Monday, September 11, 2017

News and reviews: September 2017

commercial photography locationsI'm back ...! I guess so, anyway. Is that guy from New York City still in the White House? What's his name? He's forgotten us, so I've forgotten him. There is indeed a man by the name of Donald Trump who is the President, although he bears absolutely no relation to the chap I endorsed.
This Donald Trump wants to escalate the unwinnable game of charades in Afghanistan ("Ooh, ooh, I got it—the Taliban?"), increased the debt ceiling in cahoots with the two slimiest swamp creatures in existence when there are so many other ways of providing relief for victims of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, and says he will sign whatever Chamber of Commerce-approved piece of trash legislation that Paul Ryan slept with to give a permanent amnesty to the "Dreamers". Their dream, our nightmare.
The President has said that he wants to end NAFTA, but Jivanka will convince him that Mexican CHILDREN will suffer if he does and that—mark my words, dear reader—will be the end of that.
I know, I said I wouldn't discuss that boob nor the completely useless fools in Congress anymore, so here goes ... I present you with recent stories that you may not have heard but will blow your minds:

On August 23, Naz Shah, the Muslim MP for Bradford West and a key ally of the far-Left Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn (Britain's version of Bernie Sanders), was suspended by the party for opining that the white girls in Rotherham who were sexually abused by the gang of Muslim men operating in the area should "shut their mouths, for the good of diversity."
Ms. Shah has also opined that Sharia-controlled councils are a force for good and should be supported and that "the Jews are rallying," in reference to Israel.
Shah's suspension may look like a fitting response by Labour, but Rotherham MP Sarah Champion, when she dared to posit that the people of Britain do not approve of Pakistani men abusing girls from the native population, was moved to the backbench, from her former frontbench position by the same party. I guess the message here is, lock up your girls when Labour's in power.


*   *   *

After a man—apparently, a fully grown, adult man—was chased away from a doorstep by a Yorkshire terrier, seven policemen were sent to the dog owner's house to remove the 10-year-old pet.
When a delivery man tried to deliver a parcel to the home of Claudia Settimo-Bovio, the little dog, named Alfie, became excited, prompting the man to flee in terror and scream, "He's killing me." This grown-ass man then tried to make a little scratch he received when he fell over into a bloody wound.
Settimo-Bovi said, in response to the seizing of Alfie by the authorities under the Dangerous Dogs Act, "My dog is not vicious. He’s not a Rottweiler; he's a little Yorkshire terrier. I live on my own and he's very protective of me. He just likes to chase. Show me a dog who doesn't like to chase."
The story does have a happy ending as Alfie was returned home after spending six days in custody.
Seven police officers responding to a "vicious" Yorkshire terrier. The mind just spins, does it not?


*   *   *

John Lewis, often considered the bellwether for British retail, has made the decision to sell non-gender specific children's clothes. One of the items the department store group is offering is a dinosaur-patterned dress that is intended for little boys as well as girls.
Predictably, the retailer also said it would remove "boys" and "girls" labeling from children's wear sections of its stores. While some "modern" parents approve, John Lewis faced a backlash for the move, with many customers expressing disappointment that the store would give in so easily to political correctness.
John Lewis head of children's wear Caroline Bettis defended the store's policy, noting that the retailer has no desire to "reïnforce gender stereotypes."
Andrew Bridgen, a Conservative MP, responded, "I have no idea what would possess John Lewis to do this. I cannot see many customers buying a dress for their six-year-old boy."
I'm with Mr. Bridgen on this.


*   *   *

You know, I couldn't help but notice who wasn't making their presence known in the Houston area in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey. That's right, Antifa and Black Lives Matter (Only When White People are Involved). Black families were in desperate need of assistance yet the crowd who constantly cite the evils of "white privilege" weren't there to show their solidarity with them. Funny how that works.
At least the Occupoopers tried to do some good by helping out the victims of Hurricane Sandy when it devastated the Northeast in 2012. Antifa and BLM (OWWPAI)? They couldn't see the white supremacist fascism in the weather.
And what about the technocrat billionaires and the Hollywood crowd? They love to pontificate on our responsibilities to each other, don't they? Where are the billion-dollar checks being signed and distributed by Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos and Tim Cook? At least Hollywood will make a sex- and violence-drenched movie about it next year, so that'll be their contribution.
Liberals, meanwhile, excoriated Senator Ted Cruz because he voted against a Hurricane Sandy relief fund because it was completely full of pork barrel spending and could not in good conscience vote for a bill that addressed storm relief largely in name only. Progressives also wasted no time complaining about climate change rather than concentrating on what they could do to assist the relief efforts. Never let a crisis go to waste!
Then there are the really good, caring folks who, while telling us that Trump should have been more of an "empathetic" Crier-in-Chief instead of a Churchillian Commander in Chief, displayed their own empathy by positing that Texas deserved Harvey and the devastation it wrought because Mr. Trump won the Lone Star state.
These progressives, who won’t stop bitching and trying to tear the country down while lives have been turned upside-down along the Texas Gulf coast, honestly wonder why about half the country does not want to be all "peace and love" like them. Why, these compassionate Lefties only want to overturn democracy and exterminate whites and "Uncle Tom" minorities, you know? How could you deplorables resist such an enriching sociopolitical platform?


*   *   * 


Keenan Jones, a 44-year-old black man, was viciously beaten up by a gang of teenagers when he asked them to not smoke cannabis on the train. The yout's, I should mention, were also African-American.
The incident, which happened in Dallas, was filmed and the footage shows Mr. Jones being pummeled by the gang both on and off the train. In addition to being punched and kicked, Jones was hit several times with skateboards.
Anyone want to argue at this point for the passivity of pot smokers?
When the beating continued at the Deep Ellum rapid transit station, Jones appealed to the mob, "OK, OK, y'all win!" While recovering in the hospital, Jones recalls, "Everything just went from 0 to 100. I'm just very happy to be here, happy to hug my kids."
Remember, folks, black lives matter!

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Adjusting to the Disunited Bolshevik States of America

commercial photography locationsSleep isn't coming easy to me tonight. And it's no wonder why. A five-hour session of housework and a two-mile run haven't put me any closer to drifting off. Then, when you realize that you've lost your country, that you're absolutely no longer living in the world you grew up in, it's difficult to have the peace of mind to snooze.
I need to ask, does anyone who's decent, who isn't a black-clad THUG, give a damn about anything other than the fare they view on Netflix and the fare they fill their stomachs with? Is there anyone out there who cares about anything other than their big barbeque, big TV, big car, big salary and big dick? Because you sure as fuck weren't there at the Boston Free Speech rally on Saturday.
Let me fill you in on what you missed, because you obviously did—all you brave keyboard warriors, all those of you who on Monday will be bitching and kvetching over the phone to Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Jeff Kuhner, et al., and pretending to care. A handful of libertarians, a few of them left-of-center like Garret Kirkland—a former Occupy Boston leader, for Chrissakes—were chased off the bandstand on the Boston Common, outnumbered ten to one, before they so much as said "First Amendment".
Sure, you did have some borderline insane speakers like the self-named Augustus Sol Invictus. I don't know his real name; it's probably something like Bobby Blankenheimer or Waldo Fritz Crustenpantz. He has some admittedly pretty far-out-there points of view, a reactionary who is also a pagan and who once sacrificed a goat. Believe me, I have no reason to like this individual. But if he's a white supremacist, then prove it—until such time, he has a right to say whatever is on his tiny mind to whatever audience has the dubious pleasure of being subjected to him.
The organizers of the rally, the Boston Free Speech Coalition, could not have made it any clearer where they stood:
We denounce the politics of supremacy and violence. We denounce the actions, activities, and tactics of the so-called Antifa movement. We denounce the normalization of political violence.
Maybe, just maybe, if these people had been given their permit without quibble, the media hadn't paid any mind to them, it hadn't been ratcheted up as the latest Charlottesville by the mayor and governor, things would have been just fine. It would have been a picnic in the park. But, no. The rabble must be roused. It's the American way. That's who we are.
Given the ferocity of the counter-protest led by the new fascists, the free speech rally collapsed on its own and its speakers ushered away under police protection, all the while being mocked by the new brownshirts. In its wake, every media source you turn to reports that a "far-Right" rally in Boston was shouted down by peaceful, loving Bostonians. You know, the Antifa and Black Lives Matter (Only When White People are Involved) folks, the communists, the Alenskyites and the Marxist professors. Real good apple-pie-and-mom Americans with their signs announcing "White People Suck!"
And what did the billionaire-in-chief have to say about this? Why, this sort of thing will bring "our country" together! After initially accusing the anti-Free Speech rabble of being "anti-police agitators," which was the truth, he completely turned on himself and opined:
Our great country has been divided for decades. Sometimes you need protest in order to heal, & we will heal, & be stronger than ever before! I want to applaud the many protestors [sic] in Boston who are speaking out against bigotry and hate. Our country will soon come together as one!
Got that? Resisting free speech is "speaking out against bigotry and hate". Gee, thanks, Mr. President. That was very helpful. I'm sure the regressive Bolshevik Left is very grateful and of course won't acknowledge the gift you just handed them. Now that Steve Bannon, the only person in this entire administration who kept (or tried to keep) Mr. Trump on track and on message, has been shown the door, who is advising this President? Binky the Clown?
Nobody, of course, would ever suggest we clamp down on the subjective speech on CNN, MSNBC and Fox. The only speech we need and require is that of Jim Acosta, Joy Reed, Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Shepard Smith and the like. C'mon, dear reader, you know it's true. Otherwise, we risk becoming a white supremacist nation full of hate and division and wounds that never heal! Forgive me while I emit a short but sharp girly squeak of horror. You see, I have to learn how to sound like a Leftist because it's apparent I will be completely absorbed by them soon. This is the lesson we should all take from Boston on Saturday. But, of course, we won't learn from that experience. That would be expecting those with brains to actually use them. And that, sure as shit, never happens.
Let's backtrack to Mssr. Bannon, if we could. I suppose the writing was on the wall for him ever since John Kelly became Chief of Staff. Yet, Ivanka and Jared, whose swanky metropolitan faces I could not possibly be more sick of if I tried to be, remain. Gen. Kelly apparently does not see a problem with obvious, naked nepotism in the White House. Kellyanne Conway—not to be confused with Gen. Kelly, this isn't the Rocky Horror Picture Show although it is a whole slew of other unmentionables—remains. This Cruz loyalist, this woman-child who had nothing good to say about Trump throughout 2016, this stick-figure who sat on the Oval Office sofa like an eight-year-old on her bed listening to One Direction in front of the dignified and learnéd men of the historically black colleges who were meeting with Trump. She's still there. Gary Cohn, that loudmouth, remains. Oh sure, he was "disgusted" with Trump for disbanding an advisory council of CEOs who did nothing but severely criticize and squawk at the President. Yet Cohn hasn't walked, nor has he been shown the way out. But it's all fine and dandy, because Trump is sitting in the main chair, so you know the country is going to just magically materialize into that right-of-center, libertarian, laissez-faire paradise you thought you would be getting. The problem, mes amis, is you still think you're going to get it.
Bannon, after his removal from the White House, said that the Trump administration that its supporters worked so hard to have is now over, and he’s spot on in that assessment.
Now then, in the aftermath of the failed Boston free speech rally, Mr. Trump also thanked Mayor Marty Walsh, that pinky-ringed union thug, for his so-called good work. The same Walsh who continually portrayed that rally for what it was not. The same Walsh who threatened to shut it down the moment some idiot's feelings were hurt. The same Walsh who opposed Trump and has vowed to defy the administration's stance against sanctuary cities. It would be nice to see Boston's reward for peacefully opposing bigotry be a complete revoking of the federal funds it receives. But it won't happen. I've been hearing about this threat to sanctuary cites for what feels like forever, so I'm not expecting it to actually be carried out anytime soon. Much in the same vein as "drain the swamp."
It certainly doesn't help that this President appears to have no capacity for learning from experience. He endorsed John McCain when Kelli Ward really could have used his support instead. He endorsed Paul Ryan. He endorsed Mitch McConnell. He backed every establishment stooge in the GOP that he was told to, ensuring that the "MAGA"-chanting Trumpbots would not primary any of these completely useless minions of the new world order. Now, proving he's learned nothing, Trump is backing McConnell's boy Luther Strange over the real conservative-minded reformer Roy Moore in Alabama. But don't tell the red baseball cap-wearing automatons. America is being made great while Antifa and BLM (OWWPI) constantly run riot without consequence nor punishment and free speech is given the bum's rush in Berkeley, in Boston and everywhere in between.
As for you Trump-bots who claim you will help him drain the swamp and clean up Washington, how will you do that? You can't attend or even support a simple free speech rally, you dumb fucks! I know, you had too many beers to drink while scratching your butt. “Family time,” I think they call it.
When will BLM and Antifa be defined and treated like the terrorists that they are? What more will it take? Where the FUCK is Jeff Sessions's DoJ on this? For all you oh-so level-headed people out there wanting me to calm down, WHEN. IS. THE. FIGHTBACK. GOING. TO. COME??? Could you actually answer that question, in your best estimation (if you have one), instead of merely telling me that I'm irrational and disjointed? You expect me to be happy and think a great job is being done when small armies of violent agitators assault people and rack of tens of thousands worth of damage and always get away with it? Yes, I'm the irrational one, quite clearly.
We can't be quicker to condemn neo-Nazis and white supremacists as domestic terrorists. And let me be honest: We are RIGHT to do so (no pun intended). I have no love whatsoever for these pathetic inbreds nor for any kind of horrific society they would create. These peckerheads would make ISIS look respectable. Believe me, I love the sight of a neo-Nazi's head being cracked wide open. I could watch that shit all day.
My problem is, when these heads get cracked by those who have viciously assaulted others in the same manner, just for supporting free speech or for respecting Civil War monuments or daring to be a fan of the current President (many of whom voted for Obama twice, I would like to point out), I get very angry. I would like to start observing some cracked heads on the other side, but golly gee, it never fucking happens. We can't make these thugs, who give Hitler constant wet dreams in Hell, pay for their crimes or intolerance or bigotry. Why, that would be insensitive and not the American way. Mitt Romney, John McCain, Marco Rubio and others in the Establishment swamp have said so. These people are standing up against hatred! My God, don't even think of touching these precious snowflakes, they are the cornerstone of this country's democracy.
When Trump correctly pointed out that both sides in Charlottesville were at fault, and that the jack-boots of Antifa had no permit while the neo-Nazis did, he was decried as a defender of white supremacists and an apology from him is demanded by the high priests of political correctness. Because legitimate protesters come armed with sticks, helmets, shields and homemade flamethrowers, am I right?
Furthermore, consider this, dear reader. The organizer of the so-called Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville was one Jason Kessler. This man has no previous record of right-wing activism prior to Donald Trump’s election. In fact, he was an Obama supporter and affiliated with the far-Left Southern Poverty Law Center, partly funded by George Soros. We’re to believe that Mr. Kessler became an alt-Right, white supremacist/nationalist maniac in the space of just a few weeks? This whiffs of the same inharmonious and extremely dubious air that Bashar al-Assad gassed his own people just days after Rex Tillerson announced that the U.S. would allow Syria to sort itself out. There was no proof whatsoever to demonstrate that Assad was responsible, that it wasn’t another false-flag operation to further American involvement in the Syrian civil war and antagonism against Russia. Now we are expected to earnestly and unquestionably believe that Kessler’s Virginia rally wasn’t a set-up to make white Americans look vicious and unstable? I guarantee you that if the roles were reversed, the media would be demanding verification beyond any shadow of doubt.
For those of you who read this blog and may even enjoy it, I thank you. However, I need to go in a different direction. I can't keep writing about Trump and Congress and the great stuff that isn't getting accomplished. I can't continue to discuss pipe dreams and a reality I would love to see that isn't forthcoming anytime soon. I'm just slowly killing myself heartbreak by heartbreak. This kind of constant disappointment is not healthy and I need to remove myself from it.
I will take a hiatus, maybe for as long as a month, and when I write again, I will focus on the more arcane aspects of the news, both in Britain and America—things that you may not have heard. Maybe I'll share more personal stories with you all. I don't know, I have to figure it out. I'm not giving up this blog, it just has to go in a different direction for the sake of my sanity.
I'll leave you with a perfect example of what I mean. Barcelona—a beautiful city that I have been to twice—was hit with an Islamic terrorist attack. How long over the course of this blog's history have I repeatedly condemned these terrorists and called out the governments that do precious little to prevent or combat it? Too long.
By the way, I would like, at this juncture, to repeat my call for vehicle control. It’s obvious that these things are indiscriminate killing machines that too often fall into the wrong hands. Vehicle control NOW! I’m just trying to use liberal so-called logic to try to defeat the terrorist threat and save lives.
Seriously, I feel for the dead and injured in Barcelona and I dearly hope justice will be done. But I cannot write about it, because it's beating a dead horse. I really have no idea what to say about it that I haven't said a hundred times before.
And now I have nothing more I feel that I can constructively say about the lunacy of government, be it in the US, the UK or anywhere in the West. It is what it is and I think we'd better learn to live with it, because it's obvious it is not changing. Not while George Soros bankrolls everybody who fits into the hundreds of splinter groups he's created. Not while the generals the President surrounds himself with are stalwart defenders of geopolitics circa 1945. Not while Jeff Bezos is swallowing up every aspect of our lives through Amazon and linking arms with rabidly anti-free speech technocrats like the heads of Facebook, Google and YouTube.
If you think that sounds too conspiracy theorist or "irrational" for your tastes, go have some cookies and milk, find your safe space and report me to the relevant authorities for being a big meanie. I’m sure my own free speech rights are next in the line of fire.

Friday, July 28, 2017

Photobucket says Photo-f***-it as it announces a policy of extortion

commercial photography locationsI know, I ripped the title off from this piece. Call me lazy. Whatever. I'm too pissed off to care.
Two days ago, I found that images I had both on my blog template and posted in individual entries had been substituted with some strange notice featuring an illustration of a meter and informing me that third-party image hosting "has been temporarily disabled."
The problem is that Photobucket is lying. At the very least, it is subtlely misleading its 100 million users, some of whom have faithfully been using it for a decade or more. (The company launched in 2003.) The situation is temporary until you cough up $399 for its "P500" plan.
Forget for one moment the bizarre naming of its shakedown plan. If it costs nearly 400 bucks to get one's ransomed photos to re-appear, how does "500" come into it? I don't trust any company that forces me to ponder something as mundane as this.
Here's the thing: If the fee was a one-off, that would be at least be some kind of concession to its subscribers. I doubt that customers would have reacted with as much understandable rage and consternation. I still wouldn't have paid, but enough would and Photobucket could have raised more than enough revenue.
The fee, it turns out, is yearly. You have to divvy up four-hundred dollars every year to keep your images in your blog, forum or Amazon or eBay pages. What's even worse than having to pay an extortionate fee every twelve months is that the majority of Photobucket users were not given adequate notice. The company literally sprang this change in terms and conditions on them. Photobucket stresses that it alerted users via e-mail, but I never received one, and I am far from alone in having been not only misinformed but taken completely by surprise. Customer service. No-one delivers it in more snarky fashion than Photobucket. I've got news for this company: Its name is now mud.
Photobucket CEO John Corpus recently told The Denver Post, "There is no way to make 100 million global people happy." Uhm, yes, there is, Señor Corpus. One, you don't charge them $399 every year for image hosting. Two, you don't just throw such a change of policy at them. Three, you might have thought about other avenues for revenue growth. You've been the CEO for a year and this was the best you could come up with, jefe? Give me a freakin' break. Perhaps this toolbag could use the money it costs him to fly from San Francisco to Denver once a week toward operating costs and, golly gee, actually live in the city where the company is based. Just a thought.
Now wait for it. You know what's coming next. After pontificating about not being able to adequately satisfy his customers, Corpus told the reporter, "It wasn't an easy decision." Bing, bing, bing! Raise the corporate-speak alarm. "It/this wasn't an easy decision" is right up there with "blue-sky thinking" and "thinking outside the box." I wonder how much Corpus had to "touch base" with his staff to "incentivize" a "win-win". And you know what a "win-win" is, don't you? The company and shareholders win. You, the poor consumer schmuck, lose.
Futhermore, I'll be damned if I'll pay that much every year for a sluggish website plagued by clickbait and other advertisements. There is an ad-free option for $2.49 per month, but that will probably quadruple in price without notice if Señor Corpus's record is anything to go by. Only a few months ago, Photobucket users were irate when its upload platform became dysfunctional. There was a work-around by which one could upload through the library, but no-one expects to have to dick around with quick-fixes on a supposedly premier photo-sharing website.
Photobucket used to be simple, direct and easy-to-use. It clicked every box on the user-friendly checklist. It's a shame what has become of it. I was frustrated with Photobucket long before this policy change, but the only reason I continued using it was that I did not want to have to replace my images on this blog. Turns out, I have to do that anyway. Thanks, Photobucket! That's a lot of unnecessary work that I didn't need.
I won't wish too much ill-will on Photobucket because I do not want to take my anger out on its employees. It's not their fault that the CEO for whom they work is a greedy SOB. According to the Denver Post article, the company has already reduced its workforce and I would not wish unemployment on anyone other than vivisectionists, the baby butchers of Planned Parenthood, deep state Obama holdovers or 98 percent of Congress.
Having said that, I will not pay the company's ransom for my photos and other images. I suggest using FreeImageHosting.net or Postimage.org. You don't even have to sign in—just upload your image, grab your .gif or .jpg and you're good to go.
In the meantime, bear with me, dear reader. I've already replaced all my images for this year, but I have a whole decade's worth of entries to pour through. So if you happen upon an earlier entry and are curious about any missing content, just check back in a month or two. It's going to be a lot of work and I'm going to have to take my time with it.
Please go and sign James Cann's Change.org petition to encourage Photobucket to reverse its policy regarding third-party image hosting. As of this writing it needs only 44 more signatures to reach the required 1,500 mark. Thank you.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

American media continues to display ignorance and irrationality

commercial photography locationsHere are reasons number 1,456,788 and 1,456,789 why you cannot and should not trust the mainstream media, dear reader.
Poppy Harlow—a blonde CNN filly—was reporting on President Donald Trump's visit to Paris which occurred during France's Bastille Day festivities. A military band played the Star-Spangled Banner, the U.S. national anthem—something your average six-year-old can properly identify—as Mr. Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron shook hands. Hearing that music was being played, Harlow realized that she should button up until it ended.
"Let's just listen in to the French National Anthem for just a moment," she instructed her audience. Columbia University is still turning out journalistic geniuses, I see. Harlow corrected herself about ten seconds later after somebody at the network who actually possesses a brain whispered to her from behind the set.
Not to be outdone by Harlow, the senior White House correspondent for CNN Jeff Zeleny told his audience of Rhodes scholars that the Bastille Day celebration "marks the 100th year of when the U.S. started helping—entered World War I."
Started helping? Right, because Americans were just so keen on pulling Europe's nuts out of the flames. But hey, it was all cool because a Democrat got us into a war. Just replace "Remember the Maine" with "Over There," and voilà, instant patriotism brought to you by the government/military complex. Just don't ask what Woodrow Wilson thought about black Americans and maybe we can keep World War I revisionism alive for another one hundred years.
Imagine Zeleny resting back in his chair with the smugness that all obvious know-it-alls like him radiate. Then, eventually, the news of his gaffe somehow filters through to him so that, two hours later, while pre-recording "The Lead with Jake Tapper," Zeleny noted that the President was "invited by [French] President Macron to celebrate Bastille Day and the 100th anniversary of the U.S. entry into World War I." Zeleny is noted to have added some oomph to the word "and" in that declaration.
So, mes amis, let me hear you say, "Well, it was on the news, so it must be true."
Let's just have a run-down of the latest happenings, all of which the media is ignoring as it dutifully brings us even more news about how Donald Trump and Co. flew to the Moon and back on a pegasus with the help of Vladimir Putin and the Russkies.

  • Over 400 people, including more than a hundred doctors, were charged by the Department of Justice over $1.3 billion of health care fraud which was part of a larger sting involving the prescription and distribution of opioid drugs which are devastating the country. It is the largest takedown of Medicaid/Medicare fraud in U.S. history.
  • Sheldon Silver, former Hillary Clinton superdelegate and one of New York state's sleaziest politicians, who illegally earned $4 million during his time in the New York Assembly, was set free when an appeals court overturned his conviction of corruption. Ordinary citizens are stuck in prison cells for far less crimes.
  • A sick game called the "Blue Whale Challenge" is spreading like wildfire among adolescents and pre-teens in which fifty tasks must be completed, including taking pictures of one's self from atop a roof and carving symbols into one's arm. The last challenge, which many have live-streamed, is suicide. The "game" has already claimed over 100 people.
  • The Republicans' latest health-care bill reads very much as if it was written by the insurance companies and health-care industry lobbyists. It gets rid of the individual and employer mandates, but otherwise, this proposal is in several ways even worse than Obamacare. Far from "killing millions," as Nancy Pelosi or Elizabeth Warren allege, this will cause people's premiums to skyrocket. The insurance lobby, for proof that they oversaw the crafting of this bill, opposed Senator Ted Cruz's amendment to the legislation that would require insurers to sell coverage that doesn't meet Affordable Care Act standards.
  • Oh yes, let's not forget ... Two weeks ago, North Korea successfully launched an ICBM missile, something it had previously and repeatedly kept failing at. And our indispensable intelligence community knew nothing about the developments leading up to this? Instead of trying to overturn the election and spying on American citizens, perhaps the deep state could do its job? That fat little deranged inbred in Pyongyang could hit Anchorage in the near future, and we remain obsessed with removing Assad from power in Syria in a conflict that concerns us to no degree imaginable other than to decimate ISIS.

Has the media-at-large addressed these topics at any point? I know none of them are about climate change or migrants, the only two other subjects that could possibly albeit temporarily disrupt the Russia collusion cycle.
If being ignorant of basic facts and not reporting real, actual news isn't disturbing enough for you, dear reader, how about the Associated Press updating its venerated "Stylebook" to corrupt the English language by declaring certain conservative-oriented words forbidden.
The AP Stylebook is ubiquitous in media offices throughout the English-speaking world. All print and broadcast media employ it. We even had a copy of it at the UMass-Boston student newspaper. It dispenses advice on aspects of grammar and correct terminology. This has been the standard since its first edition in 1953.
As you have no doubt gathered, unless you're on a serious mind-trip, it is not 1953 anymore. Therefore, certain edits have been made to this journalistic tome. They include: 
  • Changing pro-life to "anti-abortion".
  • Wiping the term amnesty clean of any reference to illegal aliens.
  • Using the cumbersome "people struggling to reach Europe" in place of migrant or refugee. The word "refugee" is now verboten. Somebody please inform Tom Petty.
  • Changing terrorist or Islamist to "lone wolf" or "attacker". So, in future, we will be attacked by "attackers". Brilliant analysis, AP.
  • Of course, there is an alt-right according to these language prodigies to denote alleged fascists who embrace every "-ism" under the sun, but I guarantee that you will not see "alt-left" to describe anti-democratic process, violent, irrational progressives.

This very much brings to mind George Orwell's Ministry of Truth, described in his prescient novel 1984. In an excellent essay entitled "Control the Language, Control the Masses," New Oxford Review editor Pieter Vree describes the process involved in thought control:
The close link between clarity in language and clarity of thought has not been lost on power-seekers of all stripes. Love him or hate him, Saul Alinsky was spot on when he wrote, "He who controls the language controls the masses." History has proved him right on this score: The social acceptance of homosexuality, for example, was made possible in no small part by the substitution of the word gay for homosexual in popular discourse. The latter term simply sounds weird whereas the former sounds friendlier and connotes happiness. Likewise, the debate over abortion was decisively swayed when its advocates began calling themselves pro-choice. Anyone can be against abortion, but who could be against "choice"?
That essay was published in The New York Times. Oh, wait, no it wasn't. According to that bastion of news that was never fit to print, Vree must surely be collaborating with the Russians. By daring to allege that news is fake, "democracy dies in darkness." We know that's true, because The Washington Post tells us so every day in its slogan. Jeff Bezos wouldn't lie to us, now would he?
When a person in future opines, "I read it in the paper, so it has to be true," whose truth will he or she be referencing? It is worth asking yourself that question. Still trust the darlings of the media that you tune into every evening, my sheeple?

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

CNN and MSNBC: "We could get away with our BS if only it wasn't for that pesky President!"

commercial photography locationsEveryone has heard by now how the lid has been blown off the fake news cauldron that is CNN. James O'Keefe, the intrepid conservative activist and founder of Project Veritas, sent one of his reporters to have a chat with the network's executive producer John Bonifield. This is a mere snippet from the exposé, yet it speaks volumes:
O'Keefe: (Voiceover) One story has monopolized President Trump's time in office like no other. Especially on CNN: Russia. In fact, since the inauguration CNN has mentioned Russia on their air nearly 16,000 times. So we sent our undercover reporters inside CNN to understand why and to determine if CNN even believes that the story is real. You're not going to believe what you're about to hear—or maybe you will. I'd like to introduce you to CNN's supervising producer John Bonifield in Atlanta. 
Reporter: So you believe the Russia thing's a little crazy, right? 
Bonifield: Even if Russia was trying to swing the election, we try to swing their elections. Our CIA is doing shit all the time. We're out there trying to manipulate governments. Like, you win because you know the game and you play it right. We just didn't play it right. 
Reporter: So why is CNN constantly like, 'Russia this, Russia that'? 
Bonifield: Because it's ratings. 
Reporter: Because it's ratings? 
Bonifield: Our ratings are incredible right now. 
O'Keefe: In May, CNN's ratings were significantly higher than they were the year before. The Russia story, and Trump, have made CNN millions.
Bonifield also told the Project Veritas reporter that after CNN's "reporting" on the Paris Climate Change Accord, chief executive Jeff Zucker informed everyone at the network to concentrate on the Russia story again. In the wake of this revelation, three "journalists" at CNN resigned, joining the ever-growing pile of rejects jettisoned from the network, including Kathy Griffin and Reza Aslan.
Not long after Bonifield admitted that the completely manufactured Russia story was all about ratings, the socialist agitator and host of "The Messy Truth" on CNN, Van Jones, opined that the Trump-Russia collusion narrative was "a nothingburger."
Finally, O'Keefe highlighted an associate producer for CNN's "New Day" program, Jimmy Carr, for bashing the American electorate. The reporter asks Carr about the legitimacy of questioning "the intellect of the American voter." Carr replied, "Oh, no. They're stupid as shit."
How does CNN fight back? By having Sesame Street's Elmo on a Facebook Live stream talking about how sad he felt that Syrian children could not come to America. Because it's all about the children for liberals, y'know? If that was really the case, maybe they could bring themselves to care about the nearly 60 million that were exterminated in the womb since 1973, and stop demanding the government funding of Planned Parenthood which does to newborn babies what even Josef Mengele would have refused to do. They could also consider the rotten public education they have saddled "the children" with through the Department of Education, Common Core and militant teacher's unions. They might even—gosh!—stop encouraging their sexualization at ever younger ages which does nothing to support their emotional development but does a shit-ton of damage to their psyches.


Oops, there I go getting tangential again ... If CNN treating Elmo like a war-weary, objective reporter is not asinine enough for you, we have MSNBC and the shenanigans of the "Morning Joe" show to really take your breath away.
After taking months of abuse—the usual unsubstantiated assertions that the country is being ruined by his presidency—from hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, the President, on June 29, explained on Twitter: "I heard poorly rated @MorningJoe speaks badly of me. Then how come low I.Q. Crazy Mika, along with Psycho Joe, came to Mar-a-Lago 3 nights in a row around New Year's Eve and insisted on joining me? She was bleeding badly from a face-lift. I said no!"
President Donald Trump may have been in the wrong to criticize Mika Brzezinski in such a fashion. That may demonstrate that he has not learned anything from the fallout over Megyn Kelly and the "blood coming out of her wherever" observation during the primaries. Brzezinski shot back by pulling a Little Marco, tweeting a close-up of a Cheerios box in which the statement "Made For Little Hands" is highlighted.
What may have been the final straw that prompted such a harsh tweet from the President is when Brzezinski had previously said on the program, "Nothing makes a man feel better than making a fake cover of a magazine about himself, lying every day and destroying the country."
So Trump made up some TIME magazine covers to hang around his golf clubs. Naturally, it's the end of the world. Along with the fact that he gets two scoops of ice cream at White House soirées while everyone else gets one. A riveting, breaking-news story, I should mention, provided by CNN. I'm surprised they didn't have Big Bird reporting on that one.
MSNBC is predictably crying foul. Trump, with the unsolicited help of O'Keefe, has just set one propagandist organization aflame. Time to take down another. Mark Kornhole Kornblau, the senior vice president of communications for NBC Universal, responded, "Never imagined a day when I would think to myself, 'it is beneath my dignity to respond to the President of the United States.'"
Yet the fact remains, Scarborough and Brzezinski were Trump's biggest fans in the wake of his electoral victory and during his inauguration and proceeded to turn on him for, you know, the ratings, and the fact that they dare not defy the puppet-master with the deep pockets. If you're CNN or MSNBC, you don't say no to George Soros.
What's really hilarious about the whole "Morning Joe" saga? Brzezinski and Scarborough could have taken the high road, but the day after news of the Twitter war between them and the President broke, they instead dedicated the entirety of the show to that nonsense. Brzezinski pretended to care about the President, alleging that he's unwell. "We're okay. The country's not," Crazy Mika opined.
Again, if you think the President's tweets against Brzezinski and the "Morning Joe" show and MSNBC are unwarranted, consider this. Brian Flood from Yahoo!'s "The Wrap" feature lists sixteen insults that the duo launched at Trump, including "schmuck," "jackass," and "bumbling dope".
One of the insults cited is the guest appearance by Donny Deutsch, a major-league douchebag who quite clearly suffers from small man syndrome, who criticized the President's looks. In "going thug" and noting that the President "picked the wrong schoolyard to come into," Deutsch launched his attack on Trump:
He's physically disgusting to look at. I mean, that's what I find ironic about the way he starts to always go after other people's physical attributes. So, beyond the fact that he’s obviously not well ... forget, obviously, the obvious [misogyny], the obvious vulgarity, the obvious stupidity, he's not mentally okay. We have to start paying attention to it, and he's disgusting to look at.

commercial photography locations 
I look like Mark Zuckerberg's long-lost cousin, yet I think I have the right to bash the President's appearance. 
(Photo: Screen shot courtesy of RawStory)


Donny, I know you went to the same business school that Mr. Trump attended and that you made millions, but you can still in no way match the President's success. People had heard of Donald Trump many years before he even ran for the nation's top job. No-one, except "Morning Joe"'s continually shrinking audience, has ever heard of you. You are a fake tough guy, to go along with the fake news channel you appear on. You're just embarrassing yourself. But then, you are an embarrassment. A shit-smear in the toilet bowl that is the mainstream media.
Step into the Nightdragon's schoolyard, Mr. Deutsch, you big-mouth. I'll sort you out, son. I'll see what I can do to improve your looks.
Happy Fourth of July, everyone.

Sunday, July 2, 2017

American Muslim community feels the wrath of the "undocumented"

commercial photography locationsLast Sunday, in Renton, Virginia, a 17-year-old American girl, who was Muslim, was beaten to death with an aluminum baseball bat by a 22-year-old by the name of Darwin Martinez Torres.
Nabra Hassanen was killed when Torres confronted her alongside a road leading back from a downtown McDonald's. She had, just moments before, been among a group of friends who fled to a nearby community Islamic center, where they had earlier spent the evening. Hassanen had somehow become separated from them when Torres launched his aggression. Hassanen's body was later dumped in a local pond. Some reports indicate that Torres had followed the group as they left the McDonald's establishment.
How much do you want to bet that Torres is a legal resident of the United States of America? Any takers? Torres, it turns out, is a citizen and national of that pristine, peaceful land known as El Salvador. The same country that recently moaned about the U.S. shipping back its gang-banging criminals, I should mention. I know, dear reader, you're shocked by that information. Just shocked.
The young woman, Nabra Hassanen, was a first-generation American citizen. Another "gringo" bites the dust.
Only the "gringo" in this case was a practitioner of the Islamic faith. No ordinary killing, obviously. Because, you see, had the victim been white, it would have had a fourth- or fifth-page story in the local Renton newspaper and nothing more. That would be the case without question. But when an illegal alien kills a black citizen, Hispanic citizen or a Muslim citizen, all the Leftie Lords Temporal—the denuded police forces, local politicians, the media—have no idea what to say or where to turn. Best to not label it a hate crime, at any rate.
The family and local community are furious, and I don't blame them. Hassanen's mother Sawsan Gazzar said, "I think it had to do with the way she was dressed and the fact that she's Muslim. Why would you kill a kid? What did my daughter do to deserve this?"
Again, I hate to focus on race here, because that's the modern Marxist's way of viewing the world, but had Nabra Hassanen been bludgeoned by a straight, cisgendered white American male, the tiniest village in Tierra del Fuego would know about the latest HATE CRIME to have occurred in violent, racist America.
But when an illegal alien slaughters a Muslim teen? According to Fairfax County police, there is "no link between the victim's faith or religious beliefs and the crime itself." It was just a road rage incident, according to authorities, and that is how it is being regarded going forward.
When I first heard about this tragedy, I wondered what the agitators of the Council on American-Islamic Relations would have to say about it. Would they be silent because the killer was a precious "undocumented American"? While CAIR's national litigation director Lena Masri said that the organisation would monitor the case for "any possible bias aspects," national communications director of CAIR Ibrahim Hooper noted, "You can't just say, 'Oh, he didn't say anything against Islam, so no hate crime'."
For once, I agree with CAIR!
If we insist on having this nonsense known as "hate crime" (as opposed to "I really, really like you crime"), then the powers-that-be should have the stones to apply it equally across the board. I'll say this again, so we can be quite clear on this: If a white guy had beaten to death a teenager wearing an abaya, all hell would have broken loose. If a guy with eighteen names from south of the border does the same, then it is "road rage". Do you think the white American guy would have received the same judgment? If you do, then I feel compelled to ask you which drug you are taking.
I'm going to state it right here, right now: Torres saw a group of Muslim adolescents and lost it. I know, it sounds incredible, because only straight white American males can commit such acts of intolerance, but there you go.
Now the American Muslim community has lost one its own from those "living in the shadows". May every member therein have no doubts about what other American citizens have been deeply upset about for at least a decade. We have had enough "acts of love" being forced on us from those who don't belong. I know they're grieving, but still I hope that Mohmoud Hassanen Aboras and Sawsan Gazzar, Nabra's father and motherand every one of the diverse denizens of Fairfax countyfeel the same.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Michelle Carter case: Manslaughter and the First Amendment

commercial photography locationsBy now, most of America and perhaps the world has heard the news from Massachusetts in which a juvenile court judge declared 18-year-old Michelle Carter guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of her putative boyfriend, 19-year-old Conrad Roy. Carter was found to have urged Roy to commit suicide, which he did through carbon monoxide poisoning by sitting in his idling truck, through a barrage of texts imploring him to do so.
Some have called the ruling a miscarriage of justice. Some have said the case is one in which the letter of the First Amendment has been imperiled. We're imperiling the First Amendment by stipulating that people, especially young adults, have no idea how to properly use the communication technology to which they've been entrusted? Honestly? I'm hardly a legal scholar, however my understanding is that the First Amendment does not provide cover for language that incites violence or encourages people to commit illegal or dangerous acts.
It was reported in early February that since January 20, over 12,000 postings on social media have called for the assassination of President Trump. Are any of those covered by the right to speech and expression, despite the fact that it's, you know, illegal to kill the President? Is opining that somebody out there must "take one for the team" by whacking Mr. Trump incitement to violence and illegality or is it not? It would appear pretty clear-cut to anyone with even a wet brain.
Now then, if telling someone to "be a man" and kill himself is not encouraging an illegal or dangerous act, then I would love to know what it is. When a mob boss orders a hit on someone, is he not complicit in that person's death, even though he would not be anywhere near the death scene?
The Massachusetts Juvenile Court has the chance, now that a guilty verdict on the charge of manslaughter has been handed down by the presiding judge, to put an obvious psychopath in the clink where she belongs for two decades and we have geniuses decrying it on the basis of some very dubious interpretation of freedom of speech protections. Incredible.
This is like giving a loaded firearm to a severely mentally unstable individual and, after the predictable carnage is unleashed, saying, Well, gee, I didn't expect that he would actually use it. How could you expect me to have known that? (On that note, would we "imperil" the letter of the Second Amendment by denying said firearm to said irrational person?)
I do agree with Jazz Shaw, in his Hot Air website piece, when he writes:
If someone on Twitter tells you to DIAF ('die in a fire' which I've been guilty of tweeting a couple of times) they might be accused of being a shockingly rude or offensive boor. But if you are actually unstable or self-destructive enough to turn around and self-immolate then you had some serious, unresolved issues long before the offensive tweeter came up on your radar.
Fair enough, Jazz. But Carter's harassment and admonishment of Roy concerning the issue of his suicide, before he was successful at it, was relentless. This was no one, fleeting moment of distemper, for which one may wake up the next day and feel foolish. This was determined, deliberate encouragement of a man who was on the edge in terms of his stated desire to die.
If Carter had not told Roy to go back into the truck after he initially admitted to being scared and determining that he actually wanted to live, that would be different. That's the thing that seals the deal for me beyond any shadow of doubt. If she had seen the sense in letting it go when Roy admitted his fright, there would have been no possibility of a manslaughter charge against her. Roy was profoundly depressed, but as it turns out, not suicidal after all. By badgering him to get back inside the vehicle on the grounds that he was a coward if he did not, Carter made her intentions all too clear. She was adamant that he die.
With her vile texts, Carter deliberately manipulated his thoughts and encouraged him to go against his own instincts. That's exactly why I don't buy the argument that Roy was his own moral arbiter. That's grade A bullshit. Here we go again, as a society not being able or willing to understand depressive mental illness. So young Mr. Roy just needed to pull himself up by his bootstraps and stand up to her, eh?
Were any of the people arguing against Carter's possible incarceration once nineteen years old themselves, or did they just spring from the earth as fully functional over-25s? Have they never experienced the concept of an awkward adolescent young man being completely under the spell of a good-looking woman, either themselves or through their sons' interactions? Young girls too can be just as easily manipulated by handsome but callous young men, so it slices both ways. Forgive me, dear reader, I know I'm headed into the weeds here, but I had to point that out, because I believe it strengthens the case for both Roy's actions and Carter as a major contributing factor in them.
Massive props to talk-show host Chris Salcedo who was good enough to take the time to debate me via e-mail on the merits of the case. Salcedo pointed out to me, "There is no law, that I know of, that makes suicide illegal. Further, I don't know of any law that make it illegal for a person to text words or say words that encourages suicide. Because of this ruling, an idiot who is watching a guy threaten to jump off a tall building and yelling 'JUMP!' is punishable." When I told Mr. Salcedo that I understood that we can't legislate morality, he replied, "Actually it's simpler than that. There is no law that holds people accountable for texting encouragement for suicide. If there was, then I'd be ok with the sentence."
I maintain that there must be a price to be paid for on-line behavior that goes too far. I do not want the government sticking its big, fat, odiferous butt in our business; this would be an issue for the judiciary as determined by the Supreme Court. I will never be alright with the rule of law when it stipulates that a person can do what Michelle Carter did and just skip away into the sunset. Not in my world.
This case probably will not set any further legal precedent. Even if it does, however, it will make people realize that there are consequences to what is said and expressed through texts and on the internet, especially social media. Please don't talk to me about the personal responsibility of Conrad Roy, when the issue is the responsibility—or abrogation thereof—of the so-called girlfriend who was absolutely complicit in his death.

Sunday, June 18, 2017

Megyn Kelly discovers that paranoia will destroy her

commercial photography locationsWay to go, Alex Jones! One thoroughly corrupt media icon—darling of the swamp—down, scores of others left. But if what Jones has just done to Megyn Kelly is to become the standard by which we judge these self-important nobodies, then the mainstream media has run out of rocks to hide under.
I'm looking forward to hearing the MSM, as Jones abbreviates it, try to explain this one away. But a little backstory before we begin the tale of how Jones completely dismantled Kelly and her nascent but apparently now still-born personal media empire.
Alex Jones is regarded as a far-right conspiracy theorist by many. He maintains that the atrocity of September 11, 2001 was an inside job committed by elements deep within the government to gin up a case for war, not with perpetrator Saudi Arabia but Iraq. He has said that he believes that animal-human hybrids were secretly created thirty years ago. Most infamously, he was alleged to have said that the Sandy Hook elementary school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut were staged by the government to motivate strict gun control measures, though Jones insists that he played devil's advocate to that argument, not that he endorsed it.
The parents involved in the Sandy Hook tragedy were understandably upset and enraged and, as a result of Kelly's interview with Jones, Kelly lost her role as host of an upcoming Sandy Hook Promise charity event. As Charlie May on Salon.com notes (I read it for research purposes), "[I]t is clear that Kelly is providing Jones with a massive spotlight in her latest ploy for ratings—something she has made a career doing." And how. Ratings, we should note, that are lower than those of repeats of America's Funniest Home Videos and 60 Minutes.
In the teaser for the interview with Jones that is to air tonight (Sunday), Kelly notes that Jones is regarded as "the most paranoid man in America," and asks him if that's true. Jones is featured opining that "authoritarianism knows humanity is awakening, and it's moving against humanity on a planetary scale. The great global battle for the future of our species is being fought right now." Kelly presses him on the anger expressed at him for calling Sandy Hook a false-flag operation designed to push the gun-control agenda, to which Jones replies, "well, they don't get angry at the half-million dead Iraqis from the sanctions." Of course, Jones is heard saying about 9/11 that it was an inside job engineered by criminal elements in the government working with the Saudis to frame Iraq.
Now, say what you will about Jones' thoughts on 9/11, but he has come around with respect to the Newtown shootings. He has stated that he agrees with the families affected by Sandy Hook, the ones who demanded that MSNBC yank the interview, and on his InfoWars website, Jones alleges that Kelly only asked him about the controversy created when what he did was present both sides of the debate and did not look at the full story. "She [Kelly] makes it sound like I'm saying that Sandy Hook didn't happen," Jones balks.
This is not the discussion nor the point of this entry though, dear reader. Think what you will about Alex Jones. Personally, I think he wanders off the ranch a little too often, but that some of the ideas that Jones often stretches out into conspiracy theories are correct. Not about 9/11 nor Sandy Hook, but other things he has discussed with regard to the New World Order. That's neither here nor there. The issue is that Kelly has proven, despite all claims to be her own "reporter," to be your typical duplicitous, egomaniac media whore (yes, I did just say that), and absolutely not to be trusted.
I will repeat, it does not matter what you think about Mr. Jones. Megyn Kelly set him up for what was undoubtedly a political hit job on him. Unfortunately for her, he taped Kelly soothing him with promises that she would not engage in "gotcha" tactics nor attempt to demonize him, that all she wanted was to show another side of Alex Jones, the regular human being that is Alex Jones whenever he is away from his microphone. Good thing that Jones is a paranoid man.
Here is how Kelly kicks off her ploy, almost flirting with Jones in order to secure his agreement to be interviewed.
Kelly: "This [her show] is a news magazine program, across from 60 Minutes, and it's a good opportunity for long-form story telling. You know, it's like, not a three-minute interview, it's in-depth profiles of people. And, at the top of my list for this, was you."
Jones: [Sarcastically:] "So it's like an investigative report into fake news?"
Kelly: [Uneasily] "No. No, what we're doing?"
Jones: [Warily]: "Yeah. Come on."
Kelly: "No, no, no. The reason you are interesting to me is because I followed your custody case, and I think you had a very good point about the way the media was covering it, and for some reason treated you and your family as fair game when they never would have done that to, if you will, a mainstream media figure. I saw a different side of you, in that whole thing. You know, you just became very fascinating to me ... The comments I heard from you during the course of that trial reminded me that you're just like anybody, you're a dad and you go through the same things we go through. I thought that would be an interesting story to tell."
Later in the tape that Jones recorded, we hear Kelly assuring him that there was no reason to think that he would be ambushed as her show is "different." You can trust her, she's not like all the others.
Kelly: "You know, for lack of a better term, I'm trying to create a different kind of program. And it's fine, I'll ask you about some of the controversies, of course, and you'll say whatever you want to say, but it's not going to be some kind of 'gotcha' hit-piece, I promise you that ... I promise you, that is not what this will be. It really will be about, 'who is this guy?' My goal is for your listeners—and the Left, you know, who'll be watching MSNBC—to say, 'wow, that was very interesting.'"
Now that Kelly thinks she has Alex reeled in, especially by citing her network's progressive audience, she pretends to be the reporter he can trust, who not only wants to delve into his own deep human feelings, but that whatever controversies are discussed during the interview will not be aired without him getting to review the content first and consent to airing it.
Kelly: "All I can do is give you my word, and tell you, there's one thing about me: I do what I say I'm going to do. I don't double-cross. So, I promise you when it's over, you'll say, 'absolutely, she did what she said she was gonna do,' and you'll be fine with it. I'm not looking to portray you as some bogeyman or do any kind of a 'gotcha' moment ... 
"Of course, I'm going to do a fair interview. I'm still me. You know, I'm not going to go out there and be Barbara Walters. But, you know, you just trust me. I really just want to talk about you, you know, you, [in the context] of broadcast media as opposed to print media. [Watchers] will get to take the measure of the man, away from the studio. I know exactly what you mean, you get behind that anchor desk and there's a rush of adrenaline, and I always used to say that it's like my superhero self when I'm behind the anchor desk. But this is something different altogether, this is your chance to tell people who you are ... 
"I always say that I'm a combination of Mike Wallace, Opray Winfrey and Larry the Cable Guy." 
Jones: [Laughing] I like Larry the Cable Guy, he's a good guy.
Kelly: "I love him, so that's who you'll get interviewing you. Tee-hee-hee." [Laughs]
You just trust me. I especially love that one. Talk about something that, as Prima Donna Comey would say, can be taken as a direction. That sounds like some Middle Eastern, budding jihadist cab driver, doesn't it? You just trust me. I know where I go. I get you where you want to go, you will be happy. Allahu akh ...! Oh, sorry. Heh heh. You just trust me.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the content of the tape that Jones released in the wake of the interview teaser. In so doing, Jones has proven that Kelly very much did intend to make him appear to be a bogeyman and that she did include content relating to controversies that he was not consulted on beforehand.
In the end, Kelly wanted to go after President Trump through Alex Jones. Because Jones endorsed Trump during his campaign, Mr. Trump returned the favor by appearing on his show several times before winning the Presidency. Kelly, in her Tweet written in response to the Sandy Hook charity dropping her as host, wrote that despite the goal of the interview being "to shine a light, as journalists are supposed to do, on this influential figure," she also opined that "President Trump, by praising and citing him, appearing on his show, and giving him White House press credentials, has helped elevate Jones, to the alarm of many."
Let me parse this: Wink, wink. President Trump is an unstable, mentally ill conspiracy theorist himself.
Megyn Kelly was correct on one point. Alex Jones is not a mainstream sort of guy, and clearly he never will be. He loves him some conspiracy theories a little too much. But he is also a smart man and not one to be messed with. Kelly, and the entire incendiary, seditious, Trump-hating media that she is a part of, have just been served, big-time. And for that, Jones merits our gratitude.

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Complete lack of pushback means the Left is winning Civil War v. 2

commercial photography locationsIt is war, dear reader. Make no mistake about it. It is a state of war that we find ourselves in.
Radical Islam not only declared war on us many years ago, which we in the West continue to deny because we think that's the superior way to go about it—to just ignore it and hope we ourselves or our loved ones don't get affected by it. Now the radical Left has made only too clear, through their words and their actions, that they seek the elimination of the workers, the contributors, the makers and the givers in society. You know, the "deplorables".
If the Antifa goons and other assorted two-legged trash cannot get at Trump, they will riot, cause unrest, block roads and beat up the President's supporters. And now, stoked by the vicious musings and exhibitions of celebrities and those in the media, they will take out high-ranking members of the Republican party, even though most of the GOP is complicit in the Democrat/Deep State coup against the Trump administration.
Hatred, however, as we have seen time and time again, is indiscriminate.
A Bernie Bro went ballistic and, rifle in hand, started shooting into the Eugene Simpson Stadium Park in Alexandria, Virginia where a congressional charity baseball game practice was in session. Majority House whip Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, was hit while on second base and is currently in critical condition.
The anti-Second Amendment gun-grabbing crowd cannot square with the fact that one of their own had a firearm—because it's just toothless, Right-wing hicks that have them, y'know. Furthermore, the stark reality is that if Scalice had not been at the game—if the 51-year-old had decided he was not well enough to attend—there would have been no armed cops there. In other words, had Mr. Scalice not been on the baseball field, we would very likely have had another Orlando-style massacre nearly a year to the day since the jihadist Omar Mateen took out 49 at the Pulse nightclub.
I tell you, those guns, they just have sinister minds of their own. We can't possibly blame the radical Islamist or the Rachel Madcow-worshiping moonbat for their actions, now can we? Incidentally, I'm still waiting for vehicle and kitchen knives control here in England, but never mind.
Suddenly, there's soul-searching occurring among all the subversive talking heads. Maddow herself vows she and her network will look into the matter, to "see where the evidence leads," and Joe Scarborough is suddenly concerned about the tone of current political rhetoric, conveniently forgetting that he and his consort co-host Mika Brezhinski have done nothing but ratchet up a tirade against President Trump since the day he took office.
The media now desires a "Kumbaya" moment and opines that everyone is to blame. They are asserting that the Left needs to calm down but also, in a tizzy of the moral equivalence that we have thoroughly come to expect from them, alleging that the Right has to chill as well. Can anybody tell me which college campus has erupted, how many buildings or cars have been torched, or people assaulted due to roving gangs of Sean Hannity-following conservatives? Come on, all you know-it-alls on the Left and in the media, tell me who they are.
Every single instance of politically generated violence in the U.S. lately is attributable to the progressives. But it's still somehow President Trump's language that is to blame, don'tcha know. Golly gee. Funny how that works. All the beautiful, peaceful liberals on social media, meanwhile, offered their predictable justifications for the shooting of Rep. Scalise. Here's a small sampling:

  • "If the shooter has a serious health condition then is taking potshots at the GOP house [sic] leadership considered self defense?"
  • "If KKK support [sic] Steve scalise [sic] dies, the shooter deserves a holiday, true leadership. Now the trumps, kush & Miller [sic] need to be 'transitioned'."
  • "It seems callous to say it out loud, but Republicans are pushing a health care bill that will kill people. As dead as any shooting victim."

Isn't it great how the cheap, fake assertions of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi with regard to the GOP health care bill, which isn't even a repeal of Obamacare, just the same with a bit of free-market principles sprinkled on like jimmies—and which the Senate hasn't even finished with yet—has these moonbats in a murder-advocating spot of bother? These idiots say nothing about Barry Obama's $70 million dollar book deal, the $5 million mansion he and Michelle now reside at, and his schmoozing of the Wall Street crowd for a $1 billion dollar donation for his own Presidential library, because he was such a caring man of the people and his legacy deserves to be immortalized. Yep, yep.
Don't give me the free speech argument for these freaks. Not only would the First Amendment be under attack if the Coughing Pantsuit had gotten into office, and if they had their way, but freedom of speech and of expression does not cover direct calls for violence, and that is all that the Left has offered going back to the Occupooper and Black Lives Matter (Only When White People are Involved) "movements," stirred up by Saint Obama, and the Antifag domestic terrorists mobilized in response to the legal and Constitutionally sanctioned Trump presidency.
Not that I'm about to let Mr. Trump off the hook, because he had a great chance to respond to this Leftist chaos and upheaval, but instead all we heard from him was some milquetoast RNC-approved screed about how all Americans need to come together—which is impossible because the Alinskyite Left won't allow it—and how hard our congressmen work—which is truly risible, unless Mr. Trump means hard work performed in pursuit of removing him from office through investigations into fake crimes and made-up allegations of foreign "collusion" with which to "steal" the election.
"We can all agree that we are blessed to be Americans. Our children deserve to grow up in nation of safety and peace and that we are strongest when we are unified and when we work together for the common good," Trump said hours after the shooting. So where is the unity in advance of the common good going to come from, Mr. President? Honestly, I'd love to know from which corner of the nation that will materialize, because I sure as hell don't see it.
"We may have our differences, but we do well, in times like these, to remember that everyone who serves in our nation's capital is here because, above all, they love our country," Trump also said in his speech. How he did not throw this ridiculous pablum back at speechwriter Stephen Miller and fire him on the spot is mystifying to me.
To be honest, I can't envision a more useless government body, that isn't even slightly interested in doing its job—the work of the people—than the current Congress. Mind you, I can't possibly imagine why, led as it is by inspirational luminaries such as Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelsoi. And you know that Ryan and McConnell, the majority leaders, really oppose Schumer and Pelosi in their zeal to impeach the President? Right? Anyone?
I've had it with them. The 115th Congress of the United States is a huge embarrassment, nakedly flaunting its corruption and laziness and willingness to protect its graft by allowing investigations into non-wrongdoings by President Trump and the appointment of a partisan special prosecutor. But that doesn't give a warped progressive the right to try to take out any member of the majority party. That is an act of war, and it ought to be regarded as such.
America is at boiling point right now and the first shot of our second civil war has just been fired. I say, the response to the enemy is long overdue and should be met with the fiercest firepower possible. Alas, it's not going to happen. Congress won't fight. The President, if that cringeworthy speech he gave is any indication, won't fight. How much more of the Left's insidious hatred, pure viciousness and revolutionary Marxist impulses be mainstreamed and tolerated before it is mercilessly beaten back? When will enough really be enough?
As it stands now, The Resistance has no resistance.