Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘American Left’

Fact Check: Biden Tells Biggest Lie of the Night, Maybe the Entire Election


Reported By Andrew J. Sciascia | Published October 22, 2020 at 8:21pm

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden landed himself in a factually sticky situation Thursday night, arguing former President Barack Obama had never taken part in the policy of family separation carried out at the outset of the Trump administration.

The false claim came late in the second and final debate of the 2020 presidential election cycle, as he faced off with incumbent Republican President Donald Trump on the issue of illegal immigration.

“These 500-plus kids came with parents. They separated them at the border to make it a disincentive to come to begin with,” Biden said. “They got separated from their parents and it makes us a laughingstock and violates every notion of who we are as a nation.”

Advertisement – story continues below

“Kristen, they did it,” Trump said, addressing debate moderator Kristen Welker. “We changed the policy. They did it. We changed — they built the cages.”

“We did not separate — they,” Biden trailed off, changing course.

“Let’s talk about what we’re talking about. Let’s talk about what we’re talking about. What happened? Kids were ripped from their arms and separated.”

 

The narrative was not original, having already been fact-checked on numerous occasions by independent sources in the establishment media.

The Associated Press, for its part, checked former first lady Michelle Obama for making similar claims in an address to the 2020 Democratic National Convention this past August.

“Michelle Obama assailed President Donald Trump on Monday for allegedly ripping migrant children from their parents and throwing them into cages, picking up on a frequent and distorted point made widely by Democrats,” The AP wrote. “She’s……………………………..READ THE REST OF THIS REPORT AT https://www.westernjournal.com/fact-check-biden-tells-biggest-lie-night-maybe-entire-election/

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

‘I Am 100% Antifa,’ Suspect in Execution of Trump Supporter Admitted Online


Reported By Christine Favocci | Published September 1, 2020 at 10:03am

As Portland, Oregon, enters its fourth month as a war zone, a recent casualty and the suspect who allegedly shot him speak to a broader conflict playing out there in real time. Suspected killer Michael Forest Reinoehl, 48, allegedly gunned down 39-year-old Aaron “Jay” Danielson during violent demonstrations in the city just after 9 p.m. Saturday, The Oregonian reported.

Friends remembered the victim as “a proud American and a proud Portlander” who joined supporters of President Donald Trump that day in a car caravan of members of Patriot Prayer, a faith-based pro-First and Second Amendment group. The group has a history of facing off against the violent radicals in antifa, and before the caravan had even left the suburban mall where vehicles decked out in pro-Trump banners and American flags congregated before the rally, demonstrators on both sides clashed, according to NBC News.

The organization and police originally coordinated a route around the city, but a blocked on-ramp dumped the convoy into the downtown area and forced the caravan to split into smaller groups, which put the motorcade into the belly of the beast where Danielson was killed.

Prior to that night, Reinoehl, Danielson’s alleged assailant, was caught with a loaded weapon at another Black Lives Matter protest in Portland and fought with police officers, but charges were never pursued.

“Officers arrested a male at SW Broadway and Main St. who had a loaded firearm on his person,” the Portland Police Bureau tweeted after his arrest July 5.

“He fought with office[r]s during the arrest.”

It was just weeks before that confrontation with police that Reinoehl published a diatribe laying out exactly what he was willing to do in the name of antifa. Nightly riots continued to plague Portland back then — as they did nationwide — sparked off by the death of Minneapolis man George Floyd in police custody on May 25.

“Every Revolution needs people that are willing and ready to fight,” Reinoehl began in his June 16 Instagram post.

Advertisement – story continues below

“There are so many of us protesters that are just protesting without a clue of where that will lead. That’s just the beginning that’s where the fight starts,” he wrote.

“If that’s as far as you can take it thank you for your participation but please stand aside and support the ones that are willing to fight,” Reinoehl continued.

“I am 100% ANTIFA all the way! I am willing to fight for my brothers and sisters! Even if some of them are too ignorant to realize what antifa truly stands for,” he said.

Reinoehl went on to claim that he didn’t “want violence” but that he wouldn’t “run from it either,” citing supposed police brutality against peaceful protesters as justification to respond in kind.

“We truly have an opportunity right now to fix everything,” he added. “But it will be a fight like no other! It will be a war and like all wars there will be casualties.”

“I was in the army and I hated it. I did not feel like fighting for them would ever be a good cause. Today’s protesters and antifa are my brothers in arms,” Reinoehl said.

“This is a Cause to fight for This truly is fighting for my country! I have children that need to live in a world run by Common Sense and human decency,” he said, likely referring to his 17-year-old son and 11-year old daughter.

His care and concern for his children didn’t seem to be a factor when he was caught street racing at over 100 mph with his son in June, or when he was caught with a handgun, pills and marijuana while his daughter was a passenger in his vehicle shortly before the June 16 post, according to another article in The Oregonian.

“And I will do anything to make sure that happens,” he continued in the Instagram post before warning that missing out on this opportunity to “change the course of humanity” would have them “lost for another hundred years.”

Ironically, the loosely organized movement antifa bills itself as being against fascism, although its tactics of shutting down and using violence against people with which it disagrees gives lie to that claim. In fact, leftist demonstrators rejoiced at the news of Danielson’s death, and judging from the words Reinoehl used months before he allegedly killed Danielson, this is exactly in line with what he believed needed to happen to advance their cause.

The fallacy of Black Lives Matter and antifa engaging in “mostly peaceful protests” is exposed in every city street strewn with broken glass and burned-out businesses and evident in the number of police officers killed or injured. These organizations are out for destruction and bloodshed — maybe not to the extent of unhinged folks like Reinoehl, but vandalism and violence are, after all, fruits of the same poisonous sociopathic tree.

There’s no telling whether the people who commit violent crimes were already primed to do so before the opportunity presented itself, or whether they have been pushed from word into deed by the current permissive climate for that sort of action. Either way, a segment of the population has crossed the threshold into criminal behavior because politicians have been unwilling to stop their cities from descending into chaos.

Black Lives Matter and antifa are telling Americans exactly what they’re all about through violence, whether it is against property, police officers or other individuals. State and city leaders need to take heed and restore law and order before their rhetoric is taken to its fatal conclusion again.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

DNC’s John Lewis Quote Backfires – It Actually Condemns Leftist Rioters


Reported By Andrew J. Sciascia | Published August 20, 2020 at 8:04pm

The American left’s tone-deafness and blatant ignorance caught up with it Thursday night at the 2020 Democratic National Convention. Rounding out the fourth and final night of the event with a tribute to the late civil rights hero and 17-term U.S. Rep. John Lewis, who died in July, the Democratic Party unknowingly took itself to task on matters of criminal justice reform and civil disobedience.

The topics again have become mainstays in the American political discourse following the officer-involved deaths of unarmed black Americans George Floyd and Breonna Taylor earlier this year. And the social-justice left has been quick to assert itself again as arbiters and champions of racial justice.

A quote from Lewis himself embedded within the DNC tribute to his life, however, reveals modern Democrats and progressives have no idea what it means to move the dial on such issues.

“The means by which we struggle must be consistent with the end we seek,” Lewis could be heard saying amid a slew of his most famous quotations and the praises of fellow Democratic politicians.

According to The New Republic, it was a statement made in 1994, during a PBS debate between Lewis and controversial fellow civil rights activist Al Sharpton on the topic of violence and retributive hate within the civil rights movement.

Lewis, like civil rights icon Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., was a firm supporter of peaceful civil disobedience and attempts to strive, with love, toward unity on the issue of racial injustice in the United States. The debate had been spurred on by growing support within the movement for figures such as anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan and fellow members of the Nation of Islam. But Lewis, the longtime Georgia congressman, did not hold this opinion for a brief moment at the time of the Nation of Islam’s relevancy. He lived it, skipping the historic Million Man March in 1995 due to Farrakhan’s presence, according to excerpts from his memoir.

“I did not march because I could not overlook the presence and central role of Louis Farrakhan, and so I refused to participate,” Lewis wrote. “I believe in freedom of speech but I also believe that we have an obligation to condemn speech that is racist, bigoted, anti-Semitic or hateful.”

“The means by which we struggle must be consistent with the end we seek, and that includes the words we use to pursue those ends,” he added.

WARNING: The following tweets contain graphic language and images that some viewers will find offensive.

Unfortunately, the modern American left does not seem to hold Lewis’ personal philosophy in the same esteem that it does his Democratic voting record. Or perhaps the left simply does not understand Lewis’ words at all.

Either way, apathy or ignorance, the consequences have been great in recent months, as Democratic politicians made excuses for — or outright granted a stamp of approval to — violent Black Lives Matter demonstrations nationwide.

By the second week of June, race riots had resulted in more than $25 million worth of physical damage in Floyd’s home state of Minnesota alone, MarketWatch reported. According to WITI-TV, an unofficial tally done at the time also indicated that at least 17 people, the majority of them black, had died in the opening weeks of the unrest.

 

Since the start of the demonstrations, businesses have been razed. People have, literally, been beaten and bloodied to near death in the streets by angry mobs. If only the Democrats would make an effort to understand and live by the words they espouse, the words of the late, great figures of days gone by — perhaps they wouldn’t be doomed to radicalism.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Exclusive from Gen. Flynn: This Is My Letter to America


Commentary By Michael Flynn | Published August 5, 2020 at 11:17am

We are witnessing a vicious assault by enemies of all that is good, and our president is having to act in ways unprecedented in decades, maybe centuries. The biblical nature of good versus evil cannot be discounted as we examine what is happening on the streets of America.

It’s Marxism in the form of antifa and the Black Lives Matter movement versus our very capable and very underappreciated law enforcement professionals, the vast majority of whom are fighting to provide us safe and secure homes, streets and communities.

When the destiny of the United States is at stake, and it is, the very future of the entire world is threatened. As Christians, shouldn’t we act? We recognize that divine Providence is the ultimate judge of our destiny. Achieving our destiny as a freedom-loving nation, Providence compels us to do our part in our communities.

It encourages us in this battle against the forces of evil to face our fears head-on. No enemy on earth is stronger than the united forces of God-fearing, freedom-loving people. We can no longer pretend that these dark forces are going to go away by mere prayer alone. Prayers matter, but action is required.

This action is needed at the local, state and federal levels. Action is also required in the economic, media, clerical and ecclesiastical realms.

Decide how you can act within your abilities. Stand up and state your beliefs. Be proud of who you are and what you stand for. And face, head-on, those community “leaders” who are willing to allow dark forces to go beyond peaceful protests and destroy and violate your safety and security.

Do you think Christians in America need to stand up and act?
Yes No 

Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Churches and houses of worship must return to normal. We invite everyone of goodwill to not shirk their responsibilities and instead act in a fraternal fashion. If for no other reason or with no other ability, act in a spirit of charity. We cannot disrespect or disregard natural law along with our own religious liberties and freedoms.

I am witnessing elderly people lose their connection to all that is good in their lives: connections to their faith, their families and their individual freedoms, especially the simple act of attending church, something they’ve been doing for decades. Let us not be intimidated or fear those who cry out that we are in the minority; we are not. Good is always more powerful and will prevail over evil.

RELATED: Op-Ed: The Bible Doesn’t Teach Tolerance, It Teaches Love & That Means Speaking Hard Truths

However, evil will succeed for a time when good people are divided from each other and their personal lives — children away from their teachers, preachers from their congregations, customers from their local businesses. America will never give in to evil. Americans work together to solve problems.

We do not and should not ever allow anarchy and the evil forces behind it to operate on any street in our nation. No one should have to fear for their very life because some dark, disturbed force is challenged by the very essence of what America stands for.

We are “one nation under God” and it is our individual liberties that make us strong, not liberties given to our government. Our government has no liberty unless and until “we the people” say so.

God bless America and let’s stand by everything that was and is good in our lives, in our communities and in our country. Otherwise, America as the true North Star for humanity will cease to exist as we know it.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

I Looked Up What Happened When Sweden Refused To Shut Down – They Were Right, We Were Wrong


Reported By Josh Manning | Published August 1, 2020 at 3:39pm

Sweden did it.

The Nordic country defeated COVID-19 without seeming to break a sweat — fever-induced or otherwise. They effectively showed that Fauci & Co. were completely wrong about a shutdown being necessary to save civilization as we know it.

While that accomplishment should be lauded and their efforts duplicated around the world, the media has instead chosen to blast the Nordic state and paint a dismal picture that simply doesn’t exist. A few examples (among many, many others) are below:

CBS News declared: “Sweden becomes an example of how not to handle COVID-19.”

Similarly, the University of Virginia Health System issued a news release titled: “Lack of Lockdown Increased COVID-19 Deaths in Sweden.”

Taking a stab at prognostication, Newsweek said: “Sweden COVID-19 Deaths Linked to Failure to Lockdown as Country Prepares for Second Wave.”

Always eager to bravely embrace the status quo, The New York Times ran a piece headlined: “Sweden Tries Out a New Status: Pariah State.”

Finally, Business Insider reported: “Sweden’s coronavirus death toll is now approaching zero, but experts are warning others not to hail it as a success.”

It’s all awfully prickly from a leftist media that used to adore Sweden’s welfare state. The reason for the barbed headlines is simple — Sweden dealt with COVID-19 in its own way.

The country didn’t truckle to the tyranny of over-educated, under-experienced experts. It didn’t implement authoritarian policies designed as much to break spirits as to break the pandemic. And it didn’t turn its voters into quasi-prisoners. In other words, Sweden responded more or less the way the rest of the developed world has responded to contagious diseases until 2020, which just happens to also be President Donald Trump’s re-election year.

What were Sweden’s results?

Well, first let’s consider American results brought to us courtesy of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, the establishment mediagovernment officials around the country and legions of panic-prone and morally superior “Karens.” All around the country, the U.S. tried just about every imaginable combination of masklockdownquarantinecurfew and closures orders — up to and including literally refusing entry across some state lines to certain fellow Americans.

The results were, well, not what anyone wanted. As of Saturday, the U.S. coronavirus death rate was 3.35 new deaths per million per day (based on a seven-day rolling average), which ranks as the 11th worst rating on the planet, according to Our World in Data.

And remember, thanks in large part to the Andrew Cuomo nursing home/death camp model of virus containment, New York state accounts for more than a fifth of all U.S. COVID-19 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins data. So we’re probably getting dragged down a little in the ratings by the disproportionate number of deaths in that state.

What else has America’s scattershot, but mostly heavy-handed, response yielded? If you read The Wall Street Journal, you will learn it led to anywhere between 30 million and 40 million lost jobs. (Some of those workers have no doubt been rehired as parts of the economy reopen, but millions more haven’t. And economists don’t really know how many of those job losses are permanent.)

So we destroyed constitutional rights, shed a few dozen million jobs and watched tens of thousands of people die. Oh, and we turned Americans against each other, all the way from the state to family levels.

But at least gross domestic product didn’t take it too hard, right? Not exactly. Commerce Department numbers released Thursday revealed that the U.S. economy shrank by a record 32.9 percent last quarter in what Bloomberg called the “sharpest downturn since at least the 1940s.”

So what about those rebellious Swedes? The ones who refused to play ball with all-knowing scientists and a ridiculously tunnel-visioned medical establishment?

While much of the rest of the developed world drowned themselves in hand sanitizer, locked ankle monitors onto their citizens and bought super cute masks on Etsy, the stalwart Swedes pressed on. They lived their lives. They didn’t mandate masks. They didn’t turn into NKVD-aspiring Karens, eager to publicly shame or quietly narc on neighbors, friends and family who dared bare an uncovered nostril.

Sweden defied the (dare we say) scientific consensus and has performed exceedingly well compared to the U.S. As of Saturday, Sweden had registered 0.65 deaths per million per day, based on a seven-day rolling average. Trading Economics projects a second-quarter GDP change of -4.2 percent (and a third-quarter growth of 2.4 percent). Depending on your preferred method of calculation, we could casually say that’s 7.8 times better than what the U.S. saw last quarter.

As of June 18, Statista forecast a 2.6 percent drop in Sweden’s employment rate for 2020. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, meanwhile, reported unemployment in the U.S. shot up 11.2 percentage points from 3.5 percent in February to 14.7 percent in April, before dropping a bit to 13.3 percent in May and 11.7 percent in June as parts of the economy reopened.

Now we’re not going to be like the dogmatic pro-mask Stasi here. There are lots of factors that impact the difference between U.S. and Swedish outcomes. We can’t say with 100 percent certainty that Sweden’s refusal to lock down saved their economy or is responsible for the miraculously low death rate. But it would also be foolish to say that the decision didn’t play some role in the different outcome.

We can all learn two significant lessons from how COVID-19 responses have played out in the U.S. versus Sweden.

First, it is clear that the expert class in America whom the left appeals to at every turn (aren’t you sick of hearing “scientists say” or “experts find”?) is worth substantially less than we pay them.

We’ve spent literally trillions of dollars as a result of this virus and have only managed to buy our own personal hell.

Second, Sweden succeeded using an approach that left people free. The response they got from the U.S. media complex, however, wasn’t celebration and an urge toward duplication. It was derision and aspersion.

That betrays what lays at the heart of everything COVID-19-related.

In America, COVID-19 has never been first and foremost a virus to fight. It has instead been a tool that the left, anti-Trumpers and the establishment could use to mercilessly kick Americans in our collective groin. With COVID-19, the left finally found a chink in Trump’s armor. The left knew exploiting it was vital, and they knew that Americans would have to suffer if they wanted to succeed.

As America continues to languish economically even as deaths drop, remember to thank the left for that. And when you walk into that voting booth on Tuesday, Nov. 3, remember to pay the left back for the hell they’ve just put us through — pay them back by voting for Donald J. Trump.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Josh Manning

Teachers Union Holds Schools Hostage Until Police Are Defunded, Charter Schools Shut Down


Reported By Ryan Foley | Published July 13, 2020 at 12:48pm

The United Teachers Los Angeles has released a list of demands that it argues must be met before schools can reopen in America’s second-largest city. While some of the proposals might seem reasonable in light of the coronavirus pandemic, others sound like they were crafted by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Members of the Los Angeles Unified School District’s teachers union apparently have adapted Rahm Emanuel’s phrase “never let a good crisis go to waste” as their slogan. At the very least, the policy paper put together by the United Teachers Los Angeles containing its insane demands illustrates just how political teachers unions have become.

The 35,000-member teachers union sees the coronavirus as a perfect opportunity to demand the enactment of a far-left agenda that it supported long before COVID-19 arrived in America. According to the political activists at the helm of UTLA, “The Safe and Equitable Conditions for Starting LAUSD in 2020-21” include;

  • the defunding of police,

  • a federal bailout of LA schools and

  • the abolition of charter schools.

While the document acknowledged that “the CARES and HEROES Acts provided funding for K-12,” it complained that the district still needed more money. In addition, the section on the desired “Federal Support” for reopening LAUSD schools included a demand for “Medicare for All.”

As for the section on “State Support,” the document calls on the state of California to implement a “millionaire’s tax” and a “wealth tax.” While the teachers seem quite confident that the massive redistribution of wealth would result in much-desired revenue, they failed to take into account the fact that many millionaires would flee the state the second the higher taxes were imposed.

UTLA Conditions by The Western Journal on Scribd

The most ridiculous demands came in the section on “Local Support.” Calling on local leaders to “defund police,” the brains behind the left-wing wish list urged elected officials to “shift the astronomical amount of money devoted to policing, to education and other essential needs such as housing and public health.”

Apparently, the people behind the UTLA paper aren’t bothered by the fact that homicides in their city rose by 250 percent in the first week of June as anti-law enforcement sentiment first swept through major American cities.

This shouldn’t come as much of a shock. Last month, Cecily Myart-Cruz, the union’s president, described the police as a symbol of “white supremacy” that needed to be dismantled.

Not surprisingly, the document had few kind words for charter schools, which teachers unions see as an enormous threat to their monopolistic power. UTLA said it wants a “charter moratorium,” but this radical list of demands should make Los Angeles parents who do not subscribe to the dictates of cultural marxism want to send their children to charter schools more than ever.

No document filled with left-wing demands would be complete without a call for “Financial Support for Undocumented Students and Families.”

It looks like President Donald Trump had it right when he declared that “the Democrats don’t want to open schools in the Fall for political reasons.”

This document should make Americans eternally grateful for the 2018 Janus decision in which the Supreme Court ruled that “public employees will no longer be required to pay involuntary agency fees to special-interest groups.” Nothing epitomizes the phrase “special-interest group” like a teachers union, which uses those agency fees to fund far-left groups such as the Center for American Progress and Media Matters.

The release of the UTLA demands comes just weeks before school is set to resume in Los Angeles on Aug. 18.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has made it clear to the nation’s governors that at the beginning of the next school year, “School must reopen, they must be fully operational.” For the most part, she is right. Schools should reopen in the fall.

However, in a place like Los Angeles, where advancing a political agenda is more important to the teachers than educating the next generation, parents should seriously consider homeschooling or sending their children to a charter or private school. Only then will liberal activists moonlighting as teachers in Los Angeles and other parts of the country get the message that many Americans do not support the push among some schools to reject “objectivity” in favor of indoctrinating America’s students with left-wing propaganda.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

School Principal Gets the Boot Because She Was Critical of BLM Pressures in a Facebook Post


Reported By Ryan Foley | Published June 22, 2020 at 9:02am

Tiffany Riley, the principal of Windsor High School in Windsor, Vermont, faced the wrath of the PC police after failing to fully and unequivocally endorse Black Lives Matter in a Facebook post earlier this month. The backlash was so severe that she ended up losing her job.

According to the Valley News, Riley’s post June 10 made it clear that she believes that “black lives matter,” but she added a caveat that caught the ire of the leftist mob: “I DO NOT agree with coercive measures taken to get this point across; some of which are falsified in an attempt to prove a point.”

“I do not think that people should be made to feel they have to choose black race over human race,” Riley wrote, adding: “While I understand the urgency to feel compelled to advocate for black lives, what about our law enforcement?”

She also declared that “just because I don’t walk around with a BLM sign should not mean I’m a racist.”

Sadly, according to many in Windsor, including the school board, her failure to “walk around with a BLM sign” does make her a racist.

The Mount Ascutney School Board, “uniformly appalled” by her words, voted unanimously to place Riley on paid leave June 14.


Channel 3 News

@wcax

The Mt. Ascutney School Board has voted unanimously to place Windsor School principal, Tiffany Riley, on paid leave immediately, following a Facebook post that ‘uniformly appalled” the board. https://www.wcax.com/content/news/Windsor-School-principal-on-paid-leave-following-appalling-social-media-post-571244001.html 

Windsor School principal on paid leave following “appalling” social media post

The school board says the post does not reflect the values of the district.

wcax.com

25 people are talking about this


The district’s superintendent, David Becker, said the district will work to put together a “mutually agreed upon severance package” with Riley and justified the decision to let her go by saying, “It’s clear that the community has lost faith in her ability to lead.”

Ridiculously, Becker said he thought Riley’s Facebook page was hacked and indicated that he fully agreed with the criticism that her post was “racist.”

“I felt like a post like that, with those kinds of racial overtones and what I define as pretty much outright racist in my values system, she would have never posted that,” he said.

The fact that Riley’s community would take such umbrage at her comments should not come as a surprise. Windsor County supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by a 2-1 ratio in 2016, and the state as a whole keeps electing democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders.

In an era when American education has become just another arm of the left, Riley’s circumstances are hardly unique. Eric Thompson, a professor who taught at Moreno Valley College in California, was dismissed from his position after daring to sympathize with traditional viewpoints on marriage, gender and sexuality.

In addition to causing professors to lose their jobs, holding conservative positions can also have consequences for students who hold prominent positions on campus. Earlier this month, the president of the Florida State University Student Senate was removed from his post after daring to criticize Black Lives Matter and other liberal organizations deemed heroic by the radical left.

Despite the fact that Riley went out of her way to empathize with the point of view of her opponents and offered analysis consistent with the views of many Americans, she lost her job. What happened to Riley could have a chilling effect that will cause many people to think twice about posting anything critical of Black Lives Matter — a leftist movement dressed up as opposition to racism.

That’s the whole goal.

With Riley’s firing, diversity of opinion in education continues to shrink. According to a 2016 study from Econ Journal Watch, liberal professors outnumber their conservative counterparts by a ratio of 11.5-1 in the departments of economics, history, journalism, law and psychology at “40 leading U.S. universities.”

This liberal uniformity extends into K-12 education, with research conducted by Verdant Labs finding that “there are 97 Democrats for every three Republicans” teaching English and “87 Democrats for every 13 Republicans” among math and science teachers.

Riley’s situation is saddening but not surprising. Hopefully, what happened to her will launch a renewed movement to ensure freedom of speech in education for teachers and students alike, from kindergarten through college.

Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager’s documentary “No Safe Spaces” is definitely a good start.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Report: Anonymous Berkeley Professor Debunks BLM Narrative, Scolds Academics


Reported By Michael Austin | Published June 15, 2020 at 6:14pm

URL of the originating web site: https://www.westernjournal.com/anonymous-berkeley-professor-debunks-blm-narrative-scolds-academics-pushing/

A protester holds a Captain America Black Lives Matter shield while four symbolic funeral processions converge in downtown at the intersection of 1st St and Broadway on June 8, 2020, in Los Angeles.

A person purporting to be a University of California, Berkeley professor has had enough of these ideologies, however, and decided to speak out against them in an anonymous letter. The letter was first shared on Twitter by Tracy Beanz, editor in chief of UncoverDC. Wilfred Reilly, an assistant professor of political science at Kentucky State University, who is referenced in the letter, confirmed to The Western Journal that the letter had been sent out, but could not confirm the identity of the sender.

“I can’t confirm the sender. I was sent the letter, and will note that it contained direct e-mails for me, [economist Thomas Sowell] (via National Review), and what looked like much of the Berkeley History Department,” Reilly told The Western Journal in an email.

The letter began with the alleged professor apologizing for the need to remain anonymous, citing the prevalent nature of cancel culture in modern-day America.

“I am one of your colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley. I have met you both personally but do not know you closely, and am contacting you anonymously, with apologies. I am worried that writing this email publicly might lead to me losing my job, and likely all future jobs in my field,” the anonymous party wrote.

“In your recent departmental emails you mentioned our pledge to diversity, but I am increasingly alarmed by the absence of diversity of opinion on the topic of the recent protests and our community response to them.”

The letter then went on to explain the illogical reasoning behind critical race theory, the academic theory that played a major role in the popularization of ideas such as white privilege and systemic racism.

“The explanation provided in your documentation, to the near exclusion of all others, is univariate: the problems of the black community are caused by whites, or, when whites are not physically present, by the infiltration of white supremacy and white systemic racism into American brains, souls, and institutions. Many cogent objections to this thesis have been raised by sober voices, including from within the black community itself, such as Thomas Sowell and Wilfred Reilly,” the letter read.

“Black people are not incarcerated at higher rates than their involvement in violent crime would predict. This fact has been demonstrated multiple times across multiple jurisdictions in multiple countries. And yet, I see my department uncritically reproducing a narrative that diminishes black agency in favor of a white-centric explanation that appeals to the department’s apparent desire to shoulder the ‘white man’s burden’ and to promote a narrative of white guilt.”

The purported professor then proceeded to take the Black Lives Matter movement head-on, explaining his rejection of its “problematic view of history.”

“I personally don’t dare speak out against the BLM narrative, and with this barrage of alleged unity being mass-produced by the administration, tenured professoriat, the UC administration, corporate America, and the media, the punishment for dissent is a clear danger at a time of widespread economic vulnerability. I am certain that if my name were attached to this email, I would lose my job and all future jobs, even though I believe in and can justify every word I type.”

“The vast majority of violence visited on the black community is committed by black people. There are virtually no marches for these invisible victims, no public silences, no heartfelt letters from the UC regents, deans, and departmental heads. The message is clear: Black lives only matter when whites take them. Black violence is expected and insoluble, while white violence requires explanation and demands solution. Please look into your hearts and see how monstrously bigoted this formulation truly is.”

Rather than contending with the many counterpoints that the alleged professor made to the Black Lives Matter narrative, the U.C. Berkeley history department openly condemned the letter as “against our values as a department and our commitment to equity and inclusion.”


UC Berkeley History@UCBHistory

An anonymous letter has been circulating, purportedly written by a @UCBHistory professor. We have no evidence that this letter was written by a History faculty member. We condemn this letter: it goes against our values as a department and our commitment to equity and inclusion.

1,367 people are talking about this


By dismissing the letter’s arguments out of hand, the department all but proved the writer to be correct in his or her evaluation of U.C. Berkeley and other Black Lives Matter advocates. The least Berkeley’s faculty could have done was put together a thoughtful rebuttal, but even that seemed to be too much to ask of them.

James Lindsay spoke to The Western Journal about the reported professor’s letter and what it meant for the social justice movement at large. Lindsay is a mathematician, political commentator and co-founder of the website New Discourses, an apolitical resource for those opposed to political correctness and the various ideologies of social justice.

When asked if this open condemnation of social justice politics was a trend in the right direction for American colleges, Lindsay seemed unconvinced.

“Colleges are not yet trending in a positive direction. It is probably the opposite, but there is still time to reverse that course if more academics and professors speak up like this. This is the kind of reply scholars should be making and then debating,” he told The Western Journal in an email.

When asked about claims made by the letter, he affirmed the anonymous professor’s assessment of critical race theory.

“I cannot speak to the specific data-driven claims, but the academic theory he cites (Critical Race Theory) is accurately described in terms of how poisonous, anti-intellectual, anti-society, and even intrinsically anti-black it is.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Americans Just Sent Democrats a Loud and Clear Message About Impeachment: Don’t Do It


Reported By Karista Baldwin | Published April 28, 2019 at 8:01am

Democratic leaders are in a tough spot as their base pushes for the president’s impeachment while most Americans oppose it.

A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that the majority of Americans are against impeaching the president following the publication of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. According to the poll, around 37 percent of Americans are pro-impeachment, a slightly lower figure than last month. Meanwhile, 56 percent of Americans oppose impeachment.

Breaking the results into parties: 62 percent of Democrats responded to the poll in support of impeachment, while 87 percent of Republican respondents opposed to it. Among independents, 36 percent support impeaching the president, showing a drop in the group’s support for impeachment since before the release of the Mueller report, according to January’s Washington Post/ABC News poll. Poll respondents who strongly oppose impeachment also outnumber those who strongly support, with strong opposition at 49 percent and strong support at 29 percent.

According to ABC News, this shows a 10-point rise since August in those strongly opposed to impeachment. It also reflects an 11-point decrease since August in those strongly in favor of impeachment.

The results reveal a dilemma for Democratic politicians at the moment: keeping their increasingly leftist base happy without alienating the majority of Americans who are against impeachment. The impeachment issue has already shown itself to be divisive within the Democratic party. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, both Democratic presidential nominee contenders, are placing their bets on pro-impeachment voters. Both senators have publicly urged Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump.

“I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment,” Harris said, reported by CNN. “I believe that we need to get rid of this President.”

Warren has also taken a firm stance in support of impeaching Trump.

“The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty,” Warren wrote on Twitter last week. “That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.”

Meanwhile, old-school Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has taken it upon herself do damage control for her party. Her more pragmatic approach to impeachment has shown itself to be at odds with her younger Democratic colleagues.

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in March. “And he’s just not worth it.”

The public’s views on impeachment may be backing Democrats into a lose-lose situation. While Pelosi is working to appeal to the largest group of Americans on the issue of impeachment, she’s risking angering more leftist Democrats.

And while Harris and Warren cite the Mueller report as grounds for impeachment, 58 percent of Americans say that the results of the report had no effect on their view of the Trump administration, according to the Washington Post/ABC poll. In fact, 46 percent of the poll respondents said they won’t be taking the report into consideration when they vote in the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic nominee hopefuls may have to choose between upsetting their more extreme leftist supporters or alienating the general populace, who obviously aren’t eager to initiate impeachment. Either way could cost Democratic contenders their party’s nomination.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Karista Baldwin studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

Reporter Catches Extremely Disturbing Behavior from Linda Sarsour’s Apparent Bodyguard


Reported By Malachi Bailey | Published March 7, 2019 at 1:02pm

Linda Sarsour, a far-left activist and known anti-Semite, turned her bodyguard on a reporter who asked about Israel’s right to exist at Sarsour’s rally for Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar. Sarsour’s rally for Omar, who is known for her anti-Semitic tweets about “hook-nosed Jews,” was held in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. Like the freshman congresswoman, Sarsour is notoriously anti-Semitic and known to have ties to radical Islamic groups.

And of course, Sarsour is a supporter of the “one-state solution” in the Middle East, which means the far-left activist wants to get rid of the Jewish state.

Considering Sarsour’s notoriety as founder of the Women’s March movement, known anti-Semitism and outspoken support for Omar, it makes sense why a reporter would confront her about her radical stance on Israel.

“Linda, do you believe the state of Israel has a right to exist?” a reporter asked Sarsour on Wednesday.

“We’ll answer questions later after the press conference,” Sarsour said. “I’ll be happy to answer them.”

The reporter patiently waited until after the press conference, but Sarsour’s apparent bodyguards blocked him from asking questions. As the bodyguards stopped the reporter from confronting Sarsour, he asked, “Why are you guys pushing me here?” The bodyguard repeatedly asked the reporter, “Why are you here?” and brought up anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jewish money. “Do you work for Israel? How much do you get paid? Do they pay you enough?” the bodyguard angrily asked.

The bodyguard’s comments were eerily similar to the comments made about Jewish “lobbyists” from Omar last month.

This is what the face of the new Democratic Party looks like; a growing portion of Democrats now support radical Islam and have a disdain for Jewish people. And don’t be tricked into thinking it’s only a few radicals on the left. Omar isn’t only supported by Sarsour — the representative also has the backing of her freshman colleague, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Ocasio-Cortez, who is immensely popular in far-left circles, made it clear that she isn’t bothered by Omar’s anti-Semitism. Omar and Ocasio-Cortez might not publicly support radicals like Sarsour, but they definitely have the support of radicals, and that’s evidence enough of the representatives’ extremist dog whistling.

Democrats should be concerned because their party is being taken over by a coalition of extreme socialists and radical Islam sympathizers.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Malachi Bailey is a writer from the Midwest with a background in history, education and philosophy. He has led multiple conservative groups and is dedicated to the principles of free speech, privacy and peace.

Same Day Democrat Pushed Late-Term Abortion Bill, She Also Pushed Bill To Save Caterpillars


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | February 1, 2019 at 10:04am

While Gov. Ralph Northam is the Democrat most closely associated with the controversy regarding the Virginia abortion bill which would allow a child to be killed up until more or less the moment of birth, someone had to come up with the legislation. That someone is Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran, who introduced HB 2491, “Abortion; eliminate certain requirements.”

According to the summary, the bill “eliminates the requirement that an abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy and prior to the third trimester be performed in a hospital. The bill eliminates all the procedures and processes, including the performance of an ultrasound, required to effect a woman’s informed written consent to the performance of an abortion; however, the bill does not change the requirement that a woman’s informed written consent be first obtained.

“The bill eliminates the requirement that two other physicians certify that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman’s death or impairment of her mental or physical health, as well as the need to find that any such impairment to the woman’s health would be substantial and irremediable,” it continues.

“The bill also removes language classifying facilities that perform five or more first-trimester abortions per month as hospitals for the purpose of complying with regulations establishing minimum standards for hospitals.”

That’s some extremely anti-life stuff. However, on the same day, it’s worth pointing out she did introduce a pro-life bill. I mean, provided that you’re a caterpillar.

TRENDING: Watch Tucker Segment Showing Off Walls Around the World that Democrats Actually Support

On Jan. 9 — the same day that the radical abortion bill was introduced — Tran also introduced HB 2495, which “prohibits localities from spraying pesticides intended to suppress an infestation of the fall cankerworm during the period between March 1 and August 1.”

Well, thank God we’re looking out for the cankerworm, a caterpillar which becomes a gypsy moth.

Tran, by the way, has gotten off of social media now that the controversy over her bill has hit; according to The Daily Caller, she deleted her accounts once the abortion bill became a major issue.

The Virginia GOP, meanwhile, had this to say about it:

Do you think the Democratic Party has become the party of abortion?

Yes No

Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Tribune news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
You’re logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out.
The great irony of this is that even though this contentious bill may have made Tran decide on radio silence, it didn’t actually receive much play in the media until Gov. Northam decided to go above and beyond what she had proposed.

“When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of the mother, with the consent of physicians, more than one physician by the way, and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus which is non-viable,” Northam said.

“So in this particular example, if the mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen, the infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.”

So  Gov. Northam appears to be proposing infanticide. (Northam’s people insisted the governor wasn’t talking about termination as an option, something that the context doesn’t support.) Tran believes that killing a baby a few minutes before birth is all right but a few minutes after birth would be murderous.

And she believes caterpillars ought to be protected, too. Don’t forget that.

ABOUT THE REPORTER:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between America and Southeast Asia and believes in free speech and the Second Amendment.

Feminist Rips the ‘Women’s March’ for Not Addressing Any of the Important Issues



Reported By Karista Baldwin | January 20, 2019 at 7:49am

One self-described radical feminist is speaking out against the Women’s March for its failing to focus on actual women’s issues.

Phyllis Chesler, a long-time feminist and a professor of psychology and women’s studies, called the march “a con job” and criticized it for its unfit leadership.

In an opinion piece published by Fox News on Saturday, Chesler voiced her disapproval of the latest wave of feminism.  She wrote that the marches are “stage events, not revolutions,” and lamented the loss of “a vibrant and radical feminist movement.”

Now 78, Chesler is considered part of “second-wave feminism,” the movement that ushered in the sexual revolution (and legalized abortion). She believes that the current feminist movement is no longer really concerned with women’s issues. Instead, feminism is now about intersectionality and identity politics, at the cost of real women’s liberation.

“The Women’s March addresses things like ‘immigration reform’ and ‘police violence against black men;’ they say they are ‘anti-racists,’ more than they are ‘anti-sexists;’ and they prioritize ‘queer and transgender’ politics, but never plain old garden variety women’s issues,” Chesler wrote.

She complained about how the leaders of the Women’s March are branded like actors and reality show celebrities, unlike the members of grassroots movements Chesler was a part of. Chesler expressed disapproval of modern feminism’s convoluted identity politics, where members get points for their minority statuses. She also bashed the march for its anti-Semitism, pointing to claims that Jewish leaders were pushed out of the group. Chesler believes that the few Jewish members of the march’s committee, “have mainly been chosen as window dressing and as proof of intersectionality.’”

She argued that current feminist leaders’ obsession with inclusiveness trumps their concern with women’s rights in Third World countries. Chesler called out Women’s March leader Linda Sarsour for failing to condemn the human rights abuses in Muslim states.

“Sex trafficking? Child marriage? FGM? Forced face veiling? Honour killing? None of these issues are being addressed by the American Women’s March leadership,” Chesler wrote.

Many conservatives have voiced similar confusion over the broad range of issues that are now being grouped under the name of “feminism.” However, the fact that Chesler’s criticism comes from an old-school feminist’s perspective says a lot about how far gone the modern feminist movement has come. The left is imploding on itself. Liberals can’t sustain coherence with their identity politics-focused model because it’s inherently divisive. Leftists compete with each other to see who’s more oppressed, and bash anyone they deem “privileged.” They demonize Americans by carelessly throwing around labels like “racist” and “Nazi,” and are therefore deathly afraid of the labels being turned on them.

As Chesler wrote, this comes at the price of real crises that need attention. Tied up in their own identity politics, liberals are often silent on the issues they should be helping, like the sexist practices rampant in radical Islam.

Feminism is no longer feminist enough for people like Chesler. Some African-Americans are no longer considered “black enough” for liberals. Prominent gays and lesbians are criticized for not advocating for gay rights in the politically correct way. And even old-line feminists are starting to notice.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts

Karista Baldwin studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

All It Took Was 1 Border Photo and Trump Has Leftists Triggered


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | January 12, 2019 at 11:04am

There’s nothing quite like the Trump tweet. It’s not just a matter of owning the libs, as they say. In fact, the tweets often aren’t perfect from a policy and/or public relations standpoint. There’s definitely been some problematic stuff in the presidential feed from time to time.

Nevertheless, therein lies the fun. However much you might think that the president has done harm to his cause in 280 characters or less, his enemies tend to do way more damage to theirs.

Take, for instance, a tweet that should have been entirely unproblematic. After all, it was confrontational, but decidedly true. It involved a section of new fencing being put up along the border:

Now, there wasn’t a whole lot of context here regarding funding, where this was being built or whether or not it was replacing an old barrier. The point was, however, a new border wall was indeed being built — at least according to the tweet.

And thusly did the left half of political Twitter lose their minds.

Dr. Eugene Gu, a surgeon who has become a liberal political hashtag activist because a) he does transplants using tissue from aborted fetuses and b) why the heck not, was definitely triggered by the post.

Yeah, stopping people from entering the United States illegally makes you “like the worst, evil cartoon character villain.” Also, a “Game of Thrones” reference. Yet more proof Trump does triggering better than anyone else. Also, he does “Game of Thrones” references better, too.

Oh, and one of the Brothers Krassenstein commented on it, because of course they did. They didn’t seem to understand the whole mechanics of wall funding or the fact that there are still numerous areas along our southern border that are unsecured:

Someone please remind me why these guys are beloved social media stars.

There was also a tweet from a mental health counselor and author which we can’t show here that basically said, in vulgar terms, that Trump’s “imaginary wall is a metaphor” for his reproductive parts and that he’s building it because there are, ahem, medical issues with said parts. You can see the original tweet here. Again, published mental health counselor.

There are plenty of other tweets in this vein, although these are the most famous lib trolls that seem to have been trolled and don’t seem to get either the purpose of the wall or how it’s funded.

This is the state of the left today. Even the mere mention of the wall sends them into a tizzy. “This was already planned!” “It’s a fence, not a wall!” “You’re a barbarian!” Etc., etc.

And the media says someone in the White House should take away Donald Trump’s Twitter. Not when it creates reactions like this, they shouldn’t.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts

C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between America and Southeast Asia and believes in free speech and the Second Amendment.

Identity of Woman Who Screamed at Flake in Elevator Revealed, Soros Connection Uncovered


Reported By Karista Baldwin | September 29, 2018 at

3:09pm

The woman who yelled at Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona while he was in the confines of an elevator Friday has also been vocal since then, revealing her name to be Ana Maria Archila. She and another woman in the elevator, Maria Gallagher, have been dubbed “heroes” by many on the left.

But Archila is an experienced activist with ties to George Soros. She is co-executive director of the left-wing Center for Popular Democracy, a New York-based organizing group that gets much of its money from the liberal billionaire.

“George Soros is one of the largest funders to the CPD,” The Washington Free Beacon reported in 2017. “Soros provided the CPD with $130,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2014 and $1,164,500 in 2015. Soros provided an additional $705,000 from the Open Society Policy Center in 2016.”

On Friday morning, Flake made his way to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing after announcing that he intended to vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Archila and Gallagher were among the women who confronted him while blocking the door to the elevator he was on.

“This is not tolerable!” they screamed at him.

“You have children in your family. Think about them! I have two children. I cannot imagine that for the next 50 years they will have to have someone in the Supreme Court who has been accused of violating a young girl. What are you doing, sir?!” Archila shouted at Flake.

An aide asked her if she would talk to a staffer outside, to which Archila snapped, “No. I want to talk to him. Don’t talk to me.”

Gallagher said Flake’s decision had personal significance for her, telling Flake that she was sexually assaulted and nobody believed her.

“I didn’t tell anyone, and you’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them. That’s what happened to me, and that’s what you are telling all women in America, that they don’t matter,” Gallagher said in the emotional confrontation.

“Look at me when I’m talking to you,” she demanded. “You are telling me that my assault doesn’t matter, that what happened to me doesn’t, and that you’re going to let people who do these things into power. That’s what you’re telling me when you vote for him. Don’t look away from me.”

Flake listened to their shouting silently, occasionally nodding in response.  When the women finished and allowed him to pass, he continued to the committee hearing.

“I wanted him to feel my rage,” Archila said in an interview Friday with The New York Times. Her opportunity to express it to him came after she had spent all week in Washington protesting Kavanaugh’s nomination.

After private meetings with Senate Democrats, Flake told the panel that he would only vote for Kavanaugh on the condition that the Senate vote be delayed and another FBI investigation be conducted.

Archila claimed responsibility for Flake’s request to delay the vote. “His reaction shows the power that we have, together, when we chose to tell our stories and stand up for our vision of an inclusive society,” she wrote in an Op-Ed for USA Today on Saturday. “When we take action, we breathe new life and possibility into our democracy.”

It seems that there was more at play for the protesters than just rallying around in support of sexual assault survivors. Archila may have been as much against Kavanaugh for his politics as for the allegations. In her USA Today commentary, she revealed her political views, writing, “Brett Kavanaugh is not fit to serve.”

“Much of his record on civil rights, worker protections, health care and reproductive justice is an abomination. So, too, is his personal history of treating women as less deserving of respect and control over our lives, as these accusations against him have shown,” Archila wrote.

It doesn’t come as much of a surprise that the activist had political motives for the confrontation, but the revelation of her ties to Soros falls in line with concerns that many Kavanaugh protesters are paid players in the political arena.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Karista Baldwin has studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

Watch: GOP Ad Should Run Non-Stop Until 2020, Shows Chilling Leftist Violence


Reported By Cillian Zeal | August 10, 2018 at 7:55am

What are the stakes in the election this fall? Is it just control of the House or Senate? Momentum going into the 2020 election? Well, there is that, but something more: the possibility that thuggish intimidation runs roughshod over our political process. (Warning: Video below contains some graphic images.)

Those may be harsh words, but that’s essentially the only way to describe what the American left has been involved in since they lost the White House on Nov. 8, 2016. Threats, violence, demagogy, racism — all of these have been the stock-in-trade of the Democrats and their surrogates ever since that day.

If you don’t believe me, the GOP has assembled a greatest hits list of some of the behavior the left has engaged in since the last election.

Take a look: 

The video opens with a graffito that reads “Revolution or Death” with Bernie Sanders’ voice overlaid, talking about how the “radical ideas” America wouldn’t even consider a few years ago are seeping into the mainstream. If that sounds bad enough, it’s arguably the sanest thing you’ll see for the next minute and seven seconds.

Then, we move onto Kathy Griffin holding up the bloodied, effigial head of the president of the United States.

Then, it’s a burned-out car from said president’s inauguration. Over this, Nancy Pelosi intones, “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country.”

And then it’s Maxine Waters’ most infamous rant: “If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you cause a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome — anymore, anywhere.”

And then it’s Samantha Bee, calling Ivanka Trump a feckless c***.” (They mercifully left out the part right after where she suggests Ivanka seduce her dad; I suppose that was just a little too much for everyone involved.)

And then it was Bee’s fellow comedienne, Michelle Wolf, calling White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders “an Uncle Tom but for white women who disappoint other white women” at the White House Correspondents Dinner.

And then there’s Bill Maher hoping for economic collapse, Johnny Depp calling for President Donald Trump’s assassination, Madonna saying she wanted to see the White House blown up and Snoop Dogg “shooting” a thinly-disguised version of Trump during a music video.

The ad closes with a caption that reads: “The Left in 2018: Unhinged.”

And that’s pretty much where we are in 2018. Any sort of outré behavior on the left side of the aisle is excused as some sort of legitimate reaction to Trump.

The sad thing is, these are just the major incidents that most of us remember. There are plenty of other Democrat politicians and Hollywood stars (who will eventually try and become Democrat politicians, no doubt) who have engaged in minor-key acts of disgraceful behavior.

This isn’t just about checks and balances this fall. It’s about the very future of our body politic. Trump isn’t on the ballot in 2018, but sanity is. If America rewards the left for this behavior, it’s only going to get worse. That’s why this commercial should run at every opportunity between now and 2020 — just to remind our country how the opposition acts when they don’t get their way.

New Yorker Mag Attacks ‘Creepy’ Muslim Restaurant… Oh Wait, It’s Christian


Reported By Ben Marquis | April 15, 2018 at 12:19pm

URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/new-yorker-mag-attacks-restaurant/

Democrats — the self-proclaimed party of tolerance and inclusivity — have hypocritically displayed an increasing amount of intolerance and exclusivity toward one particular subgroup of the American population: conservative Christians. That intolerance and desire to exclude Christians from modern American society is no more evident than in the left’s relentless attacks against Chick-fil-A, a prominent and growing Christian-owned restaurant chain.Image result for chick-fil-a

The New Yorker recently provided the worst yet example of the left’s anti-Christian bigotry with an article lamenting the success the franchise has seen in the liberal bastion of New York City.

The success of the chain — the piece admitted that a Chick-fil-A fried chicken sandwich is sold in the city every six seconds, and the chain is set to open a dozen more storefronts in the city — is largely dismissed and invalidated as “creepy” and an “infiltrationdue to the religious ideology of the restaurant’s founding family.

“And yet the brand’s arrival here feels like an infiltration, in no small part because of its pervasive Christian traditionalism,” wrote Dan Piepenbring for The New Yorker. “Its headquarters, in Atlanta, are adorned with Bible verses and a statue of Jesus washing a disciple’s feet. Its stores close on Sundays.” 

The piece proceeded to attack CEO Dan Cathy for his charitable donations to causes in support of traditional marriage, which were characterized as “anti-gay” and “anti-LGBT.” 

It also attacked the manner in which the new Fulton Street restaurant — the grand opening of which served as the basis for the attack piece — used the word “community,” as if non-Christian liberals are the only ones who can lay claim to fostering a positive “community.”

“This emphasis on community … suggests an ulterior motive,” wrote Piepenbring. “The restaurant’s corporate purpose still begins with the words ‘to glorify God,’ and that proselytism thrums below the surface of the Fulton Street restaurant, which has the ersatz homespun ambiance of a megachurch.”

The piece also took on the instantly recognizable Chick-fil-a Cows, a highly successful marketing gimmick by the restaurant whose role in the franchise’s success was characterized as being the “ultimate evangelists” in the “church” that is Chick-fil-A. Piepenbring seemed disgusted at the popularity of the cows and their misspelled catch phrase “Eat Mor Chikin,” which he viewed as a “morbid” advertising campaign in that “one farm animal begs us to kill another in its place.” 

On a less bigoted note, the piece also took issue with the fact Chick-fil-A has grown to become a large and powerful corporation which was now “crowding out” local diners and restaurants in the city and criticized its “deadening uniformity” while lamenting the “palliative” effect of their “homogeneous” comfort food.

“Today, the Cows’ ‘guerrilla insurgency’ is more of a carpet bombing. New Yorkers are under no obligation to repeat what they say. Enough, we can tell them. NO MOR,” concluded Piepenbring.See the source image

This piece — ostensibly about the grand opening of a new Chick-fil-A location in New York City — was little more than a blatantly bigoted attack against Christianity disguised as a restaurant review.

Imagine for a moment the owner of Chick-fil-A was Muslim and sold chicken sandwiches from a chain of halal carts around the city. Would The New Yorker still characterize its growing success as an “infiltration” of religious values that was “creepy” and needed to be opposed? Of course not, and the fact The New Yorker felt safe denigrating the Christian faith of Chick-fil-A’s owners when they wouldn’t dare do the same for another religion is simply the latest example of the left’s bigoted hatred against all things Christian, which apparently now includes tasty fried chicken sandwiches.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: