• 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

Intelligence Committee Chair, Dem’s Leftist Spy Schiff getting Weird and Wobbly!

Schiff is getting nervous

House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, stands at the center of the impeachment of the president scam.

And as word gets out about his real game and how he got it — through a spying operation aimed at the White House that he directed, he’s starting to get weirdly wobbly.

Two instances just from the weekend are starting to stand out.

First, in stark contrast to the big hullabaloo he made about hearing from the so-called “whistleblower” in Congress ahead of the planned Trump execution, Schiff suddenly doesn’t think the whistleblower is so very, very necessary to testify at his hearings at all:

“We don’t need the whistleblower who wasn’t on the call to tell us what took place during the call,” he claimed.

House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) announced on Sunday that the whistleblower at the center of an impeachment inquiry into President Trump may not testify before Congress due to concerns over the person’s safety.

“Our primary interest right now is making sure that that person is protected,” Schiff told interviewers on CBS’s Face the Nation.

Schiff explained that Democrats may be able to gather enough evidence to impeach Trump without revealing the person’s identity.

Trump blasted Schiff’s comments on Twitter on Monday morning .

“Adam Schiff now doesn’t seem to want the Whistleblower to testify. NO!” Trump wrote. “We must determine the Whistleblower’s identity to determine WHY this was done to the USA.”

Ah, safety.  Pay no attention to those sneaky-Pete meetings Schiff’s staff held with this so-called whistleblower before his complaint for impeachment was filed; it’s convenient to not have his testimony to keep those questions from being asked by curious Republicans.  Trump called it right in saying there was a problem there.

Here’s another one, reported by the New York Post:

WASHINGTON — Rep. Adam Schiff Sunday conceded he should have “been much more clear” in explaining the whistleblower’s contact with his House Intelligence Committee.

The leader of the impeachment probe expressed regret for claiming last month his committee hadn’t spoken to the whistleblower who raised concerns about a conversation between President Trump and his counterpart in the Ukraine — when in fact the anonymous official had approached an aide to Schiff for guidance on reporting wrongdoing before filing a complaint.

“I should have been much more clear and I said so the minute it was brought to my attention,” Schiff told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

It’s Schiff’s fancy way of saying he shouldn’t have lied, and not just lied, but made up phony stories.

The Post reports a fine quote from a Republican congressman who has Schiff’s number:

“What Adam Schiff wants is to get United States of America drunk on his favorite cocktail,” Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) said Sunday on ABCs “This Week.” “There’s three ingredients. One is cherry-picking leaks, second is withholding facts, and three is just outright lying.”

That’s two backtracks in a very short space of time.  It sounds as though Schiff is in retreat as the walls close in, hoping, just hoping everyone forgives him for his lying, which lit the fuse to the impeachment debacle, and then pays no attention to his missing witness, who, again, got the impeachment ball rolling.  He just wants to have his impeachment and eat his lies, too.

One can only hope this is the first of a well trod retreat path for this dishonest poll.  He’s the one who should be on trial and impeached, and already a hundred House members are signed on to that growing list.  His weakness is showing, and it’s time for the hook.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/schiff_is_getting_nervous.html

Fascistic Left Too Fascist to Understand President Trump’s U.N. Speech

The speech they’re trying to hide: President Trump’s stellar UN speech

By Monica Showalter  at  American Thinker:

Seems the mainstream media are desperate to keep President Trump’s stellar United Nations speech out of the news.

On Tuesday, Trump delivered a far from throwaway speech articulating the vision of the voters who elected him, speaking of nationalism, globalism, and socialism, along with an added rundown of problem nations to condemn and props for others.

RealClearPolitics has a video and transcript.

For starters, it was a zero apologies for America speech, which was a breath of fresh air, given the previous administration.

He drove a fine definition of nationalism in the American sense, not other countries, as a positive thing that benefits not just the U.S., but all nations.  And he exuded pride in the success the U.S. has seen as a result of recognizing this very reality:

If you want freedom, take pride in your country. If you want democracy, hold onto your sovereignty. And if you want peace, love your nation. Wise leaders always put the good of their own people and their own country first.

The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots. The future belongs to sovereign and independent nations who protect their citizens, respect their neighbors, and honor the differences that make each country special and unique.

It is why we in the United States have embarked on an exciting program of national renewal. In everything we do, we are focused on empowering the dreams and aspirations of our citizens. Thanks to our pro-growth economic policies, our domestic unemployment rate reached its lowest level in over half a century.

Fueled by massive tax cuts and regulations cuts, jobs are being produced at a historic rate. Six million Americans have been added to the employment rolls in under three years. Last month, African-American, Hispanic American, and Asian American unemployment reached their lowest rates ever recorded.

We are marshaling our nations vast energy abundance and the United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world. Wages are rising, incomes are soaring, and 2.5 million Americans have been lifted out of poverty in less than three years.

As we rebuild the unrivaled might of the American military, we are also revitalizing our alliances by making it very clear that all of our partners are expected to pay their fair share of the tremendous defense burden which the United States has borne in the past. At the center of our vision for national renewal is an ambitious campaign to reform international trade.

He returned to the subject with a rousing conclusion, too:

Love of our nations makes the world better for all nations. So, to all the leaders here today, join us in the most fulfilling mission a person could have. The most profound contribution anyone can make — lift up your nations, cherish your culture, honor your histories, treasure your citizens. Make your countries strong and prosperous and righteous. Honor the dignity of your people and nothing will be outside of your reach.

When our nations are greater the future will be brighter, our people be happier and our partnerships will be stronger. With God’s help, together we will cast off the enemies of liberty and overcome the oppressors of dignity. We will set new standards of living and reach new heights of human achievement. We will rediscover all truths, unravel all mysteries and make thrilling new breakthroughs. And we will find more beautiful friendship and more harmony among nations than ever before.

So much for Trump being a Nazi for being a nationalist, as the Left claims.  This isn’t Nazi talk.

Trump also summed up perfectly the problems that globalism has morphed into, including the problem of open borders, perfectly cutting through the kultursmog promoted by the left — exposing them as the real anti-humanitarians:

“Today, I have a message for those open border activists who cloak themselves in the rhetoric of social justice: Your policies are not just, your policies are cruel and evil,” he said, accusing them of promoting human smuggling and the “erasure of national borders.”

You are empowering criminal organizations that prey on innocent men, women and children. You put your own false sense of virtue before the lives and well-being of countless innocent people,” he said. “When you undermine border security, you are undermining human rights and human dignity.”

Wow.

He also blasted socialism as a real problem in itself, something no world leader has ever done, but all the world’s victims of socialism had to be cheering about.  Trump broke that barrier.

One of the most serious challenges our countries face is the specter of socialism. It’s the wrecker of nations and destroyer of societies. Events in Venezuela remind us all that socialism and communism are not about justice. They are not about equality. They are not about lifting up the poor. And they are certainly not about the good of the nation. Socialism and communism are about one thing only, power for the ruling class.

Today I repeat a message for the world that I have delivered at home. America will never be a socialist country. In the last century, socialism and communism killed 100 million people.

It not only put its finger on the world’s primary problem, it was also a beautiful speech. Trump described how nationalism isn’t a hateful sort of thing – it was precisely this appreciation for nationalism that enables citizens to appreciate one another’s differences. Trump had lovely words in it for all cultures, and praised many nations, it wasn’t the rah-rah me-alone sort of speech. It was nationalism with a friendly hand out, calling for common ground, because, left unsaid, there is common ground as nation after nation elsewhere comes to embrace their own versions of Trump, too.

He also did something unprecedented for any president – he brought up the need for human rights for gay people, women, and unborn babies, a human rights manifesto if there ever was one. Zero apologies, and not even the left has tried this.

But rest assured, the groundbreaking speech got overshadowed, first by the press’s own efforts and then by the shenanigans in Congress over impeachment.

First, the press focused on a supposed glaring incident with Swedish child activist Greta Thunberg at the UN, which was a nothingburger. (Why, exactly, should a head of state give any face time to an obviously manipulated foreign activist?) A non-story.

Then, following President Trump’s paradigm-shifting speech before the United Nations General Assembly, they pointed to the lack of applause, which was about to be expected from this globalist crowd. What it signaled was that they were listening closely, given the lack of cursory applause they give to everyone else, including Iran’s crazed leaders.

After that, they decided the speech was very, very ‘sleepy.’ This one got played a lot.

First, CNBC‘s nothingburger:

President Donald Trump‘s United Nations speech was a snooze — at least for Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.

The 81-year-old Ross took a nap — a very long nap — as his boss addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday.

Television footage of Ross showed the wealthy businessman sleeping soundly as Trump talked about a possible trade deal with China — which is part of the Commerce chief’s portfolio — and the U.S. stance on Iran.

Ross had his eyes firmly closed for as long as 15 minutes, video suggested, as Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave the impression of listening intently to Trump.

At one point, however, Ross’s eyes opened. He still looked drowsy, though.

Boy, look at the microscopic attention to that. Ross later smacked them down with what looks like a pretty reasonable explanation:

“This is fake news,” Ross said in a statement issued to CNBC by the Commerce Department, hours after this article first was published.

“I wear hearing aids and, during President Trump’s inspiring speech, which covered in detail the entire range of significant issues facing the world, was concentrating on what was being said,” Ross said.

Then they repeated it as a trope:

Esquire:

He sleepily accused Iran of all manner of international perfidy and gave China a few whacks. In what may have been an attempt to wake his audience up through sheer incoherence, he somnambulated his way through some anti-abortion rhetoric. It was at that point that I began to envy Wilbur Ross.

Daily Mirror:

Donald Trump sent a top ally to sleep with the ‘low energy’ and ‘boring’ tone of his speech to the UN General Assembly.

CNN:

And at the UN we watched as the leader of the free world delivered a sleepy, low-energy speech that zeroed in on one head-spinning conclusion: every nation should go at it alone.

It was anything but sleepy. Trump’s quiet, deliberate tone was quite different from his rally tone, a wild off-the-cuff style of speaking, improvised plenty, but for that reason, it was far more significant.

Leave it up to the mass media to be unable to distinguish the two and imagine the improvised stuff is more important. Trump changed history with this speech and set new boundaries. No wonder the press is trying to obfuscate and distract.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/the_speech_theyre_trying_to_hide_president_trumps_stellar_un_speech.html

Fascists at the UN Using Children as Weapons Against Civilization?

Over the weekend tens of thousands of Leftist, poorly educated, even “pre-adults” of all sexes and sizes collected to make great noise in  city streets screaming  against “Climate Change” and  our struggling,    United States of America.

Also on this past Monday the world’s leftists and fascists at the United Nations called upon wisdomless, experienceless, knowledgeless  children and teens to dictate their phrases and paragraphs to the adult world to  advance leftist  propaganda that Climate Change is primarily a white-American disorder to ruin our world.

Using children to attack adults was a major 20th century weapon against civilized humanity.   Children and teens, especially the anti- JudeoChristian ones,  were without intellectual measure, truth, knowledge,  wisdom in their learnings.    Fascist nations, especially the socialist-communist dictatorships such as the USSR, Cuba, and Red China  used children as weapons to kill countless thousands of  the fascist unwanted……even their own parents.

Socialist Bernie Sanders was a USSR fan and chose to be married in Soviet Moscow.

Please listen to  leftist-trained teen-age Greta Thunberg lecture at the United Nations headquarters this past Monday in New York what leftists taught her to say:

https://nypost.com/2019/09/23/teen-climate-change-activist-greta-thunberg-rips-un-how-dare-you/

Fascistic America’s Sahara Desert called COLLEGE!

THE WEEK @ BERKELEY

by Steven Hayward   at PowerLine:

For our Bay Area readers, the fourth year of my sentence as an inmate at UC Berkeley has started as of last week, and I’m teaching an undergraduate course on conservative perspectives on public policy issues that meets at 8:30 am on Tuesdays and Thursdays. I have plenty of empty seats in the classroom (room 250 at the Goldman School of Public Policy on Hearst Street on the north side of campus), if anyone would like to drop in from time to time. Closest public parking is on Gayley Road next to the football stadium just a short walk away.

But this week have we got a deal for you! On Wednesday, I’ll be hosting Heather Mac Donald at the Law School at 4 pm in the Warren Room, speaking about her latest book, The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture. It’s going to be epic! Come if you can. The Gayley Road public parking facility is also the best place to park for the Law School, which is in the southeast corner of the campus.

More speakers to come this fall and spring, including Amy Wax and others. Stay tuned for details.

 

The Week @ Berkeley

Dem Fascists Plotting to Circumvent Electoral College

The National Popular Vote Bandwagon

by Anthony C. Patton  at  American Thinker:

The national popular vote bandwagon continues to attract anxious passengers before the 2020 election.  Fifteen states plus D.C. with 196 electoral votes have joined the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC), which would obligate the participating states to cast their electoral votes for the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote, not the candidate who wins the state’s popular vote, but only after states with 270 or more electoral votes join the compact.  Most recently, Nevada’s governor had the good sense to veto the measure.

The sudden and palpable distaste for the Electoral College appears to be motivated by the festering anger of two stinging electoral defeats for the Democrats in 2000 and 2016, not by a sincere desire to improve our great Republic in a bipartisan way.  The counterfactual proof of this claim is the insight that if George W. Bush and Donald Trump had won the national popular vote but had lost the Electoral College, the Democrats today undoubtedly would be singing the praises of the Electoral College as a necessary check on mob rule.

The movement conveniently glosses over the fact that the Electoral College merely reflects how states send representatives and senators to Washington.  Even small states with only one representative have two senators, but the movement is not proposing to abolish the Senate.  Our Republic was founded on semi-autonomous states that do most of the heavy lifting for day-to-day governance (police, schools, courts, roads, etc.) and therefore need a voice at the federal table to avoid having a few large states control all the small states.  As such, presidential elections should take into consideration the interests of individual citizens (438 electoral votes) and individual states (100 electoral votes).

The movement misses another critical point: the way the election game has been played as a matter of fact.  When Al Gore in 2000 and Hillary Clinton in 2016 set out to win the presidency, their campaign strategies were designed to win the Electoral College — the road to 270 — not the national popular vote.  It is disingenuous to hail the virtues of the national popular vote after the fact.  When the news networks show election maps or conduct polls, their analysis and predictions are based on winning the Electoral College, not the national popular vote.

No one was surprised when Gore and Clinton did not waste precious time and resources campaigning in California or New York, where victory was certain.  Winning 50.01% or 99.99% of the popular vote for a state has the same result: 100% of the state’s electoral votes.  Consider a World Series in which one team wins four games and the other team wins three games but has more overall runs during the seven games.  The additional runs might seem like a moral victory, but no one would argue that the team with the most overall runs during the seven games should be crowned champion.  If scoring the most runs were the objective, the strategy for playing individual games would change dramatically.

The movement would be wise to consider how election dynamics might change if they had their way, to include the near impossibility of conducting a national recount in the case of a close election.  Democrats would probably still win the popular vote in states like California and New York, and Republicans would probably still win the popular vote in states like Texas and Wyoming, but voters across the country would probably adjust their voting behavior, perhaps dramatically.  Voters who otherwise might not cast a ballot, such as Republicans in California and Democrats in Texas, might turn out in droves if the national popular vote redefined the rules of the game.  In this case, past behavior should not be considered an indicator of future behavior.

The movement would also be wise to focus on winning presidential elections under the current rules of the Constitution or risk stomaching an even more painful scenario in which Republicans win the White House based on national popular vote after the change but would have lost had the Electoral College rules been in effect.  We have no way of knowing precisely how such a rule change would alter voter dynamics, and the Democrats might find themselves in the awkward position of scrambling to return to the good old days of the Electoral College.  The Founding Fathers wisely made amending the Constitution difficult, by design, to promote a national consensus based on sound reasoning.

The national popular vote bandwagon will not succeed in amending the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College — the courts would be wise to strike down the NPVIC laws — but the movement will undoubtedly use this issue to trumpet the “one person, one vote” mantra to “start a dialogue” for other political ends.  The Texas secretary of state found evidence that 95,000 registered voters were not U.S. citizens, and Los Angeles County is in the process of purging over one million ineligible voters.  Prediction: As more states audit their voter rolls and purge more ineligible voters, you can count on the movement to decry “voter suppression” and demand that we “count every vote,” eligible or not.

Anthony C. Patton studied mathematics and philosophy at Augsburg University and earned an MBA from Thunderbird — School of Global Management.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/the_national_popular_vote_bandwagon.html

Democrat California Here We Come?

The following Los Angeles story was sent by California’s Lisa Rich:

 

What Are Our Today’s Rising Big Business Dem Fascists Really Up To?

THE LEFT’S EXCLUSIONARY LANGUAGE

by  John Hinderaker   at  PowerLine:

A reader points out this article by a liberal in the Atlantic. It is titled “The Left Needs a Language Potent Enough to Counter Trump.” The writer, George Packer, is mostly intent on denouncing President Trump’s “dangerously populist” speech. As usual, the author goes off on Nazi, Hitler, and fascist tropes without acknowledging that the reason why the things Trump says are “populist” is that they make sense to most people, based on their experiences and observations. That part of the article is too foolish and boring to be worthy of comment.

But when the writer moves on to a topic he understands better, the shortcomings of his fellow leftists, he makes some good points–points that are especially noteworthy because they come from inside the leftists’ closed world:

“[T]he language of the contemporary left is anti-populist. Its vocabulary, much of it taken from academia, is the opposite of accessible—it has to be decoded and learned. Terms such as centered, marginalized, intersectional, non-binary, and Eurocentric gender discipline separate outsiders from insiders—that’s part of their intent, as is the insistence on declaring one’s personal pronouns and showing an ability to use them accordingly. Even common words like ally and privilege acquire a resonance that takes them out of the realm of ordinary usage, because the point of this discourse is to create a sense of special virtue. The language of the left also demands continuous refreshing and can change literally overnight: A writer is told that the phrase born male is no longer okay to use and has to be replaced with assigned male at birthMany of these changes happen by ambush—suddenly and irrevocably, with no visible trail of discussion and decision, and with quick condemnation of holdouts—which gives them a powerful mystique.

The language of the left creates a hierarchy of those who get it and those who don’t. Mastering the vocabulary is a way of signaling entry into a select world of the knowing and the just. The system is closed—there’s an internal logic that can be accepted or rejected but isn’t open to argument or question. In this sense, though much of the language of the left has academic origins, its use in the public square is almost religious.

Italics in the original, bold added. “Almost religious” understates the case, but the author sums up quite well the bizarre world of public discourse in which we find ourselves. I think that Democratic Party politicians are lucky that most people pay no attention to the strange things they say.

 

The Left’s Exclusionary Language

Fascistic Dem Lies are Problem President Faces with Black Racists

For some black voters, Joe Biden is deeply problematic. But Trump is even worse

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/20/opinions/black-voters-biden-trump-brown/index.html

Fascistic Dem California, the State of “Medieval Diseases, Gangs, Corruption”……..

America’s First Third-World State

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. •