachers, principals, and district superintendents,” who “knew too much” to send their own children to public school.

“The biggest source of resistance was rarely talked about,” Obama continues – namely, that these educators “would defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before.”

As to the claims of these educators, affirmed in “Navigating,” that “cutbacks in the bureaucracy were part of a white effort to wrest back control,” the author of Dreams says, teasingly, “[N]ot so true.”

“Not so true”?  In these three words one can anticipate Obama’s potential return on Ayers’s investment.  Simply put, as a black American, Obama could address sensitive racial issues in ways Ayers could not.  Ayers surely recognized this.

To advance Obama’s career, it appears, Ayers finished up Dreams, got Obama appointed chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant, and launched his state Senate run, all in 1994-1995.

The political calculus behind that ambition helped shape Dreams.  This was a careful book written to jump-start the career of a deeply indebted and highly malleable Chicago politician, maybe even a mayor, one who saw the world through white eyes, as Ayers did, but one who could articulate the city’s real problems in words that Ayers could not.

This would have worked out much better for Ayers if Obama had contented himself with Chicago.  As history records, he did not.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/so_when_exactly_did_bill_ayers_and_barack_obama_meet.html

Mass Media Infected with Deadly Mental Disorder: Feminist Fascism

The Mass Media Cult Goes Pathological

By James Lewis at American Thinker:

“In the five months since the election, the media haven’t been able to get over getting Trumped.  They’ve gone through the five stages of grief, some of them over and over again, and still The Donald drives them crazy.  Hillary was one of the worst candidates in history, but it didn’t matter.  In our Mass Cult mind, she couldn’t lose.

This is a mass media pathology, as we can see from their uncontrolled emotional outbursts.  The latest is Comeygate, which looks like a trap Trump laid for James Comey, who came out of the White House babbling that the president had demanded Comey’s personal loyalty – a no-no by Watergate standards.  But Comey has no Oval Office tapes, so it’s his word against Trump’s.  Comey has no evidence, while making an “impeachable” allegation against POTUS.

Where’s John Dean when they need him?

Every time they lose another power player in D.C., like Clapper and Comey, they have to go through the five stages of grief.  First denial.  Then tears.  Then asking God to make it not so.  On and on.

If these people weren’t so malignant, I’d feel sorry for them.

This is a kind of death anxiety for the American ruling class, which is also why they constantly fantasize about killing Donald Trump.  For psychiatrists, it’s an interesting mental disorder, and it’s too bad that millions of Americans still depend on Mass Cult for their daily news.  This is not a college textbook; it’s America today.

When Stanford psychologist Philip Zimbardo first showed how normal Stanford students could be cultified, I felt skeptical.  It couldn’t be that easy.  Basically, the kids were voluntarily isolated, so all their daily sources of real news were blocked.  Then some authority figure sold them a bill of goods, and the test was whether they would obey a plainly illegal command – to give “dangerous electrical shocks” to a confederate, who yelled in pain.

(Today this experiment is illegal, but it has been repeated in other countries with low-level shocks given to animals.)

History books have been written about crazy cult behavior, especially utopian cults.  But we think they have no real lesson for our lives because we aren’t crazy.

Most people don’t realize that “media concentration” – a functional news monopoly, day after day – has the same effect as cult indoctrination.  It doesn’t matter if Disney Corp. has a different name from the New York Times.  It matters only that they tell the same “news” story every day.  For a mental mass monopoly, you don’t need to violate anti-trust law.  All you need is mass media that make up the “news” by consensus, not by empirical reality.  Dr. Michael Barone actually looks up facts for his political column, but he is a rarity in the media business today.  The Big Media are basically playing telephone.

Closed cults like Jim Jones and Scientology do some very nasty stuff, and when it gets to the Kim Jong-un level they build nukes and fire ICBMs over countries like Japan.  Today, Kim III is pushing his WMD program as fast as he can, and where Kim goes, the mullahs follow.  Iran and North Korea co-develop those weapons and test the bombs underground in Korea, but the mullahs get the same technology.

The bottom line is that any ideological monopoly creates cults.

Where the United States used to have about 80 different newspaper owners in 1980, today we have fewer than a dozen conglomerates, with only one storyline.

The JournoList scandal showed that 400 “journalists” (propaganda liars) were able to drive the “news” in the U.S. and Europe.  They are still doing it, because nobody can stop them.

What we are seeing is cult pathology on a mass basis.  That is pathogenic (it makes people genuinely crazy), because cults that hear only one mental channel become delusional.  (The “Russian election hack” scam is a classical mass delusion.)  Fear gets amplified enormously by the headline rumor machine, which cult followers can no longer distinguish from reality.  The old 24-hour news cycle is now every hour on the hour, and human beings can easily get flooded with too much information, so their judgment is impaired.  We are seeing all of that in the media today.

Everybody has defense mechanisms, even healthy people, but healthy folks tend to ward off anxiety by rationalizing danger, both real and imagined.  But medical students, for example, can become hypochondriacs with whatever disease they are studying this week.  You study heart attacks twelve hours a day without enough sleep, and you start wondering if your heart is okay.  Medical students are physically very healthy, but med school is what it is.

Healthy people do get over all that, but if you’re caught up in the Mass Media Cult, every single day, and you don’t get enough time to recover, you become stressed out and ultimately dysfunctional.

Historians will look back at this time as a case of mass hysteria on the national level.  Ph.D. dissertations will be written about the Trump Mass Hysteria of 2016-17, but by that time the grad students will be lolling in easy chairs and chatting about the Third Millennia Frenzy, like Orson Welles’s radio drama of 1938, The War of the Worlds.

Technology gets faster and more powerful, but human beings don’t change.

I suppose it’s a kind of poetic justice, the biter being bit, but it’s sad to see.  Maybe conservatives should get together and send them all a good supply of cheap whiskey, the traditional newsman’s medicine.  I’m sure it’ll work for newswomen, too.

(http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/the_mass_media_cult_goes_pathological.html)

Media Married to Corrupt Democrat Party

The Media-Democratic Party Suicide Pact

by Patricia McCarthy  at American Thinker:

“The national media and the Democratic Party have gone stark raving mad over President Trump’s election victory; they refuse to accept it.  Their paroxysms of fury are evident all day long on every network and cable news outlet and every mainstream newspaper.   Since Nov. 8, they have leapt like a swarm of remoras onto a whale proclaiming every little thing that they think might take the man down.  Hillary’s team concocted the “Russia collusion” hoax within twenty-four hours of her defeat.  Everyone knows this!  Hillary is the one with all the Russia connections; lots of them, all financially benefitting her personal foundation.  They, the media, have come up with numerous other schemes with which to attack Trump: taxes, emoluments, tweets, family, even his ice cream servings.

The Democrats in Congress dutifully follow suit like Pavlov’s dogs.  They care not a whit whether their charges are based in fact.  Hence, “fake news.”   The mainstream media folk invented it, this “resistance,” and they are running with it, day after day after day.   They devised the game plan, and they are sanctimonious in their defense of it.  Like the Russia meme they keep peddling, they go at it from every angle in the pitiable belief that they can convince the American people that they elected the wrong person.

Yet the more they double- and triple-down on their strategy and tactics, the more the American people realize how thoroughly demented are the media and their Democrat lapdogs.  The more they contrive new tales of misconduct, chaos and/or incompetence, the more the rest of us realize how threatened they are by his successes:  unemployment is down, illegal border crossings are down, the stock market is just fine, and the rescue of our medical care has begun. The more the media and the Democrats are driven mad by his policies — the reining in of the EPA, reviewing Obama’s federal land grabs, enforcing immigration laws that Obama did not, taking hard lines on Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, ISIS, the more we anti-establishment folks out here in flyover country cheer his every move.

Does Trump stumble here and there?  Of course.  Who does not?  Clearly, he is not an experienced politco.  He’s a no-nonsense businessman with a style completely at odds with the DC establishment swamp.  And a swamp it is.  One only has to listen to Pelosi, Schumer, Durbin, Mark Warner, Adam Schiff, and the rest, to their ridiculous pretentions and imputations,  to grasp the nature of the depth to which these media leftists and Democrat toadies are willing to descend to oppose President Trump.  They are making complete   and utter fools of themselves.  Look no further than the execrable Maxine Waters; it would have been fine if Hillary fired Comey but it’s a crime that Trump did!  Hypocrisy is their stock in trade.  The left is not the brain trust they think they are.  They are the victims of their own calculated undermining of American education.  Millions of Americans miseducated in our universities sill have essential common sense.  The media and the Democrats have become as historically bereft of common sense as the graduates our universities churn out every June.

With their paid, activist-trained protesters at virtually all Republican townhalls, the violence these resistance PACs foment on our university campuses, their Soros-funded protest marches, their almost venal pro-abortion litmus test, their blatant hypocrisy re: the firing of Comey, the media and the Democrats  may think they are winning over all those ignorant Trump supporters.  But they are not.  They are demonstrating for all to see just how elitist they are, how dismissive they are of those of us who voted for him, and how disparaging they are of the US Constitution.  They are confirming that they value illegal immigrants over citizens, Muslims over Christians, criminals over law-abiding persons.  They support calculated gender confusion, speech codes, the tyranny of political correctness, and the construction of victim groups.  All humans, with the exception of heterosexual white males, are victims of oppression of one kind or another.  The left revels in pitting people against each other……..”   There’s more to read below:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/the_mediademocratic_party_suicide_pact.html

NEW OBAMA BIO IS NOT JUST EXHAUSTING, IT’S INSULTING

New Obama Bio Is Not Just Exhausting; It’s Insulting

by Jack Cashill   at American Thinker:

Dreams from My Father was not a memoir or an autobiography;” writes Pulitzer Prize-winner David Garrow, “it was instead, in multitudinous ways, without any question a work of historical fiction.”

Garrow makes this claim, italics included, in his massive new biography about Obama’s pre-presidential years, Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama. For myself and other citizen journalists who have followed Obama, this is hardly a revelation.

We concluded many years ago that Dreams was in large part fiction. We came to this conclusion during the same period when our betters were writing paeans such as, “Whatever else people expect from a politician, it’s not usually a beautifully written personal memoir steeped in honesty” (Oona King, London Times).

The book, we realized, was steeped in something, but it certainly wasn’t honesty. Before the election in 2008, no one in the major media would admit this, and afterwards mainstream critics did so only partially and reluctantly. Garrow continues the tradition.

The New York Times has dismissed Rising Star as “a dreary slog of a read.” I have seen nothing in what I have read of the book to dispute the Times on the tedium part. (My ebook version runs 2,000 pages, and it has just crashed.) I have read enough, however, to feel insulted, not only on my own behalf but also on behalf of those other citizen journalists who dared to report the truth before the major media grudgingly did the same.

Garrow adds a little more to the accepted record — oh yeah, there was no Obama family — but the book serves in certain ways to cauterize Obama’s wounded reputation. It is hard to imagine another author going deeper. Garrow spent ten years on the project. He interviewed more than a thousand people. There is much not to like about Garrow’s Obama, but the faithful need never fear learning anything worse than that their man was shallow and self-centered. What politician isn’t?

Like other mainstream biographers, Garrow has the unfortunate habit of insulting those who challenge the orthodoxy, myself included. In July 2008, I first raised the issue of the authorship of Dreams. Beginning in September 2008, I traced the muse behind Dreams, speculatively at first, to the notoriously unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers.

Obama biographer David Remnick admitted just how problematic this revelation could have been. “This was a charge,” he wrote in his 2010 biography, “that if ever proved true, or believed to be true among enough voters, could have been the end of the candidacy.”

The way for Remnick, the New Yorker editor, to deal with the charge was to attack its provenance — “the Web’s farthest lunatic orbit.” To assure the charge was not repeated, he accused anyone who repeated it, Rush Limbaugh most notably, with racism.

Garrow has his own way of slighting the assertion that Ayers had a hand in Dreams. He ignores it. He makes no mention of my name in the text of the book. Nor does he mention Christopher Andersen. Andersen presented more of a problem than I did. A bestselling biographer with solid mainstream credentials, Andersen gave biographical detail to what I had inferred from textual analysis.

In his 2009 book, Barack and Michele: Portrait of an American Marriage, Andersen spent six pages on Ayers’ role in helping craft Dreams. As Andersen related, Obama found himself deeply in debt and “hopelessly blocked.” At “Michelle’s urging,” Obama “sought advice from his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.” What attracted the Obamas were “Ayers’s proven abilities as a writer” as evident in his 1993 book, To Teach.

Noting that Obama had already taped interviews with many of his relatives, both African and American, Andersen elaborated, “These oral histories, along with his partial manuscript and a trunkload of notes were given to Ayers.” Although I had not talked to Andersen, his observations, based on two unnamed sources, made perfect sense given Obama’s repeated failures to complete the book on schedule.

One of Obama’s radical friends in Hyde Park did not shy from giving Ayers his due. “First, chronologically and in other ways,” wrote Rashid Khalidi in his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire, “comes Bill Ayers.” Khalidi elaborated, “Bill was particularly generous in letting me use his family’s dining room table to do some writing for the project.” Khalidi did not need the table.  He had one of his own. He needed help from the one neighbor who obviously could and would provide it.

Garrow has not a word to say about Andersen’s claim, not even to rebut it. In fact, the reader of Garrow’s book would have no reason to believe anyone ever questioned Obama’s authorship. As for me, Garrow adds a comically gratuitous slap.

The reference is a telling one. It involves a poem Obama submitted to his college literary magazine as a sophomore called “Pop.” Garrow writes that most critics presumed the poem was about Obama’s grandfather, but “hostile critics,” namely me, claimed the poem was about Obama’s Communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis.

In his footnotes, Garrow cites an article published in American Thinker in 2011. In it, I quoted Remnick’s claim that “’Pop’ clearly reflects Obama’s relationship with his grandfather Stanley Dunham.” I disagreed. “The poem does no such thing, “ I wrote. “For starters, if the poem really were about ‘Gramps,’ Stanley Dunham, why didn’t Obama simply call it ‘Gramps.’”

There is a variety of evidence arguing for Davis as “Pop.” This includes a 1987 interview with Davis recorded by the University of Hawaii for a documentary on his life.  Watching it, one can visualize “Pop”: the drinking, the smoking, the glasses, the twitches, the roaming eyes, the thick neck and broad back. “I could see Frank sitting in his overstuffed chair,” Obama remembers in Dreams, “a book of poetry in his lap, his reading glasses slipping down his nose.”

Among the details in the poem that disqualified Dunham as the poem’s subject was this one: “he switches channels, recites an old poem/ He wrote before his mother died.” As I explained, Dunham’s mother died when he was eight years old. Frank Marshall Davis’s mother died when he was twenty and had already established himself as a poet of promise. “When an insider like Remnick gets something this obviously wrong,” I concluded, “I begin to suspect disinformation, not mere misinformation.”

Remnick and those critics who preceded him insisted the poem was about Dunham because they did not want to give Davis his due. To his credit, Garrow admits Davis was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA and a pornographer with at least a fictional taste for the underaged and the male.

Garrow knows I am correct about the authorship of “Pop.” But Remnick is the editor of the New Yorker. Even when he is wrong, Garrow writes about him respectfully. Here, Garrow concludes the brief discussion on ‘Pop” by writing, “Yet Barack would forcefully reject the Davis hypothesis.” Of course he would.

Here is the kicker. When Garrow cites me by name in his endnotes on this subject, he adds in parentheses, “someone who is cited with the greatest reluctance.” Ouch! I suppose I would be reluctant to cite me too. I can disprove Garrow’s thesis that the muse for Dreams was his law school buddy Robert Fischer as convincingly as I can disprove “Pop” was Stanley Dunham. More to come.

In July 2008, on the cyber pages of WND, I first raised the issue of the authorship of Barack Obama’s acclaimed 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father.

In September 2008, again at WND, I traced the muse behind Dreams to the notoriously unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers.

If other conservative media had the courage that WND has shown over its twenty-year history, they would have followed up on my story, and Barack Obama would not have been elected president. But they did not, and he, alas, was.

A book by Pulitzer Prize-winner David Garrow about Obama’s pre-presidential years, Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, has the potential to tell the stories the major media and much of the conservative media refused to tell. No Obama fan, Garrow critiques Obama from his left.

Garrow allegedly interviewed a thousand or so people for the book. When I suggested to friend Susan Daniels last week that Rising Star, out May 9, has potential, she asked, “Did Garrow interview you?”

No, come to think of it, he did not. I asked Susan if Garrow interviewed her. He should have. A licensed private investigator, it was Susan who discovered that Obama was passing through life with a Connecticut social security number.

No, Garrow had not talked to Susan either, despite the fact that she had taken her case against Obama’s use of that number to court in her native Ohio.

That got me to wondering just who(m) did Garrow talk to. I contacted Joel Gilbert, producer of the widely seen documentary, Dreams from My Real Father.

“Not me or anyone I know or interviewed in Obamaworld. Not Malik or Keith etc.,” Gilbert replied.

Malik would be Obama’s half-brother and the best man at his wedding, Malik Obama. Keith Kakugawa, was Obama’s best friend in high school. He appears frequently in Dreams as “Ray.”

Gilbert added, “We know he interviewed Barry, which is a red flag! Claim sounds like BS.”

I reached out to Charles Johnson, founder of Gotnews.com and a deep Obama researcher. Johnson is also the possessor of an early draft of Dreams. Said Johnson of Garrow’s claimed thousand interviews, “I think he is lying.”

“He never contacted me,” said Jerry Corsi who led the quest to secure Obama’s birth certificate at WND and in a best-selling book.

Given that Garrow has reportedly discussed Obama’s alleged bisexuality, I thought for sure he would have interviewed Larry Sinclair.

In June 2008, Sinclair held a press conference at the august National Press Club in Washington to discuss what he claimed were his drug-fueled sexual assignations with Obama in Chicago.

The media called the conference a “circus act” and refused to follow up. To be sure, they did not review his book, Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder. For all his eccentricities, Sinclair tells a convincing tale.

I reached out to Sinclair through Facebook. “I just don’t know any David Garrow,” he told me, “nor have I given any interviews in last couple of years as I have been restoring a neglected community.”

When I told Sinclair that Garrow has not interviewed anyone I know who knows anything about Obama, he replied, “That doesn’t surprise me considering he is connected to the SPLC [Southern Poverty Law Center] which listed me as a racist and hate group promoter.”

Finally, though, I did hear from one fellow whom Garrow had contacted, John Drew. Drew met Obama in December 1980 in California. He had flown to visit his girlfriend and fellow traveler, Caroline Boss. A few years earlier, Drew had founded the Marxist-Socialist group at Occidental College.

Drew was at Boss’s parents’ home when an expensive luxury car with two well-dressed young men pulled up. One was Obama, the other Hassan Chandoo, “They’re on our side,” Boss told him.

Throughout the long evening, the group talked Marxist politics. Drew recalled Obama repeatedly using the phrase “When the revolution comes.”

Drew met Obama on several occasions in the future. “At that time,” say Drew, “the future president was a doctrinaire Marxist revolutionary, although perhaps — for the first time — considering conventional politics as a more practical road to socialism.”

Garrow interviewed Drew in December 2011. He told Drew that his next stop was to visit Caroline Boss. It appeared that he had already interviewed others at Occidental.

“From a recent radio interview,” Drew said, “I’m not sure that you or I had much impact on [Garrow’s] thinking. He believes one of Obama’s friends at Harvard Law School helped with the rewrite of Dreams and not Bill Ayers. (This just seems absolutely stupid to me.)”

Drew continued, “Darrow also dismissed the ‘conspiracy theories’ that Obama was a Marxist, Muslim, or gay. Although I use the broadest definitions, I see Obama as all three. I’m not even sure I made the final cut of the book at this point.”

When I asked Drew if he minded if I quoted him, he replied, “Not at all. I think Garrow made a huge mistake by not speaking with you.”

The New York Times has already panned the book. It will probably flop. My suspicion at this point is that it will be too honest for the left and not honest enough for the right.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/new_obama_bio_is_not_just_exhausting_its_insulting.html

Truth: Dems Wanted Comey Fired….Until Trump Fired Him!

President Trump Tweets Video Montage Of Democrats Bashing Comey: #DrainTheSwamp

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/05/11/president_trump_tweets_video_montage_of_democrats_bashing_comey_draintheswamp.html