• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

The Fascist Left’s Invasion of Illegal Aliens… “Good Morning, San Francisco!”

San Francisco Getting 78 Calls A Day About Human Feces In The Street

The San Francisco Chronicle published a snapshot of how the city is dealing with thousands of homeless people living on the streets and the waste, including drug needles and feces, they leave behind. The good news is that the number of tent encampments is down substantially from two years ago:

The number of tents on San Francisco streets has been cut by more than half in the past two years, but despite the shrinking numbers, the street behavior by the homeless, the mentally ill and the drug-addled continues to be a challenge — with no quick solution in sight.

The city’s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Services clocked the number of homeless encampments on streets and sidewalks at 568 in July — compared with 1,200 in July 2016.

But if the number of tents are down, the number of people shooting drugs and using the sidewalk as a bathroom is still remarkably high. In July alone the city received over 1,000 calls about used needles and nearly 2,000 about feces on the street.

The city’s 311 service portal reported logging 1,138 complaints about discarded syringes between July 1 and July 25 of this year — or about 45 a day. During the same period, the 311 line clocked 1,948 calls — or about 78 a day — from people reporting human feces or waste on the streets or sidewalks.

One flash point are BART’s downtown stations, where there has been a growing number of complaints from riders about hypodermic needles littering the transit system.

Four BART riders have been pricked by needles in the past two years, including a mother of two from San Ramon, who claimed she sat on a stray needle in May while riding to San Francisco. She was later tested for HIV and got a hepatitis vaccine shot — but must continue to be tested every three months over the next 1½ years.

Meanwhile, new figures from BART show that since April janitors have cleaned up more than 13,000 dirty needles left behind at the Civic Center and Powell Street stations.

San Francisco recently banned single-use plastic straws but the city gives out millions of single-use needles every year and a tremendous number of those are left behind on the street. From the AP:

The city distributes an estimated 400,000 syringes each month through various programs aimed at reducing HIV and other health risks for drug users. About 246,000 syringes are discarded through the city’s 13 syringe access and disposal sites. But thousands of the others end up on streets, in parks and other public areas, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Thursday…

To address the problem, San Francisco Mayor Farrell has hired 10 workers whose sole job will be to pick up needles starting in June.

I wrote about the situation at BART stations back in April. As you can see in the video below, we’re not talking about one or two addicts tucked in a corner, we’re talking about the entire space clogged with people who are sprawled along the ground, blocking the path of people who are actually using the station.

San Francisco just elected a new mayor, London Breed, who has promised to make homelessness her central focus. One of the items on her agenda: So called “safe injections sites” where the city’s addicts can use drugs away from the eyes of tourists. Maybe that will keep a few more needles off the street but I think the 10 guys whose job it is to clean up this mess don’t need to worry about their job security.



What the Trump administration gets very wrong about free speech


(CNN)“A generation of sanctimonious, sensitive, supercilious snowflakes.” That’s howAttorney General Jeff Sessions described college students in late July.

The Trump administration’s Justice Department is diving into the roiling waters of campus free speech controversies, mounting legal challenges to alleged infringements on speech by public universities, including the University of Michigan and the University of California at Berkeley. But one of the core premises of the administration’s intervention — that the attacks on speech are primarily directed at conservatives — is called into question by a data analysis from Georgetown University’s Free Speech Project that finds that infringements on free speech are just as likely to come from the right as the left.
Of the more than 5,000 college campuses in the United States, the Georgetown study logged only about 60 incidents of suppressed speech since 2016. In analyzing each one, they found limited evidence that conservatives are being targeted unfairly. Most incidents where conservative speech got interrupted or silenced involved the same high-profile voices, in contrast with the incidents from the left covered by the study, who were speakers and scholars with lower profiles. The researchers note that their work is preliminary and not comprehensive, but their findings do suggest that the state of free speech on campus is far more complicated than Sessions and others of similar mind might have us believe.
Georgetown, with funding from the Knight Foundation, built an online tool to analyze these incidents. The Knight Foundation also recently released a report showing that students strongly support the First Amendment.
Campuses have sometimes lapsed in protecting free speech, and the administration is right to stand up for open expression. But Jeff Sessions’ approach to the campus speech debate — which has thus far been one-sided and even insulting — risks fueling the very intolerance that he aims to counter.
Sessions’ latest salvo in the speech wars came in his July address to conservative high school students attending a conference convened by conservative right-wing nonprofit Turning Point USA. He pinpointed what he called a series of campus free speech threats, including policies confining protests to narrow “free speech zones,” speech codes delineating what can and can’t be said and unruly demonstrations that drown out speakers. He also expressed alarm over mandated warnings about sensitive material in course curricula, catalogues of microagressions and enforced “safe spaces.” Sessions opined that, in an effort to make students feel comfortable, some campuses veer too far toward infantilization. Spotlighting the most extreme examples — campus “cry closets” and lounges with play-doh and coloring books — Sessions ridiculed what he characterized as the spectacle of universities aiming to “equip”students to handle tough rhetoric and uncomfortable ideas.
He cataloged a series of prominent instances of wrongful interference with speech, including a Black Lives Matter disruption of an ACLU event at William and Mary in October 2017, violent demonstrations against theorist Charles Murray at Middlebury that March, and a protest against a Jewish group at Brown the previous year. Sessions rightly asserted that “the First Amendment is not a partisan issue. Constitutional rights are for all Americans — not just those in one party or faction.”
But, despite the bipartisan bromides, Sessions has made it clear that the administration’s prime concern is safeguarding space for conservative ideas and viewpoints on campus from an assault by what he has dubbed the “hard left.” During the July speech Sessions goaded the right-leaning students, citing “elements in our society today who want to stop you and silence you. … They want you to feel outnumbered … to get discouraged … to quit.”
The truth is, in the wider society, conservatives are hardly silenced; they enjoy a great deal of political power, with control over all three branches of government. But Sessions has a fair point that many college campuses skew liberal, and some don’t pay enough attention to ensuring that conservative perspectives can be aired without fear of reprisal.
What Sessions left out is that liberal and left-wing speakers are often targeted as well. As the new Georgetown study, based on analysis of more than 90 recent incidents, points out, there is “strong reason to believe that this widespread perception (that most campus speech attacks originate from the left and target conservative speech) is not entirely accurate.” Sessions might have mentioned Fresno State University Professor Randa Jarrar, who was put under investigation this spring after comments critical of First Lady Barbara Bush, or Princeton Professor Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, who canceled speaking engagements when she was threatened over her criticisms of President Donald Trump.
Perhaps the most egregious omission was any mention of free-speech-chilling actions by the event’s hosts, Turning Point USA. Turning Point publishes a “Professor Watchlist” naming hundreds of academics for alleged offenses, including op-eds and course material judged too liberal. The American Association of University Professors has criticized the watchlist as a tool of intimidation.
Sessions is off base when he mocks students as “snowflakes.” Most of the examples of campus speech controversies Sessions touched on — for example, Black Lives Matter and Murray’s use of race to explain IQ differentials — center on issues of race. Student activists drawing attention to policing abuses, discrimination in higher education and other forms of racial injustice have sometimes overstepped, veering into misguided calls to suppress speech activists deemed offensive. But their core purpose — to demand a more equal and inclusive learning environment — is one that the Justice Department should ratify rather than ridicule.
Over the last two years, the Anti-Defamation League has documented a threefold spike in white supremacist incidents on campuses, including an allegedly racially-motivated murder at the University of Maryland that is being prosecuted as a hate crime.
The most notorious incident was the white supremacist march at the University of Virginia the night before the deadly rally in Charlottesville. Sessions’ boss, President Donald Trump, later tried to defend the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who took part, saying there was “blame on both sides.”
While talk of campuses as “safe spaces” might once have been dismissed as a misguided quest for psychological comfort, the rise of hateful gestures on campus raises genuine concerns of physical safety.
Amid these rising instances of the use of racial epithets, display of swastikas and nooses hung in trees, students are rightly demanding that their universities do more to provide a safe, equal learning environment for all. Rather than belittling such efforts, Sessions’ Justice Department should promote constructive measures — such as facilitated dialogues across ideological lines, peaceful counterspeech, and stronger reporting mechanisms for hate crimes — that address hatred without impairing free speech.
While the Justice Department has set forth some legitimate concerns, an ideologically lopsided approach risks compounding an already precarious appreciation of free speech among college students. Some student advocates of racial justice evince a sense of alienation when it comes to First Amendment rights, having witnessed them being invoked mainly in relation to speech that they consider offensive. In his dismissiveness, Sessions surrenders the chance to persuade skeptical students that the First Amendment is a critical tool in their quest for social justice, one they should embrace and defend.
Follow CNN Opinion

Join us on Twitter and Facebook

As a rising generation comes to grips with tensions over free speech, it is essential that they not come to view the defense of the First Amendment as a right-wing weapon being used to strip protections that foster an open and equal learning environment. If the administration’s leading national voice on campus free speech treats the debate as yet another ideological sparring ground, it should not come as a surprise if students come to view the defense of free speech with suspicion. As Sessions pointed out, the First Amendment is not a partisan cause. No one, including Jeff Sessions, should try to make it one.


US Lefties Control Nation’s Press, Education, and TELEVISION ….except Business Fox.


by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

The fact that Facebook and Twitter are the platforms on which political discussion largely takes place, and probably will remain such for the foreseeable future, given the network effects that entrench them, is deeply troubling. Both companies are run by liberals, and free speech is under attack on both platforms.

This story in Entertainment Weekly is a chilling reminder of how little regard liberals–even liberal reporters!–have for free speech:

Facebook executives promoting their video-on-demand service got into a combative exchange with reporters while at the Television Critics Association’s press tour in Beverly Hills on Wednesday. The issue: the presence of right-wing conspiracy site Infowars and Fox News on the social network’s platform.
Reporter: One of the most prominent organizations you’re working with is Fox News, and they’re sort of incorrigible about proliferating a lot of misinformation. Can you speak to your reasoning behind that? Why would you want to work with an organization like that when, as you said, you’re trying to limit the spread of false information?

At this, Rick Van Veen, head of global creative strategy at Facebook, jumped in: “Yeah, well, given that we have limited time. I’d like to keep it — Fidji and I don’t lead the news organization. Campbell Brown leads that…”

Another reporter in the background: Answer the question!

“We have limited time —”

Another reporter: We’ll give you time!

Simo: “We have a range of new shows we’re presenting —”

Reporter: But Fox News is still on every day, including the weekends on this programming list.

Simo: “So is CNN —”

This was met by some chortles in the crowd, presumably because they don’t think CNN and Fox News are remotely compatible when it comes to accuracy.

Simo: “We are really trying to show a range of programming that shows the range of the political spectrum.”

Fox News is by far the most-watched cable news channel, but some liberal reporters, at least, don’t think it should be allowed on Facebook. At this press conference, the Facebook executives explained how the platform limits the circulation of ideas that are deemed to be untrue. Most of the people making decisions on what is untrue, or designing the algorithms that identify untruths, are liberals, and all the pressure to squelch speech comes from the Left. So it isn’t hard to predict the direction this is going.

Meanwhile, Twitter has been trying to persuade users that it doesn’t “shadow ban” conservative accounts. Twitter executives Vijaya Gadde and Kayvon Beykpour wrote yesterday:

People are asking us if we shadow ban. We do not. But let’s start with, “what is shadow banning?”

The best definition we found is this: deliberately making someone’s content undiscoverable to everyone except the person who posted it, unbeknownst to the original poster.

We do not shadow ban. You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile). And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.

But wait! When people talk about shadow banning, they don’t mean making a user’s tweets “undiscoverable.” They mean that that person’s tweets may not show up in your time line, even though you follow that person. The whole point of following someone on Twitter is that people rarely go to other users’ Twitter pages; they see tweets because they appear on the time line. So while Twitter denies shadow banning, its explanation confirms that the platform does, in fact, shadow ban–“you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile.”

That leaves us with this blanket denial: “[W]e certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.” But Twitter also says that it is working on improving the “health” of political discussion on the platform:

Kayvon Beykpour@kayvz

We’ve heard questions from some of you relating to our work to drive healthy conversation on Twitter. People are asking us 1) about the breadth and precision of our work & 2) the impact of our work on the Search experience. We wanted to address these questions transparently here.

Kayvon Beykpour@kayvz

In May, we started using behavioral signals and machine learning to reduce people’s ability to detract from healthy public conversation on Twitter. This approach looks at account behavior & interactions with other accounts that violate our rules. https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/996421373902905344 

Twitter Safety


Today we are introducing new behavior-based signals into how Tweets are organized and presented in areas like conversations and search.

This is to improve the health of the conversation and improve everyone’s Twitter experience.

Once again, the interpretation of “behavioral signals” and the design that guides “machine learning” are in the hands, overwhelmingly, of liberals. As Ben Shapiro says:

[T]his is the problem: while social media giants like Twitter and Facebook insist that these are just misapplications of their algorithms, the algorithms themselves are completely non-transparent — and mistakes seem to universally hit just one side of the political aisle. There’s a reason for the lack of trust here, and transparency would help cure it. When you take it upon yourself to curate “healthy” conversation, you must define your terms — and all too often, those definitions have resulted in a bias toward those on the Left.

What is currently Twitter’s highest priority? Improving “information quality ahead of the elections.”

Kayvon Beykpour@kayvz

Though we’ve made a lot of progress towards a holistic solution, the truth is that this work is still incomplete and we’re choosing not to prioritize it just now (attached is an email I sent our Health leadership team last week) pic.twitter.com/6xoEv1n3TR

(Note:  Google is also  suspected  for zapping conservative commentary  and complaints.   I suspect so, but must admit I have no actual proof to “report”.  I only note that numbers of contacts  are down dramatically…..once President  Trump took office.)

At Last Someone Challenges Snot- Nosed Leftist Liars in Public….Thank you, Secretary Pompeo!

Pompeo to Markey: “Fear Not,” Trump Not Being Fooled By North Korea; Hope You Can Sleep A Little Better Tonight


Democratic Sen. Ed Markey questions Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about whether the Trump administration is being “taken for a ride” by Kim Jong Un in the denuclearization negotiations.

“Fear not,” Pompeo said. “May I? Fear not, this administration has taken enormously constructive actions that have put us in a place that is far better than in either of the previous two administrations, one Republican and one Democrat. We have put an unequaled sanctions regime in place… until such time as denuclearization as we define it is complete. Pressure on the regime is clearly being felt. We still have lots of work to do, but unlike previous administrations, we have no intention of allowing the U.n. sanctions that we led the charge to be put in place, to allow those sanctions to be lifted or not enforced. And until such time as Chairman Kim fulfills the commitment that he made, I am incredibly hopeful that he will. We have not been taken for a ride, senator.”

“I hope you can sleep a little bit better tonight,” Pompeo said.



Maxine Waters Crowd Burns More Flags at Maxine Waters Place

Maxine Waters Would Like To Not Be Associated With Her Flag-Burning Fans, Please

As John Sexton reported last week, a bit of a scuffle broke out near the congressional offices of Maxine Waters (D-CA) in Los Angeles. Some conservatives from Oath Keepers were reportedly going to be protesting outside the building and Waters’ supporters got there first, presumably to rush to her defense. But when the Oath Keepers failed to show up, the locals were forced to find ways to amuse themselves, including setting fire to an American Flag and chanting about how America was never great. Then the fights broke out. (Click this video for a quick refresher course.)

At the time, John speculated (with a hint of sarcasm) that Waters must be “thrilled” to see her self-appointed protectors behaving in such a wonderfully patriotic way right outside of her office. Turns out he was on to something. Waters was finally forced to come out and “distance herself” from the activities, insisting that she’s not to blame for the actions of a few bad eggs. (Daily Mail)

Waters issued a lengthy statement on Saturday distancing herself from the flag-burning protesters, saying they were acting to further ‘their own agenda’ and that the incident ‘overshadowed’ her calls for peaceful protests.

‘While most of those counter-protesters remained peaceful, I have learned that there were others in attendance who were not necessary from the 43rd District, but who nevertheless participated as counter-porters not so much in support of me, but to seek press attention in furtherance of their own agendas,’ Waters said.

‘Unfortunately, this group’s actions with respect to the American flag, and their passing physical contact with other protesters, has created fodder for partisan media outlets to exploit and overshadowed the majority of counter-protests who engaged in peaceful demonstrations.

Whenever protests go off the rails, politicians find themselves having to come up with excuses. The tactic that Waters employs here is a familiar one, similar to the defenses offered in both the Michael Brown and Freddie Gray riots. Local officials come out and claim that most of the people are simply “peaceful protesters” and blame the violence and other bad behavior on shadowy, anonymous “outsiders” who show up to “further their own agenda.”

Of course, in reality, nine times out of ten we find that the pictures reveal people actually do live right in the community and were all too happy to begin starting fires and smashing windows. This case doesn’t seem to be appreciably different.

Waters went on to claim that she, “doesn’t agree with torching the flag as a form of protest.” But she understands the Constitution guarantees everyone the right to this form of free expression.

That’s true enough, but you certainly weren’t condemning them either, were you? If the Oath Keepers had actually shown up (with a permit) for a public demonstration, they would have been met by a mob, some of whom clearly arrived carrying bats, clubs and other improvised weapons. When the designated enemy didn’t appear they broke out in fights between other groups. And yes… they burned an American flag. All of this followed your public calls to have mobs chase members of the White House administration out of public places when they’re not even working and let them know they were “unwelcome” in society.

And now you want to distance yourself from the response of your own supporters? Pull the other one, congresswoman. It’s got bells on it.


CJack on Peace with Putin’s Russia

…Though We Must Continue to Seek Peace with Russia, We Must Ask…

What about the $145,000,000.00 donated by Rosatom (the Russian business concern in which Putin has a financial interest) to the Clinton Foundation following the infamous sale of 20% of the US Uranium deposits (known as the Uranium One Deal) to Rosatom? A deal carried out by ex-president Barack Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, when Robert Mueller was director of the FBI.

And what about the $500,000.00 paid to Bill Clinton for a speech to Russian bankers in Moscow plus a hushed $400 million donation from Russian nationals to the Hillary Clinton campaign in exchange for a commitment to roll back the Magnitsky Act? President Vladimir Putin rightly posed these questions during the telecast of the interview of President Trump and Putin in Helsinki.

And we must investigate George Soros’ Open Society Foundation meddling in the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and subsequent activities to overturn Mr. Trump’s election to the White House.

So far the Mueller probe has yielded more incriminating evidence of a growing network of crooks and maneuvers to depose the President than any evidence of any Trump-Russia collusion to derail Hillary Clinton’s election to the White House.

Yes, what has really come to light is the irrefutable evidence of a well-funded plot to propagandize the left’s pretentious ‘rightful’ indignation with the results of the 2016 presidential elections all in an effort to impeach and unseat the duly elected President of the United States. But as fate would have it, the failure of this devilish plot against the American people has now become a feverish redacting of incriminating documents and a shower of legal maneuvers and delays to produce specific documents requested by the diligent Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Congressman Devin Nuñes.

No doubt these maneuvers are to cover up the seditious activities of the Obama administration-(certainly the activities of Obama’s nefarious propagandist and ex-CIA director John Brennan, a past member of the Communist Party of the USA and ardent Stalinist who voted for Gus Hall, leader & chairmen of the Communist Party of the USA who ran for president of the US in 1972, 1976, 1980, and 1984)-the actions of its corrupt Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s and her pay-to-play scheme, as well as the corrupt and abusive practices of the Obama administration’s Federal Bureau of Investigations and Department of Justice.

Please, let the American people understand the political consequences of choosing to live in a land governed by capricious men who can arbitrarily stifle their aspirations to be free citizens. So let us not hesitate or delay to punish those involved in this sordid plot to overthrow our duly elected President. The trampling of the US Constitution, its laws and legal processes should be considered a crime against the people of the United States.

Alert the American citizenry of its most formidable foe: the anti-American left wing media which is in cahoots with rogue members in the US Congress and seditious high officials in its government. And let these enemies of our liberty know that not one of them is above the law; and that we shall never permit the breaking of our laws, the incitement of societal violence, or a state of general anarchy to destabilize the nation.

Because the Trump-Putin Helsinki Summit was a wise initiative in the pursuit of peace and economic prosperity for all nations, we reject the anarchists’ arguments in favor of the civil embrace of the two most powerful men in the world who seek peace and better understanding. And we encourage the President to extend an invitation for the President of the Russian Federation–the Honorable Vladimir Putin– to visit the United States for a 2nd Summit in Washington to follow up on the matters discussed in Helsinki.

Cjack, Sentinel on the Gulf, July 21, 2018 (corrected and edited version of the previous comments)

Communist John Brennan, Head of Obama’s CIA, Dumps on Trump!

Brennan: Trump-Putin Presser Nothing Short Of “Treasonous,” “There Will Be Consequences For Him”

by Ian Schwartz  at  realclearpolitics: