• 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

Feminized Google Fired Damore For Revealing Absolute Truth!

GOOGLE WOMEN HELP PROVE DAMORE’S POINT

 

by Paul Mirengoff  at PowerLine:

“It is being reported that, in response to James Damore’s memo challenging Google to examine its “unconscious bias” and its “politically correct monoculture” on the grounds that women in general are different from men in general, some female employees chose to stay at home on Monday. Reportedly, they stayed home because the memo made them feel“uncomfortable going back to work.”

If female Google employees really did stay home in response to Damore’s memo, then they went a long way toward proving his point. As Tyler O’Neil at PJ Media says:

In the document, Damore suggested that “women on average are more cooperative” and “more prone to anxiety,” and that this often involves a search “for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average.”

What could demonstrate these arguments more clearly than women staying home (focusing on life over work and accepting a cut in status) in solidarity with other women (more cooperative) and feeling “uncomfortable” going back to work (more prone to anxiety)?

I think the part about anxiety is the most salient one. Frankly, one needs to be an emotional wreck to feel too uncomfortable to work just because one employee in a large organization raised the kind of issues Damone articulated.

Of course, it’s possible, and maybe probable, that the female employees who reportedly stayed home didn’t really feel uncomfortable. They simply wanted to protest and grabbed the language of protest they frequently heard in college — language that seems to have near magical power in that bizarre milieu.

This too would confirm gender differences. I can’t imagine men (1) skipping work because someone wrote a memo they didn’t like and (2) couching a protest in the language, not of traditional grievance, but rather that of “feeling uncomfortable.”

Men aren’t completely stupid, though. Eventually, many of us will learn to employ the lingo that, in our increasingly feminized society, most effectively helps one get one’s way.

So the deconstruction of masculinity project isn’t entirely hopeless. And Google is doing its best to help it along.”

Note:  Normal people, those with workable brains, eyes, and bodies are fully aware of the truth and even the reason the human female and human male animals have been programmed by Nature’s God to possess and display their particular roles  while alive.  But, it must be noted that after death we DO decay quite similarly by pace if not pound.

Perhaps that  duplicity  is what Google and today’s national Democrat fascists have in mind regarding their sex’s carbon emissions similarities.  Dems do  control American communication and education these days.  It’s part of their new religion, dogmatic Marxist fascism.

Good friend from Deephaven, Minnesota sent the above article.

Fake American Obama’s Legal Lady Lynch Hid Behind Fake Identity

OBAMA’S ATTORNEY GENERAL USED FAKE IDENTITY TO HIDE CLINTON INVESTIGATION E-MAILS

“Former President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch, used a fake name to cover up an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server, indicates an admission from Lynch’s attorney.

Lynch was caught conducting a secret meeting with Bill Clinton aboard a private plane on a tarmac in Phoenix last year as Clinton’s wife pursued the presidency and amid an ongoing investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private, unsecured email server, which she illegally used during her tenure as secretary of State. Soon afterward, the former attorney general reportedly used a pseudonym to coordinate a narrative about the meeting with Department of Justice officials, Chuck Ross at The Daily Caller reports. 

Also shortly after the private plane meeting, former FBI director James Comey announced that agency would not pursue a case against Clinton, despite admitting he had enough evidence to do so. A month later, Lynch announced the DOJ would not investigate the Clinton Foundation’s relationship with the State Department during Hillary’s tenure, despite the FBI’s reccommendation to do so. The chain of events caused many to question Lynch’s motives, as it was also widely reported that Hillary planned to keep Lynch as attorney general had Clinton won the election.

Using an email account under a fake name, Lynch (a.k.a. “Elizabeth Carlisle”) coordinated with DOJ officials to respond to queries about the secretive meeting with the former president. Lynch’s attorney, Robert Raben, confirmed her use of an alias on Monday and said she used an email account under a fake identity to prevent “inundation of mailboxes.”

Using fake names was a common tactic among Obama administration officials to evade accountability.  AG Eric Holder, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson all did so when serving in public offices during Obama’s tenure. Lois Lerner, an IRS official who has been suspected of using the tax-collecting agency to target conservative nonprofit organizations, is also thought tohave used an email address registered to a pseudonym to conduct official business.

Reporters at The New York TimesThe Washington Post, and ABC News were hesitant to cover Lynch’s secret tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton, according to emails between journalists and DOJ officials the American Center for Law and Justice recently obtained.

“My editors are still pretty interested in it and I’m hoping to put it to rest by answering just a few more questions about how the meeting came about,” wrote Matt Zapotosky, a reporter for the Post — which recently changed its motto to “Democracy dies in darkness” — in an email to a DOJ official.”

 

http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/07/obamas-attorney-general-used-fake-identity-hide-clinton-investigation-e-mails/

Racism: The Black, Feminist, and Latino War Against Americana Begins?

WHY SHOULDN’T US IMMIGRATION LAW BE GOOD FOR THE US?

by F. H. Buckley at the New York Post:

“The immigration reform bill that Sens. Tom Cotton and David Perdue introduced Wednesday — the RAISE Act — won’t become law anytime soon. But it’s a milestone that’s going to change the way we think about immigration, and will be the biggest issue in 2018 and 2020.

There are two simple principles behind the bill. We’re going to admit people on the basis that they’ll make Americans better off. And amnesty is off the table.

The bill would reduce the number of family-preference immigrants, people who come here because they have an immediate relative in the country. Right now two-thirds of our green cards each year go to family members. They’re a source of chain migration, people admitted because they have a relative here, and who once here bring their relatives in.

Under the RAISE Act, the number of family-preference immigrants would drop from 600,000 a year to less than 90,000. Along the way, the bill would eliminate the idiotic lottery system, which at present admits 50,000 people a year who hold a lucky ticket.

The case for family-reunification preferences is far weaker today than in the past. In the 19th century, the immigrants who arrived at Ellis Island didn’t expect they’d be seeing their relatives in the old country again. It was the long goodbye. But today it’s different. Compared to 1965, plane tickets and calling cards are cheap, and Skype is free.

It’s often thought that our existing immigration policies impoverish America, but when economists run the numbers it’s not clear that on net they’re costly. The most respected immigration scholar, George Borjas, concludes that one really can’t say. That’s not the end of it, however……”   Please continue reading below:

http://nypost.com/2017/08/04/why-shouldnt-us-immigration-law-be-good-for-the-us/

WHY SHOULDN’T THE IMMIGRANT RACIST WAR BEGIN AGAINST WHITE AMERICA!   by Fabiola Santiago of the Miami Herald

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/fabiola-santiago/article165344802.html

Hillary’s Pay to Play Culture Exposed

Judicial Watch reveals Huma emails indicating pay-to-play culture at Hillary’s State Department

By Thomas Lifson  at American Thinker:

“Judicial Watch has been doing the work that Congress and the Justice Department can’t or won’t do, uncovering evidence of Clinton scandals heretofore hidden from the public.  Thanks to their FOIA lawsuits, the State Department is coughing up redacted documents that are part of the public record – even the ones on Hillary Clinton’s illegal server and (soon, we hope) Anthony Weiner’s laptop, where Huma Abedin forwarded classified emails “to make them easier to print.”

In the latest release of 1,606 pagesJudicial Watch noted “repeated use of unsecured communications for classified information and numerous examples of Clinton Foundation donors receiving special favors from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff.”

As Hillary’s closest aide, Ms. Abedin had access to everything Hillary did.

There is a lot to go through, but the U.K. Daily Mail picked out this highlight:

[An] email from 2009 released by the State Department reveals Kelly Craighead of the Democracy Alliance and friend of Hillary Capricia Marshall, a former HillPAC director, putting in a good word for a person they describe as a ‘loyal supporter.’

Craighead followed up to try to get the booster a job.

‘It would mean a lot to me if you could help or advise on a personnel situation for a dear friend,’ she wrote.

Abedin, who worked for Clinton in the Senate and State Department and went on to join her presidential campaign, seemed to buy it. ‘We love [redacted]’ she wrote. ‘Looking into this asap.’

If and when a special counsel is appointed to look into the possible crimes associated with the Clinton Foundation and State Department, I am sure that this interaction will be the subject of inquiry and cross-examination of Ms. Abedin.

And this:

The emails also show the reemergence of Hillary Clinton brother Tony Rodham, who intervenes to try to get someone help with his green card.

In the 2010 email, assistant Monica Hanley wrote Abedin: ‘Hi Huma – Tony Rodham called again looking for an update with his greencard issue. Let me know if this is something I should follow up on.’

A March 2010 email from Hanley appears to show an effort to get out of the task.

‘Do you want me to tell Mr. Rodham that the State Departmtn doesn’t handle Green Card matters or do you want me to tell him something else?’ she inquired.

If only the State Department handled Green Cards, there would not be a problem in granting the favor – special consideration, it sounds like.

Leftist apologists are claiming that because Hillary Clinton lost the election, she should be immune from criminal prosecution.  These are potential crimes in office, and the American people deserve a full inquiry.  The left demands investigations, so let’s show how it is done.

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/08/judicial_watch_reveals_huma_emails_indicating_pay_to_play_culture_at_hillarys_state_department.html

How Far Away Is Our USA from Venezuela’s Socialist Fascism?

Twenty many million illegal/legal nonAmericans have invaded the United States of America over the past decade organized, used, encouraged, maneuvered, financed, transported, purchased, and plotted with and  by the anti-white racist urban and university uneducated   Obamaling  rebels to put an end to the nation’s freedoms.

The nation’s communications and educational empires sell fake news, lies and threats to cripple the duly elected American businessman,  Donald J. Trump, to make way for leftist Dem thug rule….not too unlike the rise of Socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez  (more  Bernie Sanders crude than Barack sly) rule in Venezuela a few years ago.

Venezuela was until the rise of thug Hugo, the wealthiest, most stable “democratic oriented” or more accurately the most  democratic “touched” nation in the Western Hemisphere south of the Rio Grande.

While you are reading the following New York Post article regarding the collapse of Venezuela, how many American teens to the thirties do you think give a damn about the traditional American freedoms the nation once valued and often fought to defend……compared to those who scream freedom  for  marijuana!

http://nypost.com/2017/08/01/venezuela-a-nation-devoured-by-socialism/

 

Victor Davis Hanson Reviews the Stench Emanating from THE CRIMINAL CLINTONS

Victor Davis Hanson

In a perfect and disinterested world, when Washington, D.C. is deluged in scandal, a nonpartisan investigator or prosecutor should survey the contemporary rotten landscape. He would then distinguish the likely guilty from the probably falsely accused—regardless of the political consequences at stake.

In the real cosmos of Washington, however, the majority party—the group that controls the House, Senate, presidency, and U.S. Supreme Court—if it were necessary, would de facto appoint the government’s own special investigatory team, and then allow it to follow where leads dictate. Its majority status would assure that there were no political opponents in control of the investigations, keen on turning an inquiry into a political circus. That cynical reality is known as normal D.C. politics.

But in contemporary Republican La-La Land, the party in power with control over all three branches of government allows its minority-status opponents to dictate the rules of special investigations and inquiry—a Jeff Sessions recused, a Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) excused from his investigations of unmasking and leaking, a Robert Mueller appointed as special counsel, friend of to-be-investigated James Comey, and employer of partisan attorneys.

Is naiveté the cause of such laxity? Do Republicans unilaterally follow Munich rules because they hope such protocols will create a new “civility” and “bipartisan cooperation” in Washington?

Demonizing Resistance 
Or is the culprit civil dissension among the ranks, as the congressional leadership secretly has no real incentive to help the despised outsider Trump? When Republicans get re-elected on repealing and replacing Obamacare during the assured Obama veto-presidency, and then flip in the age of surety that Trump would reify their campaign boasts, should we laugh or cry? Is the Republican establishment’s aim to see Trump’s agenda rendered null and void—or does intent even matter when the result is the same anyway?

Or is the empowerment of progressive conspiracy-mongering due to fear of the mainstream media, which demonizes principled resistance to progressivism and lauds unprincipled surrender to it?

Or, lastly, is the cause a bewildering misreading of human nature? I say “bewildering” because conservatives supposedly brag that they are the more astute students of unchanging human nature, while progressives are purportedly naïve believers in therapeutic remedies to perceived human frailties?

If any of the above, the Republicans had better soon wise up. For eight months, progressives have swarmed the media and our politics with false charges of Russian collusion, aimed at delegitimizing both a president and his conservative agenda.

In a logical world in which Republicans enjoy monopolies on political power, they would have dispensed with the progressive strategy of emasculating the Trump administration through endlessly hyped fake news accounts of quid pro quo Russia-Trump subversion. And they would have done so by themselves taking the offensive.

Endlessly refuting each week’s new progressive charges—no, Donald Trump did not watch sick sex acts with prostitutes in Moscow; no, Donald Trump did not send his lawyer to Eastern Europe to rig the election; no, three swing states did not have their voting machines rigged; no, the electors will not betray their constitutional responsibilities; no, Trump is not going to be removed through impeachment, the 25th Amendment, or the Emoluments Clause—achieves nothing but to undermine public confidence in the conservative effort to undo the Obama agenda. They are no more serious stories than the scandal sheet allegations that Trump shorts his guests a scoop of Häagen-Dazs, that his wife is an illegal alien, or that his son is autistic. Apparently, Republicans don’t get it that when a president is smeared as watching urine-porn in Moscow or getting Russian hush money for undermining Hillary’s campaign, then the abyss between such charges and assassination chic in the popular media, is considerably narrowed.

Go Full-Bore on Real Scandals
The salvation of both the Trump Administration and the Republican congressional fate in the 2018 elections is to reestablish political deterrence—accomplished by going on a full-fledged offensive against real, not merely perceived or alleged, political scandals. Only that way will the accusers feel the predicament of the accused, especially as there is real merit to Democratic liability in a way that charges of Trump collusion have largely proved a political fraud. Only when deterrence is achieved, will the Democrats be forced to concentrate on agendas, issues, laws, and messages, not on ambushing the president.

-The Republicans should announce far more forcefully to the media that Vladimir Putin may have been funneling via shady third-parties millions of dollars to anti-fracking groups. Such collusion, if proven through investigation, really is treasonous—given that the crashing price of oil, brought about solely due to North American frackers, is about the only check on Putin’s ambitions that the West enjoys. So, to take one example, did the San Francisco-based, family-controlled, and hedge-funded Sea Change Foundation receive laundered Russian money to help enhance its anti-fracking messaging? If so, when, how, and who?

-Secondly, Republicans should go full bore on the most explosive scandal of the age, the House Intelligence Committee’s investigations into the surveilling, unmasking, and leaking of American citizens by key members of the Obama Administration, likely done for perceived political advantages.

Rather than envisioning the ethical Devin Nunes as a liability to be controlled, the House leadership should see him as an asset to be encouraged to uncover inconvenient truths—especially given that progressives see the unprincipled Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) as a resource in hiding a scandal. After all, what in the world was the self-righteous and self-described civil libertarian and humanitarian Samantha Power doing, as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, in allegedly reading, unmasking, and leaking intelligence reports on conservative private citizens during a national campaign?

-Thirdly, we forget that Hillary Clinton’s scandals were terminated not by exonerating investigations, but by the fact that she lost a presidential campaign, and thus they were no longer deemed disruptive of an election.

No one has ever really understood exactly why Russian interests paid such lucrative honoraria to Bill Clinton or gave so lavishly to the Clinton Foundation, or why they cut an advantageous deal to acquire substantial interests in North American uranium holdings, but apparently did not prove so generous both before and after Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state and her announced presidential candidacy. When Clinton not only destroyed requested emails, but also lied that they were all neither classified nor connected to government business, and faced no consequences at a time when regular citizens went to jail for such transgressions, then there is no equality under the law left to speak of.

-Fourthly, what an Orwellian world it is when progressives allege “obstruction of justice” (which  Mueller’s burgeoning team of lawyers is apparently investigating) in the case of Donald Trump’s sloppy, off-handed, and out-loud wishes to FBI Director James Comey that he hoped “good guy” Michael Flynn did not get ruined by a loose investigation.

Yet obstruction is not much pursued even when no one seems to deny that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch met stealthily for private discussions with the spouse of a suspect of a current Justice investigation (subsequently dropped), and when she unapologetically seems to have directed the self-described moralist, Director Comey again, to alter the nomenclature of his ongoing investigation of fellow Democrat and presidential candidate Clinton (and Comey shamelessly acceded to Lynch’s detailed requests).

-Fifthly, there is the surreal case of Imran Awan and his tribal clan, the frauds, cheats, and possible blackmailers, who worked as techies for Democratic congressional representatives and in particular for former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Schultz apparently maintained some unfathomable relationship with the disreputable Awan that would force her into utterly untenable positions to protect his skullduggery. And unlike other allegations of collusion, the Florida congresswoman appears on video unapologetically threatening the chief of the U.S. Capitol Police with “consequences” unless he returns computer data concerning possible crimes to Awan.

Reestablish Deterrence or Lose
Finally, no one has ever fully gotten to the bottom of the Fusion GPS/Steele dossier, the fountainhead (thanks to Buzzfeed and CNN) of the entire Russia-Trump collusion mythos.

The much passed-around file was one of the most repugnant episodes in our recent checkered history, with evidence of ethical and perhaps legal wrongdoing on the part of Republican primary candidates, the Clinton campaign, the office of Senator John McCain, the FBI, and the Obama administration, who all at various times trafficked in preposterous and pornographic untruth, in some cases leaked the smears to the toady press, and apparently believed that it was the silver bullet that would put down the Trump werewolf.

Reestablishing deterrence—or what a mellifluous constitutional scholar and recent Nobel Peace Laureate once variously called “taking a gun to a knife fight,” “getting in their faces,” and “punishing our enemies”—is not quite Old Testament eye-for-an-eye, but rather, given human nature, the only way to stop a progressive and media lynch mob.

In the old West, a sheriff did not save those falsely accused in his jail by walking outside to the street to calm an armed and frenzied hanging mob through reason and appeals to sobriety.

(The above article was sent by a good friend and devoted Christian and American.)

Chelsea….the Developing Star?

CIVIL WAR ON THE LEFT, PART 45: THE BANALITY OF CHELSEA

by Steven Hayward at PowerLine:

“We noted here a couple of months back the obvious truth that Chelsea Clinton is a nitwit. Who knew, however, that a leftist would stumble across this fact.

Prof. Corey Robin of Brooklyn College, author of a book popular among leftists called The Reactionary Mind that purports to explain conservatism (gee: I wonder if we can figure out the thesis from the title), got into an argument recently with Chelsea. On Twitter. About banality. No, you can’t make this up.

Chelsea tweeted a link to a story about an arson fire at an LGBT center in Arizona with her coda about how it is an example of “the banality of evil”—the phrase made famous in Hannah Arendt’s controversial book Eichmann in Jerusalem. Prof. Robin thought this a gross misuse or misunderstanding of Arendt’s phrase, and naturally defaulted to the usual mode of progressives everywhere, hectoring Chelsea for her superficiality. And Chelsea responded!

You can read the whole delicious saga at Corey Robin’s website, but here are a few lowlights:

I didn’t think Clinton was using Arendt’s concept of “the banality of evil” correctly. I retweeted her with some snide commentary.

There follows a lot of explication about Arendt’s phrase, but twice Robin describes Chelsea thus: “author of a best-selling book; vice chair of a powerful global foundation; former special correspondent to NBC; possible congressional candidate, with a net worth of $15 million; daughter of the former president of the United States; daughter of the former Secretary of State and almost-president of the United States,” adding that “We have in this country a really weird ruling class.”

There’s lots more here in the whole post, and Chelsea does not come out well in the exchange. I do especially like this initial response from Chelsea:

“Thankful to have read Arendt at Sidwell & Stanford” is a nice touch, another sign of the total lack of self-awareness of entitled elitist mediocrities of the left. It take something for me to side with Corey Robin on anything, but that’s what makes the ongoing left-on-left action so much fun to watch. Popcorn please!”

(Comment regarding the obvious which seems to escape the feminized:   The human male is an animal born  to be a killer and  sexual predator to survive as an animal species.  The he is born to be a problem solver……(unless born as a Democrat in America these days).

The human female animal is born to be the carrier of human offspring to continue the species.   She needs, she prefers, demands security   over problem solving,  comfort and make-believe over Truth.