Progressive 'Thought-Blockers': Racism--How the Left amasses and consolidates political power

(Hat tip: KimR) - Rather than being a racial healer, Barack Obama has presided over and at times stoked more racial divisiveness than we have seen in a long while. Just in the last year we’ve had Black Lives Matter marches and verbal assaults of Democratic candidates, the Oscar protests over the absence of nominated black actors, Ivy League university students marching over “microagressions” no one else can see, and the still simmering protests and agitation over police shootings of black men. Driving it all is our duplicitous and malignant national racial discourse. Read more at Frontpage Magazine Read More......

The Left is the Real Terror Threat

...The greatest obstacle to defeating Islamic terrorism is still the left. --The left helped create Islamic terrorism; its immigration policies import terrorism while its civil rights arm obstructs efforts to prevent it and its anti-war rallies attack any effort to fight it. In America, in Europe and in Israel, and around the world, to get at Islamic terrorists, you have to go through the left.

Read more at Frontpage Magazine
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Why Does the Left Continue to Insist that Islamic Terrorism Has Nothing to Do with Islam?

(Snip) If you Google "Christian terrorism," you're probably a jackass to begin with. But if you do -- bidden not by your own drive to jackassery but by the natural curiosity inspired by this "news"letter -- you'll find lots of left-wing trollery about how the worst terrorist attacks on American soil have been committed by Christians.

Read more at National Review
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Left-Right Divide on Gun Control:The Left asks,“Does it feel good?” The Right asks,“Does it do good?

Assuming that there are good and bad people on both the right and the left and that everyone is horrified by mass shootings, how is one to explain the great divide between the Right and the Left on the gun issue as it relates to mass murders, such as the one recently committed at Umpqua Community College? Why does the Left focus on more gun-control laws, and why doesn’t the Right? One reason the Right doesn’t focus on gun-control laws is quintessentially American. Many Americans believe that it is their right — and even their duty — to own guns for self-protection. Unique among major democratic and industrialized nations, Americans have traditionally believed in relying on the state as little as possible.

Read more at National Review
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

The New Left: Envy, Resentment and Hate

Bernie Sanders is angry. Who is he angry at? Rich people. Why rich people? That’s not clear.
At Liberty University, Sanders complained about a small number of people who have “huge yachts, and jet planes and tens of billions” while others “are struggling to feed their families.” In Madison Wisconsin, Sanders called for a “political revolution against greed.” --So what’s the connection between people who have “tens of billions” and people who are “struggling to feed their families”? For the most part it’s a positive one.

Read more at Townhall.com
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Knocking The Immoral Left Off Its High Horse

Just what is it about leftists and their fellow liberal travellers that compels them to proselytize for Socialism? In their holier-than-thou condescending style, leftists and liberals love to dictate to people about what is and isn’t moral as if their ideology is the perfect truth which all should follow. Their default position is Socialist and liberal beliefs are more enlightened and therefore, they are automatically morally superior to everyone else. Socialists and Liberals will be shocked and offended should anyone dare to question their perfect truth and will become outraged, angry and even violent should dissenters refuse to be brow-beaten into believing Socialist dogma.

Read more at Flopping Aces
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

The Differences Between Left and Right: Part I

Dennis Prager - Most Americans hold either liberal or conservative positions on most matters. In many instances, however, they would be hard pressed to explain their position or the position they oppose. --But if you can’t explain both sides, how do you know you’re right? At the very least, you need to understand both the liberal and conservative positions in order to effectively understand your own. --I grew up in a liberal world — New York, Jewish and Ivy League graduate school. I was an 8-year-old when President Dwight Eisenhower ran for re-election against the Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson. I knew nothing about politics and had little interest in the subject. But I well recall knowing — knowing, not merely believing — that Democrats were “for the little guy” and Republicans were “for the rich guys.”

Read more at Frontpagemag.com
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

Differences Between Left and Right: Part II

Dennis Prager - The difference between Right and Left addressed in this column concerns a fundamentally different method that each utilizes in order to improve society. --Conservatives believe that the way to a better world is almost always through moral improvement of the individual — by each person doing battle with his own moral defects. It is true that in particularly violent and evil societies such as fascist, communist and Islamist tyrannies the individual must be preoccupied with battling outside forces. Almost everywhere else, however, and certainly in a free and decent country such as America, the greatest battle of the individual must be with inner forces — that is, with his or her flawed character and moral defects. (See Left-Right Difference Part 1 concerning their differing perceptions of human nature.)

Read more at Patriot Post
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

'Does It Do Good?' vs. 'Does It Feel Good?' Left-Right Differences: Part III

Dennis Prager - A fundamental difference between the left and right concerns how each assesses public policies. The right asks, "Does it do good?" The left asks a different question. --One example is the minimum wage. In 1987, The New York Times editorialized against any minimum wage. The title of the editorial said it all -- "The Right Minimum Wage: $0.00."

Read more at Townhall.com
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

The Left Rejects Painful Truths: Left-Right Differences, Part IV

Dennis Prager - Here's a difference between Left and Right that is rarely noted despite the fact that it is at least as important as any other and even explains many of the other differences. --At the core of left-wing thought is a rejection of painful realities, the rejection of what the French call les faits de la vie: the facts of life. Conservatives, on the other hand, are all too aware of these painful realities of life and base many of their positions on them.

Read more at Townhall.com
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

How Liberals Ruined College

College should be a place of new ideas and challenging views. Instead, liberals have made it a place of fear and intimidation. --The root of nearly every free-speech infringement on campuses across the country is that someone—almost always a liberal—has been offended or has sniffed out a potential offense in the making. Then, the silencing campaign begins. The offender must be punished, not just for justice’s sake, but also to send the message to anyone else on campus that should he or she stray off the leftist script, they too might find themselves investigated, harassed, ostracized, or even expelled. --If the illiberal left can preemptively silence opposing speakers or opposing groups— such as getting a speech or event canceled, or denying campus recognition for a group—even better.

read more at the Daily Beast Read More......

The Left’s Love Affair With the 4-letter N Word

“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.” - Aldous Huxley

I like quotes.  Quotes are wisdom for those with short attention spans.  They are disregarded by many as irrelevant platitudes or obsolete; however, they are knowledge, often hard-earned and considered by their authors to be important enough to be passed on.  I’ve chosen the above quote for today, not only because it is always relevant, but because we bear witness to a time where the political left of this country is trying to realize Aldous’ dystopic “Brave New World” (which I’m reasonably sure he meant as a warning, not a blueprint).

To this end, the left has slandered any group that has opposed their fundamental (Socialist) transformation of America, and they love one name more than any other: Nazi (the 4-letter N word).  But how accurate is this?  What traits do the political left and right really share with this infamous party of villains?

Read more at Gun News
(Hat tip: KimR) Read More......

The Left Right Paradigm is Over: Its You vs. Corporations

Interesting...
THE BIG PICTURE, 9/27/2010 (a year ago) by Barry Ritholtz - Every generation or so, a major secular shift takes place that shakes up the existing paradigm. It happens in industry, finance, literature, sports, manufacturing, technology, entertainment, travel, communication, etc. ✧ I would like to discuss the paradigm shift that is occurring in politics.

The new dynamic... Read more at The Big Picture. Read More......

The evidence for Neocommunism

American Thinker, October 9, 2007 - James Lewis wrote,

There is a compelling factual case to be made that the contemporary radical Left can properly be called "Neocommunist." The Hard Left is grounded in Marxist vision of creating a "new man" under a system led by a vanguard that knows best what the rest of society needs. And Neocommies behave in patterns with startling parallels to Old Communist tactics.

The Neocommies are not members of a Communist Party, and are part more of a movement than a conspiracy. They are utterly different from traditional liberalism in America and Europe. Traditional liberals were democratic -- people like Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Harry Truman. They fought passionately against the Totalitarian Left, as Ronald Reagan did when he was president of the Screen Actors Guild. Reagan started as a democratic liberal, and became the most famous conservative of the 20th century. As he said so often, he didn't leave the Democratic Party -- it left him.

Over time, the Democrats became more totalitarian in spirit and practice after the first wave of the New Left started its takeover of the Party in the 1970s and 80s. Half a century ago... (Continued)

Read More......

Fred Thompson defends Rush Limbaugh

Fred '08, Announcements, October 3, 2007

"Congressional Democrats are trying to divert attention from insulting our military leader in Iraq and pandering to the loony left by attacking Rush Limbaugh. He is one of the strongest supporters of our troops, yet Democrats claim he is not being strong enough. I wonder who General Petraeus and his troops think is most supportive?"

Read More......

Excerpt: How The Left Was Won

The following is an excerpt from the opening pages of Chapter One of How The Left Was Won: An In-Depth Analysis of the Tools and Methodologies Used by Liberals to Undermine Society and Disrupt the Social Order. [This seemed overly harsh and I was reluctant to put it up until the Oregon Legislature, controlled by liberals, managed to punish 60% of Oregon voters during the week of the 16th with legislation that, if not unconstitutional, appears tyrannical.]

Let’s face it, when you get right down to it, all of liberalism is fueled by a singular strategy—a strategy which has been continually perfected and relentlessly executed over the past forty years. That strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness.

Everything liberal politicians do is based on this simple principle. Tell the people that are given to hating the most, that they are the ones who are hated. Tell the people who expect the most, that they deserve more. Tell blacks to hate whites. Tell women to hate men. Tell the lazy to hate the motivated. Tell the poor that only conservatives are rich, and then be sure to tell them to hate them for it.

Class warfare, race baiting, name calling and man-hating—all with a singular goal: to get themselves in power by promoting and exploiting divisiveness. Of course, once this divisiveness turns into frenzy, these same people suddenly act as if they actually want to solve a problem that didn’t even exist before they did everything they possibly could to create it.

To liberals, every issue, every situation is an opportunity to divide. History, religion, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the death of a soldier, a political debate, the hurricane which devastated New Orleans. Every tragedy exploited to divide. Every victory belittled to divide. Every incident, every word, every distorted statistic, every holiday—you name it, they will find some way to divide it.

Unfortunately, it’s not just the politicians who promote and exploit divisiveness; it is the people as well. Malcontents, jealous of anyone with any sort of success, come up with any way they can to attack those who are more successful then they are. Someone is rich only because they stole something from them. Certain groups are more successful only because they took advantage of them. Work has nothing to do with it. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Planning ahead has nothing to do with it. Even luck has nothing to do with it.

And what do these kinds of people view as the solution to this imaginary injustice? Why special rights, privileges and opportunities for themselves, of course. Level the playing field. Get something for nothing. Take from the rich, the white, the male dominated, homophobic society that has already given them everything. Take what they have, what they built, what they earned—whether it be money, property, liberty or opportunity—and find some way, some justification, some cause or some guise to redistribute it to the people who have done nothing to earn it. To people who refuse to compete on merit. To people who insist on taking more out of society than what they put in to it. To people who don’t give a damn that their inclusion comes only at the expense of someone else’s exclusion. The strategy is simple, really—promote divisiveness and then exploit it for your own benefit.

Liberals should thank God every day for differences between people because without them, liberalism would be dead in the water. Without them, the country might have some stability. Without them, it might have a chance to survive. Without them, the problems between those who want and those who have might actually be manageable in some meaningful or productive way. But differences have given liberals the perfect opportunity to stop any rational discussion dead in its tracks. Differences have led to polarization. Differences have led to countries within a country. Differences have led to the dreaded xist-ism-monger-phobia. Differences have allowed liberals to add any of these four sounds to the end of any word they choose, virtually guaranteeing that they can get away with anything they want.

Worse yet, liberals actually have the nerve to turn around and endlessly accuse conservatives of divisiveness. To them, conservatives— who believe everyone should be held to the same standards—are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives—who believe everyone should have the same rights regardless of the guises used to justify different ones for different people—are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives—who sacrifice their time, money, careers and often their lives to defend the true meaning of freedom and liberty—are somehow divisive.

But the reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who are trying to make some contribution to our society. The reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who expect others to at least try to do the same. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something out of a society far beyond what they are willing to put back in. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something for nothing…

Read More......

How the Left Intimidates the Media

AIM Special Report March 19, 2007, By Cliff Kincaid -- Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was recently paid $20,000 by Virginia Tech to tell the students that there aren't two sides to the global warming debate and that the problem with the media today is that we don't have a fairness doctrine. Those positions, which sound contradictory, betray the modern liberal agenda. They want to bring back the fairness doctrine not to ensure true fairness and balance in journalism but to intimidate and censor those expressing a view contrary to their own. Continued at AIM...

Read More......