Today’s national socialists and their Untermensch
Today’s young [and old] national socialist Democrat resisting indivisibles are quick to call people who disagree with them Nazis. Meanwhile, they’ve cut off reasonable feedback from family and friends through ridicule and scorn, and one doubts they’ll ever escape or grow out of the Leftist cult. The worldview inside their self-imposed cult blinders, riven by identity and class divisions, misery, envy, hate, and retribution, is immune from critical analysis. They don’t want to improve conditions for all mankind. They want to take what they think is coming to them.
The lynchpin for the whole syndrome seems to be killing babies – believing that it makes women’s lives better to exercise that sordid tenant of social justice. But abortion sets the bar high for abominations against fellow mankind. All manner of imposition, force, militancy, redistribution, regulation, and yes, retribution, fall well within that standard. On that scale, any force less than termination becomes a reasonable method for the achievement of utopian social justice.
And if human nature weren’t at the bottom of it all, motivating us to do what we do, to create what wealth we can create, to protect the fruits of our labors from theft by others as we must, the Left’s utopia could actually work.
But human nature is our nature, and no amount of Leftist redefinition of that nature can change it. The Left’s struggle to change human nature will always fail. Calling a baby a fetus won’t somehow undo the baby.
Anyone who doubts this can try the following: Rename your hand “anvilus.” Believe it! Now, smash your anvilus with a hammer.
Changing the label for something, or some beings, does not change their nature. It’s been tried before: See Untermensch
Vibrant young people, so intent on changing human nature to serve an unworkable utopian vision, spend gobs of good energy chasing after bad ideas. They deal out insults and rage like Halloween candy when challenged. They cut themselves off from reality feedback by friends and family outside of the cult from whom they might learn and recover sanity.
On the eve of this election, Trump and the Senate did what they could to set conditions to reasonably consider the mess of adjudicated social policies tearing the country apart.
Meanwhile, Obama and the Left aim to take back control to continue their wave of destruction because it makes them feel good about their good intentions. Haven’t we had enough of the Left’s good intentions?
From the perspective of today’s unborn untermensch, those intentions became genocide. Thankfully, the remainder of the Left’s policies, while disastrous, expensive and unworkable, are at least not so deadly.
Matheson, more windmills than people.
The uncivil strategy for offensive Leftism
The Left foreshadowed their ongoing street theatre of harassing leadership and throwing up phoney charges at the opening of the Kavanaugh hearings. Audience members jumped up shouting and wailing in a calculated and prolonged demonstration, made to appear like random testaments, to insert themselves into, and destroy the hearing process – egged on by phoney procedural delay attempts from their Leftist Senators.
It was all planned, and it raised a big middle finger to the American people who tuned in to learn something about their government.
The Left cannot permit reason to control. Under reason, they lose. But the rule of law is no match for the rule of the mob. Civility can’t compete with barbarity. Consent means nothing in the face of force.
The Left moved the bar to shouting, property destruction, procedural disruption, and all things uncivil. Without civility, what remains to check human impulses? How long until they start shooting?
That’s how previous Leftist movements all ended up. The fascists, communists, and socialists always end up imposing violent repression because citizens don’t usually voluntarily give up their freedom. Freedom gets taken surreptitiously. It’s stolen quietly, a bit at a time.
Like now. Our Supreme Court nomination process has been taken from the people and put under the force of Leftist dominion. Our Republican leadership seems oblivious to the theft.
Antifa, BLM, the Indivisibles, the Resist movement, the DSA, all the Soros-funded groups, etc., want their violent escalations to end up in revolution. No way are they moderating themselves.
Amy Wax on Dissent and Disagreement
…and the “familiar litany of sins”
The best response is no response
The best response to Leftist violence is to starve it of attention. Theater only works with an audience present. Don’t attend, only publish the conflicts on social media alongside critical analysis. Don’t give the barbarians meme space. Leave the angry Left alone to demonstrate and yell at itself.
What possible reason exists to confront it in the streets anyway? Few arguments, however reasonably delivered, could be sufficiently compelling to change a zealots mind during a mob event. Confrontation sustains the mob, and that’s exactly what the mob is there to generate.
Philosophical arguments aren’t settled in the streets. They require cool heads to even be heard.
The Left knows this. That’s why they keep their people in a constant state of agitation. Don’t help them.
widespread deep state surveillance
Newsmax – Sunday, 19 Mar 2017 01:04 PM
Nunes Must Ask FBI’s Comey About Montgomery Mass Surveillance Case
By: Larry Klayman
The old expression about Washington, D.C., is that if you want a friend, get a dog! In the case of President Donald Trump, this is a lesson he has undoubtedly learned in his thus far short tenure as the commander in chief. Nowhere is this seen more than over the current controversy concerning the president’s claims that he was wiretapped, that is, illegally spied upon, by his predecessor’s administration, former President Barack Obama.
As I have written in this Newsmax blog and elsewhere particularly of late, my client, former NSA and CIA contractor Dennis Montgomery, holds the keys to disproving the false claims of those representatives and senators on the House and Senate intelligence committees, reportedly as well as FBI Director James Comey, that there is no evidence that the president and his men were wiretapped.
Montgomery left the NSA and CIA with 47 hard drives and over 600 million pages of information, much of which is classified, and sought to come forward legally as a whistleblower to appropriate government entities, including congressional intelligence committees, to expose that the spy agencies were engaged for years in systematic illegal surveillance on prominent Americans, including the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 156 judges, prominent businessmen such as Donald Trump, and even yours truly. Working side by side with Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence (DIA), James Clapper, and Obama’s former Director of the CIA, John Brennan, Montgomery witnessed “up close and personal” this “Orwellian Big Brother” intrusion on privacy, likely for potential coercion, blackmail or other nefarious purposes.
But when Montgomery came forward as a whistleblower to congressional intelligence committees and various other congressmen and senators, including Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who, like Comey, once had a reputation for integrity, he was “blown off?” no one wanted to even hear what he had to say. The reason, I suspect, is that Montgomery’s allegations were either too hot to handle, or the congressional intelligence and judiciary committees already knew that this unconstitutional surveillance was being undertaken. Moreover, given the power of the NSA, CIA, and DNI, for congressional committee heads to take action to legitimately and seriously investigate and if necessary recommend prosecution of officials like Clapper and Brennan could, given the way Washington works, result in the spy agencies disclosing and leaking (as occurred recently with General Michael Flynn), the details of their mass surveillance, ruining the careers if not personal lives of any politician who would take them on.
After Montgomery was turned away as a whistleblower, he came to me at Freedom Watch. With the aid of the Honorable Royce C. Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who I had come to respect and trust over the years of my public interest advocacy, we brought Montgomery forward to FBI Director James Comey, through his General Counsel James Baker. Under grants of immunity, which I obtained through Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, Montgomery produced the hard drives and later was interviewed under oath in a secure room at the FBI Field Office in the District of Columbia. There he laid out how persons like then businessman Donald Trump were illegally spied upon by Clapper, Brennan, and the spy agencies of the Obama administration. He even claimed that these spy agencies had manipulated voting in Florida during the 2008 presidential election, which illegal tampering resulted in helping Obama to win the White House.
This interview, conducted and videoed by Special FBI Agents Walter Giardina and William Barnett, occurred almost two years ago, and nothing that I know of has happened since. It would appear that the FBI’s investigation was buried by Comey, perhaps because the FBI itself collaborates with the spy agencies to conduct illegal surveillance. In landmark court cases which I filed after the revelations of Edward Snowden, the Honorable Richard Leon, a colleague of Judge Lamberth, had ruled that this type of surveillance constituted a gross violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. (See www.freedomwatchusa.org for more information.)
A few months ago, given FBI’s seeming inaction in conducting a bona fide timely investigation of the treasure trove of information Montgomery had produced and testified to, I went to Chairman Bob Goodlatte of the House Judiciary Committee, as I had done earlier with Senator Grassley, since Montgomery had revealed that judges had been spied upon, and asked his staff to inquire of Director Comey the status of the investigation. I have heard nothing back from Goodlatte or his staff and they have not responded to recent calls and emails.
So last Thursday, I traveled to Capital Hill to personally meet with Chairman Devin Nunes (RCa.) of the House Intelligence Committee and, when his scheduler claimed that he was “unavailable,” forcefully pushed for a meeting with one of his committee lawyers, Allen R. Souza, and fully briefed him about Montgomery and the FBI’s apparent coverup. I told this staff intel lawyer to inform Chairman Nunes of the facts behind this apparent coverup before the committee holds its hearing on the alleged Trump wiretaps and questions Comey this Monday, March 20, in open session. My expressed purpose: to have Chairman Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee ask Comey, under oath, why he and his FBI have seemingly not moved forward with the Montgomery investigation.
During my meeting with House Intelligence Committee counsel Allen R. Sousa I politely warned him that if Chairman Nunes, who himself had that same day undercut President Trump by also claiming that there is no evidence of surveillance by the Obama administration, I would go public with what would appear to be the House Intelligence Committee’s complicity in keeping the truth from the American people and allowing the FBI to continue its apparent coverup of the Montgomery “investigation.”
And, that is where it stands today. The big question: will House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes do his job and hold FBI Director Comey’s feet to the fire about the Montgomery investigation?
Please watch the House Intelligence Committee hearing closely this Monday.
Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, is known for his strong public interest advocacy in furtherance of ethics in government and individual freedoms and liberties.
Domestic Terrorism
Republicans who think the Leftist backlash against Trump is personal to Trump have paid too much attention to the Left’s rhetoric, and not enough attention to their actions over the last couple decades.
In the words of Elvis Costello, Trump is “This Year’s Model.” The Leftist freakout (see: https://www.facebook.com/events/637030473110590/ ) would be every bit as damaging were it inspired by any other “presumptive” Republican candidate. The specific hyperbolic form of attack would be fine tuned to fit whatever another candidate exposed, but the degree of hyperbole, and the projected violence of the attack, would be the same.
This is true because all of the Leftist attacks resolve to the Leftist agenda. The end points never change regardless of the motivating circumstances or the motivating persons that get cast into the nexus of Leftist umbrage.
The Left will create conflict, even where none exists, because without a compelling argument, they must fabricate a change agent to color themselves as some sort of response and solution.
So, Republicans who think an accommodation to the Left will buy them some peace, are flat wrong. They might as well try to mollify Islam. Oh wait, ….
TAMMY BRUCE: Anti-Trump rallies funded by the left
From Chicago to Albuquerque to San Diego, and now last week’s obscene riot in San Jose, California, Americans and the world saw supporters of the liberal agenda violently target Trump supporters, peacefully trying to attend a rally, as though they were prey. Make no mistake – these supposed anti-Trump riots are not organic nor are they… [Read more…]
Remember what nation it is whereof ye are
Grounds for impeachment
Fighting the Ideological War
From an essay by Stephen Ulph, Islam and Totalitarianism: The Challenge of Comparison, in, Fighting the Ideological War, ed. by Katharine C. Gorka and Patrick Sookhdeo, 2012.
A conspiracy requires the existence of a constant enemy. If for Nazi Germany the role was filled by the Jews, in the case of the Islamists it is actually more than merely the Jew, it is the ewige Kafir, the eternal infidel. If the “enemy” defines those with an unclear sense of their own identity in the modern multi-faith pluralist environment, Islamist ideologues make ample use of the device to force the message of an eternal plot of disbelief against Islam. Beyond Jews, Christians and imperialists luring Muslims away from the true faith, the roster of enemies expands to the more sinister, internal conspirators: these are the liberal Muslim thinkers and the secularists. The al Qaeda affiliated al-Neda jihadi website provides us with the list and the commentary on elements that pull Muslims away from the true faith:
The Threat to Islam from Muslims
“Sometimes a hundred times worse than the hatred of the enemies of the nation, the Jews and the Christians” emanating from the leaders of Islamic countries and the clerics who serve them.The Secular Threat
“One of the greatest threats to the hegemony of Islam and the dominance of Shari’a is the American secularism that will be imposed forcefully on the region… The Islamic world will change from dictatorship to democracy, which means subhuman degradation in all walks of life.”The Threat of Those Who Abandoned the Islamic Tradition
Since secularism will be rejected by a large section of Muslims, the Zionist-Crusader coalition is encouraging major spiritual groups such as the Sufis, “who are mostly infidels” and believe in monism, pantheism, and re-incarnation and observe “conscience, inspiration, and other endless falsehoods.” Orders such as the Sufis “oppose Jihad and do not oppose the infidels.”The Threat of the Rational School
A “deadly seedling that maintains that Islam is not opposed to atheism, and that Islam must get close to the infidel and coexist with him.” A school of thought, planted by British imperialism and “established by Muhammad `Abduh and which maintains that logic takes precedence over the text [of the Quran].” This school “may become the first stepping stone to secularizing the region, because it is a mixture of secularism and Islam.”More intensive than Fascism, the plot in this case is nothing less than machinations of Satan against the Truth, and his exploitation of the enemies of Islam within the Islamic world for this purpose.
~
No matter how you slice it, Obama fits multiple infidel threat categories. Turns out it was never reasonable to expect he could become a peacemaker between Islamism and America.
B_Imperial
hyperbolic times
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh
Polite debate is no longer the accepted norm in our society. The liberal left is not tolerating divergent opinions, they want them eliminated. Outrageous labels, personal threats, and even violence have escalated during what used to be polite discourse and disagreements of opinion. [Read more…]
winners and losers
When the Democrat-controlled Colorado Legislature gets through imposing restrictive gun laws upon law-abiding citizens, will we be any safer? No, we won’t, because none of the prescriptions contained in any of these new bills address any element of the crimes committed with guns that will have motivated the bills’ passage.
In the instant case, losers will be law-abiding citizens. Winners will be Democrat politicians, their adoring liberal media, their captive voters, and the criminals who will have an easier time of it going up against a less-armed law abiding citizenry. But that’s only in the instant case. There’s also winners and losers in the larger scheme of things.
The country’s Founders designed a system they hoped would protect minority rights under the governance of a majority. They contemplated that with all the checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, the 4th estate of the press, and the people, that enough pauses to consider would exist in the public discourse over new law, that the best argument, the best philosophy, the best solution, the mostly soundly reasoned answer, would tend to carry the day.
They did not anticipate ruthless progressivism with its will to win at all costs, and notwithstanding the soundness of their argument. They did not expect that all of the checks and balances in our country would fail in their primary function and become the captive organs of a single cult mythology.
Wherever progressives get a political majority, they ram through their agenda. Sound arguments to the contrary are not rebutted, nor debated. Opposed parties are procedurally silenced, crowded out, shouted down, ridiculed, overwhelmed, and ignored.
Sure, we have instant winners and losers as each issue comes up under the progressive agenda. But the bigger loser is our system, the one that brought us to this point of social evolution, the one responsible for our success.
And perhaps the biggest losers of all are the progressives themselves. The ones who have no idea what they’ve lost by damaging their fellow American minorities, whom they take such joy in suppressing. The ones dancing in the streets after each victory, the ones shouting in the streets when they’re not dancing.
They’ve lost their minds.
B_Imperial
Fascism – Obama already did it
When Democrats Talk Like Socialists
By SVETLANA KUNIN
Posted 08/22/2012 06:47 PM ET
‘What exactly is the point of this article?” asked a reader of my last (July 25) column titled “President’s Attack On Success Shows U.S. Falling, Not Rising.” “That the U.S. has a robust private sector and a host of freedoms? That people with good ideas can succeed in America? Who is arguing these points?”
Too many people think that freedom, opportunity and a variety of choices are ever-present features of life in the U.S. — that fundamental transformation of America will not affect accustomed standards. [Read more…]
Fascism
Dreams From My Real Father
This film documents the socialist conquest of America. Whether Obama is the son of Frank Marshall Davis or not, the history of the totalitarian movement they both dedicated their lives to is an on-going American tragedy that must be seen, must become known, by all Americans.
I’m ashamed to be called ‘newsman’
by Joseph Farah
After watching the press reaction and “questions” following Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s breathtaking news conference yesterday, I have to tell you I’m embarrassed to call myself a newsman.
If someone asks me what I do for a living, maybe I’ll identify myself as an Internet entrepreneur.
Or maybe I’ll say I’m a “writer.”
Or maybe a publisher or businessman.
I never thought it would come to this. Being a newsman was all I ever wanted to be as far back as I can remember. It’s really all I’ve ever done through adulthood. It’s all I really know and love.
But I don’t ever want to be associated with that pack of jackals from Phoenix who jumped all over Arpaio and his investigator, Mike Zullo, for courageously presenting overwhelming evidence – I would even use the term “proof” – that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent and that the state of Hawaii is not only a willing accomplice in this scandal but perpetrating an even bigger one as a virtual factory for phony documents giving noncitizens instant citizenship with a stroke of the pen.
Some 50,000 people across the globe watched the live presentation on WND TV. If you didn’t get a chance to see it unfold, I urge you to take the time to review on demand, at your convenience.
In another era, with another occupant of the White House – someone like Nixon or Reagan or Bush – such an event would have been carried live by ABC, NBC and CBS. The New York Times would have had a half-dozen reporters on the scene. CNN, FOX and CSPAN would have carried coverage and offer instant analysis and debate over the issues raised.
But that’s no longer the America in which we live.
Today, without the Internet, we live in a 100 percent controlled media environment. There are more sacred cows than edible ones. The watchdogs are now lapdogs. The “reporters” are propagandists for the political establishment and the status quo.
I watch in horror as my chosen profession collectively disgraces itself.
Can our nation even survive without a free and independent and inquisitive, watchdog press?
Thomas Jefferson said, “Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe.”
Are we “safe” in America today?
On the other hand, Vladimir Lenin said, “When one makes a Revolution, one cannot mark time; one must always go forward – or go back. He who now talks about the ‘freedom of the press’ goes backward, and halts our headlong course towards Socialism.”
Is that where we’re headed in America today – forward to socialism and tyranny?
I feel sympathy for Arpaio and Zullo for the abuse they have endured. I understand it well, because I’ve experienced it firsthand for the last four years in my own commitment to the pursuit of truth regarding Obama’s life story.
The easiest choice to make is to go along with the conventional wisdom, not ask the hard questions, not relentlessly pursue truth. Kudos to Arpaio and Zullo, who didn’t take the easy way out like those clowns in the local Phoenix media and all those in the national media who just ignored what the only law-enforcement investigation of Obama’s birth certificate found.
I may not want to associate myself with the media anymore out of sheer humiliation. But I promise you one thing: I’m not going to stop being a real journalist. I’m not going to stop doing what I’ve been doing for 35 years. I’m not going to stop supporting intrepid, independent renegades like the WND team who make me believe there’s still hope for redeeming the media.
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
The ObamaCare litigation is history, with the president’s takeover of the health sector deemed constitutional. Now we can focus on the rest of the Obama imperial presidency.
Where, you are wondering, have you recently heard that term? Ah, yes. The “imperial presidency” of George W. Bush was a favorite judgment of the left about our 43rd president’s conduct in war, wiretapping and detentions. Yet say this about Mr. Bush: His aggressive reading of executive authority was limited to the area where presidents are at their core power—the commander-in-chief function.
By contrast, presidents are at their weakest in the realm of domestic policy—subject to checks and balances, co-equal to the other branches. Yet this is where Mr. Obama has granted himself unprecedented power. The health law and the 2009 stimulus package were unique examples of Mr. Obama working with Congress. The more “persistent pattern,” Matthew Spalding recently wrote on the Heritage Foundation blog, is “disregard for the powers of the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision making without—and often in spite of—congressional action.”
Put another way: Mr. Obama proposes, Congress refuses, he does it anyway.
- For example, Congress refused to pass Mr. Obama’s Dream Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for some not here legally. So Mr. Obama passed it himself with an executive order that directs officers to no longer deport certain illegal immigrants. This may be good or humane policy, yet there is no reading of “prosecutorial discretion” that allows for blanket immunity for entire classes of offenders.
- Mr. Obama disagrees with federal law, which criminalizes the use of medical marijuana. Congress has not repealed the law. No matter. The president instructs his Justice Department not to prosecute transgressors.
- He disapproves of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, yet rather than get Congress to repeal it, he stops defending it in court.
- He dislikes provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, so he asked Congress for fixes. That effort failed, so now his Education Department issues waivers that are patently inconsistent with the statute.
Similarly, when Mr. Obama wants a new program and Congress won’t give it to him, he creates it regardless.
- Congress, including Democrats, wouldn’t pass his cap-and-trade legislation. His Environmental Protection Agency is now instituting it via a broad reading of the Clean Air Act.
- Congress, again including members of his own party, wouldn’t pass his “card-check” legislation eliminating secret ballots in union elections. So he stacked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with appointees who pushed through a “quickie” election law to accomplish much the same.
- Congress wouldn’t pass “net neutrality” Internet regulations, so Mr. Obama’s Federal Communications Commission did it unilaterally.
- In January, when the Senate refused to confirm Mr. Obama’s new picks for the NLRB, he proclaimed the Senate to be in “recess” and appointed the members anyway, making a mockery of that chamber’s advice-and-consent role.
- In June, he expanded the definition of “executive privilege” to deny House Republicans documents for their probe into the botched Fast and Furious drug-war operation, making a mockery of Congress’s oversight responsibilities.
This president’s imperial pretensions extend into the brute force the executive branch has exercised over the private sector.
- The auto bailouts turned contract law on its head, as the White House subordinated bondholders’ rights to those of its union allies.
- After the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Justice Department leaked that it had opened a criminal probe at exactly the time the Obama White House was demanding BP suspend its dividend and cough up billions for an extralegal claims fund. BP paid. Who wouldn’t?
And it has been much the same in his dealings with the states.
- Don’t like Arizona’s plans to check immigration status? Sue.
- Don’t like state efforts to clean up their voter rolls? Invoke the Voting Rights Act.
- Don’t like state authority over fracking? Elbow in with new and imagined federal authority, via federal water or land laws.
In so many situations, Mr. Obama’s stated rationale for action has been the same: We tried working with Congress but it didn’t pan out—so we did what we had to do. This is not only admission that the president has subverted the legislative branch, but a revealing insight into Mr. Obama’s view of his own importance and authority.
There is a rich vein to mine here for GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Americans have a sober respect for a balance of power, so much so that they elected a Republican House in 2010 to stop the Obama agenda. The president’s response? Go around Congress and disregard the constitutional rule of law. What makes this executive overreach doubly unsavory is that it’s often pure political payoff to special interests or voter groups.
Mr. Obama came to office promising to deliver a new kind of politics. He did—his own, unilateral governance.
Kimberly A. Strassel kim@wsj.com
condolences
Critics painted me as a defender of the old guard. Ha! The only things I defended in this election cycle were competence, sound management, realistic thinking, and the rule of law. Tragically, these bedrock principles did not win today in the Elbert County Republican Party primary. Well, the principles still exist, and it appears I will have plenty more opportunities to defend them in the future.
Come November, commissioner choices will be between agenda driven liberals and, um, agenda driven liberals. I’m sure this prospect has the New-Plains democrats, populists, and leftists, dancing in their switch grass patches tonight, however, consequences for the county will be grim.
We’ll see ubiquitous zoning and higher taxes. We’ll see environmentalism and its basket of unfounded mythologies unleashed in a flurry of ersatz relevancy as they consume the public discourse. We’ll experience these mythologies fail in an expensive protracted drama full of denial and blame. We’ll see none of these agenda progenitors take responsibility when their no-growth, anti-industrial, country-in-county ideas further impoverish Elbert County. We’ll see the few of us who use their 1st Am. right to dissent from these prevailing insanities called more names, if that’s even possible at this point.
I never wrote for the sake of the old guard. I wrote for the sake of limited sound government. A voting minority of Elbert County voted for bigger more intrusive government. They made a big mistake, and the county government they’ve chosen for all of us will make us pay dearly for it. That’s what unbridled government does to people and these people are all about the unbridling of government power.
The left has won. You’re not going to like these new-strange bedfellows when they start implementing their plans for you.
B_Imperial
Plato
“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”