Connect with us

Media

Sean Hannity responds incoherently to Roy Moore’s open letter

Published

on

Fox News host Sean Hannity called on Roy Moore to respond to the sexual misconduct allegations that have dominated the news for a week. Moore sent an open letter, which Hannity read on the air Wednesday night. He then responded and essentially said nothing.

It’s not that he didn’t speak words. He spoke many. It’s that Hannity sounded borderline incoherent. The transcript of his response reads like a President Trump off-the-cuff statement.

“The people of Alabama, they need to know the truth, and they’ve got to have all the facts that they need,” he said. “And that means that the Alabama voters can make an educated, informed, inclusive decision for their state when they go to the polls.”

If you just read through it casually or hear it passively, it might sound somewhat normal. Read it more carefully and it’s really not saying much at all. What is an “inclusive” decision?

It got worse:

“And if that means whatever it means to get to the truth, if it means more time, I believe the governor according to Greg Jarrett has the ability to make that decision. The Alabama people deserve that. Greg Jarrett said the governor can delay the race if need be. Now, the people of Alabama deserve to have a fair choice, especially in light of the new allegations tonight.”

Look, I’m not trying to pick on Hannity. This is a tough situation considering he’s backed Moore. But he failed to respond to the substance of Moore’s letter. He made the demand for an open letter, then didn’t discuss it. Instead, he gave a passionate plea for… fairness? Delaying the election? Inclusive decision-making?

Hannity drew a huge audience who wanted to hear him respond to Moore’s letter. Instead, he applied doublespeak to say as little as possible. It was as if this was his exit plan to distance himself from Moore in case more heat comes down, which will likely happen whether the allegations are true or not.

0

Democrats

The next demand after ‘universal’ background checks: Governmental permission to defend yourself

Published

on

By

Universal Background Checks Video

As predicted, the left is now moving on to new demands for licensing for unalienable human rights.

FreedomToons debunks the next stage in the authoritarian socialist left’s obsession with gun confiscation, the requirement for governmental permission to possess an unalienable human right. The left is never satisfied with just one incremental imposition on our freedom. They see their campaign to destroy liberty as a multi-step process.

‘Universal’ background checks place the government in control of private property, something the founding fathers would find to be abhorrent. Having to obtain governmental permission to buy, sell or transfer private property means the government is asserting control over that property, to record who has that property, tax it when they see fit or even deny said transfers. This is why the national socialist left obsesses over this step towards gun confiscation.

Registration/licensing is the next step on this journey, formally placing the government in control of an unalienable human right.

‘Universal’ background checks change the essential relationship of government having the consent of the people, to that of the people needing to obtain the consent of the government in exercising their unalienable human rights. Make no mistake, these kinds of tyrannical moves only begin with the right of self-preservation. Soon enough, they morph into requirements for other freedoms.

Registration is confiscation.

Placing the government in control of an unalienable human right means that permission can be withdrawn at any moment. We have already proven that registration/licensing is confiscation with the only distinction being were the guns are stored until they are destroyed.

Licensing/registration schemes for basic civil rights means that the government can simply revoke it’s permission on a whim and demand that the people surrender their guns as has happened down through history. Our second video will make that point clear.

While they will promise that each new restriction on freedom will miraculously solve the problem, these are but mere steps to their ultimate goal of gun confiscation. As we already predicted, the demand for ‘universal’ background checks will quickly morph into demands for self-defense licensing. A requirement that everyone obtain permission from the government in order to exercise the basic human right of self-preservation. Never mind that setting up the government to be in control of it’s own constraints makes no sense.

Does the left really want to place the government in control of our civil liberties?

We would have riots in the newsrooms of the New York Times if freedom of the press depended upon governmental permission. The precepts of the Bill of Rights are constraints on the government, they don’t exist if they depend upon it’s permission. The right to privacy or due process, won’t exist if the powers that be control their implementation. But somehow the authoritarian socialist left doesn’t seem to have a problem with this issue when applied to guns. It’s that special exception that everyone misses in the founding documents that says that these are unalienable human rights, but only if kids aren’t crying on the tele.

Please note that the 2nd amendment only affirms a pre-existing right:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[Emphasis added]

Note that says the people, not militia and that this pre-existing right shall not be infringed. This was meant as a bulwark against tyranny, it doesn’t make any sense to have this control against tyranny in the hands of the government.

Sometimes, it’s just too easy to predict the actions of the authoritarian socialist left.

It was only back in August that we predicted that if the Republicans and President Trump knuckled under to the liberty grabber leftists, that they would be back with new demands for licensing/registration requirements on our inalienable human rights.

In the case of the original video from VOX, published in September, they are getting ahead of themselves with new demands even before their old obsessions were fulfilled. Apparently the left is so obsessed with gun confiscation, they couldn’t wait to make this new demand for the restriction of liberty.

The authoritarian left wants to restrict liberty based on what might happen.

One almost has to admire the chutzpah of the authors of the original production in talking about restricting the liberty of people based on future actions. Part of their ‘logic’ being that a long arduous licensing process would catch or deter someone who is ‘in crisis’ [whatever that means] before they might do something ‘bad’.

Again, it’s easy to predict where this will go from here, since it’s just a minor leap in logic to decide to preclude any future actions with the final solution of gun confiscation.

Registration, Confiscation, Annihilation.

Our second video proves the point that licensing/registration is virtually confiscation. It is a first hand account of what happens when people forget that the common sense human right of self-defense is a restraint on the government.

We also had gun control. The government said that children were playing with guns and we had hunting accidents. People accidentally shooting each other and we had criminals again murderers. The only way that they could track the murderer was by the serial number of the gun so bring us your gun to the police station then we can register the serial number and we can track the criminal.

Not long afterwards they said, no it did not help we could not track all the criminals the best way to have no more crimes and no more people getting hurt. Bring your guns to the police station and they already know who had guns because we registered our guns.

[Emphasis added]

The Bottom-line.

Everyone should be able to see why the national socialist left obsesses over ‘universal’ background checks, a critical step to gun confiscation. The ‘big picture’ on all of this should make it clear why the left is double-dealing on demanding gun confiscation while denying they are demanding gun confiscation.

They need to determine gun ownership with ‘universal’ background checks. This is followed by virtual gun confiscation with licensing/registration schemes. From there it’s just a matter of calling in the guns at the appropriate time, most likely after another mass murder tragedy since these requirements never solve the problem of societal violence.

This is why more people are answering NO or we will not comply to the demands of the left in destroying our liberty. The original VOX video proves than ‘universal’ background checks won’t ever be enough. Virtual gun confiscation with licensing/registration won’t be enough for the liberty grabbers. For the national socialist left, gun confiscation will always be the final solution to the liberty problem.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Media

Progressive anchor Shepard Smith steps down at Fox News

Published

on

Shepard Smith steps down at Fox News

The long-time face of Fox News daytime news reporting is stepping down. Shepard Smith, who has held the 3pm weekday slot at Fox News as their Chief News Anchor and Managing Editor of the network’s breaking news unit, is leaving the company after 23 years.

“Recently I asked the company to allow me to leave FOX News and begin a new chapter,” Smith said. “After requesting that I stay, they graciously obliged. The opportunities afforded this guy from small town Mississippi have been many. It’s been an honor and a privilege to report the news each day to our loyal audience in context and with perspective, without fear or favor. I’ve worked with the most talented, dedicated and focused professionals I know and I’m proud to have anchored their work each day — I will deeply miss them.”

Smith has been heralded by journalists and viewers alike over the years, but has come under scrutiny from conservatives, including the President, who believe his brand of reporting has shifted away from the network’s pro-Republican stance. As a news anchor, this is understandable since he is not supposed to be biased, but clashes with the opinion side of the business in recent months has likely prompted this move.

Fox News president Jay Wallace said in a statement: “Shep is one of the premier newscasters of his generation and his extraordinary body of work is among the finest journalism in the industry. His integrity and outstanding reporting from the field helped put Fox News on the map and there is simply no better breaking news anchor who has the ability to transport a viewer to a place of conflict, tragedy, despair or elation through his masterful delivery.”

Conservatives on Twitter responded immediately:

This isn’t really a great loss for Fox News and gives them the opportunity to bring in someone who isn’t afraid to call out Democrats more. The question now is, will they take advantage of the open time slot or give it to another progressive?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

For the socialist-left, its all about control over liberty

Published

on

By

For the socialist-left its all about control over liberty

The socialist-left in the states and the Chinese Communists have one thing in common, a desire for control.

A new video from Tim Pool details the demise of yet another national socialist media mouthpiece while those of the pro-liberty right are expanding. Of course, it is always good news when the cause of liberty is furthered, but in the video he makes very interesting point. That people are sick of being told what to do. What jokes they can laugh at or the words they can use. For those paying attention to larger issues, that sounds eerily like what the Chinese Communist Party would like when it comes to the ideas of freedom and liberty.

We submit it’s in direct connection to the ongoing issue of the NBA being on the wrong side of liberty. This is a case where the issues of one subject intersect with another, primarily because they are philosophically connected with the overall scheme of things. They are all over on the far-left, with the desire for control side of the rational political spectrum model.

Looking at the underlying strategy of the left.

Sometime it is very instructive to look at the underlying reasons for leftist actions. In the case of their denying their obvious goal of gun confiscation, it’s to keep the debate away from the fact that firearms save far more lives than are lost. In the case of the political spectrum, it’s to avoid the subject of the control desire of the left. They cannot be honest about this basic fact of their collectivist ideologies.

While they prefer to couch their ideological goals in terms of fairness, equality, safety or saving the planet. These all boil down to their being control of everyone’s liberty, property, firearms or energy, forget about the fact that this control never actually resolves these issues. The most important result in all of these ‘crisis’ is that they get to rule over everyone else.

When faced with this dilemma, leftists can either dispense with this control fetish or confuse the issue. Hence, we see them make extraordinary claims that socialist organisations aren’t really socialist or that failed versions of their collectivist ideologies were somehow ‘right-wing’ or something.

Confusing the issue.

Leftists can only do this by objecting to a rational model of the political spectrum. The right side has the general aspects of minimal government and maximum liberty, while the left side has the general aspects of maximum government and minimal liberty. The left would prefer to keep this hidden since it has always placed them in a bad light as authoritarians.

Thus many on the left will insist that a political spectrum model have multiple axis or dimensions to try and confuse the issue and avoid the basic fact of their collectivist ideology being one of control. However, one only needs to look at the results of their socialist national agenda rather their ‘good intentions’ to see that it is axiomatic that they favour maximum government and minimal liberty.

The bottom line.

Circling back to the video we presented, the point is that the ‘cancel culture’ and political correctness and the censorship attempts by the CCP all have the commonality of collectivist control endemic to the left.

While leftists would like to divert attention elsewhere or muddy the waters. The fact is that their ideologies are bent on control as those of the Chinese Communist Party over Hong Kong.

Those on the collectivist-control side of the political spectrum would rather that no one makes that connection. Maybe that’s how they can sleep at night, but the fact is they are on the side of government forces trying to control liberty in Hong Kong and in the states. They pretend to be ‘liberal’, but they are in opposition to liberty.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending