• 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

Krauthammer Warns America of Obama’s OFA Creep to Communism

Bruce and Arlene Taber sent the following outstanding article in the New York Post by Charles Krauthammer:

”There’s a reason why in New York Harbor we have the Statue of Liberty,
Not the Statue of Equality.”An article from the New York Post:I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called “Organizing for Action” (OFA).

OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do. This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing. It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago. If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run. What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws?

If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America!

Our ex-president said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep. He has moved many of his administration’s top dogs over to Organizing for Action.

OFA is behind the strategic and tactical implementation of the resistance to the Trump Administration that we are seeing across America, and politically active courts are providing the leverage for this revolution.

OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for “progressive” change. Its issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform.

OFA members were propped up by the ex-president’s message from the shadows: “Organizing is the building block of everything great we have accomplished Organizers around the country are fighting for change in their communities and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines. Commit to this work in 2017 and beyond.”

OFA’s website says it obtained its “digital” assets from the ex-president’s re-election effort and that he inspired the movement. In short, it is the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic we know as AMERICA.

Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says, “The OFA will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the ex-president will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House.”

Sperry writes that, “The ex-president is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the Trump administration through a network of non-profits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide. The OFA IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate that the OFA has 32,525 (and growing) volunteers nationwide. The ex-president and his wife will oversee the operation from their home/ office in Washington DC.

Think about how this works.. For example: Trump issues an immigration executive order; the OFA signals for protests and statements from pro-immigrant groups; the ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action in support of these activities; the twitter sphere lights up with social media; and violence follows. All of this happens from the ex-president’s signal that he is heartened by the protests..

If Barack Obama did not do enough to destroy this country in the 8 years he was in office, it appears his future plans are to destroy the foundation on which this country has operated on for the last 241 years.

If this does not scare you, then we are in worse trouble than you know.

So, do your part. You have read it, so at least pass this on so others will know what we are up against. We are losing our country and we are so compliant. We are becoming a “PERFECT TARGET” for our enemy!

Charles Krauthammer

 The Taber duo sent the following rejoinder:

“The Enemy Among Us” Commentary By Charles Krauthammer- Incorrect Attribution!

Summary of eRumor:

Charles Krauthammer has penned a column under the headline, “The Enemy Among Us,” about President Obama’s use of a group called Organizing for  Action (OFA) to advance his political agenda after leaving the White House.

The Truth:

We couldn’t track down the author of the “The Enemy Among Us” commentary, but it was not written by conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer or published by the New York Post.

The column first surfaced in discussion forums and on social media in February 2017. At the time, it was attributed to the New York Post, but no author was listed. A quick read of those early versions reveals that the column wasn’t published in the New York Post — but it cited and was largely based on a commentary written by Post columnist Paul Sperry under the headline, “How Obama Is Scheming to Sabotage Trump’s Presidency.”

Sperry argues in the column that Organizing for Action (OFA), a 501c4 nonprofit group derived from Obama’s reelection campaign that works to organize and mobilize support for the former president’s agenda, has  undermined President Trump by planning protests and coordinating opposition to Trump’s presidential agenda.

“The Enemy Among Us” has a similar premise, but it goes a step forward by arguing that Obama is using OFA to not only undermine Trump’s presidency — but to undermine America. Some version even reference a coming civil war:I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called “Organizing for Action” (OFA).

OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do. This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing. It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago. If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run. What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws?

If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America!

“The Enemy Among Us” column was first attributed to Charles Krauthammer by Before Its News, a website that publishes user-generated (and conspiracy-minded) commentaries with no editing or fact-checking, on October 12, 2017. However, the commentary can’t be found at places where Krauthammer’s work regularly appears, including  Fox News, the National Review and the Washington Post.

And we’ve seen columns inaccurately attributed to Charles Krauthammer before. Because he’s a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist and a household name in conservative circles, Krauthammer’s name has been falsely used to help raise the visibility of essays and commentaries like this one in the past. The idea is that people give more weight to a column by Krauthammer, a well-known conservative thinker, than to a column by somebody they’ve never heard of. That appears to be the case here. Krauthammer didn’t write “The Enemy Among Us.”

A real example of the eRumor as it has appeared on the Internet:

Collected on: 10/18/2017

Advertisements

Will America’s “Democrat-Marxist” Tiger Sharks Tear the Nation Apart with Their Leftist Lies at School?

The Left’s Sirens Are Already Hinting Our Culture Wars Will End In Another Civil War

..
“The radicalization of the Democratic Party is transforming everything that happens in America into another battle in our unending culture war.

By John Daniel Davidson at realclearpolitics: John Daniel Davidson

Is there anything left in American public life that isn’t an occasion for political rancor and division? NFL games are now nothing more than crude pieces of political theater. On Sunday even Vice President Mike Pence got in on the act, showing up to a Colts-49ers game then leaving after a few players knelt during the national anthem. Next day was Columbus Day, which the cities of Los Angeles and Austin decided this year to replace with “Indigenous Peoples’ Day,” because Christopher Columbus is apparently the new Robert E. Lee. And it’s only Tuesday.

It should be obvious by now that our culture wars will henceforth be constant and unending; the next battle could be triggered by almost anything. Whether it’s the reactions (or non-reactions) of Hollywood celebrities to the unsurprising news of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual misdeeds or the outraged calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment the instant news broke of the Las Vegas massacre, very little can happen in America now without it being an occasion for an appeal to one’s own political tribe. No matter how tawdry or horrifying the news, there is vanishingly little room for solidarity because there is no appetite for it. Not even late-night comedy shows with their shrinking audiences can resist the urge to devolve into partisan political rants.

For all his eagerness to wage the culture wars in his improvised, bombastic style, this didn’t begin with Donald Trump. It didn’t begin with Barack Obama, either, but a recent studyby Pew Research Center found that divisions between Republicans and Democrats on fundamental political values reached record levels during the Obama administration. You don’t need a Pew survey to tell you that, of course, but the data helps illuminate an otherwise vague feeling that American society is coming apart at the seams, and has been for years.

Right and Left Are Moving Farther Apart, And Fast

The Pew study measures responses to issues Pew has been asking about since 1994, things like welfare, race, and immigration. On almost every count, the gaps between Republicans and Democrats held more or less steady up until around 2010, when they began to widen. Today, “Republicans and Democrats are now further apart ideologically than at any point in more than two decades,” with the median Republican more conservative than 97 percent of Democrats and the median Democrat more liberal than 95 percent of Republicans. Here’s what that looks like in a chart:

Pick your issue. On immigration, 84 percent of Democrats say immigrants strengthen the country, while only 42 percent of Republicans say the same. Ten years ago, those percentages were nearly identical. On environmental regulation, 77 percent of Democrats say more regulation is worth the cost, compared to just 36 percent of Republicans. A decade ago, that spread was 67 and 58 percent, respectively. On whether Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence, 65 percent of Republicans say it does while 69 percent of Democrats say it doesn’t. When Pew first asked that question in 2002, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, the partisan gap was just 11 points.

Here’s the other notable thing about Pew’s findings. Among the ten questions about political values that Pew has asked since 1994, the partisan gap is much larger than divisions based on demographic differences like age, race, and education. For example, the average partisan gap has increased from 15 to 36 points, whereas 20 years ago the average partisan differences on these issues were “only somewhat wider than differences by religious attendance or educational attainment and about as wide as the differences between blacks and whites (14 points, on average). Today, the party divide is much wider than any of these demographic differences.”

The Pew survey is a rich trove of fascinating survey data, but it mostly confirms what we can all see for ourselves: Americans are sorting themselves into political tribes that have less and less in common. Partisanship has even crept into the online dating scene. Last month the dating website OkCupid announced a partnership with Planned Parenthood that allows users to attach a badge to their profile, the obvious purpose of which is to avoid accidentally going on a date with someone who doesn’t share one’s views on abortion.

Identity Politics Is Poisoning American Civic Life

That brings us to something else that might get lost in the Pew numbers: the median Democratic voter has radicalized much faster than the median Republican voter, and most of this radicalization happened while a Democratic president was in office. That counterintuitive trend points to a larger problem with how the Left in particular understands the American project and our prospects for living together in peace and prosperity. Although it’s true that Republicans have moved further to the right as Democrats have moved further to the left, it’s the leftward slide that should worry us.

For all their shortcomings, conservatives at least have a limiting principle for politics. Most of them believe, for example, in the principles enshrined in the Constitution and maintain that no matter how bad things are, the Bill of Rights is a necessary bulwark, sometimes the only bulwark, against tyranny and violence. In contrast, here’s Timothy Egan of The New York Times arguing unabashedly for the repeal of the Second and Fifth Amendments.

The rapid radicalization of Democrats along these lines follows a ruthless logic about the entire premise of the American constitutional order. If you believe, as progressives increasingly do, that America was founded under false pretenses and built on racial oppression, then why bother conserving it? And why bother trying to compromise with those on the other side, especially if they reject progressives’ unifying theory that America is forever cursed by its original sin of slavery, which nothing can expiate?

Before you scoff, understand that this view of race and America is increasingly mainstream on the American Left. To read someone like Ta-Nehisi Coates, whose recent article in The Atlantic is a manifesto of racial identity politics that argues Trump’s presidency is based on white supremacy, is to realize that progressive elites no longer believe they can share a republic with conservatives, or really anyone with whom they disagree.

Coates has attained near god-like status among progressives with his oracular writings on race and politics, which take for granted the immutability of race and racial animus. So it’s deeply disturbing when he writes, as he does in a new collection of essays, that “should white supremacy fall, the means by which that happens might be unthinkable to those of us bound by present realities and politics.”

What does Coates mean by that? It isn’t hard to guess, and lately Coates isn’t trying too hard to disguise it. In a recent interview with Ezra Klein of Vox, Coates expanded on this idea. Writes Klein:

When he tries to describe the events that would erase America’s wealth gap, that would see the end of white supremacy, his thoughts flicker to the French Revolution, to the executions and the terror. ‘It’s very easy for me to see myself being contemporary with processes that might make for an equal world, more equality, and maybe the complete abolition of race as a construct, and being horrified by the process, maybe even attacking the process. I think these things don’t tend to happen peacefully.’

This is the circuitous, stumbling language of man who knows precisely what he wants to say but isn’t sure if he should come right out and say it. Coates isn’t alone in feinting toward violence as a means—perhaps the only means, if Coates is to be taken at his word—of achieving social justice. On college campuses, progressive activists increasingly don’t even bother mincing words, they just forcibly silence anyone who disagrees with them, as a Black Lives Matter group did recently during an event featuring the American Civil Liberties Union at the College of William and Mary. (Ironically, the talk was supposed to be about students and the First Amendment.)

For a sincere progressive, almost everything that happened in the past is a crime against the present, and the only greatness America can attain is by repudiating its past and shaming—or silencing, if possible—all those who believe preserving our constitutional order is the best way for all of us to get along.

Seen in that light, the radicalization of Democrats is something qualitatively different, and much more dangerous, than the radicalization of Republicans. It means, among other things, that the culture war is now going to encompass everything, and that it will never end….”

Water Troubles Hit Lake Superior!

Warning:   The following article may be disturbing for Californians, feminists, black racists, university professors, elementary and high school teachers,   Harvey Weintstein, Al Franken,  Hillary Roddham Clinton, Lefty Judges and other moguls to “fathom”.

LAKE SUPERIOR DRYING UP DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE! NO, WAIT…

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

“Today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune headlines: “Lake Superior is near record high and threatening shoreline.” The lake is within two inches of its highest recorded level, and the consequences are dire:

Wayne Jensen sat on his narrow strip of Lake Superior shoreline last month, listening to waves crash against his small cliff and soaking in the scent of woods near Port Wing, Wis., his frequent escape from the bustle of his home in Minneapolis.

Just then, he watched a piece of his paradise disappear. A chunk of land about 15 feet long and about 6 feet wide slid into the big lake, trees and all, as he sat nearby.

“I wanted to start crying. I’m watching this beautiful, pristine shoreline fall into the lake,” Jensen said. “I just stood there in awe.”

[I]f the gales of November come early, before the water level has a chance to go down as it typically does this time of year, the devastation could be widespread, Jensen and others worry.

Already, the high lake level is sinking fixed docks and causing problems as water seeps into homes on Duluth’s saturated sandy spit known as Park Point.

Why is Lake Superior’s water level so high? We’ve gotten a lot of rain and snow in recent years. But the Strib hints at a darker possibility:

“Is it climate change? Or is it just a cyclical thing?” Buck wondered aloud. “What can we do? What can we expect?”

But wait! Just a few short years ago, we were told that Lake Superior was drying up, as water levels were, for a while, below average. What caused the level of the Great Lakes to fall? Climate change, of course. And low levels, like high levels, are bad.

National Geographic: “Climate Change and Variability Drive Low Water Levels on the Great Lakes.”

The National Resources Defense Council: “Climate change is lowering Great Lakes water levels.”

It’s no secret that, partially due to climate change, the water levels in the Great Lakes are getting very low.

The U.N’s IPCC: “[T]he following lake level declines could occur: Lake Superior -0.2 to -0.5 m.”

Dick Durbin: “What we are seeing in global warming is the evaporation of our Great Lakes.”

Minnesota Public Radio

Scientists at the Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [are] studying the interplay between low water levels, shrinking ice cover and warm water temperatures, Gronewold said. They have already concluded that climate change is playing a role in determining Great Lakes water levels.

In the world of climate “science,” there is no penalty for being wrong. It would be nice, however, if reporters were to notice now and then…..”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/10/lake-superior-drying-up-due-to-climate-change-no-wait.php

Communist Curse to America, George Soros Behind Black NFL Rebellion

Bombshell Report: The NFL Players’ Union Has Been Working With George Soros

This makes so much sense. Lots of people have been wondering why the NFL has been drifting into left wing politics. Associating with George Soros in any way will typically make that happen.
The Washington Times has the story:
 
NFL players’ union teamed up with Soros to fund leftist advocacy groups
 
Even before its feud over the national anthem with President Trump, the NFL Players Association wasn’t on the same political team as many of its fans, judging from its contributions to leftist advocacy groups.
 
Tax documents released by 2ndVote show the NFLPA donated $5,000 in 2015 to the Center for Community Change Action, a group active in the anti-Trump resistance and bankrolled by a host of liberal foundations, including top Democratic donor George Soros’s Foundation for Open Society.
A member of the AFL-CIO, the NFLPA also contributed in 2013 and 2015 to Working America, the AFL-CIO’s community affiliate, which Open Secrets said spent $1 million in 2016 to defeat Trump.
 
Working America has since mobilized against the Republican tax-cut framework, denouncing it as the “Trump tax scam.”
 
The NFLPA contributed $5,000 in 2014 to Jobs with Justice, another pro-union group backed by Soros, and $5,000 in 2013 to the progressive Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy.
 
The NFL is going to have to answer for this. Why would they do business with Soros in any capacity?

Arrogant Jewish Bret Stephens Professes Against Second Amendment

“I was taught by my well educated, old maid public school teachers throughout the 1940s to seek learnedness, that is, to listen to all phases of arguments in order to discover Truth.  Learning knowledge, I was told, would make me closer to GOD!

Truth was important in those days.  The 1940s were the war years.

Everyone living on our modest prewar built block was God-worshiping then.  All of the sixteen houses had persons connected to children.   No one was divorced.  Every house had a father.

Two households were Jewish.   These two households were different as neighbors.

Each year the neighborhood was invited to celebrate Spring and Early Autumn with a grand picnic of the households.  Everyone would bring food and drink, and gathered in an empty lot connected to our Victory Garden during the War.     I was the  boy  who twice a year personally delivered  written invitations to every household.  Although always welcomed and invited, the two Jewish families chose never to join us.

Our Jewish population significantly increased in my grade school years and  at the high school where I attended.  Academically, despite their clannish separation from friendships during grade school,  by seventh and eighth grades Jewish kids became more like ‘us’ kids of the same age.   Jewish girls, however,  would usually  refrain from talking to me and other Gentile boys, but not the boys.

I attended a high school with a larger percentage of Jewish students and benefited from it culturally with the exception of one very, very important human  arena of life.   Jewish kids and their parents, who were even then lawyers and business owners, knew NOTHING ABOUT THE OUTDOORS.

Nearly all of the mothers who attended our neighborhood picnics gardened feverishly.   From  age 8 to the end of the War, I was in my glory.    I was in charge of tilling, weeding, harvesting, and insect controlling the vegetables of our half lot wartime Victory Garden, a nation-wide urban effort to grow and share vegetables around the neighborhood.    Our Jewish neighbors never participated in any way.

After teaching high school Social Studies and Russian for twelve years, I wound up working outdoors for a living by developing  artistic  styles of landscape gardening, a business I been  blessed by serving many Jewish families who had a feel for beautiful settings…..despite their inability, actually a disdain to do work out doors especially in public.   They seemed to hate the labor as well as the product.  It was foreign territory.

Many a time  these clients, some also becoming   good friends,  would stand over me while I, lying  on the ground would be stretching,  artistically pruning a conifer to fit the setting and remark,  “You can’t make any money doing that for a living, Glenn!”

I’d guess about 99% of our nation’s Jewish CITIZENS are allergic to their outdoors, especially if they are narrow-minded  jerk  Democrats as arrogant as New York Times Leftist transfer from the Wall Street Journal, writer Bret Stephens is.

He wants to kill the American Federal Constitution’s Second Amendment.

Repeal the Second Amendment

by Bret Stephens of the leftist New York Times:

“I have never understood the conservative fetish for the Second Amendment.

From a law-and-order standpoint, more guns means more murder. “States with higher rates of gun ownership had disproportionately large numbers of deaths from firearm-related homicides,” noted one exhaustive 2013 study in the American Journal of Public Health.

From a personal-safety standpoint, more guns means less safety. The F.B.I. counted a total of 268 “justifiable homicides” by private citizens involving firearms in 2015; that is, felons killed in the course of committing a felony. Yet that same year, there were 489 “unintentional firearms deaths” in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Between 77 and 141 of those killed were children.

From a national-security standpoint, the Amendment’s suggestion that a “well-regulated militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State,” is quaint. The Minutemen that will deter Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un are based in missile silos in Minot, N.D., not farmhouses in Lexington, Mass.

From a personal liberty standpoint, the idea that an armed citizenry is the ultimate check on the ambitions and encroachments of government power is curious. The Whiskey Rebellion of the 1790s, the New York draft riots of 1863, the coal miners’ rebellion of 1921, the Brink’s robbery of 1981 — does any serious conservative think of these as great moments in Second Amendment activism?

And now we have the relatively new and now ubiquitous “active shooter” phenomenon, something that remains extremely rare in the rest of the world. Conservatives often say that the right response to these horrors is to do more on the mental-health front. Yet by all accounts Stephen Paddock would not have raised an eyebrow with a mental-health professional before he murdered 58 people in Las Vegas last week.

What might have raised a red flag? I’m not the first pundit to point out that if a “Mohammad Paddock” had purchased dozens of firearms and thousands of rounds of ammunition and then checked himself into a suite at the Mandalay Bay with direct views to a nearby music festival, somebody at the local F.B.I. field office would have noticed.

Given all of this, why do liberals keep losing the gun control debate?

Maybe it’s because they argue their case badly and — let’s face it — in bad faith. Democratic politicians routinely profess their fidelity to the Second Amendment — or rather, “a nuanced reading” of it — with all the conviction of Barack Obama’s support for traditional marriage, circa 2008. People recognize lip service for what it is.

Then there are the endless liberal errors of fact. There is no “gun-show loophole” per se; it’s a private-sale loophole, in other words the right to sell your own stuff. The civilian AR-15 is not a true “assault rifle,” and banning such rifles would have little effect on the overall murder rate, since most homicides are committed with handguns. It’s not true that 40 percent of gun owners buy without a background check; the real number is closer to one-fifth.

The National Rifle Association does not have Republican “balls in a money clip,” as Jimmy Kimmel put it the other night. The N.R.A. has donated a paltry $3,533,294 to all current members of Congress since 1998, according to The Washington Post, equivalent to about three months of Kimmel’s salary. The N.R.A. doesn’t need to buy influence: It’s powerful because it’s popular.

Nor will it do to follow the “Australian model” of a gun buyback program, which has shown poor results in the United States and makes little sense in a country awash with hundreds of millions of weapons. Keeping guns out of the hands of mentally ill people is a sensible goal, but due process is still owed to the potentially insane. Background checks for private gun sales are another fine idea, though its effects on homicides will be negligible: guns recovered by police are rarely in the hands of their legal owners, a 2016 study found.

In fact, the more closely one looks at what passes for “common sense” gun laws, the more feckless they appear. Americans who claim to be outraged by gun crimes should want to do something more than tinker at the margins of a legal regime that most of the developed world rightly considers nuts. They should want to change it fundamentally and permanently.

There is only one way to do this: Repeal the Second Amendment.

Repealing the Amendment may seem like political Mission Impossible today, but in the era of same-sex marriage it’s worth recalling that most great causes begin as improbable ones. Gun ownership should never be outlawed, just as it isn’t outlawed in Britain or Australia. But it doesn’t need a blanket Constitutional protection, either. The 46,445 murder victims killed by gunfire in the United States between 2012 and 2016 didn’t need to perish so that gun enthusiasts can go on fantasizing that “Red Dawn” is the fate that soon awaits us.

Donald Trump will likely get one more Supreme Court nomination, or two or three, before he leaves office, guaranteeing a pro-gun court for another generation. Expansive interpretations of the right to bear arms will be the law of the land — until the “right” itself ceases to be.

Some conservatives will insist that the Second Amendment is fundamental to the structure of American liberty. They will cite James Madison, who noted in the Federalist Papers that in Europe “the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” America was supposed to be different, and better.

I wonder what Madison would have to say about that today, when more than twice as many Americans perished last year at the hands of their fellows as died in battle during the entire Revolutionary War. My guess: Take the guns—or at least the presumptive right to them—away. The true foundation of American exceptionalism should be our capacity for moral and constitutional renewal, not our instinct for self-destruction.”

(Further comment regarding Bretprint above….Indoor bigots like Bret Stephens and his mouthful leftist feminist counter parts, do hate outdoor people.  They know nature, a world Brets know nothing about, that  some people  still kill cows and pigs for the food Bret leftists eat.

Bret Stephens people work inside glass and mortar whose walls and floors they don’t clean or repair.  Instead they daintily  toast   pleasures and politics far removed from the realities and demands of the outdoors whether hunting,  gardening or landscaping.

I am NOT a hunter. One of my son’s is and is an avid  fisherman as well.  There is a skill to hunting and other   efforts for retain personal  self reliance.      The indoor, inbred Brets at the New York Times, Washington Post, etc.,  might soon dictate that whatever they deem is  obnoxious and/or threatening  to their afternoon drinks while posting their fake news must disappear from the public Soviet style.

We peons must keep our weapons to defend if attacked….ghr)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marxist CNN’s ‘MUSLIM GIRL’ CONNECTS LAS VEGAS MASSACRE AND WHITE MEN

How America has silently accepted the rage of white men

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/opinions/mass-shootings-white-male-rage-modan-opinion/index.html

Relative to Population, Murderers in America Overwhelmingly are Urban Blacks Without Fathers

(America’s Blacks Vote Democrat by 10-1, a Truth never mentioned:

On average, there is mass killing bigger than Vegas in Chicago each month

By Jack Hellner  at American Thinker:

“There were 762 murders in Chicago in 2016, the most in 19 years.  On average, there was mass killing – by different perps – that adds up bigger than the Las Vegas massacre each month.  Where is the wall-to-wall coverage?

Chicago has very strict gun laws, with no gun shops in Chicago.  The Chicago police and politicians know where the criminals, gangs, and guns are, so why don’t they get them off the street?  We see more effort to restrain the cops instead of restraining the criminals.  In Chicago and elsewhere, we repeatedly see killings and other serious crimes committed by illegals and legal citizens with long criminal records.  What we have is a catch-and-release program instead of a system that protects the public.  We have more concern for the criminals than either the cops or the victims.

Where is the outrage on the nighttime news and the late-night “comedy” shows about the mass killings each month in Chicago?  Where was the demand for a discussion during Obama’s eight years as to why the strict laws weren’t working?

Instead of trying to save the children and others in Chicago at the hands of gangs and other criminals, we had discussions about how bad the police were.  We had demands for sanctuary cities to coddle people who willingly violate our laws.

Many mass killings throughout the world occurred in gun-free zones.  Why weren’t the people safe?

The Nazis took away the guns.  Did that make it safer for the citizens, or did millions die at the hands of the tyrant socialists who took away the guns?

Our founding fathers knew what they were doing when they gave us the Second Amendment to protect the people from the tyrants who throughout history have been willing to kill thousands and millions of their people.

So yes, let’s have an honest nationwide political discussion: we should discuss why the gun crime rate is so much higher in Chicago than Houston, even though Houston has much more lenient gun laws and many gun shops.  We should discuss why so many mass shootings occur in gun-free zones, since that is what they are supposed to protect against.  We should honestly discuss black-on-black crime and murders, because that is the cause of most black deaths, not cops or whites.  We should discuss why so many groups gin up hate on cops, since the significant majority of them do their best to protect the public and reduce crime.

Let’s have an honest discussion about sanctuary cities.  Isn’t it logical for people to believe they have the right to pick and choose what laws to obey if politicians who took an oath to enforce the laws pick and choose which ones they want to enforce?  The majority of the public is against sanctuary cities, so why don’t Democrats and reporters who live and die by polls care about those polls?

We should also be honest about Colin Kaepernick.  He kneeled as a protest against cops and to discuss race.  When he wore pigs on his socks, he was ginning up hate against cops.  He, along with Obama, wants to remake America.  It was not about freedom of speech.  When reporters, Democrats, other athletes, and Hollywood say it is about unity and freedom of speech, they should be asked about the pigs on the socks.

The protest by Colin wasn’t popular, so we got the fantasy that it was about freedom of speech.  Then we got the media, politicians, athletes, and others pretending Trump turned it to race.  Reporters and others do a lot of pretending about Trump.  They were for Hillary, and they hate Trump, and almost all reporting reflects that.

I have turned off the nightly “comedy” shows because they are anti-Trump all the time.  Hillary jokes would be much more relevant.  She is a whiny little child complaining every day about how mistreated she is.  They never cared about anything Obama did.

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/10/on_average_there_is_mass_killing_bigger_than_vegas_in_chicago_each_month_.html