|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Monday, December 3, 2018
Democrats now have full Control of Illinois
It’s time to declare violent left-wing mobs to be domestic terrorists
Dear President Trump: It’s time to declare violent left-wing mobs to be domestic terrorists
Friday, November 09, 2018 by: Mike Adams
Tags: Left-wing, Liberal Mob, lunatics, President Trump, protests, Tucker Carlson, violence
Tags: Left-wing, Liberal Mob, lunatics, President Trump, protests, Tucker Carlson, violence
4,830VIEWS
(Natural News) In case you haven’t seen the real news today, the left-wing mobs are now activated and working to terrorize conservative journalists:
Antifa ‘Cracked’ Tucker Carlson’s Front Door, Spoke Of Using Pipe Bombs; Wife Feared ‘Home Invasion’ – InformationLiberation.com
Tucker Carlson’s wife was at their DC home Wednesday night when an unhinged leftist mob suddenly tried to smash their door down before screaming “we know where you sleep at night!”
Carlson’s front door was reportedly “cracked” and the mob spoke of wanting to bring a “pipe bomb” to Tucker Carlson’s house.
From The Washington Post:
Fox News host Tucker Carlson was at his desk Wednesday evening, less than two hours before his 8 p.m. live show, when he suddenly started receiving multiple text messages.There was some sort of commotion happening outside his home in Northwest D.C.
“I called my wife,” Carlson told The Washington Post in a phone interview. “She had been in the kitchen alone getting ready to go to dinner and she heard pounding on the front door and screaming. … Someone started throwing himself against the front door and actually cracked the front door.”
His wife, thinking it was a home invasion, locked herself in the pantry and called 911, Carlson said. The couple have four children, but none were home at the time.But it wasn’t a home invasion. It was a protest.
It wasn’t a “protest” it was a terroristic threat.
They doxed the home addresses of Tucker and his brother Buckley, as well as Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and The Daily Caller’s Neil Patel and demanded he change his political views.
That’s the definition of terrorism.
President Trump: You must declare violent left-wing mobs to be domestic terrorists (and deal with them accordingly)
These lunatic left-wing mobs are now functioning as terror gangs who openly terrorize conservative journalists. What has become abundantly clear now is that the radical Left is incompatible with civil society. Even when they win the House in a mid-term election, they escalate the violence to a whole new level, asserting that any person who espouses views different from their own has no right to exist.
It’s time to push back against these lunatics, and while I do not espouse violence as the default posture, I have to wonder why Tucker Carlson didn’t open fire on this violent mob as its members were bashing in his door while his wife was shivering with fear, hiding in the cupboard, thinking their home was about to be overrun by violent lunatics intent on causing severe physical harm or even death.
You probably don’t have to be told this, but if such a left-wing mob assaulted the home of any patriot in Texas, they would all be shot without hesitation. This isn’t posturing; it is a simple matter of asserting the right to self-defense. We all have the right to be safe in our homes. Those who assault our homes are fair game to be stopped by all available legal means, including the use of firearms.
Leftists want to end the Second Amendment so that their targets cannot defend themselves against the violent left-wing mobs
Note carefully that the very same left-wing lunatics who are now assaulting the homes of conservatives journalists also demand the complete dismantling of the Second Amendment. This would, of course, render it impossible for victims of their violence to defend themselves. And that’s the whole point: These left-wing fanatics are essentially communists, and they know very well that their attempted communist takeover of America cannot succeed as long as the American people are armed.
Soon, they may come to find out precisely what the Second Amendment was written for. If these left-wing lunatics don’t back down from their acts of terrorism and threatened violence, it’s only a matter of time before someone opens fire on them in self-defense, demonstrating the appropriate application of firearms in halting violence and protecting the innocent. (And demonstrating mastery of the perforating arts.)
Sunday, December 2, 2018
The Party of Illegal Immigrants, Fake Votes, and Stolen Elections
Originally published at Fox News Newt Gingrich
Watch the Democrats try to steal elections.
Think about how Democratic dishonesty is a lot greater threat to freedom than some unproven Russian conspiracy.
As you watch the long, long, long counts in Florida, Arizona, and California, remember the long count which stole Senator Norm Coleman’s Senate seat for Al Franken in Minnesota.
Remember Democratic candidate for governor in Georgia Stacey Abrams’s assertion that her blue wave was made up of both legal and illegal residents. Remember that 22,000 of the applications her voter registration group filed in Georgia were either canceled, duplicative, or couldn’t be reconciled (probably because the voters did not exist).
The Democratic supervisor of elections for Broward County, Florida has a consistent record of breaking the law and trying to steal elections.
When you have the state’s sitting governor and Senate candidate, Governor Rick Scott, filing a lawsuit against “rampant fraud” and saying, “I will not stand idly by while unethical liberals try to steal an election.” Things have gotten very serious.
As Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has said, “what’s happening in Broward County should concern every American.”
In Arizona, you can bet many of the 400,000 mail-in ballots still outstanding will likely turn out to be non-existent or votes cast by illegal immigrants – or simply made up by the election officials in two of the state’s most liberal counties. Already, the state Republican party has alleged that left-wing election officials in one county destroyed evidence related to early voting irregularities.
The fact is, that after all their feigned worries about Russia influencing the election, Democrats will end up stealing a lot more votes than Putin ever dreamed of taking.
Watch the next few days, remember the lies, smears, and character assassination Democrats threw at Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
And worry for the very fabric of our country.
Girl Scouts of the USA (GSUSA) filed a lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America (BSA)
The Girl Scouts of the USA (GSUSA) filed a lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) over advertising concerns surrounding the use of gender-free terms like “scouts.”
The complaint was filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, NPR reported.
The complaint stems from the BSA using gender-free terms such as in the campaign “Scout Me In” and changing a program name from Boy Scouts to Scouts BSA.
A Boy Scouts of America (BSA) merit badge sash is pictured as BSA welcomes girls to join scouting. SHUTTERSTOCK/ Amy Kerkemeyer
GSUSA believes having “scouts” as a term by itself makes it seem like the two organizations became one, according to NPR. (RELATED: The Boy Scouts’ March To Inclusivity Is Over, And The Girl Scouts Aren’t Happy)
“Such misconduct will not only cause confusion among the public, damage the goodwill of GSUSA’s GIRL SCOUTS trademarks, and erode its core brand identity, but it will also marginalize the GIRL SCOUTS Movement by causing the public to believe that GSUSA’s extraordinarily successful services are not true or official ‘Scouting’ programs, but niche services with limited utility and appeal,” the complaint said, NPR reported.
BSA announced it would allow girls to join the Cub Scouts program in October 2017. The organization added that a scouting program would also be made available for girls that can help them earn an Eagle Scout ranking, the highest rank in the organization.
The scouting program will be known as Scouts BSA rather than Boy Scouts starting in February 2019, BSA announced in May.
Cub Scouts serves those in grades K-5 while the Scouts program is for 11- to 17-year-olds.
“Parents interested in signing up for Girl Scouts programs have instead mistakenly signed up for the new girls’ programs offered by BSA,” the complaint said, The Associated Pressreported.
BSA became aware of the lawsuit on Wednesday, according to NPR.
“Our decision to expand our program offerings for girls came after years of requests from families who wanted the option of the BSA’s character- and leadership-development programs for their children – boys and girls,” BSA said in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
More than 170,000 girls are registered in BSA programs and more than 62,000 girls joined the Cub Scouts program since the inclusion of both genders.
“The action Girl Scouts took are in keeping with standard practice in any field, and we did what any brand, company, corporation, or organization would do to protect its intellectual property, the value of its brand in the marketplace, and to defend its good name,” GSUSA said to TheDCNF.
Saturday, December 1, 2018
Jim Acosta violated one of the oldest rules of journalism
By producing a split decision, the election that was supposed to end all elections turned out to be fairly predictable. But it’s the day after that was unlike any other.
The Republican president, the likely speaker of the Democrat-controlled House and the Senate’s Republican majority leader each started Wednesday by talking about working together to get things done. They talked to each other privately and talked separately in public about what they thought they could accomplish for the country.
For most Americans, that would make for a very good day. Given the overheated environment leading up to the midterms and the fear among many that we are drifting toward an era of disunion and spreading political violence, bipartisan pledges to work together for the common good were like the sudden emergence of a bright candle flickering in the wind.
Alas, it was the last thing some members of the White House press corps wanted, so they tried to snuff it out.
The conduct of a handful of so-called reporters during President Trump’s news conference was disgraceful beyond measure. This is not journalism, this is narcissism.
Naturally, the boorish Jim Acosta of CNN was the instigator. As is his habit, Acosta doesn’t ask questions — he makes accusations and argues. Almost daily, he does it with the press secretary; Wednesday, he did it with the president.
“I want to challenge you,” Acosta began after Trump called on him. Trump realized he’d made a mistake, murmuring, “Here we go,” and Acosta didn’t disappoint.
He insisted that despite the president’s use of the word “invasion,” the caravan of Central American migrants “is not an invasion.”
He adopted a lecturing, I-know-best tone to declare that “they’re hundreds and hundreds of miles away; that’s not an invasion.”
Trump’s response should not have been necessary: “Honestly, I think you should let me run the country, you run CNN.”
After more back-and-forth, he called Acosta “a rude, terrible person” and said “CNN should be ashamed of itself.”
SEE ALSO
That should have been enough — Acosta got the attention he wanted and got Trump’s goat, giving his network video it could make hay out of for days. Besides, there were scores of other reporters raising their hands to be called on.
But Acosta wouldn’t give up the microphone and kept talking over Trump, trying to lob another grenade.
The president, clearly angry now and stepping away from the podium as if he might bolt the room, pointed at him and said forcefully, “That’s enough, that’s enough. Put down the mic.”
Finally, Acosta sat down, then stood up to argue again, interrupting another reporter. That reporter, from NBC, praised Acosta and picked up the baton by making his own accusation disguised as a question. He mentioned Trump’s attacks on Democrats and “asked” the president: Why are “you are pitting Americans against one another?”
Trump, to his credit, actually answered in a substantive way, but that didn’t satisfy because the reporter didn’t really ask a question. He too just wanted to make an accusation and argue. On camera.
There was a time not long ago when young journalists were taught not to become the story. Apparently, many news organizations have flipped that lesson on its head.
But we are witnessing something more insidious here than media trash talk. Plain and simple, we are watching expressions of personal hatred.
Yes, it’s true that most journalists lean far left and their bias sticks out like so many sore thumbs. That’s been true for a long time, but political bias is an insufficient explanation for the Jim Acostas of our time.
They hate Trump. They really, really hate him. There’s nothing professional about it.
They are not alone. Take a poll of almost any major newsroom in America and the vast majority of those working there, if they are being honest, will confess that they too can’t stand the existence or the sound of Trump.
Or try to imagine Acosta and his ilk behaving in similarly hostile fashion toward Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Keep trying, but you can’t imagine it because it never happened. Both of those pols lied to journalists repeatedly, yet you can bet 90 percent still voted straight Democratic.
Even if they didn’t like Obama or Clinton, the political reporters would never dare accuse them publicly of anything, argue with them or interrupt them. Even when skeptical, they were respectful.
Recall how Obama used to spend 10, 15 and even 20 minutes answering a single question — without interruption.
Many in the press corps may have found him overbearingly arrogant. They may have resented the way he looked down on them and bristled at critical stories or tough questions. They knew he started more leak investigations than any other president, and might have feared him because his Justice Department wiretapped a Fox News reporter during a leak case.
But they would never interrupt him or insult him or refuse to give up the microphone.
White House press credentials are not a universal right. There are implicit expectations of proper behavior, and the White House decision to suspend Acosta’s credential is warranted.
Just as Acosta can’t go into a movie theater and yell “Fire” when there is no fire, he should not have the right to hijack a presidential press conference to suit his own ego.
It is also long past time for his colleagues, including those from other outlets, to remind him that his shameful conduct is making all of them look bad. More important, scenes like Wednesday’s further erode the public’s already declining trust of the media and fuel resistance to the First Amendment.
The anti-Trump antics are no longer a sideshow. America has serious problems as well as dangerous enemies, and the mere prospect of Trump, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell working together is the best news we could have hoped for Wednesday.
Instead, it was overshadowed by a few narcissists chasing their own vanity.
What’s Behind College-Educated, Suburban Women Flipping To Democrats
These women who reside in wealthy suburbs are an odd group.
Sometimes they vote on the economy, but their loyalty to the pocketbook only
goes so far.
NOVEMBER 7, 2018 By D.C. McAllister
Suburbs in Northern Virginia, New York, and New Jersey, among
others across the nation, swung for the Democrats in the midterms, securing
their control of the House. College-educated white women in these areas are
being credited for the win, giving credence to the women’s movements that have
dominated the headlines for the past two years. But this is only part of the
story.
These women who reside in wealthy suburbs are an odd group.
Sometimes they vote on the economy, but their loyalty to the pocketbook only
goes so far. If they think their equality is threatened or health care won’t be
available to everyone, they’ll abandon the economy in a heartbeat.
In the 2018 midterms, exit
polling showed that
voters’ main concern was health care—a whopping 40 percent. Immigration came in
second at 23 percent, followed by the economy at 21 percent. Given the
Republicans’ goal to whittle away at Obamacare and the notion that this will
leave people without coverage or access to health care, it’s not surprising
that these women weren’t inspired by the economy to keep the Republican agenda
going.
Another issue that affects how many
women vote is fear of inequality. For two years, activist groups and
politicians beat the drum that the Republicans are threatening women’s rights.
New Supreme Court justices could mean overturning Roe v. Wade. Free birth control might end with changes
in health care. The Me Too movement created an environment of fear that men are
predators, especially those in the Republican Party.
The rhetoric of Trump as sexual deviant in chief filled the pages
of women’s magazines. Protests, pussy hats, celebrities wailing about the
dehumanization of women even as they objectified themselves rained down on
female voters, enlivening their allegiance to equality, even when it’s not
actually being threatened.
These two issues, along with hatred of Trump, drove these women to
vote blue. They despise Trump, and they always have. They voted for Hillary Clinton
in 2016, 51 percent to Trump’s 45 percent. Some were Never-Trumper Republicans
going for other candidates. They are, at the core, elitist. They didn’t like
him then, and they don’t like him now.
Their feelings about Trump negated any objective judgment of his
job performance or recognition that his policies and programs have benefited
them greatly, including a strong economy and greater security for our nation.
Emotionalism won the day.
In 2012, Mitt Romney won this group over Obama by six points because
they had catapulted the economy to the top of their concerns. Many
college-educated wealthy white women weren’t swayed by the war on women
narrative at that time, nor were they concerned about health care as much,
although it was still high on the list. They weren’t too worried; after all,
Romney had instituted government health subsidies in Massachusetts.
Romney also soothed their elitist sensibilities. He was dignified.
Their feelings could take a back seat to objective concerns because those fires
weren’t stoked effectively enough to deter them. This wasn’t true for all women
at that time. Some were swayed by the “binders full of women” attack, but not
all.
This changed both in 2016 when they
supported Clinton and even more significantly in 2018 when they flooded the
polls to usher in a Democratic House majority. As reported by Ronald
Brownstein just before the midterms, “Over two-thirds of
college-educated white women, an unprecedented number, said they planned to
vote Democratic for Congress, according to figures provided by CNN polling
director Jennifer Agiesta.”
But they weren’t the only ones. College-educated suburban white
men who were also offended by Trump’s behavior showed up to kick out
Republicans. “Just over half of college-educated white men preferred Democrats
in the survey,” Brownstein wrote. “That represents a sharp swing from their
usual congressional voting behavior: Democrats haven’t won even 40% percent of
college-educated white men in any congressional election since 2008, according
to exit polls.”
This combination of elitist voters who can go Republican under
some circumstances but will vote Democratic if they’re offended or worried
about inequities made a difference in key suburbs.
Additionally, some of the congressional
districts that had previously been favorable to Republicans because they were
mostly rural—a stronghold for Trump—were redrawn to include wealthy suburbs,
shifting the vote Democratic. As reported by USA Today,
a fifth of the districts now under control of the Democrats had been redrawn in
Pennsylvania.
The changes weren’t trivial: Democrats increased their share of
the vote by an average of 20 percent in the districts they flipped in the
Keystone State. The biggest change came in the 5th congressional district, a
sprawling, mostly rural district in central Pennsylvania. Democrats won an
anemic 33 percent there in 2016. In 2018, with the new boundaries in place,
they won over 65 percent of the vote.
The suburban slaughter in the midterms, therefore, can be
attributed to three things: motivated college-educated white women who put
their fears about women’s issues and health care over economic and national
security; both college-educated white women and men who are personally offended
by Trump’s personality and rhetoric; and redrawing of district lines to include
these groups to curb Republican advantages.
It’s uncertain if Trump can do anything to attract these voters.
Probably not. That ship has likely sailed. The best he can do is shore up his
base for the next election. The rest of us—conservative women in particular,
who don’t vote by feelings and unfounded fears—need to step up. It falls on our
shoulders to educate our suburban sisters about the role of government in their
lives, the dangers of government-run health care, and the lies of feminism
regarding “inequalities” in America.
Denise C. McAllister is a journalist
based in Charlotte, North Carolina, and a senior contributor to The Federalist.
Follow her on Twitter @McAllisterDen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)