The elite media has been largely dishonest in reporting on this issue in order to attack President Trump.
1 – The elite media says that family separation and incarceration of illegal migrant minors started under President Trump because of his zero tolerance policy. This is not the case and they well know it. For example, the Washington Post March 11, 2015 under Obama, wrote about this very issue:
2 – The truth about family separation. The elite media leaves out all of the important details which bring clarity to this issue. The vast majority of Central American children who show up at the border are unaccompanied by their parents. The Border Patrol says that up to 85%, nearly 207,000 children from 2007 -2015 were unaccompanied when apprehended at the border; meaning that that an overwhelming number show up already separated from their family.
Parents can be detained until trial, but children can only be detained for 20 days because of the 1997 court ruling Flores v. Reno, at which time children are moved to a non-detention like facility or placed with any relatives that can be found in the United States, hence they are “separated from their parents”. Such has been the case long before Trump was President.
3 – Media reports of Trump backing down on “family separation” are wildly misleading. What they are not telling you is that Trump’s executive order states that the few minor border crossers who enter with parents must stay with their parents for as long as it takes, thus ending the separation, however, an executive order cannot supersede current law so this executive order will almost certainly be overturned by the courts.
4 – The conditions in which many illegal migrant children were held were much worse under Obama while Democrats and the elite media kept it quiet. The main reason for this is that more suitable and luxurious dorm like accommodations were not built up yet as they are today.
If you want to see some of the conditions that these children were held while Obama was president you can see for yourself HERE.
5 – President Obama said the same thing when he was in office that Trump is saying today. He also prosecuted many illegal border crossers:
Wow. Obama really did agree with @realDonaldTrump on Immigration.
The elite media is a bubble as we have seen by this past election. A previous example is when the New York Times’ lone “conservative columnist” announced that he was voting for Bill Clinton. To be fair, Safire did come back around to a degree.
The modern version, albeit worse, is the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin whose column is wrongfully named “Right Turn”. Rubin has been on a hate screed against any Republican bucking the corrupt status quo for years. You do not have to take our word for it, just browse her columns and start reading what she has to say about Republican reformers just since 2009. Rubin is indeed the far left’s favorite “”””Republican”””.
There is an important distinction between having a problem with excessive and unwise immigration policy and having a problem with an immigrant simply because he or she happens to be an immigrant. One position is perfectly reasonable, the other is much less so. Imagine how easy it is to word an immigration question to get the desired result of “Trump voters don’t like immigrants.”
In this video Rubin cites “polls” who go unnamed that she says back up her claim. Rubin knew Carlson was going to ask her about this as that is almost all he has done on his show since the election and yet she provided no citation, nor did she cite a verifiable one in her column.
National Review abandoned it’s banner as the voice for the traditional American with a conservative mind some time ago. Under Bill Buckley’s leadership, National Review stood up for the wisdom of the everyday American conservative, especially from the smears of the radical, neo-marxist left who has taken root into academia. Save for the brilliant Andy McCarthy, those days are long gone.
We have decided not to write about the nonsense that has appeared in National Review for the last year. Their readership has cratered and almost no one takes them seriously any more. Responding to them just brings everyone else down in the mud with them.
We are making an exception today as this recent piece is especially nasty and egregious.
I will start by stating the obvious, just dropping the Nazi bomb is an automatic implication that he is one. There is a reason that Godwin’s Law is Godwin’s Law.
To cover itself legally, National Review quotes Julia Jones in saying that there is no evidence that Bannon is a racist or antisemitic and that he has had minorities close to him all his life, which is all true. Then National Review writer Ian Tuttle goes on to associate Bannon with this mystery so called “Alt Right” which Tuttle describes as white supremacist and antisemitic. As evidence Tuttle points out that a Breitbart writer once called discredited “NeverTrumper” Bill Kristol a “Renegade Jew.”
What National Review conveniently leaves out is that the writer calling out Kristol as a “Renegade Jew” is David Horowitz, one of the most prominent Jewish American activists in American history. Horowitz’ activism in civil rights, fighting antisemitism, Jihad, neo-marxism and other evil “ism’s” is legendary among conservatives.
Horowitz used those words because Kristol encouraged people to simply not vote at all because Donald Trump is the nominee, when there is no question that in every way Trump is far more favorable to Israel and our alliance with them, when compared to Hillary Clinton and her record of hostility toward the Jewish homeland. Horowitz points out that Bill Kristol hates Donald Trump, and his opposition to the ruling elite, so much that he is willing sellout his own heritage.
The “evidence” that National review used to smear Bannon with the taint of antisemitism is an article that is a passionate defense of our alliance with the Jewish people and the Jewish state. Is it possible to be any more dishonest?
Here is David Horowitz engaging a jihadist campus activist who managed to get by Homeland Security:
As far as this “alt right” business that has creeped up in the last few months. This very writer has been involved in the grass roots since Reagan. I have never met a single person who describes himself as “alt right.” The only person I am aware of who speaks for them is is Milo Yiannopoulos, who describes himself as a Gay, Greek, Jew with a black boy friend.
Yiannopoulos says that the alt-right is all about defending the ideas of Western Civilization, which is the best thing for diversity as it helps keep minorities like himself safe. This rings true with us as the radical left has conspired, and they are open about it in their own writings, to bring down Western Civilization by screaming “racist”, “sexist” etc.
Milo Yiannopoulos:
National Review says that Steve Bannon is not a Nazi and then directly implies that he is. They say that he is not a racist Jew hater and then directly implies that he is. The evidence they used is presented 180 degrees away from what it really is. This is Orwellian doublespeak at its worst. If only Bill Buckley could return to put an end to it.
I can say, without hesitation, that Steve is a friend of the Jewish people and a defender of Israel, as well as being a passionate American patriot and a great leader.
A word or two about my credentials: I am an Orthodox Jew, and I hold a Master of Arts degree in Jewish Studies. My thesis at the Isaac and Jesse Kaplan Centre at the University of Cape Town dealt with the troubled status of Jews in an increasingly anti-Israel, and antisemitic, post-apartheid South Africa. I believe myself to be a qualified judge of what is, and is not, antisemitic.
It defies logic that a man who was a close friend, confidant, and adviser to the late Andrew Breitbart — a proud Jew — could have any negative feelings towards Jews. As I can testify from years of work together with Steve in close quarters, the opposite is the case: Steve is outraged by antisemitism. If anything, he is overly sensitive about it, and often takes offense on Jews’ behalf.
Steve cares deeply about the fate of Jewish communities in America and throughout the world, a fact that is reflected in Breitbart News’ daily coverage. It was in that spirit that Steve joined Breitbart News CEO Larry Solov (also Jewish) in launching Breitbart Jerusalem last year, fulfilling Andrew’s dream of opening a bureau in Israel specifically to cover the region from an unabashedly Zionist perspective.
This is one of the reasons so many people voted for Donald Trump, the elite media has simply gone off the rails in support for the radical left wing. The constant name calling, race baiting, the lies, the dishonest spin, and in many cases simply making stuff up. Thanks to WikiLeaks we now know that dozens of reporters were in direct collusion with Hillary’s campaign.
CNN was the most guilty as they asked the Democrats for negative information on Republicans, let the Democrats write their questions and we know that CNN, somehow someway, provided debate questions to Hillary in advance.
Here are the buses the paid thugs came in on just before they started creating a mess in Chicago. Thanks to Zero Hedge for the video:
In the video below CNN’s Symone Sanders plays flippant lip service to how she opposes violence, but when asked about someone who was brutally beaten her true feelings came out loud and proud. Where does CNN find these people?
In email after email after email we have seen a contempt from Hillary’s inner circle aimed at regular people they are supposed to be serving.
One thing I will never forget about the progressive left in college is that they truly believed that they were born to rule “the rabble.” Remember that old man who stood up to Loki and said, “There are ALWAYS men like you,” well it’s true.
This email exchange is between John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign chairman and Jennifer Palmieri, her communications director.
UPDATE – Hillary Campaign and DNC emails substantiate the video. Bob Creamer is shown in multiple DNC emails about events where they are sending agitators:
Legendary undercover journalist James O’Keefe strikes again. This time inside the workings of the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Campaign.
In the video you see top DNC operatives like Scott Foval, Deputy Director of People for the American Way, a DNC think tank, and Bob Creamer, husband of Congressman Jan Schakowsky (D-ILL).
As you can see top DNC staffers hire violent agitators, they use pressure groups to coordinate illegally between Hillary’s Campaign, SuperPAC’s and the DNC. They also say in the video that people from Iowa and Wisconsin are “Racist as f^ck.”
Not only were they paid to start violence at Trump events, but were paid to act as if they were there on behalf of Bernie Sanders.
Newt Gingrich points out that political violence is a federal crime. Where is the FBI?
The NYT accused John McCain of having an affair with a lobbyist and it was just a lie.
The NYT in coordination with the Obama Campaign accused Herman Cain of having multiple affairs and touching women. It also was shown to be a bunch of lies as Cain was able to show that he was not even in the cities mentioned by several of the women. All of the women knew David Axelrod, who was Obama’s campaign manager. One even lived in the same building as him.
[UPDATE II – Kit Daniels at Infowars verifies what we showed below and digs up a few other facts. We are NOT fans of Infowars as some of their journalism is shoddy, but this is a solid piece of journalism and credit is given when it is due – Editor]
Now the NYT says that Trump touched a lady who was flying first class with him decades ago.
More than three decades ago, when she was a traveling businesswoman at a paper company, Ms. Leeds said, she sat beside Mr. Trump in the first-class cabin of a flight to New York. They had never met before.
About 45 minutes after takeoff, she recalled, Mr. Trump lifted the armrest and began to touch her.
The New York Times story is highly suspect not just because of their recent election history of dropping lies like this, the cute timing of this story and, thanks to Hillary’s campaign emails being released by WikiLeaks, we know that the NYT coordinates with the Democrats as a matter of routine – even if you toss all of that aside…….
………first class arm rests do not swing up, are large and are completely immobile. Take a look at these pictures of what first class looks like and it becomes obvious why the story falls apart:
But what if it was on an old Boeing 727 or 737? OK take a look:
UPDATE – We now know that the alleged flight was a 727 – Editor
UPDATE –
NY Times Gets Punked! Fake Groping Victim Used Velvet Underground Song Lyrics to Describe Trumped-Up Attack – LINK
UPDATE – So what do they plan to do about you problem Catholics? Look HERE.
While most people have overheard locker-room conversations like the one Donald Trump had 11 years ago, read the email below and ask yourself how many people do you know actually talk about people they are supposed to be serving with this kind of arch contempt? This is truly disturbing.
In short they say that Catholics are cowards and frauds who are too chicken to become evangelicals because their rich friends won’t see them as “sophisticated” if they did. They trash people for getting baptized and go on to state that Catholics are attracted to female oppression and being Catholic is the closest they can get to that oppression in a socially acceptable way.
In this email are Hillary’s Campaign Chairman John Podesta, her Director of Communications Jennifer Palmieri, and John Halpin from the Center for American Progress which is essentially the Clinton’s pet think tank.
The Catholic League, an anti-defamation organization, blasted the Clinton campaign for the exchange.
“These anti-Catholic remarks are bad enough but it makes one wonder what else Clinton’s chiefs and others associated with the campaign are saying about Catholics and Catholicism,” the group said in a statement.
A politically conservative group called Catholic Vote, which claims 500,000 members, is demanding Palmieri resign.
“Everyone has a unique faith journey, and it’s just insulting to make blanket statements maligning people’s motives for converting to another faith tradition,” Brian Burch, the group’s president, said in a statement. “Had Palmieri spoken this way about other groups she would dismissed. Catholics will be watching Hillary Clinton to see whether she thinks our religious faith should be respected, or whether it’s fair game to mock us.”
Thanks to WikiLeaks and the carelessness that Hillary and her crew have misused email we have a great understanding of the corruption, pay to play deals and general contempt the Democrat leadership has for the American people. Their actions are right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook.
Bill Ivey to Hillary for President Campaign Chairman John Podesta – LINK:
And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking – and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.
Senator Durbin is the second most powerful Democrat in the Senate. Illinois has the highest taxes in America so companies are leaving in droves. Time to whip out the thug card….
Score another victory this week for the Senate’s lead political thug, Dick Durbin. The second-highest-ranking Senate Democrat and lead political henchman coerced retail giant Walgreens to stay in Illinois and not move as planned to Switzerland.
The government’s intimidation campaign against Walgreens was so heavy-handed that it would make Richard Nixon blush. Walgreens was set to move in order to reduce its tax liability and avoid the 40 percent income tax rate it pays as an Illinois-based corporation. This would have saved the company and its mostly American shareholders an estimated $4 billion over five years.
But back in July Mr. Durbin sent an astounding letter to Walgreens CEO Gregory Wasson warning the company, and demanding that it abandon its plans to relocate.
He lambasted the company’s move as a “clever tax dodge,” and threatened that “deeply patriotic” customers would not “support Walgreen’s decision to turn its back on the United States.” He added, subtly, that “nearly all of your $2.5 billion in profits earned last year were from sales to U.S. taxpaying customers.”
That was followed by other threats of political retaliation. “Much of Walgreens financial success was built on programs and infrastructure provided by the U.S. government” and “the future success of Walgreens will continue to depend on U.S. taxpayers and government-funded programs.” Just in case Mr. Wasson didn’t get the point, he reminded him that “nearly 25% of Walgreens profits were from U.S-funded Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
Unfortunately, our elected officials in Congress now feel they have the political power to carry out these threats with impunity.
Now Mr. Durbin is celebrating the Walgreens shakedown. The big losers here were the shareholders — including thousands and thousands of middle class Americans — whose retirement funds include Walgreens stock. The stock fell in the 24 hours after the announcement by more than 10 percent and so shareholders lost at least $6 billion on the announcement. That’s a lot of financial wreckage from one single senator.
In case there is any doubt that Mr. Durbin’s threats were heard, the statement by Walgreens about why it was not moving after all was revealing. The firm cited big risks of “consumer backlash and political ramifications, including the risk to our government book of business.” In other words: We got your message, Mr. Durbin.
Leftists/Marxists/Progressives/Liberals/Communists believe that wealth and prosperity come from government bureaucracies. There is a small amount of truth to that as they are quite adept at enriching themselves, their donors and their cronies with your money.
Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.” “Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.
From FBI interrogation footage. Confessed terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II, who attacked Family Research Council on August 15, 2012, shooting and injuring Leo Johnson (before Johnson subdued him and took his weapon) explains to FBI interrogators that he used the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list to find his target.
Dennis Prager, on why the left doesn’t just disagree with, but truly hates Sarah Palin even though she has done nothing wrong and hasn’t harmed anyone.
The elite media does a lousy job reporting the civil rights violations that happen almost every day in our public schools. Civil rights organizations such as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, the Alliance Defense Fund, the Rutherford Institute, the Student Press Law Center, and more have so many complaints of abuse that they have have no hope of acting upon them all.
We report on a few of the most outrageous cases here, and we spend a lot of time on this issue, but in truth we barely scratch the surface of the problem, as the problem is just that that big.
Bureaucrats, and unfortunately that includes some school administrators seem to have the ability to make the most outrageous behavior sound reasonable. Even now the school principal insists that the school was within its rights (to stick their hands in a boys underwear, not tell the parents, and take the 4th Amendment and toss it out the window) to conduct the strip search. I suspect that the courts are going to give the school a rude awakening. But even so, the administrators won’t be punished, the tax payer will just have to pay the damages and the administrators will just go on violating students.
Notice what national news outlet is reporting this story?
Parents’ outrage as school strip searches a 10-year-old boy to find a ‘stolen’ $20 bill that was actually in the cafeteria
North Carolina parents are outraged after an assistant principal strip-searched a 10-year-old boy to find a $20 bill the student didn’t even have.
Union Elementary School assistant principal Teresa Holmes is named in a complaint filed against the school, alleging that she made a young boy strip down to his underwear.
She suspected fifth-grader Justin Cox of having the missing $20 and when he didn’t turn it over she demanded he remove his socks, shoes, pants, and shirt so that a manual search could be done.
Holmes defended herself, saying that other students and faculty had said that the money was missing and that Cox had dived under a table for it.
Holmes told Cox he ‘he left her no choice and that she had to search him,’ according to court records.
She then told him she was ‘within her legal rights to do so.’
The complaint against Holmes states that Cox was deprived of his constitutional rights barring unreasonable search and seizure.
According to court documents, Cox had gone under a lunch table after money a passing girl had dropped. Holmes returned the cash to the girl, and afterwards was told that there was still $20 missing.
When confronted, Cox told her he didn’t have it.
Ordered into her office with a custodian to act as a witness, Holmes went so far as to put her fingers inside the waistband of his underwear and run her fingers on his bare torso.
She explained she had the authority to search him ‘because teachers and students thought Justin had the money.’
But another teacher came into the office to announce that the money was ‘miraculously’ found on the cafeteria floor.
[Editor’s Note – Tammy Bruce is one of the greatest thinkers alive today and any chance to see her in action is a privilege.]
In this video Tammy debates an atheist who represents a group that is trying to monopolize all of the city public displays for the holiday season with posters that insult people of faith.
The atheist says it is all about rights, Tammy Bruce sees right through his “rights” shield red herring argument and blasts his agenda, which is pushing people of faith out because his tiny minority cannot adapt to a country that is 95% religious. It is about bullying and malignant narcissism. The intellectual and philosophical mismatch becomes apparent very quickly. Enjoy.
Perrysburg police today issued misdemeanor citations to four men for allegedly being in possession of stolen political signs.
Those charged with receiving stolen property included John Russell, 39, of Toledo, and Chris Monaghan 41, of Rossford, who are both listed on the Sheet Metal Workers Local 33 Web site as business agents for the union’s Toledo district.
The men were in a pickup truck registered to Local 33 in Parma, Ohio, police said.
Also cited were Corey J. Beaubien, 37, and Sean Bresler, 33, both of Toledo.
A Tea Party Web site reported Friday the truck was loaded with the campaign signs of GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney and running mate Paul Ryan. Perrysburg police did not confirm that, but a police incident report said that the summonses were issued about 12:30 a.m. in the 11100 block of Fremont Pike “after several reports were taken of political signs being stolen in the city of Perrysburg.”
Singer and liberal activist Bruce Springsteen is well … a man of the people.
“He stands up for the little guy. A regular blue-collar Joe. A union man. A bona fide working-class hero.
And, when he’s not busy being all that… he’s a tax-dodging liberal hypocrite worth over $200 million who pretends to be a farmer to save hundreds of thousands of dollars on his property taxes that would have otherwise funded the welfare programs he pretends to care about.”
Recall that Springsteen actively campaigned for Obama in 2008, hosting free concerts that attracted tens of thousands of people in key battleground states. Springsteen’s song, “The Rising,” became a campaign staple for Obama’s speech venues and culminated in him playing for Obama’s Inauguration. And this time around, the White House plans on using the aging rocker’s new politically-motivated track, “We Take Care of Our Own,” to warm up crowds as the re-election bid kicks into high gear.
~snip
Bruce Springsteen pays over $138,000 a year in taxes for his three-acre home in Colts Neck, New Jersey. He owns another 200 adjoining acres. But because he has a part-time farmer come and grow a few tomatoes (organic, of course) and has horses, his tax bill on the remaining 200 acres is just $4,639 bucks. Do the math. By being a fake farmer, the working-class zero Springsteen is making a mint by robbing New Jersey of the antipoverty program funds he says they desperately need.
“I think it is unfair to our other property taxpayers that if you are a fake farmer, and that you don’t legitimately farm, that you are getting a property tax break and forcing your neighbor to pick up your tab,” said state senator Jennifer Beck. “That was not the intent of the law. It’s a violation of the public trust.” When Fox 5 New York reporter Barbara Nevins Taylor asked a lawyer for the trust that owns Springsteen’s land to comment on the Boss’s lucrative fake-farming tax breaks, predictably, the lawyer had no comment.
The tax loophole comes from the New Jersey’s Farmland Assessment Act of 1964. Originally the provision was created to help preserve agriculture in New Jersey. To qualify for the tax break, landowners must own at least five acres of land and produce just $500 a year in goods in order to qualify. Anyone who can meet those minimum standards can reduce their farmland tax bills by an astounding 98 percent.
People like to believe in the veracity of their own perceptions; literally they want to believe what they believe is in fact true. That has always been a fact of life, and this writer isn’t going to change it. However, what has changed is that our culture and society no longer reinforces practices, ideas and daily rituals that helped to keep that particular problem in check, making Americans better critical thinkers, and gave Americans a special collective wisdom.
Years ago Professor Christopher Lasch penned an article in Harpers titled “The Lost Art of Argument” where he lamented the so called “objective journalism” (which is anything but) model (from Walter Lippmann) as a tool for elites to set agendas and control the conversation on main street. The power of the elite media narrative is difficult to overstate, as it is much like group think. Everyone wants to be included and accepted, and if you stand out against such group narratives some will resent it. Most people do not realize just how easily they are persuaded by manufactured group narratives. Allow me to demonstrate with a few examples of popular group think narratives that many people still believe.
“Gravitas”. For those who are politically aware, and were so before the 2000 election, the word gravitas conjures up an image of former Vice-President Dick Cheney. Why? Dr. Thomas Sowell explained it well:
RUSH LIMBAUGH has been having some fun lately, playing back recordings of politicians and media people, who have been repeating the word “gravitas” like parrots, day after day. Before Dick Cheney was announced as Governor George W. Bush’s choice for vice presidential candidate, practically nobody used the word. Now everybody and his brother seems to be using it.
The political spin is that Governor Bush lacks “gravitas” — weight — and that Dick Cheney was picked in an effort to supply what the governor lacks.
In other words, the fact that Bush picked somebody solid for his running mate has been turned into something negative by the spinmeisters. The fact that media liberals echo the very same word, again and again, shows their partisan loyalties — and their lack of originality.
How many people believe that “former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is ignorant”?
Perhaps some of you who are reading this very piece continue to buy into this false narrative. Just so you realize how much you have been effected I will pose the following: did you know that in her infamous interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson ABC had edited out portions of her substantive answers to make her look ignorant? Did you know that ABC did this again in her interview with Barbara Walters. Remember when Charlie Gibson asked her a question about the Bush Doctrine that “Palin got all wrong”? Well, depending on what political historian you talk to there are five or six Bush Doctrines of which Governor Palin and Charlie Gibson each described one accurately. Atlantic Monthly, a left-wing political magazine, went back and did an exhausting review of her time as governor and concluded that she did a great job and pointed out how she was an innovative and competent executive. Odds are that people who buy into the false narrative that Palin is ignorant don’t know any of this.
“Republicans want to gut Social Security.”
The truth is that Reagan (Republican) saved the program with key reforms without decreasing benefits. It was President Clinton (Democrat) who increased the tax on Social Security benefits on the middle class which amounted to a benefit cut. It was George W. Bush (Republican) who tried to get at least a part of Social Security put into individual growth accounts so that Congress couldn’t spend your money (Democrats in Congress stopped him), and it was President Obama (Democrat) who has kept up a Social Security payroll contribution cut that is blowing an even bigger whole in the program. Odds are that people who bought into this narrative didn’t know any of that.
“Republicans want to get rid of Medicare.”
I regularly encounter uninformed voters who buy into this particular false narrative. It was Democrats, with Obamacare, who gutted $716 billion (over 10 years) from an already in trouble Medicare program without a single Republican vote. It was Republicans who added the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit (Part-D) which is not only popular, but gives seniors a choice of plans. This was accomplished at 40% under budget because the program was designed so well. One current Republican idea is to redesign the other parts of Medicare to work in a way that is similar to Medicare Part-D, so that it too can be more efficient and save money to help rescue the program. Democrats say no. Odds are that people who bought into this narrative didn’t know any of that (gee I am getting repetitive).
“Democrats want to tax the rich.”
This is perhaps the biggest false narrative of all. The Democratic Party leadership has never been interested in taxing the very rich. They have been “taxing the rich” for 50 years. Is it just a coincidence that they just happened to keep missing the target? President Obama gave the speech at Google, which paid 2.4% federal tax on 3.1 billion in income. In that speech he trashed the Chamber of Commerce for fighting against raising the tax on most small businesses which actually employ people from 35.5% to 39.9% . In the 2008 elections President Obama railed against Wall Street, but not only did he take more money from Wall Street and “the big banks” and such, but as if to add insult, their executives became the who’s who of those running his administration (LINK – LINK). Keep in mind that CNN once said Obama attacks private equity at 6am and is fundraising with private equity at 6pm. Wall Street and the big banks made more under three years of Obama than they did under eight years of Bush. His Treasury Secretary says that taxes on small businesses must rise so that government doesn’t shrink, and Obama’s new health care taxes target you, not just the rich. All of the stimulus and spending and so forth all in the name of the poor sounded nice, but look who got rich. Odds are that people who buy into this narrative know none of this (really there is a point to this).
Such false narratives are not merely myths that people fall into, they become emotionally invested in them, to the point where some people will say anything to support them:
MORE – Watch people lie about the political debate they never saw – VIDEO
False narratives rely on three crutches:
1 – The first is the selective promotion of key facts, combined with the suppression and/or omission of key fundamental truths. The use of a key fact that is partially true, when inserted into the false narrative, creates clear disconnects from the fundamental truths of the situation or event.
Politicians are masters of this. The second Obama/Romney debate is a classic example. In the debate section on the brutal slaughter of Americans at our consulate in Libya, the administration knowingly put out a false narrative that our people were killed by a flash mob upset by a video on YouTube. The White House created this deception because it was caught in a “Mission Accomplished” moment from having created a false narrative which stated that because Usama bin Laden was out of the picture, Al-Qaeda was beaten (The truth is that Al-Qaeda’s umbrella organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, has been actively helped by this Administration) . When caught, the White House tried to rewrite history, and focused on a key assertion–that Obama used the word terror in one speech describing the attack, as if that somehow dismantles two weeks of willing deception.
2 – Delivery of the few selected facts delivered with an attitude (an emotional trigger) that creates the false narrative.
A good example of this comes from a piece I read in the Washington Post some years ago. The article stated there had been documented misuses of the Patriot Act in order to wrongly access the private information of innocent citizens, and the Attorney General refused to state whether he would press criminal charges. This sounds quite ominous doesn’t it? Thirteen paragraphs later we learn that the error rate had been about 1.5%, comprised of honest mistakes, and all were caught by the internal Justice Department Inspector General whose job it is to find and correct errors. Consider the entirety of the pertinent facts, remove the emotionally charged delivery, and the message is quite different from the headline, would you not agree? Most newspaper editors know that the majority of readers never get passed the fifth paragraph in a newspaper piece. This type of deception is known as attitude change propaganda. Attitude change propaganda is not produced by accident.[Note – today reported abuses of the Patriot Act are higher. We are aware of this, so please do not blow up our inbox – Editor]
3 – Repetition. Joseph Goebbels said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie”.
This is why truth itself can become an enemy to some, and why those telling the truth are often disregarded, maligned and ridiculed. Once again we can look to the Washington Post for an example. Remember the Valerie Plame story? Remember when the White House outed a CIA Agent because her husband, Joe Wilson, had written a letter saying that President Bush made false claims in a speech? Well there was one problem; this entire story was based on a small stack of lies, and virtually none of the narrative that was repeated over and over in the Washington Post and the elite media was true, and the Post well knew it. This very writer wrote a 40 page article on the Washington Posts’ coverage of this story. Day after day, on page one, the Post repeated Joe Wilson’s lies and perpetuated the false narrative, while at times even on the very same day on the editorial page or buried in the paper, they would tell the truth about what was going on and explain how the evidence clearly showed that Wilson lied about nearly every aspect of his story.
I have been pretty tough on the left in this article because deception and propaganda is fully endorsed by many leftist/progressive thinkers such as Mao, Walter Lippmann, Joseph Goebbels, nearly all writers from the Frankfurt School, and Saul Alinsky. The progressive leadership in this country uses lies as a tool for calculated aggression.
This is not to say that the American right is free of the problems of false narratives, group think, and ideological boxes either.
There are/were many in the State Department, elite media and some in the Republican Party who have totally bought into the propaganda from the Muslim Brotherhood–that they want peace, free elections, and so forth–when anyone who studies their history going back to WWII knows very well what their agenda is. Bill Kristol from the Weekly Standard, as well as some on the famed internet Republican Security Council, fell for the “Arab Spring” false narrative. How quickly we forget history. The Mullah’s in Iran spoke to the Carter Administration about freedom, democracy and social justice; look at what they did as soon as they got into power. The same goes for what happened in Lebanon, and then Gaza when they had elections. Now look at the disaster that is Egypt and Libya, and yet some Republicans continue to say we should help Syrian rebels with arms, which would essentially be handing Syria as well to the Muslim Brotherhood/Al-Qaeda.
Republicans would love to see a genuine democratic, pro-western revolution in the Muslim world as we had in Eastern Europe, but today many forget that it took years of cooperation between Reagan, Thatcher, and the Vatican to cultivate pro-western forces and influences in secret right under the communist’s nose. We were ready to come in with monetary, logistical and other support when those forces made a major push. We knew very well who it was we were supporting, and we had an overall strategic concept in mind. Many Republicans jumped on the Arab Spring bandwagon because they bought the pie in the sky narrative from the State Department and they really wanted to believe it. Why? Because the false narrative targeted the freedom loving sensitivities of most Republicans perfectly. In short, they selected tidbits of truth, omitted others, and made a false reality that fit ever so perfectly into an ideological box.
Some so called “neo-cons” (by their critics) of the GOP may like to shape reality into something neat and tidy, but they aren’t the only ones. Many Ron Paul supporters are just as guilty of this. They argue that the U.S. should adopt some form of neo-isolationism. While it is clear that for the sake of finances we need to have a foreign policy that is less flamboyant, trade still needs to be protected with a serious Navy; the diplomatic credibility of the United States must still be backed up with military capability. If you want to see an economic collapse like the world has never witnessed, park the US Navy at home and it won’t take long. Many Ron Paul supporters say that “neo-cons” are “chicken-hawks” who have never served in the armed forces, and who would never send their sons to die “in some Middle East hell hole” (their words not mine). While it is true that some who may be labled as neo-cons have never served, the truth is that many who agree with at least some of that policy have served and have family who are serving.
Another example of taking reality and manipulating it is the often heard claim from Ron Paul supporters that militant Islamists attack us because of our foreign policy, and the argument that if it wasn’t for “neo-cons” we would not get attacked. When I run into people who say this I ask them, “Militant Islamists attack and kill Hindus in India. What is it about Hindu foreign policy that makes Islamists do this? How about the Buddhists who lived in Afghanistan? In Afghanistan the Islamists ran the Buddhists out and blew up their monasteries and artifacts. What about the Islamists in Southern Thailand who like to kill school teachers who dare to educate little girls? When the Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt with the aid of the Obama Administration, what is it that Coptic Christians did to cause the Muslim Brotherhood to attack them with armored vehicles? This is usually about that time where I start getting called all sorts of colorful names. The most experienced Middle-Eastern war correspondent says that those who believe the “its because of our policy” argument are fooling themselves.
We are experiencing a wholesale breakdown of critical thinking in this country and most of the learned academics I know have confided this to me directly. I have noticed this myself in my studies. How did this happen? Professor Lasch was rather fond of the old fashioned “partisan press” that we used to have before the “Lippmann Objective Model”. In those days each town had two or more newspapers, each with its own partisan or philosophical viewpoint. Each day citizens would read them all and discuss the arguments of the day at the local barber shop, soda shop, or even at work. There is no better exercise for creating an informed, thinking electorate. Today we live in an electronic society where people can just push a button and anything that puts them out of their comfort zone vanishes instantly.
American society has become a place where people get beyond offended when told that they are wrong. We have teachers who too often cannot understand the difference between being presented an inconvenient truth that scuttles their narrative and a personal attack. We have people who refuse to take the argument of another seriously, so any truths another may have will not be accepted or even considered. Truth has become the new hate speech.
This must stop.
The sting in any rebuke is the truth – Ben Franklin.
[Editor’s Note – For a short video followup on this story click HERE – you won’t regret it.]
Union members are told that they will be fined if they do not campaign for Massachusetts Senate Candidate Elizabeth Warren. All she has is this class envy nonsense she spews all while the big money interests and far left academics are the ones that are funding her.
Friends, this is absolutely Stalisnist and that is not a term we use lightly. This administration has threatened and targeted reporters again and again and is now using underhanded tactics like this to keep the elite media, who is already mostly in the tank for them, in line.
Internal Department of Justice emails obtained by The Daily Caller show Attorney General Eric Holder’s communications staff has collaborated with the left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America in an attempt to quell news stories about scandals plaguing Holder and America’s top law enforcement agency.
Dozens of pages of emails between DOJ Office of Public Affairs Director Tracy Schmaler and Media Matters staffers show Schmaler, Holder’s top press defender, working with Media Matters to attack reporters covering DOJ scandals. TheDC obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act request. (RELATED: TheDC’s complete coverage of Media Matters)
Emails sent in September and November 2010 show Schmaler working with Media Matters staffer Jeremy Holden on attacking news coverage of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation scandal.
Holden attacked former DOJ Civil Rights Division attorneys J. Christian Adams and Hans von Spakovsky on Sept. 20, 2010 for what he called an attempt “to reignite the phony New Black Panther Party scandal.”
Before Holden posted his article at 7:52 p.m., Schmaler sent him several emails with information helping him attack both former DOJ oficials.
“Here’s one Wolf letter,” read the subject of one email Schmaler sent Holden that contained no text. The email was likely a reference to Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf, a member of Congress who led the Republican charge on the New Black Panther Party scandal involving alleged voter intimidation at a November 2008 polling place in Philadelphia.
In response, Holden told Schmaler that “The response to interog 38 is particularly helpful. Thanks!”
Interrogatory 38 was a reference to a question from Congress that the Justice Department answered, concerning the role of several senior officials in discussing litigation related to that voter intimidation case.
A follow-up email shows Schmaler sending Holden more information.
“[H]ere’s another one to Smith,” Schmaler wrote. “[I]t’s about perrelli contact with w. WH. helpful in that it makes clear perrelli didn’t have discussions w/ WH on the case (obviously confirming he knew of it) … but also illustrates [REDACTED] they’ve tried to throw up that won’t stick[.]”
Holden responded at 8:34 p.m. — three hours after Schmaler sent her first email at 5:34 — to say, “Post is live, FWIW [for what it’s worth]. Thanks again.”
Nearly two months later, on Nov. 18, 2010, Holden wrote a new blog post he described as an “EXCLUSIVE,” titled “Right-wing commission to vote on flawed New Black Panthers report.”
“The conservative-dominated U.S. Commission on Civil Rights will vote Friday on an interim report that omits critical evidence disproving allegations that the Obama administration refuses to enforce voting-rights laws against racial minorities, according to Media Matters’ analysis of a copy of the report we obtained,” Holden wrote in the Nov. 18 article.
Holden attacked Adams again, and Christopher Coates — another now-former DOJ attorney.
After Holden published that piece, Schmaler sent him an email titled “Great piece…” and continuing in the body of the message, “On USCCR investigation.’” One minute later, Holden responded, writing, “Thanks!”
This is the product of radicalized leftists that have so much influence on campus. Why does the Democratic Leadership actively go out of the way to conceal just how far to the left they are?
While there are many good educators out in the trenches, one thing cannot be denied, public schools attract the incompetent, the radicalized and the foolish.
The teacher in Gig Harbor, Washington helped pin the child down while other students piled chairs on him, took off some of his clothes, drew on his feet, shoved his sock in his mouth dragged him around the room etc.
The school district of course does what they do, and promotes the teacher after a ten day suspension.
Cell phone video, shot by students, shows the then 13-year-old being dragged around the classroom. It also shows several students stacking chairs on top of the boy, a classmate putting a sock in his mouth and others sitting on him while he is held by his arms and legs. Watch an edited segment of the video by clicking here.
“I was shocked. My wife broke down crying. It was tough to see,” said Randall Kinney, the boy’s father.
All of it happened in front of a teacher, who at times participated in the incident.
Remember how the far left in America has said since the rise of the Tea Party that the right is awash in “violent rhetoric”? What about the proposition to kill the Boy Scouts like one would kill a rabid dog? That is what a columnist for The Atlantic has implied.
James Hamblin, the magazine’s health editor, proclaimed his desire to kill Boy Scouts based on his distaste for their recently re-affirmed policy of refusing to admit openly gay members. Hamblin feels justified in using violent, even hateful rhetoric to attack the Boy Scouts merely because he disagrees with them.
Boy Scouts is an organization that was and is so close to being great. Remember when they had to put Old Yeller down because he got rabies? It’s not like he was a bad dog, but he got a brain infection and he tried to eat Travis
Apparently the First Amendment only applies if you agree with gays?
It should be noted that Hamblin posted his desire to kill Boy Scouts the day after another gay activist tried to do just that, kill people with whom he disagrees. Hamblin posted his hate-mongering screed the day after a gay activist entered the Washington DC headquarters of the Family Research Council intent on mass murder.
Hamblin next went on a hyperbolic trip of accusations that the Scout’s policy will “cause.”
Perpetuating a culture where gay teenagers — who are already commonly battling notions of inferiority and self-hatred — can be openly and decidedly told they aren’t welcome among a preeminent organization that purports to represent and define a standard of behavioral ideals, is dangerous. It’s a decided step back in rejecting the culture of gay bullying. We will see more depression, and more suicide. We’ll see more discrimination of every sort, and more hatred.
But notice the absurdity in Hamblin’s statement. He says that the Scouts “define a standard of behavioral ideals.” But how can one have standards and ideals if one simply pushes them aside for every disgruntled group that comes knocking at your door claiming discrimination? The Boy Scouts aren’t breaking any laws and aren’t illegally discriminating and since the Scouts base their ideals on Christian principles, they have steadfast principles quite regardless of whether Hamblin likes them or not.
This is what government is all about. Forget roads, mass murder through warfare, or locking people up for their consumption choices: it’s making sure that no one gives out water without a permit.
This is from last week but I believe un-noted here: ABC-TV 15 from Phoenix reports that local Christian proselytizer Dana Crow-Smith was ordered by a “Neighborhood Preservation Inspector” to stop giving out free bottled water last month because she lacked a vending permit, though she was not vending.
She is threatening to sue the city with help from the Rutherford Institute, a civil liberties group with a focus on religious liberties, if the city doesn’t apologize and swear to train its enforcement officers to not make the same mistake again.
Former Amalgamated Transit Union local 689 president Mike Golash, now an “Occupy” movement organizer, was caught on tape Sunday revealing his political goals: overthrowing capitalism in the United States and instituting a communist government.
“Progressive labor is a revolutionary communist organization,” Golash said during an Occupy DC “People’s Assembly” on August 19.
“Its objective,” he added, “is to make revolution in the United States, overthrow the capitalist system and build communism.”
Golash said he and his comrades are “trying to learn something from the historical revolutions of the past: the Russian revolution, the Chinese revolution, the revolutions in Cuba and Eastern Europe.”
“What can we learn from them so we can build a more successful movement to transform capitalist society?”
Of course it is illegal for the Army to participate in law enforcement, but since when do laws like the Posse Comitatus Act matter to far left oligarchs bent on a radicalized agenda?
In this scenario the TEA Party comes into a town, occupies it without paying for permits, etc, and takes over parts of the town illegally, while ignoring the requests from law enforcement. Now wait a minute, who behaves this way? Oh that’s right, the Obama endorsed Occupy Wall Street movement that has resulted in dozens of rapes, several deaths, arrests measured in the thousands, organized efforts to resist, even with violence – law enforcement, mass vandalism, threats etc. But it is the TEA Party folks who show up with cute signs and flags, and always clean up after themselves that are the problem.
PJTV’s Trifecta and reporter Anthony Martin respond:
A retired U.S. Army colonel who now teaches modern warfare to soldiers at the University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. has co-written an article with a Civil War expert that has ignited a firestorm today among those increasingly concerned about what some say is a distinct anti-civilian tone that has infected much of the military and Homeland Security since 2009.
Retired Col. Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, Associate Professor of History at the University of Kansas, co-wrote an article for Small Wars Journal on a 2010 Army report titled, “U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 – 2028.”
The report describes how the Army will respond to threats “at home and abroad” in the coming two decades and in doing so has made clear that a monumental cultural shift has occurred in the thinking of those at the top levels of military command. This shift has some government watchdogs worried, particularly given that Benson is using the platform provided at Fort Leavenworth to educate military personnel in his vision of the nature of modern warfare in America. According to the vision articulated by Benson, future warfare will be conducted on our own soil. The military will use its full force against our own citizens. The enemy will be average citizens whose values resonate with those articulated by the tea party.
The fictitious scenario used in the Army report as a teaching tool is a future insurrection of “tea party activists” in South Carolina. As the scenario goes, the tea party group stages a takeover of the town of Darlington, S.C. The mayor is placed under house arrest and prevented from exercising his duties. The police chief, the county sheriff, and other law enforcement officials are removed from office and told not to interfere. The city council is dissolved. The governor of the state, who had previously expressed solidarity with tea party goals, does little to address the situation.
A news conference is called by the new town leaders, all tea party activists, who tell the media that due to the failure of central government to address the concerns of the citizens, the Declaration of Independence has been re-imposed and the local government has been declared null and void.
Several items of interest are to be noted in the scenario the Army uses to describe the tea party activists — “right wing,” “extremists,” “insurrectionists,” all of whom are lumped together with militias and organizations that are considered “racist” and “anti-immigration.”
By contrast, those who oppose the tea party are referred to as “mainstream.”
The obvious question that arises is why would this sort of scenario, with its obviously biased and skewed portrayals, be presented as a teaching tool to military personnel? Why would the U.S. military consider the tea party to be “extremist” or “insurrectionist?” And why would the tea party be classified together with groups that are “racist, “anti-immigration,” and “extremist right wing?”
In the numerous tea party rallies that have occurred across the nation no racism was noted by any observer. Speakers included persons of all races and ethnic backgrounds. No sentiment was expressed against legal immigration but outrage was directed toward those break the law and enter the country by illegal means. And the charge that the tea party is extremist right wing is difficult to justify given that the main thrust of the movement is the protest against runaway government spending that has placed the nation on the brink of economic ruin due to its enormous and unsustainable debt.
Yet repeatedly since the election of Barack Obama in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has referred to the tea party as “potential homegrown terrorists.“
…the military under the Obama administration has made sure that the words “Jihad” and “Islamic” are deleted from all official documents concerning very real threats to the safety and security of citizens. The administration went out of its way, for example, to avoid referring to the Fort Hood terrorist as an “Islamic extremist.”
Yet when describing the frightening possibility that a U.S. city could be seized by an insurgency group, its mayor, police chief, and city council removed from office and placed under house arrest, the Army chooses to use the tea party, not an Occupy Wall Street nor a radical Islamist entity, as the insurgency group in the teaching tool.
When former U.S. Rep. Gabriella Giffords, D-Ariz., was shot along with others in the infamous Tucson massacre of 2011, the Obama administration, the mainstream media, and liberal activists were quick to blame the tea party, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, and Mark Levin for using “hateful rhetoric” that leads unstable persons such as the Tucson shooter to undertake such violent measures.
Yet none of the those mentioned as the sources for the hateful rhetoric have ever called for violence against anyone.
Several who posted comments on the PJTV video stated that they had attended Benson’s workshop and that each time someone would point out the threat posed by groups such as Islamic extremists, or the Occupy movement, workshop leaders would turn their comments around to continue the established scenario that ordinary citizens are the ones who pose the threat due to their hysteria over Islam and liberal insurrectionist groups.
Yet the ones who routinely call for violence against those who steadfastly resist their collectivist plans are the liberals in academia, government, the media, and left wing activist groups.
Time Magazine’s Joe Klein once accused conservatives shortly after the 2008 election that they were guilty of “sedition” and implied that sedition laws should be resurrected so that conservatives who resist the program being implemented by Barack Obama could be rounded up and jailed. Pamela Geller of the blog Atlas Shrugs has received countless death threats for merely reporting the facts on the activities of extremist Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood stated recently that America will be “brought to its knees.” Liberal commentators on various web sites have routinely called for the deaths of conservatives such as Dick Cheney and Michelle Malkin, and when former Fox News commentator Tony Snow was diagnosed with cancer, left wing hysterics stated that they hoped he would die a slow, painful death.
But these examples are only the tip of the iceberg. President Barack Obama stated in 2008 during the presidential campaign, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” Obama’s friend and political ally Bill Ayers called for young people to kill their parents when he launched the very first “occupy” movement in Chicago in 1969. Ayers is also on record as stating that he supports the killing of tens of millions of conservatives unless they agree to be reeducated in his extremist liberal agenda.
Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, have often stated that they have not changed their views at all since the 1960s and wish they had done much more to advance their agenda.
In addition, the Communist-Socialist-Marxist ideology is singularly responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people during the 20th century alone. Stalin murdered at least 20 million Russians. Chairman Mao murdered at least 65 million Chinese. Fidel Castro along with his henchman Che Guevara murdered hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans, a figure that many say is much too low. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge murdered at least 5 million Cambodians and Southeast Asians after the Viet Nam War.
An in-depth study conducted by a University of Texas professor in 1997 for the National Center for Policy Analysis places the figures cited above much higher.
[Editor’s Note – Let us be clear on this, it seems the shooter wanted to kill people at the FRC because they are Christians.]
As of 12:40 PM Fox News is the only television network reporting the story on the air. Radicalized leftists targeted the Family Research Council because the CEO of Chick-Fil-A gave them a donation [And nothing on the network news other than Fox. UPDATE – Nothing on MSN’s homepage news-feed.]
UPDATE – Shooter carried a Chick-Fil-A bag – LINK. Shooter said to guard, “Don’t shoot me, it was not about you, it was what this place stands for.”
The suspect in Wednesday’s shooting at the Washington, D.C. office of the Family Research Council has been identified as Floyd Corkins, 28, of Herndon, Virginia. David Mariner, executive director of The DC Center for the LGBT Community, said Corkins has worked as a volunteer at the center for about the past 6 months, Newser reported.
A security guard at the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C., was shot in the arm by a gunman who sources said expressed disagreement with the conservative group’s policy positions.
The guard, who was not identified, was conscious after the shooting and was being treated. The shooting occurred in the Chinatown neighborhood Wednesday morning. The gunman was apprehended and was being questioned by the FBI, sources said. Sources said he is in his twenties and may have been posing as an intern.
The suspect “made statements regarding their policies, and then opened fire with a gun striking a security guard,” a source told Fox News.
Authorities were treating the attack as a case of domestic terrorism.
As of now the Washington Post, Huffington Post, ABC local, and Politico are reporting the shooting online, but are omitting that the shooter shouted comments against the Christian lobbying group. Anyone surprised?
UPDATE III – FRC President Tony Perkins: SPLC Is Responsible for Creating Environment That Led to Shooting
“If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X
Political Arena 