Encouraging Violence II

IT’S TRUMP’S FAULT!

Republican congressman says TRUMP is partly to blame for ‘demons that have been unleashed’ in lead up to baseball shooting

Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., talked about the role President Trump’s rhetoric played in the hostility that led up to Wednesday’s shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., and others, in an Alexandria ball field.

‘I would argue that the president has unleashed, it’s partially, again not in any way totally, but partially to blame for demons that have been unleashed,’ Sanford said Thursday on Morning Joe.

The South Carolina congressman-turned-governor-turned-congressman said he’s noticed a discernible difference in how his constituents talk to each other, and thought they might be taking a cue from the top.

We’re at an inflection point,’ Sanford said. ‘There are forces at play that I’ve never seen before over the roughly 20 years I’ve been involved in politics.’

Sanford talked about a recent town hall he hosted at a senior center, which seemingly got out of control.

It ‘was like out of a movie,’ Sanford told the Morning Joe hosts, saying he was shocked by what his constituents said to one another.

Making a broader statement, he lumped some of Trump’s campaign rhetoric in.
‘Whether it’s what I saw at a senior center back home and people saying “FU” and “FU” and “FU” to each other … at a retirement center where they’re going to see each other playing croquet the next day,’ he said.

‘Or with what happened yesterday, again not with what happened, but the fact that, you know, you’ve got the top guy saying “I wish I could hit you in the face, and if not, why don’t you and I’ll pay your legal fees,” Sanford continued.

 

Guess what, cuck, some of us noticed this shift in tone years ago, long before Trump showed up.  People are sick of being constantly attacked and, because they have been, are getting very quick on the eff you draw.  After all, it’s the only argument that works anymore since reason and discussions go nowhere.

Encouraging Violence

Gun control?  No, how about BernieBro Control.  The media didn’t bother to mention that the “white supremacist” who murdered people in Oregon was a Bernie supporter, but the shooter in Alexandria wasn’t attacking a muslim, he was attacking Republicans so white supremacist is out as an excuse.

Bernie disavows!

‘I have just been informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice this morning is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign,’ Sanders said to a near-empty Senate chamber, speaking for he benefit of C-SPAN and YouTube viewers.

‘I am sickened by this despicable act, and let me be as clear as I can be: Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms.’

Just a little problem there, Bernie…

Sanders to faithful: Take down Trump, take over Democratic Party

Bernie Sanders’ permanent “political revolution” rolled into Chicago on Saturday night, as the Vermont senator called on progressive activists gathered here to beat back President Donald Trump’s agenda while remaking the Democratic Party.
***
Sanders also took a series of stinging shots at Trump, labeling him “perhaps the worst and most dangerous president in the history of our country” and a habitual liar.

Not what you were going for, Bernie?  But if people truly believe that Trump and the Republicans are horrible, scary, evil people out to destroy them, their lives, and their country, it’s not a big jump from “beating back” to violence.  The liberals already have assassination on their minds.  They’ve been play acting at it with their stabbings and beheadings.  They’re working hard to dehumanize their enemies so big surprise if someone actually decides to turn the play acting into a reality.

But it doesn’t matter who or why or what happened because the left will always dive straight for that too many guns! narrative.

Will the British finally wake up?

I was surprised to read that maybe, just maybe the British may have had enough of “tolerance.”  I was not surprised to read that America’s liberals are as hypocritical and insane as ever, refusing to learn the obvious lessons the recent terror attacks are teaching.

London Undone by Terror

An ocean away, another seven caskets tell the story of a war the West is desperate to end. For the British, who’ve watched the tide of terrorism swell to three attacks in as many months, the time for sensitivity is over. There’s been “too much tolerance” of Islamic extremism, Prime Minister Theresa May warned, as police searched for clues to another ISIS-inspired rampage. Just days after families put 22 loved ones to rest after the Manchester Arena bombing, three men slammed their van into a crowd of people while others hacked through a local market with foot-long machetes.

“It is time to say enough is enough,” May said of the lax attitude that’s given radical Muslims a foothold on their soil. “Right now, through weak policies, we have allowed the fundamentalists to spoil it for the majority,” intelligence sources explained. After three bloody months, British officials are putting every option on the table — including burka bans and new citizenship rules. As far as May is concerned, political correctness is a luxury the U.K. can no longer afford.

Three thousand miles away, that’s a point Donald Trump has been trying to drive home since the earliest days of his candidacy. After eight years of letting foreigners stream into our country — with the barest of background checks — U.S. leaders have watched ISIS’s infiltration of Europe with an anxious eye. In his first week on the job, President Trump rolled out an executive order designed to keep what’s happening in England from coming here. Liberals came unglued, accusing the new administration of religious profiling — or worse. Now, months into a vicious court battle that’s stopped the president from keeping America safe, the Left’s protests seem more ridiculous than ever. While the London police rush to put up concrete barriers across its most beloved landmarks, the world has a choice: it can learn from Britain’s mistakes — or repeat them.

We know where this White House stands. “In any event we are EXTREME VETTING people coming into the U.S. in order to help keep our country safe,” the president tweeted. “We need the courts to give us back our rights.” While the Supreme Court decides whether to take the case against the president’s “travel ban,” President Trump is already asking for a tougher version. And there’s good reason for it, as Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) pointed out over the weekend. “You’ve got some [terror] groups that are looking at a big play like taking down an airliner. You’ve got others who need very little support, very little planning, and can do incredible damage, which is actually in many ways almost more of terrorism because you go anywhere, do anything, you wonder what could happen at any moment. It could happen here.”

Perhaps the most maddening part of the liberals’ effort is that they’re trying to tie Trump’s hands, when he has the benefit of intelligence that most people don’t — including the judges deciding this case. As someone who worked in counterterrorism and law enforcement, I understand that there’s a reason the president is entrusted with screening protocols, especially when they’re in the interest of national security. As David French wrote in National Review, there’s nothing extreme about that.

“We know that terrorists are trying to infiltrate the ranks of refugees and other visitors. We know that immigrants from Somalia, for example, have launched jihadist attacks here at home and have sought to leave the U.S. to join ISIS. Indeed, given the terrible recent track record of completed and attempted terror attacks by Muslim immigrants, it’s clear that our current approach is inadequate to control the threat. Unless we want to simply accept Muslim immigrant terror as a fact of American life, a short-term ban on entry from problematic countries combined with a systematic review of our security procedures is both reasonable and prudent.”

“The stakes are indisputably high,” White House officials warned in its brief to the Supreme Court. “The court of appeals concluded that the president acted in bad faith with religious animus when, after consulting with three members of his cabinet, he placed a brief pause on entry from six countries that present heightened risks of terrorism.” Is the Left going to take responsibility if its lawsuit succeeds and people are killed on American soil because no one could look into these foreigners’ backgrounds? Will they hide behind black robes when Britain’s terror lands at our shores, ushered in by eight years of Obama’s indifference?

Meanwhile, liberal hypocrites like Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are daring to criticize President Trump for not doing enough on terrorism. That’s ironic, since Schumer’s party is the one standing in the way of the White House’s security overhaul! “Rigorous vetting and tightening up wherever we have to is essential in this new world,” he argued. Of course, this is the same man who in January decried Trump’s stricter immigration policy, insisting, “Tears are running down the cheeks of the Statue of Liberty.” Better the Statue of Liberty, British mourners would say, than thousands more grieving families who will never see their loved ones again because their government was more concerned about being politically correct than protecting their citizens.

Prager Explains Never-Trumpers

Denis Prager had an interesting response to the Never-Trumpers here:  Why Conservatives Still Attack Trump

Prager was pretty generous in his interpretation of Never-Trumpers behavior and motivations — though honest enough to tick them off (if you want to read a lame response to Prager, see Jonah Goldberg’s).

Trump is too far from their ideal leader for some conservatives to support him.

When people you know well and admire, and who share your values, do something you strongly oppose, you have two options: (1) Cease admiring them or (2) try to understand them and change their minds.

In the case of my conservative friends who still snipe (or worse) at President Trump, I have rejected option one. The reason — beside the fact that I simply like many of them — is what I refer to as “moral bank accounts.”

Every time we do good, we make a deposit into our moral bank account. And every time we do something bad, we make a withdrawal. These conservatives have made so many deposits into their moral bank accounts that, in my view, their accounts all remain firmly in the black.

That means my only choice is option two. But to try to change their minds, I must first try to understand their thinking. I have concluded that there are a few reasons that explain conservatives who were Never-Trumpers during the election, and who remain anti-Trump today.

The first and, by far, the greatest reason is this: They do not believe that America is engaged in a civil war, with the survival of America as we know it at stake. While they strongly differ with the Left, they do not regard the left–right battle as an existential battle for preserving our nation. On the other hand, I, and other conservative Trump supporters, do.

That is why, after vigorously opposing Trump’s candidacy during the Republican primaries, I vigorously supported him once he won the nomination. I believed then, as I do now, that America was doomed if a Democrat had been elected president. With the Supreme Court and hundreds of additional federal judgeships in the balance; with the Democrats’ relentless push toward European-style socialism — completely undoing the unique American value of limited government; the misuse of the government to suppress conservative speech; the continuing degradation of our universities and high schools; the weakening of the American military; and so much more, America, as envisioned by the Founders, would have been lost, perhaps irreversibly. The “fundamental transformation” that candidate Barack Obama promised in 2008 would have been completed by Hillary Clinton in 2016. To my amazement, no anti-Trump conservative writer sees it that way. They all thought during the election, and still think, that while it would not have been a good thing if Hillary Clinton had won, it wouldn’t have been a catastrophe either.

That’s it, in a nutshell. Many conservatives, including me, believe that it would have been close to over for America as America if the Republican candidate, who happened to be a flawed man named Donald Trump, had not won. Moreover, I am certain that only Donald Trump would have defeated Hillary Clinton.

In other words, I believe that Donald Trump may have saved the country. And that, in my book, covers a lot of sins — foolish tweets, included.

The Never Trump conservative argument that Trump is not a conservative — one that I, too, made repeatedly during the Republican primaries — is not only no longer relevant, it is no longer true. Had any Never Trump conservative been told, say in the summer of 2015, that a Republican would win the 2016 election and, within his first few months in office, appoint a conservative to the Supreme Court; begin the process of replacing Obamacare; bomb Russia’s ally Assad after he again used chemical weapons; appoint the most conservative cabinet in modern American history; begin undoing hysteria-based, economy-choking EPA regulations; label the Iranian regime “evil” in front of 50 Muslim heads of state; wear a yarmulke at the Western Wall; appoint a U.N. ambassador who regularly condemns the U.N. for its moral hypocrisy; restore the military budget; and work on lowering corporate tax rates, among other conservative achievements — that Never Trump conservative would have been jumping for joy.

So, why aren’t anti-Trump conservatives jumping for joy? I have come to believe that many conservatives possess what I once thought was a left-wing monopoly — a utopian streak. Trump is too far from their ideal leader to be able to support him.

There is also a cultural divide. Anti-Trump conservatives are a very refined group of people. Trump doesn’t talk like them. Moreover, the cultural milieu in which the vast majority of anti-Trump conservatives live and/or work means that to support Trump is to render oneself contemptible at all elite dinner parties. In addition, anti-Trump conservatives see themselves as highly moral people (which they often are) who are duty-bound not to compromise themselves by strongly supporting Trump, whom they largely view as morally defective.

Finally, these people are only human: After investing so much energy in opposing Trump’s election, and after predicting his nomination would lead to electoral disaster, it’s hard for them to admit they were wrong. To see him fulfill many of his conservative election promises, again in defiance of predictions, is a bitter pill. But if they hang on to their Never Trumpism and the president falls on his face, they can say they were right all along. That means that only if he fails can their reputations be redeemed. And they, of course, know that.

But there is another way. They can join the fight. They can accept an imperfect reality and acknowledge that we are in a civil war, and that Trump, with all his flaws, is our general. If this general is going to win, he needs the best fighters. But too many of them, some of the best minds of the conservative movement, are AWOL. I beg them: Please report for duty.

Never-Trumpers, one might say, are too much like the leftist establishment; they are snobs, too far removed from the regular people, they are utopians and idealists (in the worst sense of the word) and they are convinced they are correct and everyone who disagrees in an uneducated moron.

Aside from their similarity to Pharisees (that I noted earlier), they are conceited, being so pathologically prideful they cannot bear to lose face by changing their position on Trump.  Prager, unlike many conservative establishment types, may have been wrong about Trump at one point, but is intelligent and humble enough to revise his opinion and wishes to convince others to do the same.  Sadly, it seems unlikely they will do so, preferring to cut off their nose to spite their face by opposing Trump and refusing to work with him.  Trump is caught between two sides, the Left and the “Principled Right,” which both work tirelessly to sabotage him.

People who criticize Trump for not accomplishing more so far in his presidency should rather wonder he’s been able to do anything.

 

Paris Climate Agreement: a scam we’re lucky to escape

President Trump just outed the US from the Paris Climate Agreement: cue outraged hysteria.

After days of drama and suspense, President Trump announced Thursday that his administration will exit the Paris climate agreement.

“So we’re getting out,” Trump said. “The Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States.”

Trump’s decision fulfills a campaign promise and satisfies strong Republican opposition to the global climate deal but also isolates the U.S. and is certain to bring condemnation from world leaders and critics in the scientific community.

But even people who think “climate change” is a “real problem” don’t think that the Agreement would have done much of anything to fix the “problem.”  It just would have further crippled the US economy.

Sinking just a little lower

We already know the left is disgusting.  The latest anti-Trump social media stunt even had some liberals disavowing it.  Although plenty of folks had no problem with it.  One jerk even mocked Baron Trump’s reaction: Game-show winner Ken Jennings mocked 11-year-old Barron Trump for reacting to comedian Kathy Griffin’s beheading photo of President Donald Trump

As if Kathy Griffin’s photo with a mock severed head of Trump wasn’t disgusting enough, the photo was on tv where little Baron Trump got to see it.

It Was Just Revealed How 11-Year-Old Barron Trump First Learned of Kathy Griffin’s Photo — Horrific

Barron Trump, President Donald Trump’s 11-year-old son, reportedly “panicked” and became distressed after seeing Kathy Griffin’s now-infamous “beheading” photograph because he didn’t know who Griffin was or understand the context of the photo.

Trump tweeted this response: “Kathy Griffin should be ashamed of herself. My children, especially my 11 year old son, Barron, are having a hard time with this. Sick!”

The left proves yet again that they have no taste, no sense of decency, and absolutely no thought of the well-being of children.  But these are often the same people who want to tell others how to raise their kids and impose more governmental control over parents and families “for the good of the children,” and to cry out for more gun control because “think of the children!”  These are the people who manufacture tears about children to manipulate people into agreeing with them.

These people don’t give a damn about real kids.

Can you imagine what would have happened if someone had done to Obama what Kathy Griffin just did to Trump?  There would have been no end to the outcry.  And someone might very well have gone to jail.

But this isn’t Obama; it’s Trump.  And Trump is apparently so evil that opposing him makes all fair game.  The only thing surprising really is that CNN actually fired Griffin.

UPDATE: Looks like Griffin might be quite pleased to upset Baron Trump so much – I really don’t have words for this witch…

The Left’s Counter Attack

If the Left was routed in the last election, they haven’t given up the fight.  They’re intent of fighting tooth and claw against Trump and all that his voters stand for and want for the US.  I thought this summary by the Family Research Council of how the Left is trying to undermine Trump and up the ante in the culture war sounded accurate (though not complete):

The Left is pulling out the stops to destroy President Trump and to stop conservatives any way they can.

Here are five ways the “Progressives” have intensified the war on your values and freedoms:

1) Igniting an explosion of propaganda sold to Americans as “news.” The mainstream media are overwhelmingly committed to undermining President Trump and the conservative cause. We now know that many supposedly nonpartisan journalists were heavily — even financially — committed to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for president.

2) Destroying public trust and spreading confusion. The media are hard at work in supporting the leftist agitators by spewing “fake news” and sounding the alarm about nonexistent crises virtually every day — dutifully affirmed and repeated by liberals in Congress and statehouses across the nation — all designed to deceive the American people.

3) Unleashing lawless radicals in the streets and town meetings. It’s now evident that Barack Obama is behind the mobilization of tens of thousands of radical agitators to shout down conservative members of Congress when they hold town meetings back in their districts and states.

4) Maintaining a shadow government working against the American government. Obama appointees who are still serving as unelected bureaucrats inside the federal government are now working against the Trump White House, essentially operating as a sort of “shadow government” from within the government itself. A torrent of suspicious leaks, some of them endangering our national security, as well as several other outrages, have made it painfully clear that enemies of America are at work inside the federal bureaucracy.

5) Coordinating and unifying the falsehood and disruption. The Left is obviously unified in its anti-Trump messaging, and its attacks are clearly coordinated across the entire spectrum of liberal media platforms and organizations.