Connect with us

Politics

The Democratic debates just got infinitely more interesting

Published

on

The Democratic debates just got more interesting

At President Trump’s election kickoff rally last night, he revealed his intention to live tweet the first set of Democratic debates next week. Scheduled for next Wednesday and Thursday on NBC, the President’s public display of his observations and musings is sure to cause a stir.

I used to wish that the President would put Twitter down. I no longer really care what or how much he tweets. Somewhere in the process of transitioning from a Never Either voter to a rational human being who supports the President when I agree with him and opposing him when I don’t, his timeline stopped bothering me. I am focused on results and outcomes. I also realize this is one mechanism the President uses to get his message on to legacy media outlets. They actually cover Trump tweets.

So without ever being interviewed, the President’s message gets to the American people on a regular basis. It gets through the way he would like it to be said. To me the obvious goal is to cut through some of the constant negativity you see on CNN and other networks. I am not sure how effective it is, but in the current environment it is one way for him to go head to head with the constantly negative panels and commentators.

In the case of the Democratic debates, I do not think there could be a better use of his Twitter timeline. If he follows through, he has inserted himself on to the stage in a way only he can. If there is one thing the President knows how to do it is troll the media. In this case it is actually a genius move to force his way into a conversation he should be excluded from.  You just know someone at NBC will have to be monitoring his commentary. One has to wonder if his comments will actually make their way into the debate in the form of questions. It will almost certainly be used in post event analysis. He will actually force the media to cover him on the night o a marquee event for the Democrat primary.

The Democratic debates are first chance for the candidates to distinguish them from the very crowded field. Yet you know in the back of their minds they will be wondering if they just earned one of Trump’s caustic nicknames. Or what embarrassing political misstep he may be choosing to point out. Perhaps concerned about what kind of excellent opposition research the GOP has collected on them that the President might choose to share. Maybe even how effective the President might be at calling them out on their hypocrisy, inaction on key issues and positions that don’t align with the majority of Americans.

If I could make a wish, I hope the President is sitting in a recliner, flanked by Mick Mulvaney and Secretary Pompeo and Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAlleenan watching the debates. These fine men armed with reams of data on immigration, foreign policy and the horrific costs of the Democrats pet programs could then dictate the perfect response to be accentuated with the President’s inimitable Trump speak. Debunk that legacy media.

I think I have live tweeted every debate since I joined Twitter. This year I may just sit back and watch the show while the President takes the driver’s seat. And then enjoy listening to the CNN panel whine a convulse while they have to read his real-time responses in their post-debate analysis. The whole idea of watching the debates just got a whole lot more appealing. It also just got a whole lot more entertaining if history is any guide.

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

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

Erica Thomas is every Democrat who’s addicted to playing the race card

Published

on

Erica Thomas is every Democrat whos addicted to playing the race card

There was a time when I assumed hate hoaxes were the result of people seeking personal gain by playing on concepts in the news such as Jussie Smollett’s “MAGA country” claim or Erica Thomas‘s “go back where you came from” story. As Andy Ngo pointed out in his excellent hate-hoax compilation, there are just too many instances when radical progressives are caught either making themselves look like fools or committing actual crimes just to paint the President, Republicans, conservatives, or a combination of the three as bigots.

Now, I’m not so sure it’s all about personal gain. Sure, that definitely has something to do with it as many are seeking sympathy and even reward for achieving the highest status level of radical progressivism – the status of being a victim. But I’m starting to believe it’s an addiction of sorts. It’s not physiological or even necessarily psychological. Instead, it’s like an emotional high, a dopamine rush of sorts, to be able to tell the world, “Look at me, the bigots on the right attacked me! Shower me with your love (before the truth comes out)!”

But it’s not just with hoaxes. There’s a certain knee-jerk reaction seen in many leftists, including the lawmakers who are part of “The Squad,” in which every defense of their words or actions invokes race, sex, religion, or some other component that highlights the lauded intersectionality they possess. For example, if you attack Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in any way about anything, she invokes the phrase “woman of color” in her defense of whatever it was that got attacked.

She’s a woman. She’s of non-Caucasian heritage. Therefore every attack against her latest loony idea must be an attack on a woman of color by default even if the attack was substantive and not racist or sexist in nature. That’s the mindset of too many on the left nowadays. It’s the mindset of Erica Thomas, which is why she scrambled to have a press conference to highlight the racist attack against her. What she didn’t expect is that the attacker would show up at her interview, proclaim that he’s Cuban and a Democrat, and acknowledge that he called her a “lazy b—h.”

He was also crystal clear that he did not say anything racist towards her, including the statement Thomas made that he told her to “go back where you came from.”

But Thomas is not a one-off problem for Democrats. She actually represents a large and growing batch of lawmakers at the state and national level who don’t think twice about lying if it means they can call someone else a bigot. Like I said before, I believe they’re addicted to victimhood which is why they try so hard to manufacture it.

The problem we’re seeing with this isn’t just a Democratic Party that can’t be trusted. They haven’t been able to be trusted since JFK. The bigger problem is there are actual victims of racism whose stories don’t get nearly the attention they deserve. There’s racism from the right and the left. There’s racism by Caucasians and towards Caucasians. There’s bigotry between members of the various aspects of intersectionality; feminists and LGBTQ activists have been clashing on and off for a couple of years now, for example. Sexism is rampant in both parties; when we have Democratic presidential candidates state they will only consider a Vice President who is a woman, they don’t see that this is both sexist and eliminates half the potential nominees for the second-ranking position in our government.

The playing of the race card is so rampant on the left, it’s becoming hard to distinguish between what’s real and what’s just another hate hoax. They like to say “words matter.” I am more in the camp of believing “truth matters.”

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

Democrats play for ‘reasonable’ climate change plan will turn radical soon enough

Published

on

Democrats play for reasonable climate change plan will be more unpopular than it should be

All things being equal, the Democrats’ proposed climate change plan, which calls for net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, isn’t crazy. But things aren’t equal and the plan is going to get panned by both sides of the political aisle for one important reason: Everyone’s perspective on climate change is pushing to the extremes.

On the right, you have full-blown climate change deniers who get more attention than sensible conservatives who question the climate change industry and the pseudo-science behind it. There’s a difference between saying climate change isn’t real and appreciating that whether it’s real or not, it makes sense to move to renewable energy within a reasonable time frame.

On the left, you have the climate catastrophe ideologues who demand an end to fossil fuels yesterday. No more beef. No more air travel. It’s Green New Deal or bust for the radical progressives even though the Green New Deal has very little do with addressing climate change at all.

The “moderate” view is that we should be heading towards two things as a country: Fossil fuel independence and renewable energy technology that is cost-effective. And the 2050 number proposed by Democrats falls within the realm of “reasonable” as long as we assume science will better understand climate change in the future and technology will make renewable energy more efficiently collected and stored than it is today.

And if by around 2050 there are still climate change doubts and/or if renewable energy still isn’t as cost-effective as fossil fuels, we push that date further.

Personally, I am a very big climate change skeptic, but my biggest concern is in how the science is being manipulated for political activism and to push a progressive agenda. I’m not such a skeptic that I wouldn’t look at proper climate science data. I’ve just had a hard time seeing the actual data pointing to the cataclysm that’s allegedly a decade away.

Still, both sides are going to push back against the moderate proposal, and that includes people who are otherwise political moderates. Just as the abortion debate has turned much more polarized in recent years, so too has climate change. It’s do everything now or nothing at all, depending on one’s perspective.

Democrats are going to make climate change an issue for the 2020 elections. But they’re going to do so from a “moderate” perspective. Don’t be fooled. They will shift to the radical if ever allowed in office.

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

Culture and Religion

Nothing says ‘running out of ideas’ more than overusing certain words

Published

on

By

Nothing says 'running out of ideas' more than overusing certain words

Its time for normal people to ignore the far-Left fringe and its exploitation of the language.

The radical far-left is now in diminishing-return-mode in abusing the language and certain words. When all they have are shrill false accusations, endlessly repeating them only has the opposite effect over time. Most normal people are busy living their lives unencumbered by the concerns of the country’s political minority. However, the far-left radical fringe sees things differently, with every utterance by the chief executive is nascent racism, with his actions verging on some sort of authoritarian preeminence.

The charge of racism only works the first few billion times.

The problem for our friends of the radical far-left is that they are rapidly using up their language. When everything is racist, nothing is. Where do they go after screaming the word over and over again when it doesn’t really apply? Criticism isn’t racism unless it refers to race. That should be obvious to everyone.

They are turning into their own variation of an Aesop fable ‘The Leftist Who Cried Racism’. Eventually no one will listen or worse yet, see them for what they truly are, Racists who project that derangement on everyone else, failing to see it in themselves.

Try as they might to enhance the charge as being worse than racism, eventually the taunt will fall on deaf ears. That this will immunize true racists will be a horrible outcome, one that will be correctly blamed on the far-left radicals.

Where do they go after claiming it’s a climate emergency?

Much like the abused and rapidly diminishing racism charge, trying to stampede the ceding of Liberty to them because of what naturally occurs will eventually see diminishing returns. Anyone with a sense of history will realize that we’ve heard this song and dance far too many times. It’s been 30 years of hysteria, 30 years of ‘emergency’ conditions that people are starting to ignore, were do they go from here? Do they declare that it’s worse than an emergency?

They have already admitted what is obvious to everyone, that this is just a pretext to control the people and the economy. After some point it won’t matter what term they use, everyone will ignore their climate conniptions.

Nazis, Klansman and Brownshirts, oh my!

Apparently, Godwin’s humorous aphorism only applies to the targets of Leftist projection. Never mind that all three originated on the far-left and that history proves this to be the case. Much like other Leftist pejoratives on a hair-trigger deployment at anyone not of their political minority, they keep on using these words, not knowing what they truly mean. We’ve all heard these illogical insults, gradually they become so much background noise, meaningless in scope and diminishing in return.

Still worse for the radical far-left fringe, over-using these words will bring forth the point that these are all apparitions of their side of the political spectrum. With the KKK begun by Democrats with one infamous participant, Robert C. Byrd. Then there is the historic fact that the Nazis and Brownshirts were of a socialist workers party.

Their complaints that people are pointing out that those offensive words describe the far-left will fall on deaf ears as they continue to weaponize the language. Correctly stating that the Nazis were Leftists will be the natural result of their trying to falsely project that on their political opponents.

Divisiveness.

This little gem its only in the beginning stages of overuse, it’s one of those double standard terms the radical far left favors since they can project it on others while ignoring it in themselves. Much like racism, it has a circular logic confirmation. Someone is racist because they are racist, someone is divisive because they are divisive.

Then of course, denying the accusation somehow affirms the accusation. It’s divisive to deny one is divisive, and denying one is being divisive is being divisive. It helps to not logically think about and just spew a convenient hashtag with an accompanying supply of aspirin.

It’s not socialism, its ‘Democratic’ socialism.

At some point along the line, trying to repackage this societal slavery as something else will be seen for what it truly is. Even now there are reports that socialists are trying to sell this enslavement without using the word itself. We’ve seen this little shell game before, when they tried to foist this socialistic snake oil as ‘Project X’.

Bolt on a positive term like ‘Democratic’ and that should make all the difference. Just like referring to equine excreta as road apples changes the whole perspective on manure. Repackage such things as something else and viola! People will seemingly buy the deception for at least a little while. Then reality crashes in and no rewording will ever work again.

First, it was socialism, then the bait and switch of communism, then Leninism, then fascism, then democratic socialism, each time it’s the same base ideology of centralized government control and wealth redistribution, dressed up with a new label. Each time the Left denied that the failures of the past were really socialism, each time they were going to do it correctly and each time had the same horrible results.

There is something about the concept of Liberty that is very persuasive. Most likely, this is why those trying to sell its antithesis falsely using the term ‘Liberal’ and talk of ‘Liberation’. Thus, it makes perfect sense to ‘Liberate’ a society with secret police and concentration camps.

The Bottom-line.

Using words instead of a functioning ideology only works for a little while, then people see through the deception. The resulting downfall is even worse when the words are false pejoratives justified only by circular logic. An attempt at playing the same game with alternative words only proves that it was all a sham in the first place.

The radical far-left fringe cannot compete with the Pro-Liberty Right because we have the better system: Economic freedom or free enterprise [No, we’re not using that leftist pejorative: capitalism]. It’s not perfect, but nothing based on the interaction of flawed beings can ever meet that goal. This is why the Left loves to exploit the woefully inept comparison of the theoretical ideal of their system to the practical reality of ours. But comparing apples to oranges is meaningless, directly comparing the practical reality of both shows that ours the superior system, and that is why we are winning.

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