Left’s Latest Demand: Race-Based Reparations

Left’s Latest Demand: Race-Based Reparations, by Pat Buchanan.

Having embraced “Medicare-for-all,” free college tuition and a Green New Deal that would mandate an early end of all oil, gas and coal-fired power plants, the Democratic Party’s lurch to the left rolls on.

Presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren both called last week for race-based reparations for slavery.

“Centuries of slavery, Jim Crow, legal discrimination and segregation, and discrimination that exist today have led to a systemic wealth gap between black and white Americans,” Harris told The New York Times. “I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities.”

Echoed Sen. Warren: “We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country.” This history has crippled “the ability of black families to build wealth in America for generations.”

British anti slaving ship overhauls a slaver

Anti-slaver ships. Slavery was abolished world-wide by white Christians.

That black Americans are handicapped by their history in this country, and cannot accumulate wealth as easily, and require compensatory reparations for slavery and segregation, is more than a controversial assertion.

Are the Democrats going to say this in their national platform in 2020? And how much will the rest of America be forced to pay, and for how long?

Warren says Native Americans, too, must be “part of the conversation.” Apparently, they suffer from a similar handicap and need the same reparations.

How far and fast has the Democratic Party lunged leftward? In 2016, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders all rejected reparations.

Have Warren and Harris thought this through?

The questions that instantly arise are: Who would qualify as a beneficiary of reparations, and who would pay the immense transfer sums involved?

It’s all about votes for the left. Principles be damned.

Jordan Peterson To the Rescue

Jordan Peterson To the Rescue, by Bill Muhlenberg (Culture Watch)

h/t Stephen Neil

Though our greater audience likely now knows of Canadian psychologist Jordon Peterson, he’s currently on an Australian tour so this will be timely as a debrief from his recent interview.

He agreed to enter the Lion’s Den known as Q&A and as usual, turned the slings and arrows aimed at him toward his detractors.

Read on for Bill Muhlenbierg’s nice synopsis of what really took place versus what you might have read from the usual suspects in the mainstream media.

Enjoy!

Statistics, like gender, are now fluid too?

Statistics, like gender, are now fluid too? By Mark Powell (Spectator Australia)

h/t Stephen Neil

“This is a serious matter indeed. If government agencies cannot be trusted to accurately report the facts, then who can we trust – and, perhaps more importantly, what is their flawed material doing in schools?”

Collectively, the Left, our Educational institutions, the Media and Government use the psychological concept of “projection” (click on the word for examples) toward the non PC realist.  This has become known in the popular culture as “Fake News” for a reason.

James Woods Rips ‘Arrogant Idiot’ Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ‘You Work for Us’

James Woods Rips ‘Arrogant Idiot’ Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ‘You Work for Us’. By Justin Caruso (Breitbart)

The always acerbic and quite frankly brilliant James Woods schools our latest “wanna be dictator” on how the American constitutional system works.

Soon after her election, she stated, “If we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress — Uh, rather, all three chambers of government: the presidency, the Senate, and the House.”

The 3 branches of the US government are: the executive (Presidency), legislative — both Senate and the House of Representatives combined — similar to the upper and lower houses of Parliament and the judicial (the ultimate arbiter in the USA is the 9 member Supreme Court).

As AOC was elected to the House of Representatives, we should hope that she would have a clue as to the structure of the US government.

Alas, hope merely springs eternal…:-)

Woods conducts government class, yet again – Read on!

Kim Jong Un is taking a laborious 3.5-day train ride to meet Trump in Vietnam, and it could be because he’s too embarrassed to borrow a plane from China

Kim Jong Un is taking a laborious 3.5-day train ride to meet Trump in Vietnam, and it could be because he’s too embarrassed to borrow a plane from China, by Aexandra Ma.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is taking a 2,000-mile, 3-1/2-day train ride to meet US President Donald Trump in Vietnam this Wednesday, most likely to save face because he doesn’t want to ask China to lend him a plane.

Kim boarded his family’s armoured train at Pyongyang Station on Saturday evening, and he plans to arrive in the Vietnamese capital of Hanoi on Tuesday, the day before his summit is scheduled there with Trump. …

Last year, Kim borrowed a Boeing 747 plane from Air China, the airline majority-owned by the Chinese state, to get himself to Singapore in June for his first summit with Trump.

His 40-year-old, Soviet-made Ilyushin Il-62 plane was deemed unsafe for the voyage at the time. …

The North Korean leader did not appreciate remarks about his reliance on China last year, Cheng Xiaohe, a North Korea expert at Beijing’s Renmin University, told The New York Times.

Socialism! Happens every time.

Ocasio-Cortez: People Maybe Shouldn’t Reproduce Due To Climate Change

Ocasio-Cortez: People Maybe Shouldn’t Reproduce Due To Climate Change, by Ryan Saavedra.

Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) suggested on Sunday night that people should consider not having children due to climate change because there is a “scientific consensus” that life will be hard for kids.

“Our planet is going to hit disaster if we don’t turn this ship around and so it’s basically like, there’s a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult,” Ocasio-Cortez said while chopping up food in her kitchen during an Instagram live video. “And it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, ‘Is it okay to still have children?'”

Glenn Reynolds:

AOC was born in 1989, the same year that AP reported that “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000,” and the New York Times published a column by Al Gore headlined, “An Ecological Kristallnacht. Listen.” Presumably, she’s glad that her parents ignored such apocalyptic scaremongering.

Babylon Bee:

The nation breathed a collective sigh of relief Monday while watching footage in which Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez appeared to come out against the concept of reproducing.

Stating they realized that we really dodged a bullet this time, citizens all over the country expressed their sudden sense of comfort and serenity at the fact that Ocasio-Cortez would probably never have children. …

“This is a huge burden off my chest,” said Lyle Billings of Lawrence, Kansas. “I suddenly realized that there could be two, three, or even four little Ocasio-Cortezes running around one day. So I totally support the congresswoman’s position against having children. It’s really what’s best for the nation as a whole.”

While the nation is typically baffled at Ocasio-Cortez’s positions, her bold stand against having children has become her most popular policy position yet, garnering a 97% approval rating.

Autopsy of a Dead Coup

Autopsy of a Dead Coup, by Victor Davis Hanson.

For those of you not familiar with Victor Davis Hanson, I include a few biographical tidbits along with his wikipedia page here: Victor Davis Hanson

“VDH” as he is affectionately known, is a brilliant historian and classical thinker. He truly is a farmer in the San Joaquin Valley of California — an area that is the “bread basket to the world”. If  California were its own country, it would still be the world’s 5th largest economy, far surpassing Russia, (for example).  The continuing mismanagement of the state by its “progressive” policies has caused an incredibly shrinking middle class and at an alarming rate.  The old adage in the USA is that, “so goes California, so goes the rest of the nation”.  VDH has written brilliantly about this and many other topics including this linked article above where he tells us of the desperation of the left to defeat Trump, the left’s boogey man de jour.

If California is the leading indicator for the USA, it can also be said that the USA is often a leading indicator for the rest of the Western world.  Caveat Emptor — buyer beware!

Trump as tragic hero

Trump as tragic hero, by Victor Davis Hanson.

I tried to use as many examples as I could of the classic Western, whether it was “Shane” or “High Noon” or “The Magnificent Seven.”

They all are the same — the community doesn’t have the skills or doesn’t have the willpower or doesn’t want to stoop to the corrective method to solve the existential problem, whether it is cattle barons or banditos. So they bring in an outsider, and immediately they start to be uneasy because he is uncouth — his skills, his attitude.

Then he solves the problem, and they declare to him, whether it is Gary Cooper in “High Noon” or Alan Ladd in “Shane,” “I think it’s better you leave. We don’t need you anymore. We feel dirty that we ever had to call you in.”

I think that is what is awaiting Trump…

Alan Ladd in Shane

The article in the New Yorker where Hanson is interviewed is also a classic example of how the PC crowd label anyone not on their political agenda as “incorrect” or “not PC” to delegitimize and discredit them before they speak:

Chotiner’s lead-in descriptions of Hanson leapt out at me as being a debunking of the opinions of the man he is set to interview (supposedly respectfully). He can’t do away with Hanson’s obvious academic achievements and honors, but he distorts Hanson’s record outside of academia in a way that is meant to discredit Hanson in the reader’s mind before even reading any of Hanson’s words in the interview. One small example:

…[Hanson] has a history of hostility to undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants, who he claims are undermining American culture, and to African-Americans who speak about the persistence of racism…

Speaking of “hostility,” that’s a hostile summary description of Hanson’s work that’s patently unfair to Hanson, and yet meant to label him as a bigot at the outset.

That Hanson’s responses to the interview are so thoughtful and interesting merely makes it even more important that Chotiner set it up in the readers’ minds in a way that the reader knows that he or she is not supposed to seriously pay attention to the actual thoughts of this bigoted person.

Keep an eye out for this technique. You’ll see it all the time on the Australian ABC, for instance, when they bring in a non-PC guest.

Trump’s Failing. Don’t Ask Me To Lie About It.

Trump’s Failing. Don’t Ask Me To Lie About It. By Ann Coulter.

For decades, voters have been lied to by politicians promising to crack down on immigration. We vote and we vote and we vote, and nothing ever changes. Wage-lowering, culture-destroying policies manage to appear in every bill Congress passes.

We finally got sick of it and voted for Trump. He promised to build a wall, deport illegal aliens and end the anchor baby scam. No matter how much the establishment screamed at him, he never backed down.

To call Trump’s promise to build a wall his “central campaign promise” routinizes it. That promise was indispensable to his election in a way that no other president’s campaign promises ever were.

Trump had none of the qualities voters typically look for in a president. He hadn’t been vice president, a U.S. senator or governor of California. There was little about his character to inspire a nation.

Trump’s mandate on immigration was the loudest bell ever to be rung in American politics.

While I admire people’s loyalty to the first presidential candidate to speak honestly about America’s problems, what if they’re being loyal to a false front?

The bill President Trump signed last Friday is worse than anything Hillary could ever have gotten through Congress.

Israel has one, and it dropped illegal immigration to zero.

His bill expressly prohibits funding the wall:

To mention the two most shocking examples, the bill prohibits Trump from using any Homeland Security funds to build a wall anywhere along the border. Only bollard fencing is permitted — and even that is allowed in only one small section of the border with the approval of local authorities.

Inasmuch as the “local authorities” in that particular sector are liberal Democrats and/or beholden to Mexican cartels, the bill Trump just signed effectively prohibits any barrier whatsoever from being built on the border.

It’s being called the Pedophiles-Go-Free Act.

The bill also expressly prohibits the deportation of any illegal aliens who are part of a household, or thinking of becoming part of a household, that contains an “unaccompanied minor” — i.e. any illegal alien who claims to be under 18 years old with no parent in the country.

The Art of the Deal???

Trump — and those hoping to be invited to the next White House Christmas party — refers to this as a “deal.” Gen. Custer struck a similar “deal” at Little Bighorn.

Dealing With Europe’s ISIS Returnees

Dealing With Europe’s ISIS Returnees

h/t Stephen Neil & Scott of the Pacific

This will become an increasingly hot topic in the weeks and months to come. Does Australia, Europe, the US, and the UK have the common sense to deal with it?  Should we re-admit unapologetic (at the least), sociopathic murderers back into our midst?

What society would do this and why?   Read on to see the politics of Jihad as it may soon affect us all including the incredibly convoluted pretzel logic of some of your favourite politicians. What would motivate them, in their attempt to “virtue signal” and have them willing place your safety and that of our neighbors and loved ones in jeopardy?

Millennials haven’t forgotten Mao, Stalin or Lenin. They never knew them.

Millennials haven’t forgotten Mao, Stalin or Lenin. They never knew them, by Joanne Nova.

We teach kids identity politics, and how to control the weather with light globes, but not the most important political lesson of the 20th Century.

We won the cold war, then lost the peace.

Why Millenials are embracing Socialism

Tom Switzer, Sydney Morning Herald:

The survey evidence is clear. In a YouGov poll commissioned by the Centre for Independent Studies last year, 58 per cent of Australian millennials have a favourable view of socialism, with only 18 per cent having an unfavourable one. These findings reflect Millennial attitudes in Britain and the US.

What’s going on?

Part of the problem is plain ignorance. Most Millennials were hardly alive when Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an “evil empire”.

According to the CIS poll, only 26 per cent of Millennials are familiar with Vladimir Lenin and 34 per cent with Joseph Stalin. Only 21 per cent of those questioned said they knew well who Mao was. Never mind that these men were responsible for the deaths of tens of millions and the impoverishment of hundreds of millions.

Whatever excuse explains Millennials’ ignorance of communism, they should at least know about Venezuela where the socialist regime of the past two decades has led to repression, an economy in free fall, widespread disease and starvation and mass emigration.

Tom Switzer is executive director of the Centre for Independent Studies and presenter at the ABC’s Radio National.

Time to say “No” to failure says Joanne Nova:

Here’s a radical idea, no child should get a high school certificate if they can’t answer the question “which political party caused the most deaths in the last 100 years”? The answer starts with C, and if you say Capitalism you have to repeat a year, and so do your teachers.

Politics, Historical figures, CIS, Graph, education, millenials, familiarity with dictators.

Only one in five people aged 25-39 in Australia are familiar with Mao, Stalin and Lenin.

PRAGER: Explaining The Left, Part VI: Do Leftists Believe What They Say?

PRAGER: Explaining The Left, Part VI: Do Leftists Believe What They Say?

For those of you who don’t know Dennis Prager, he is a brilliant conservative thinker who has the ability to get efficiently to the heart of a matter.  Through his PragerU.com videos, he has approximately 5 minute clips which explain.

“Why does the left lie?”  As perplexing and frustrating as this question might actually be, it’s what we experience in our daily lives.  While we’re gobsmacked at what we hear, the left believes they’re sincere in issue of the day – facts are irrelevant, emotion is king explains Prager.

“There are two main reasons.  One is that leftists deem their goals more important than telling the truth.” “The second reason is leftism is rooted in feelings, not reason or truth. From Karl Marx to Bernie Sanders, left-wing preference for socialism over capitalism is entirely rooted in emotion.”

“Do leftists believe there are more than two sexes? “Of course not”, explains Prager.

“Do leftists believe global warming will destroy the world as we know it in 12 years, as recently suggested by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? How many leftists with beachfront property anywhere in the world have sold it?”

“The left tells us that colleges are permeated by a “rape culture,” yet virtually all left-wing parents send their daughters to college.” 

Then why do they promote this? Prager explains:

…on the left, truth is subservient to two higher values: doctrine and emotion.

Smollet Story: When Journalism Becomes Politics — Tucker Carlson Tonight

Smollet Story: When Journalism Becomes Politics — Tucker Carlson Tonight

h/t Scott of the Pacific

What’s the Smollet Story really all about and why is it important? Watch Tucker Carlson’s 11 minute monologue to see how, what and why the mainstream media  (which is indeed the front line of the political left), need to do to maintain both their audience and constituency.

Identity politics is the the manifestation; the bread and butter of the “politically correct”.

This short video describes the damage our well meaning friends are doing to society.