It’s now Christmas season – a season of love and mercy. But Progressives are making it difficult. Jill Stein managed to sucker enough people into paying for a recount – so far, only in Wisconsin, but it looks like Pennsylvania and Michigan will get the sore-loser treatment, as well. Do note that our Progressives, in their relentless pursuit of electoral purity, aren’t challenging the results in New Hampshire and Minnesota – even though New Hampshire was closer than Wisconsin. It won’t work, Progressives – if anything, it will just increase Trump’s margin in all three States slightly.
According to this article, Obama and his team are the adults in the Democrat room. The allegation is that Obama convinced Hillary to concede – and now some Team Clinton people are bent out of shape over that. The article says that some on her team want to have the multi-State recount; they apparently believe that this election result can be reversed. These are people who nearly became our government, folks – completely divorced from reality. The votes were cast, they have been counted – recounts, at most, move a few votes either way. If Hillary had lost all three States by, say, a couple hundred votes each, that would make it worthwhile to fight it out…but she lost Michigan by more than 10,000 votes, and that’s the closest vote total (to overturn it, it wouldn’t be a matter of just finding 10,000 Hillary votes that were somehow overlooked – given the way it went, any uncounted/miscounted votes are likely to be roughly even between the two candidates; for this to work, Democrats would have to find like 30,000 votes…and with Hillary getting a miraculous percentage of them…and they’d have to do this three times to change the election result). There’s no possible way that any conceivable form of recount can alter that. Taking one thing with another, I’m pretty sure it is Team Clinton people ultimately behind Stein’s recall effort…but as Obama’s former communications director put it, they’d have been wiser to put the money into the Louisiana Senate runoff. The good news in all this: our opponents are monumentally stupid. Trump might be in for a very easy time, after all.
And for all the talk about Russians hacking the vote to give it to Trump, it is Russians who are pushing the recount issue in social media.
There is a gutsy prediction out there of what it’ll look like after the recount is completed.
The European Union has halted talks on making Turkey a member. Good to point out right now that Turkey is a NATO ally…which means if Russia were to attack Turkey, we’d be committed to going to war against Russia; you know, sending our sons and daughters to die in the defense of Turkey’s tyrannical regime. Please explain to me, again, just why we have to retain NATO…
The fires in Israel are quite terrible – and perhaps there is a terrorism angle?
SJW business owner denounces Trump supporters – sister of SJW decides to cut into SJW’s business.
Some people are saying that Trump’s business interests amount to an emolument from foreign princes and potentates, in violation of Constitutional provision. Some people need to get a life. Suppose Trump divested himself of all his properties and holdings…ok, so now he’s got $10 billion in cash – what’s he supposed to do with it? Stuff it under his mattress? No, he’d have to put it somewhere…and anywhere he puts it might (and probably will) have some sort of foreign connection. Demanding Trump divest is to set up an impossible situation – which is probably why some people are bringing it up.
Should Trump deny access to MSMers who were in Clinton’s pocket? I say, “yes”. Why in heck would you want to give access to people who are doing to deliberately lie about you? Who are nothing more than stenographers for the DNC? Deny them access – give access to new, upcoming reporters who will know their access depends on reporting honestly.
Castro is dead.
About time. Now I can rest in peace — Ted Kennedy, Yasser Arafat and Fidel Castro are all room temperature.
And, man, are our Progressives taking it hard…oh, some of them will put in a “in spite of” before going on to laud Castro for Free Health Care, but most are just defending the guy like he was a good man.
Now, to be sure, I did the Catholic thing – first I heard of his death, I said a prayer for the repose of his soul. I do hope that just before the end, he repented of his crimes…but the bottom line is that he had a lot of crimes to repent of. In fact, we can’t say one good thing about the man – even the alleged improvement in literacy and health care is undetermined because without a free press and political opposition in Cuba, there’s no way to know what is really going on there…and we know for a fact that socialist dictatorships, once overthrown, reveal horrible living conditions for the people, and that is outside the relentless oppression people are subjected to.
Castro was always a hero of the Left, him and his murderous assassin thug Che Guevara. To this day you see people wearing Che T-shirts. They might as well be wearing Ted Bundy T-shirts, or celebrating the life of Jeffrey Daumer. Che tortured and killed with no regard for politics, he was a hired thug, and he just happened to be working for Fidel when the Left decided Fidel was a great guy.
All we have to do is look at the roster of Leftist heroes to get a really good idea of what the Left is like. Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Margaret Sanger, Robert Byrd, Michael Brown, Treyvon Martin, etc. What a lineup!
Compare that to our list: The men and women who created this country, Lincoln, Reagan, Mother Theresa, Chris Kyle and the men and women who put their lives on the line for this country, etc. It’s quite a contrast.
Probably a good thing we didn’t elect Jill Stein.
Have you noticed that none of the Castro fan club ever acknowledge the fact that people were willing to risk death to escape his “paradise” and that people were shot for trying? I’ve always been intrigued by the Left’s passion for countries which kill people who are desperate to leave, and have so much hatred for the country they will die trying to reach.
To a complete Progressive, those who fled Castro’s prison were defectives on the Wrong Side of History and were doomed to die anyways…they really do believe that what Castro did was good. Even if you point out to them that it appears the Castro estate will come in at around a billion dollars, they won’t take it amiss. It is right, in their view, that the special people who understand get a bit (or a lot) extra. They need that so they can concentrate their efforts on saving us from ourselves. Most Progressives would have no problem living rich in Manhattan while the rest of us are lining up for our monthly potato rations.
That does bring up memories of the photos of people in Moscow lined up around the block to get whatever happened to be for sale—a single roll of toilet paper, a couple of eggs, maybe a few ounces of meat—-and watching the convoy of limousines passing by, taking the elites to their dachas for the weekend.
There is a very good article by a Cuban-American in today’s Daily Signal.
It ends with this very apt comment: What world leaders say about the departed tyrant will reveal whether they have an inner moral compass or not.
It really irritates me – you realize, when you think about it, that Jill Stein tweeting out her heartfelt condolences for Castro is a person who would have us all arrested and/or shot, if she could. This image of the “clean government, democratic Progressive” politician falls entirely flat the moment you realize that she admires what Castro has done…everyone knows that Castro had his opponents jailed and killed…everyone. There isn’t a person with an IQ above room temperature who doesn’t realize that Castro’s regime is only maintained in power by force…and, so, anyone who in any manner has a kind word to say about Castro is someone who likes what Castro has done…all of it. They might harp upon the bogus Free Health Care, but they’ve also simply must, in the back of their minds, desire the ability to incarcerate anyone who dissents. It gets the blood boiling and it re-affirms the desire to see these Progressives – tyrants just waiting for their chance – entirely driven from power.
Geraldo says that conservatives “mocking nuanced views of Castro” make him gag.
“nuanced views” does sound a lot better than “adulation of a vicious dictator” doesn’t it? But Geraldo, we’ve spent 65 years making fun of “nuanced views” of brutal dictators. Remember the defense of Mussolini—“at least he made the trains run on time”. Of Hitler: “Well, he did love dogs.” Saddan Hussein: “At least the country had a stable government.”
Poor Geraldo, still a legend in his own mind and still a joke.
The only thing he ever said that I liked was when he was the first one sent home this season on Dancing With the Stars and he said if he had not been bounced he would have asked for a recount. But ten seconds of self awareness doesn’t make up for decades of pompous blather.
The alt-right is not an example of white supremacy marching toward the mainstream; this has always been the case. It is an example how white supremacy went from an unarguable fact of American culture to a debatable and offensive reality.
Marching towards the main stream?? How completely irresponsible is that statement? Spook posted the numbers for us a little while back and IIRC, the alt right was approximately 3/10 of 1% of the population – not exactly a “march towards the mainstream”. The NYT evidently has learned nothing from the recent election and would be better served looking in the mirror rather than finding fringe societal elements to blame. Conservatives completely dismiss this line of thinking but unfortunately in liberal circles including the NYT editorial pages, race and ethnicity continue to be paramount to social structure and policy and we will never “progress” as long as this attitude persists.
Additionally, at a time when the “alt left” is actually growing in numbers and influence and exacting destruction and death on the streets of our cities along with being invited to lunch with the POTUS, I would think that that story needs to be written somewhere if at the very least to provide some balance and objectivity to the alt right hysteria. But alas, only white people can be racists and only their actions can be considered a threat to our union. That is at least the obvious opinion of the elite intellectuals at the NYT. Everyone needs to read this article.
Funniest line in the whole article:
I got a kick out of this line as well:
Ironically, it’s the Left who is making sure that the white race is not submerged.
I just read a book, “The 15:17 To Paris”, about the three young Americans who took down an armed terrorist on a crowded train on its way to Paris. The three young men were invited to the White House, and in the book, which had observations presented as seen through the eyes of different people, the young black man in the group noticed Obama’s homage to MLK—“A bust of Martin Luther King Jr. on the side table. Books about Martin Luther King Jr. on the shelf, which Anthony assumed came with the Obama presidency.” (Yes, the whole badly written book is littered with sentence fragments like this. Blame the “educational” system and move on,)
A black man is president of the United States, and on the international stage represents the whole country. When I watch TV, I see ads and shows in which black people and white people interact with little evident attention paid to race. Certainly in the corporate offices a decision is made to show a black family buying a car to make that car appeal to black people, but there doesn’t seem to be a concern that this will offend any other race. We see racially mixed people, racially mixed friendships, racially mixed marriages, all the time, and it doesn’t seem to make any difference, To me, that corporate decision is very significant, because to an entity which has profit as its prime concern an acknowledgment that profit won’t be affected by using actors of various races, in all sorts of relationships, is a statement that the country is pretty much color blind and race doesn’t really matter that much any more.
There may still be some people who are offended when a black football player on Dancing With the Stars is matched with a blond white girl, and they dance together in dances that require a lot of physical contact and show a deep and intimate friendship developing over the span of the season, but I think few of these are white people. There is no support for white racism. It is socially unacceptable, it is isolated to small enclaves, and most white people find it distasteful. It is considered low-class. It has no legitimacy.
People don’t even blink when a black person is identified as a successful business person, or a Senator or a governor, even in a Southern state. When we see a family at the mall with black children and white children, we don’t look twice or even think anything of it. A mixed-race couple walking down the street holding hands doesn’t turn heads. When a TV show or movie features powerful black people interacting with equality and assurance with white people, it seems perfectly natural. When my neighbor adopted an orphan from Somalia, we responded to her sweetness, her shyness, her beauty. Her color was insignificant.
One would think that the dream of Martin Luther King Jr. has been realized, or nearly so.
Sadly, that dream is now held, respected and aspired to not by most black people, but by whites. Black people are more and more focused on skin color, above all else, and with the approval and even assistance of this president and his administration the entire King dream of people being judged solely by their character (and one might extrapolate by their actions) is ignored if not derided.
Which leads me to a really big concern of mine, which is the erosion of the very nature of the nation the Founders created. We are becoming a nation of different laws, and different rules, for different classes of people. If you are here illegally and you run a red light and cause an accident, you probably won’t get a ticket, because there is no way to hold you accountable for your actions. I, a white woman who is a citizen, would be ticketed and given a court date, if not arrested, depending on the seriousness of the accident. We have people demanding that Hillary Clinton be given a pass for her crimes and misdemeanors, sending the message that the rich and powerful are not held to the same standard as the rest of the nation. We have people prosecuted because of their political positions (think of Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay) and being punished for things that were not even crimes, while others in the party in power violate the law with impunity, knowing they are protected. A TV show will be about a man arrested, tried and convicted for trying to hire someone to kill his wife, while a black organization openly offers money to someone to kill George Zimmerman and this is ignored by law enforcement.
The list is nearly endless, as it grows every day.
Now think of what the response would be if a white Democrat said the party should be reserved for white people. In the last 50 years or so, I don’t think there is any organization, much less a national political party which has been the party of our president over and over again, which could have called for excluding anyone from positions of authority or even membership based on race, if the demand was made by white people demanding white supremacy,without instantaneous outrage and calls for penalties for making the suggestion. But this demand made by black people does not arouse the same outrage, at least not to Liberals.
But we have different rules, and sadly even different laws, for black people in this country. And to have a supporter and even instigator of this regression to race-based hatred and violence posturing as a believer in the message of Dr. King is the height of hypocrisy.
Spook, did I miss something? (Very possible.) When you say “… it’s the Left who is making sure that the white race is not submerged…” it seems that you might mean “.. it’s the Left who is making sure that the white race is submerged…” based on its desire to become subservient to black dominance. Feel free to straighten me out on this.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. As the article notes, Leftist abortion policies are aborting the black race at such a rate that, were it not for abortion, blacks would account for about 17% of the population instead of 12.3%. Just from 2000 to 2010 blacks as a percentage of the U.S. population dropped from 14.8% to 12.3%. Millions of black babies have literally been tossed in the trash. Leftist policies have also resulted in millions of blacks, particularly young blacks, being ousted from the workforce, many of whom are instead incarcerated. The black family as a cultural unit has all but been destroyed. All this has been done by white leftist elitists who publicly claim to have blacks’ best interests at heart. I’ve always said that Global Warming/Climate Change is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind, but what the Left has done to blacks, particularly in this country, while simultaneously conning them into voting lockstep for Democrats, has to be right up there as well.
It is just terrible what we have done – to the African-American community and so many others; abortion is the worst of it, but there are so many other pathologies that our Progressives have imposed.
Thanks, Spook. Now I see where you are coming from. My perception was that so many white Liberals, wallowing in White Guilt and their strange concepts of “fairness” and so on, are willing if not eager to become, as I said, subservient to the Black Cause. Not to have equality, but to turn over institutions such as the Democrat Party to black domination.
I do agree that Liberal policies have contributed to the slaughter of millions of black babies and the destruction of the black family, resulting in a population that is increasingly impotent, dependent and without its own resources.
Cluster, to me the core of the NYT piece is this total restatement of reality, upon which the entire article seems to be based:
Part of the problem is a lack of historical awareness. When white supremacist organizations crop up in tellings of American history, they appear and recede from the story quickly, a footnote about racism to be overlooked, not a central component of the American story.
What the author is either ignoring or simply lying about is the fact that when these organizations did “…crop up in tellings of American history…” they “….appear(ed) and recede(d) from the story quickly..” for the simple reason that they represented only a fringe element of the nation, and had no serious or significant relationship to the attitudes of the nation as a whole. His entire premise is based on his opinion that the reason these blips on the American history screen were fleeting is not because they didn’t really play much of a role in the American story but because of some malignant desire to cover them up to hide their true meaning.
In other words, the entire concept is dependent on one person’s biased interpretation of events in our history.
Remember the fad of the “Baby On Board” stickers on car windows? Most of us saw them as signals to first responders in case of an accident, to look for a baby in the wreckage, and/or a reminder to other drivers that the car contained a fragile human being. But I read a complaint about these signs claiming that their true intent was to gloat over the ability to reproduce, to diminish and ridicule those who did not or could not have children, that it was a sign of spite and malice and a desire to make other people feel bad.
When I see someone like the author of this article claiming that the true reason these racist organizations got so little attention in the overall history of the nation is not because they deserved so little attention but because of a massive conspiracy to hide them, cover them up, to disguise their true role in the identity of the nation, I am reminded of the ability and need of some people to spin the most most innocuous and innocent things into something malignant and even part of a conspiracy of evil. To me, his conclusion says nothing about the psyche of America, regarding race, but volumes about his personal delusions and desperate need to validate them through his highly personal interpretations of history.
He develops his theme: Hence, the alt-right appears novel only if we ignore the continuum of “intellectual” white supremacy from which it emerged: scientific racism in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the national Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s, and the Citizens Councils of the 1950s and ’60s.
What makes this so bizarre is that the very things he decries as the seeds of the invented-by-the-Left “alt-right” alleged movement were constructs of the Left. The “scientific racism of the 19th and early 20th centuries” were epitomized by Leftist idol Darwin and continued by Leftist idol Margaret Sanger, and let’s do stop for a moment to consider that “the 19th and early 20th centuries” were the 1800s and early 1900s—in other words, from 100 to 200 years ago. The KKK was a Democrat invention, supported by Democrats well into the end of the 20th century, as shown by the constant reelection of former KKK official Robert Byrd. ( Notice that the same people who demand the removal of the Stars and Bars and the renaming of buildings named after allegedly racist historical figures never demand the renaming of any of the monuments to Byrd, a fully documented official contemporary racist.)
The entire article is pure toxic fantasy created to smear the very political arm that has fought racism for its entire history, and evidently ignorant of the origin of the abbreviation “alt”. By its very name this alleged new movement is an alternative to the Right wing. Duh. Not a version of it, not a branch of it, but an alternative TO it.
In other words, the entire concept is dependent on one person’s biased interpretation of events in our history.
And the last 8 years have been dependent on the Democrats and the medias biased interpretation of issues, history, etc.. Thankfully it caught up with them.
Sometimes it is a biased misinterpretation, sometimes it is an out-and-out blatant lie wholly invented to misrepresent history to advance an agenda.
The progressive hysteria over the alt right is similar to the hysteria over global warming, just another manufactured crisis designed to advance their agenda. Well there is not so good news on that front:
Day’s study shows current Antarctic sea ice “is just 14 per cent smaller than at the highest point of the 1900s and 12 per cent bigger than than the lowest point.” Why is that significant? It means Antarctic sea ice has fluctuated throughout the 20th Century due to natural climatic shifts, and not man-made warming.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/25/antarctic-sea-ice-extent-similar-to-what-it-was-100-years-ago/#ixzz4R8ICW2S4
I wonder if those who manufacture these bogus crises realize that when they are revealed to be hollow fantasies, which can only happen under a strong conservative administration and better dissemination of facts, they will be deprived of the only thing that keeps them going. On top of that, some of those who have bought into the hysteria might even realize it was ginned up specifically to manipulate them.
Just look at the shrill “crises” that keep the Left afloat right now:
Black Lives Matter/Police Brutality
Trump and his FEMA camps, etc.
When the nation cruises into economic prosperity, the earth fails to go into a complete meltdown and Bakersfield doesn’t have oceanfront property, we manage to point out that objections to Trump’s policies are not racist so why are they convinced that objections to Obama’s were, it becomes more and more clear that the violence so many abhor is always coming from the Left, and no one is rounded up and put behind barbed wire, I think there will be a shift away from it and its constant screeching.
I still think we need a communications leader, one who can put together ideas and mix them with good natured humor. I really miss Tony Snow. Dennis Miller is brilliant but way way WAY over the heads of most Libs and a lot of the rest of us. I’m thinking the choice of Press Secretary might be one of the most significant, given Donald’s lapses into incoherence and the ease with which he is so easily distracted away from the original path of his statements, and it would be fun to see Miller befuddling the press corps.
Trump loves his Tweets and has commented on the need for understanding and using social media. Maybe he will appoint a Social Media secretary who can and will handle and manage this means of communicating. We sure need someone.
Well it looks as though the progressives are going all the way in on climate change and are staking out this issue as one of their best issues to rally support and oppose Trump. I have read several articles this morning from leading leftists that the climate and our “way of life” is in severe danger under a Trump presidency. In some of the other articles I have read, the authors claim among other things that hurricanes now are “extreme weather events” and that NY and FL will soon be evacuating coastlines due to rising sea levels, but the following is my favorite:
Trump has also promised to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement, an international accord aimed at slashing greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to limit global warming to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels.
So do progressives actually believe that man can control the mean temperature of the earth?? Man has a hard time predicting if rain is in the 10 day forecast, yet somehow we have the knowledge to stop rising temperatures? If in fact that is even real. Are they aware of the decade old false alarms that Al Gore has made a fortune on? This entire movement is insane.
Cluster, what’s really humorous about the whole climate change issue is that what the Left wants to achieve by threat of force and financial penalty is actually happening as a result of natural market forces.
(emphasis – mine)
I do take issue with referring to a trace gas that is essential for human life as a “key air pollutant,” but this trend should certainly please those on the Left, although I know it won’t.
Honestly if we wanted to increase the sea ice extent in the Arctic and thus cool the oceans down longer in spring and summer we could do it pretty cheap.
Permanent sea ice could be 6-7 ft thick. We have pumps that can pump 10,000 cubic feet of water per second. If you had dozens of these things working during winter in the Arctic you could increase the permanent sea ice area dramatically. Of course you would cool the oceans and cause global cooling but in a few short years…..
Isn’t it odd that the Left wants a recount in Wisconsin, which Trump won by over 27,000 votes but not in New Hampshire, which Hillary won by only 2,700 votes?//sarc
For years the Left has ridiculed Conservatives claims that one of the main reasons for voter ID laws is to prevent voter fraud. Many of our trolls have claimed that there’s zero evidence that significant voter fraud exists anywhere in the country. Now, in the ultimate irony, it is the Left that claims massive voter fraud exists, but only in 3 states that Hillary lost by small margins. I actually wouldn’t bet against Democrats finding enough votes to overturn the election. I don’t think the Clinton people would glom onto this effort if they didn’t think they might gain by it. It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.
Well, they have about three weeks to do it, as my understanding is that the vote of the Electoral College is binding. If the claim is made that the Electors are not bound to state votes, then if the Electors do elect Trump before a recount is in, or possibly even in spite of it, he is the president.
What the poor frantic Left is doing is trying to play both sides, much as they did in their SCOTUS argument about the mandate to have insurance. It’s a tax, except it’s not, you guys take your pick. Here they are arguing that the Electors are not bound to their state votes, but can vote for anyone they want, while running the risk that the Electors might vote for Trump even in states where the vote tally has been altered to show that he didn’t win that state.
This after Hillary stated that refusing to accept the election results would be horribly, oh so horribly, damaging to the democratic process. That was, of course, before she lost and then decided to work to overturn the election results.
I stayed up late last night to watch the cliffhanger Broncos game, and I am sure it generated a lot of hope in Liberal hearts, as they looked at a very controversial call in the last few seconds that gave KC a touchdown and then saw the ball bounce off the goal post to—-just barely—tumble onto the right side to give them the win in the last second or two of overtime to give them the game. They are trying to pull off the same kinds of last-minute interpretation of facts and wild chances to give them what they couldn’t earn on their own.
There could be something going on behind the scenes that we aren’t privy to. Either that or they just haven’t thought through the ramifications of stealing the election in such a blatant way. Given that Leftists almost always look at things through a static lens, I’d bet on the latter.
From the YCMTSU file, On his show today, Rush was reading various statements from foreign leaders, diplomats, etc,, one of which (don’t remember who) said Castro’s legacy will be that he fought for better conditions for the poor. This really is a glimpse into the Leftist thought process. That ANYONE could make such a statement with a straight face speaks volumes about our adversaries.
Oh, Spook, you clearly do not grasp the need for NUANCE in describing tyrants.
I clearly DO NOT.