So how long did it take for a movement called “libertarians for Trump” to realize that they are dealing with a politician? What is it about certain libertarians that they simply refuse to accept historical facts about the nature of politicians, and aspiring politicians once they are in power? The phrase “fool me once, shame on you…” does not even apply here, as these libertarians allow themselves to be fooled time and time again. Continue Reading
Contrary to the claims that the “women’s march” on Washington was “spontaneous” and “non-partisan”, itself quite a ludicrous statement when so many “partners” are involved, it turns out the unavoidable leftist oligarch George Soros is heavily involved with a large number of the ‘partners’ involved in the march.
Also, it was clearly an anti-Trump protest, and not some neutral pro-women march. And if that wasn’t enough, partners involved in the march included organizations such as CAIR, which itself has been tied with the Muslim Brotherhood: quite the “feminist” organizations, these. Continue Reading
Finally, the “intelligence community” has released a full report of alleged Russian “hacking” of the DNC, in order to influence the U.S. presidential elections.
And it managed to have 25 pages of absolutely NO PROOF whatsoever. Only mere assertions. Words like “we are confident” and “judge” are rampant, yet anyone with half a brain knows what this really means.
To have evidence is to “know for a fact”. To have mere suspicions, or worse, mere assertions, is to be “confident” and to “judge”. Why are they confident? Why are they not SURE? Because they have clearly not found any actual evidence. This being the U.S. intelligence agencies of CIA, FBI and NSA, this should speak volumes. Between the three of them they could not find any solid evidence. Could it be because it is not there to begin with? Continue Reading
In a fit of honesty, Hillary Clinton could have said the following in private circles:
“I’ve lost the elections because the whole country wasn’t behind me and kissing my dimpled arse. I’ve lost especially because there have been individuals and organizations that have revealed me to be a corrupt witch that has privately asked a large number of mainstream media reporters for cooperation, for the purpose of achieving victory; cooperation which she subsequently received, for instantly by being given debate questions ahead of time. Continue Reading
Note: the below opinion piece is not aimed at decent, humble progressive liberals who accept the consequences of Hillary Clinton being the Democratic candidate. It is aimed at those on the left – a substantial number of people i would classify as the Hard Left – who wouldn’t know hypocrisy if it sat on their faces; who think the rules do not apply to their camp; who believe society should be at their beck and call; who believe everyone, especially women, owes them; who accept everything they ordinarily reject, when its expedient to do so; who despite their age are spoiled children who scream, cry and throw temper tantrums in the streets and on social media when they don’t get their way; who despite calling themselves “Democrats” are in reality supporters of a “One-Party-Democracy” in the tradition of communism. Who think another term for Media and Journalism is “lapdogs for the left” and are shocked when this doesn’t happen to be the case for once. Who think Russia has some kind of obligation to be nice to the candidate that is seeking war with them. Who blame others for doing – and being – exactly what they wanted them to be, if it ends up blowing in their faces. Continue Reading
National Review’s Kevin Williamson believes Donald Trump’s appeals to the white working class are “immoral” because that demographic’s way of life deserves to die out.
Trump has so thoroughly destroyed future of the neocons’ gravy train that the hatred of neocons toward those who support Trump now comes out in the open. Take note of the hatred, of the frustration, of the pure contempt.
Watch the whole video, and especially Stefan Molyneux’s message at the end.
It wouldn’t be the first time Antiwar.org’s Justin Raimondo expresses naivety. He had previously supported Rand Paul, called all those libertarians who suspected Rand of being phony “purists”, and members of a “sect”, but finally had to distance himself from the younger Paul. Not that this led to any self-reflection on Raimondo’s part because he managed to still vilify “purists” while admitting Rand Paul was not worthy of a libertarian vote. Nevermind that many of those who saw through Rand Paul actually supported Ron Paul’s for the presidency.
Of course, Ron was principled and consistent and Rand proved almost from the start that he wasn’t. This was no problem for Raimondo, at least not until Rand was unprincipled in the ways that Raimondo himself could no longer accept. Does this not make Raimondo himself a “purist” on matters of foreign policy? Of course it does, because every libertarian has his limits and draws the line somewhere, and Raimondo draws his around war and interventionism. To suggest that the line ought to be there and nowhere else is a purist position in itself.
But never mind that. Justin Raimondo’s naivety apparently goes farther. So far, in fact, that he is actually surprised that Bernie Sanders, a leftist, would condone or even support aggressive and disruptive actions by his supporters at a Donald Trump rally.
A CNN commentator claimed Saturday that Donald Trump will put people in camps and do away with the writ of habeas corpus if he is elected President.
Daily Beast columnist Sally Kohn was taking part in a CNN panel, and when asked what her final thoughts were, she blurted out that Trump would become a rabid dictator.
It is highly unlikely this would happen, but what is most interesting thing about this is that two presidents in history which are generally regarded very highly by liberal Democrats did precisely this: suspend the writ of habeas corpus and/or use internment camps.
I am talking about Abraham Lincoln and Franklyn Delano Roosevelt, of course.
Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the American civil war.
Franklyn Delano Roosevelt suspended the writ of habeas corpus by putting Japanese-American citizens in internment camps.
Yet how many liberal Democrats do you hear bemoan these actual historical dictators? They are widely regarded as heroes and “great presidents of history.”
However, the mere ridiculous hypothesis that a president that is not preferred or admired by liberals may actually resort to the same totalitarian and unconstitutional tactics has them sent some of them into a hysterical, hypocritical panic. I would almost say: “not nice when the shoe of big, totalitarian government is on the other foot, is it?”
Of course, we also have Barack Obama, who issues executive orders to have American citizens that are merely suspected of terrorist ties assassinated; who kept and keeps Guantanamo Bay open; who likes using drones; who supports the Patriot Act and the NSAA; who keeps Homeland Security in existence as well as the TSA; under whose watch the NSA has engaged in massive surveillance of the population; who punishes whistleblowers etc etc. Need we go on about the ways in which liberal darling Obama and his administration fascistically violate constitutional rights?
The pot calling the kettle black simply doesn’t do it justice. Liberals are champions of big government overreach, constitutional rights violations and using presidential power to attain certain goals supported implicitly or explicitly by the liberal-left.
I almost… almost … want to see disgustingly hypocritical liberals like Sally Kohn experience what it’s like to be under the boot for a change, instead of in it.
P.S. Sally, don’t you think it would be a good idea to have a right to bear arms, just in case your worst nightmare about Trump comes true?