90 Miles From Tyranny : Search results for deplorables

infinite scrolling

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query deplorables. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query deplorables. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, August 2, 2018

REPORTERS, CELEBS CALL TRUMP SUPPORTERS ‘NAZIS,’ ‘KKK,’ WANT THEM ‘EUTHANIZED’ AFTER TAMPA RALLY

President Trump held a raucous rally in Tampa, Florida, Tuesday night.

Thousands of supporters packed the arena to hear Trump hammer his critics and tout his administration’s accomplishments. There was plenty of hecklers, comedy and chants about Hillary and 2020. Trump stopped to pick on one of his favorite targets, the media, approximately half-way through the speech. The president heckled the press in the press pen as “fake news” and the audience roared, chanting “Fake News” and “CNN Sucks” at the reporters.

On of the favorite targets of the audience was CNN’s Jim Acosta, who tweeted multiple videos of the crowd mocking him before and after the rally. Acosta blamed Trump for the vitriol, saying “I’m very worried that the hostility whipped up by Trump and some in conservative media will result in somebody getting hurt.” The tweet showed Trump supporters jeering at Acosta after the rally.




Just a sample of the sad scene we faced at the Trump rally in Tampa. I’m very worried that the hostility whipped up by Trump and some in conservative media will result in somebody getting hurt. We should not treat our fellow Americans this way. The press is not the enemy.

The tweet quickly went viral with many celebrities and journalists insulting the supporters. Celebrated composer Christopher O’Riley, who is a regular on PBS and NPR, literally called for the enforced slaughter of Trump supporters. “Calling them Deplorables is euphemizing them. Maybe better to euthanize?” the verified twitter user quipped.

Calling them Deplorables is euphemizing them. Maybe better to euthanize? https://t.co/1arbq2Anqz
— Christopher O’Riley (@cjoriley) August 1, 2018
Other verified handles of celebrities and reporters were just as vulgar, likening the Trump supporters to Nazis, KKK members, white trash and Hitler while speculating the crowd will eventually commit murder. Others said the Trump supporters made them “ashamed” of...

Friday, March 8, 2019

DNC Bans Fox News, Like Hillary Clinton Banned “Deplorable” Middle America: It Will Back Fire

The Democratic National Committee’s public rebuke of Fox News is really a public rebuke of anyone who watches the network.

It seems the DNC hasn’t learned much from its past mistakes: Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign is the biggest example.

And we all know what happened with her strategy. She underestimated and undermined many midwest voters and middle-class Americans. Many of those voters were independents and when she called President Donald Trump’s supporters a “basket of deplorables” she helped sink her own election.

That’s exactly what the DNC is calling viewers of Fox News “deplorables.”

The DNC has drawn a line in the sand, making their divisions public by saying it won’t allow the network to broadcast any of its 2020 presidential primary debates.

If the DNC really wanted to lure voters to their side of the debate they wouldn’t stay on familiar ground but would welcome the opportunity to get asked the tough questions by some of the most respected anchors in the business: Chris Wallace to name just one.

Instead, the DNC has targeted Fox News and its viewers. What the DNC is actually saying is anyone who watches Fox News is a “deplorable” and the Democrats don’t need them.
DNC Chairman Spins

Just listen to what DNC Chairman Tom Perez said Wednesday.
“I believe that a key pathway to victory is to continue to expand our electorate and reach all voters,” said Perez. “That is why I have made it a priority to talk to a broad array of potential media partners, including FOX News.”

Perez attempted to pin the decision on recent reporting in The New Yorker that there is an inappropriate relationship “between President Trump, his administration and...

Tuesday, December 15, 2020

The Future Of America First In The Face Of Electoral Larceny



We deplorables will focus and fight, even with potential election setbacks including unfortunate dodges by courts and certifications of tainted votes by feckless state leaders in swing states. We must recognize the reality of what has transpired and then quickly ascertain the best affirmative path forward for the future of the America First movement.
Whatever unfolds in the coming weeks, the first decision involves firmly rejecting defeatism. Yes, the 2020 process has been wholly corrupted. If Joe Biden is sworn-in as president in five weeks, this electoral larceny emanates from two primary sources of distortion.

The first fraud commenced with crooked state officials leveraging the China Virus pandemic as cover to institute massive, illegal, and unconstitutional pollutions of voting procedures. These perversions of the process resulted in inexplicable late-night halts to ballot counting followed by statistically inconceivable vote spikes for Biden, plus massive amounts of verifiable fraud.

The second attack on election integrity leveraged the massive powers of US intelligence community alumni, corporate media, and Big Tech.

When the biggest story of the entire campaign broke via the New York Post in October, these powerful groups flagrantly conspired to conceal the truth of the Chinese Communist Party funneling millions of dollars to the Biden Cartel, including credible, corroborated evidence that Joe Biden himself benefitted as the “big guy.”

Potent establishment overlords like former CIA Director John Brennan, CNN chief Jeff Zucker, and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey largely succeeded in discrediting, ignoring, and burying this bombshell story. Indeed, the very same people obsessed over a Trump-Russia election “collusion” fantasy for years showed no compunction in openly, callously colluding themselves to manipulate the 2020 election.

But, despite such malfeasance, our movement cannot devolve into a despondency of prattling lamentations.

To be sure, many events of recent weeks understandably dispirit patriotic Americans, and the threats to our Constitution and way of life are very real, indeed. But we deplorables must also recognize that we fight decades of institutional rot in American society. The Left has deftly played the long game, successfully co-opting key levers of influence in...

Tuesday, November 15, 2022

The ‘Whiteness’ Smear Is Really An Attack On Private Life, Relationships, And Universal Values


Identity politics aims to humiliate ‘whites’ by constantly accusing them of their presumed ancestors’ role in things they didn’t do themselves.

As social wounds fester, identity politics spawns social distrust and dysfunction. Political correctness cuts us off even further from open conversation with others. The agitation of mobs intimidates people into greater isolation. All these processes erode civility and grow the worst primitive instincts in people.

These mechanisms promote the narrative that revenge is justified. And, voilà, a mob can be mobilized by stimulating that destructive passion. The mob can now dish out punishment to anyone associated with the offending act, no longer to individuals who are guilty as charged according to a rule of law and due process. While identity politics segregates blacks by constantly reminding them of former oppressions, it aims to humiliate “whites” by constantly accusing them of their presumed ancestors’ role, demonizing them for things they did not do themselves.

Many willingly accept the punishment since the propaganda maintains an illusion of majority opinion. This seems to be a weakness of the so-called white demographic, particularly those in well-to-do suburbs. Working-class whites have had a lot more activist venom directed at them in recent years because of their association with populism and the 2016 presidential campaign during which Hillary Clinton labeled them a “basket of deplorables.”

Constant propaganda that threatens to mark whites as domestic terrorists or white supremacists takes its toll. Many become defensive and succumb to the threat rather than push back. Such were the probable internal dynamics that caused a thousand residents of an affluent white suburb to take a loyalty oath to the Black Lives Matter movement because of its superficial claims of being antiracist. Yet by doing so, they marked themselves as eternally guilty of racism by accepting the BLM definition of white.

But what comprises a white identity, anyway? Advocates of identity politics have made an industry of defining the term for us. The irony is that they use the same methods of propaganda and social pressures that advocates of Jim Crow laws used in the past to get Americans to accept racism.

A century ago, “whites” in America were viewed primarily as...

Thursday, August 8, 2019

The Hunt - Official Trailer [HD]







Hollywood blockbuster that satirizes killing of ‘deplorables’ causes outrage: ‘Demented and evil’

Monday, January 15, 2018

Confirmed: Trump Is, Indeed, a Very Stable Genius

By now, everyone has heard about President Donald Trump's tweet countering accusations made by the Wolff in sheep's clothing, who wrote a book detailing the supposed Shakespearian machinations that Wolff asserts are consuming the Trump White House. In his tweet, President Trump claimed he is, in fact, a "very stable genius."

Throughout the media world, this made journalists' heads explode. Dilbert creator Scott Adams points out the genius of this move by reminding people that liberals will forever mock Trump for it and that it is not a bad thing for Trump to have his name and "genius" associated with each other in perpetuity.

I recently wrote that it was genius when Trump called Elizabeth Warren "Pocahontas" at a White House ceremony. Had he merely mentioned her false claim of American Indian ancestry in order to procure a job at Harvard University, the media would have made sure no one heard about it. He set a trap, and in a futile effort to destroy him, the media took the bait.

Trump calling her "Pocahontas" and the media publicizing it made millions of people aware of what Warren had done – potential 2020 voters who would have never learned that little embarrassing tidbit from the shady past of the one who persists. (Or is she the one who resists? It's so confusing.)

Donald Trump is a master of controlling the conversation. Every time people think of Warren now, they will think of her lying to get a job, and every time someone mentions Wolff's book, people are now going to associate Donald Trump with "very stable genius."

With this president, unlike any Republican for decades, the swamp and the media no longer control the conversation. They are bystanders, and this makes them so mad that they scream and search endlessly for that one thing Trump will say that will be the bridge too far, the thing they can use to dethrone him. They want this so much that they will jump on everything he says – playing his game instead of forcing him to play theirs.

Take the infamous tweet he made about his nuclear button being bigger than little Rocket Man's nuclear button. People were appalled. It was going to start a war; it was unpresidential; it was a disaster, they said. You could almost hear liberal heads pop.

Kim Jong-un is an isolated leader who had gotten used to stealing Obama's lunch money every day. (Why do you think Obama's so thin?) It was all so predictable with Barry, but he is terrified of Donald Trump, a volatile hothead. He knows that attacking America would signal the end of his regime and his life. The Chinese have already said they won't come to his defense if he starts a war. (Note: They never did that when Barry was in charge.) So what does Kim have? Threats worked well against Barry, but everything worked well against Barry, whose brilliant idea on North Korea was a policy of "strategic patience" – you know, a seven-course meal of "do nothing and leave it for the next guy," only with a clever, pithy name because Barry never tired of showing poor deplorables how smart he was. "Do nothing" was, incidentally, his idea about almost everything, unless it was something where he could pretend to be an emperor ruling with his pen and phone.

If you watched the news this past week, there was Kim taking a meeting with his counterpart in South Korea, and there was the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, thanking Trump for helping to make it happen. Wow: I guess his confrontational approach might actually bring results after all.

Let's look at ISIS, Obama's bastard Middle Eastern child. Maybe he should have called them "the Snows" instead of "Daesh," an appellation he used instead of "ISIS." It is an acronym for the Arabic phrase "al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham." Everything Barry did had to have a little sham to it.

Obama said it would be a long fight comprising years of costly sacrifice in the form of American blood and treasure. You see, he had strict rules of engagement, dictating that American forces were not allowed to shoot first or return fire if there was a possibility of civilians around. It was the first war in history where one side wasn't allowed to shoot first and sometimes couldn't even shoot back. I wonder how many American lives were sacrificed for that. Keep in mind that this is the guy they told us is a "genius."

Once Trump threw away those ROEs, and changed Obama's policy of "defeat and allow retreat" to "defeat and pursue to the death," it took less than a year for Trump to wipe the floor with ISIS.

Liberals and the media will not admit it, but I think it's clear with both Lil' Kim and ISIS that Trump has been successful.

They say the president has the bully pulpit, and until now, that has meant getting his message out by making speeches and giving interviews. Yet the narrative has always been controlled by the left. The last Republican president able to dictate the conversation was Ronald Reagan, and even the "great communicator" was only partially successful.

Well, Donald Trump has been one hundred percent successful. When he tweets or says something off the cuff, it drives leftists crazy to the point where they will bang their heads against the wall repeatedly until they draw blood in the hope of convincing the public how unsuited and ignorant our president is.

There is a subtle genius to what Trump does and says. If you allow yourself to step back and see the big picture, Trump is extremely effective.

Ask Steve Bannon how effective he is. Bannon was presented to us by the media as the man whose hand controlled Trump the puppet, much as Cheney supposedly controlled Bush. How did that work out for him? First, he lost his job in the White House. In anger, he gave the Wolff in the henhouse many delectable quotes. For a few weeks, he was even contemplating running for higher office. That's all gone today. Forever labeled "Sloppy Steve," he lost benefactors and then his job at Breitbart. Now (with apologies to Yeats), there is no country for that old man. He is nothing more than "a tattered coat upon a stick."

I will close with this. In his book, the boy who cried "Wolff" presented Donald Trump as a semi-literate eleven-year-old boy, paranoid, delusional, and more than just a little unbalanced – so much so, in fact, that the Wolff maintains that the 25th Amendment should be invoked to depose him as president in what would be a bloodless (they should think again about that) coup.

The first thing Trump did was the "very stable genius" tweet. Then he held a successful televised bipartisan and bicameral meeting on immigration. Trump sat between Democrat Senator Dick Durbin and Democrat Rep. Steny Hoyer, two vocal supporters of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). Just as a successful CEO would do, he went around the room asking those from each party for ideas. He then vowed to sign any legislation presented to him.

As a means to an end, he dangled the return of "earmarks," whereby, in order to get a congressman's vote, money would be allocated for some project in that congressman's district. Earmarks are wrong – but as a strategy to get bipartisan support, they are effective. It's surprising how inexpensive it is to buy a politician, and wouldn't it be better to waste a few million dollars in a Democrat's district or state and get his vote for a Republican bill than have the bill fail? Maybe promising a Democrat something can get his vote to end chain migration, or to end the visa lottery, or build a wall.

It's called negotiating, and earmarks at least give Republicans something to negotiate with.

Besides, Obama spent a billion dollars on his vacations, parties, and golf outings. Are we now going to worry about a few billion dollars out of our serial multi-trillion-dollar budgets?

In any case, Trump looked every bit the statesman, CEO, and president.

In many ways, the man really is a very stable genius.

By now, everyone has heard about President Donald Trump's tweet countering accusations made by the Wolff in sheep's clothing, who wrote a book detailing the supposed Shakespearian machinations that Wolff asserts are consuming the Trump White House. In his tweet, President Trump claimed he is, in fact, a "very stable genius."

Throughout the media world, this made journalists' heads explode. Dilbert creator Scott Adams points out the genius of this move by reminding people that liberals will forever mock Trump for it and that it is not a bad thing for Trump to have his name and "genius" associated with each other in perpetuity.

I recently wrote that it was genius when Trump called Elizabeth Warren "Pocahontas" at a White House ceremony. Had he merely mentioned her false claim of American Indian ancestry in order to procure a job at Harvard University, the media would have made sure no one heard about it. He set a trap, and in a futile effort to destroy him, the media took the bait.

Trump calling her "Pocahontas" and the media publicizing it made millions of people aware of what Warren had done – potential 2020 voters who would have never learned that little embarrassing tidbit from the shady past of the one who persists. (Or is she the one who resists? It's so confusing.)

Donald Trump is a master of controlling the conversation. Every time people think of Warren now, they will think of her lying to get a job, and every time someone mentions Wolff's book, people are now going to associate Donald Trump with "very stable genius."

With this president, unlike any Republican for decades, the swamp and the media no longer control the conversation. They are bystanders, and this makes them so mad that they scream and search endlessly for that one thing Trump will say that will be the bridge too far, the thing they can use to dethrone him. They want this so much that they will jump on everything he says – playing his game instead of forcing him to play theirs.

Take the infamous tweet he made about his nuclear button being bigger than little Rocket Man's nuclear button. People were appalled. It was going to start a war; it was unpresidential; it was a disaster, they said. You could almost hear liberal heads pop.

Kim Jong-un is an isolated leader who had gotten used to stealing Obama's lunch money every day. (Why do you think Obama's so thin?) It was all so predictable with Barry, but he is terrified of Donald Trump, a volatile hothead. He knows that attacking America would signal the end of his regime and his life. The Chinese have already said they won't come to his defense if he starts a war. (Note: They never did that when Barry was in charge.) So what does Kim have? Threats worked well against Barry, but everything worked well against Barry, whose brilliant idea on North Korea was a policy of "strategic patience" – you know, a seven-course meal of "do nothing and leave it for the next guy," only with a clever, pithy name because Barry never tired of showing poor deplorables how smart he was. "Do nothing" was, incidentally, his idea about almost everything, unless it was something where he could pretend to be an emperor ruling with his pen and phone.

If you watched the news this past week, there was Kim taking a meeting with his counterpart in South Korea, and there was the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, thanking Trump for helping to make it happen. Wow: I guess his confrontational approach might actually bring results after all.

Let's look at ISIS, Obama's bastard Middle Eastern child. Maybe he should have called them "the Snows" instead of "Daesh," an appellation he used instead of "ISIS." It is an acronym for the Arabic phrase "al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham." Everything Barry did had to have a little sham to it.

Obama said it would be a long fight comprising years of costly sacrifice in the form of American blood and treasure. You see, he had strict rules of engagement, dictating that American forces were not allowed to shoot first or return fire if there was a possibility of civilians around. It was the first war in history where one side wasn't allowed to shoot first and sometimes couldn't even shoot back. I wonder how many American lives were sacrificed for that. Keep in mind that this is the guy they told us is a "genius."

Once Trump threw away those ROEs, and changed Obama's policy of "defeat and allow retreat" to "defeat and pursue to the death," it took less than a year for Trump to wipe the floor with ISIS.

Liberals and the media will not admit it, but I think it's clear with both Lil' Kim and ISIS that Trump has been successful.

They say the president has the bully pulpit, and until now, that has meant getting his message out by making speeches and giving interviews. Yet the narrative has always been controlled by the left. The last Republican president able to dictate...

Monday, September 10, 2018

SENATOR BOOKER QUOTES VIOLENT RACIST WHO URGED MURDER OF JEWS, WHITE PEOPLE

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing was the beginning of the Democrat 2020 primaries, and the winner was the Senate Democrat who yelled the worst possible thing.

That was Senator Cory Booker.

Unlike some Senate Dems, Booker didn’t just confine his attack to Brett Kavanaugh, a mild-mannered man widely beloved by both the Democrats and Republicans who worked with him, he went for broke.

The Founding Fathers were racist geniuses, Booker insisted. Their constitution was flawed. Originalism, interpreting the Constitution as it was written, rather than whatever social justice activist the Dems had managed to plant on the bench, is going to be racist and sexist, because its authors were deplorables.

“Native Americans were referred to as savages, women weren’t referred to at all, African Americans were referred to as fractions of human beings. As one civil-rights activist used to say ‘constitutu, constitu, I can only say three-fifths of the word,’” Booker bloviated.

Who is this “civil rights activist”? A violent racist who had called Adolf Hitler “the greatest white man”.

You can see why Booker might have hesitated a bit when using him to bolster his claim that the Founding Fathers of this country were flawed racist sexist men. Even though, unlike Booker’s civil rights hero, they didn’t admire Hitler or call for the mass murder of Jews.

Senator Cory Booker doesn’t yawn without first rehearsing it before three staff members and two consultants to extract the maximum amount of pathos from each fake gesture. He had been regularly delivering the same attack on the Constitution as a stump speech. You can find Senator Cory Booker bleating the same basic remarks last March at SXSW before a much friendlier lefty audience.

“Look, our founding documents are saturated — unfortunately — are scene with replete through them, these examples all those darker strains of human nature,” Booker held forth at SXSW. “Native Americans are referred to as savages, women aren’t referred to at all. Blacks are, you know Stokely Carmichael used to say, constitute constitute I can only say three fifths of the word.”

Booker appeared to have also quoted Carmichael in June of last year and again in July of this year.

There are examples going back several years, with Booker saying, “Stokely Carmichael said it best: we are the leaders we’ve been looking for.”

In a July interview this year, his Stokelyite attack on the Constitution was even harsher. “Yeah, if you read the Declaration of Independence now, you see the Native Americans referred to as “savages.” And women are clearly, by their omission, a second-class citizenry. Stokely Carmichael — I love how he used to always say, ‘Constitu-, constitu- — I can only say three-fifths of the word.’”

But the sneering line about the Constitution isn’t Stokely’s most famous quote:

Wednesday, February 23, 2022

The Treason of the Ruling Class


Because of the egocentrism and megalomania of the current ruling class, our country is inexorably and stealthily marching toward a tyrannical one-party socialist oligarchy beholden to a globalist agenda. These elites, in their determination to achieve political and societal status in perpetuity, are willingly allied with the relatively small number of true believers in their midst whose sole focus is to transform America into another failed socialist nation.

In a major step toward accomplishing that goal, the ruling class in both Canada and the United States have calculatingly acquiesced to these ideologues maliciously exploiting the Covid-19 pandemic in order to permanently consolidate their political and societal status.

The current and ongoing fascistic actions of the government in Canada in dealing with the trucker protest have revealed that this process is more advanced in Canada than it is the United States. However, this nation is not far behind as its government has also declared a de facto war on America’s unwashed masses they claim are marinated in white supremacy and racism as these “deplorables” endlessly plot insurrections and domestic terrorism.

Fearful of the spread of a populist uprising, the true believers in Canada’s ruling class, as personified by Justin Trudeau, convinced the rest of their fellow ruling elites that they must violently stifle a peaceful grass roots political protest fomented by their deliberate abrogation of individual freedom. They have brutally assaulted the demonstrators they refer to as domestic terrorists by invoking “emergency measures” designed for wartime. This has allowed the government to unilaterally and without any legal basis freeze bank accounts and seize assets, censor non-state-sanctioned media, jail people without due process and outlaw any political demonstrations opposed to the regime.

The true believers within the American ruling class, fearful of a populist uprising, convinced the rest of their alliance to go along with casting the January 6, 2021 protest as an “insurrection.” They have imprisoned many without bail or trial including those charged with misdemeanor trespassing. They have choreographed public displays of arresting those who legally entered the Capitol and some who did not enter the building. Their allies in the financial community have arbitrarily closed people’s bank accounts and businesses. They have recruited the social media conglomerates to censor speech. They have stereotyped of all who voted for Donald Trump as “domestic terrorists.”


Never in the history of this country has there ever been a more mal-educated, narcissistic, gullible, and avaricious ruling class. While unfortunately ignored by the bulk of the American citizenry for far too long, these traits were recognized and exploited by one of this nation’s most pernicious adversaries beginning five decades ago.

The Soviet Union did not intend to conquer but instead to destabilize the United State through societal and political transformation so that it would no longer be an impediment to their plans for global hegemony. In the 1960’s and 70’s the KGB recognized that the quickest way to undermine the United States was through subverting those with elitist mindsets in the political, media, entertainment, education and corporate circles.

The operational tenets of communism/socialism are particularly attractive to these egocentrics because these statist philosophies necessitate a permanent one-party ruling class and relegates the unwashed masses to de facto servitude. Having to not answer to the “deplorable” citizenry and to wallow in one’s superiority is irresistible regardless of the reality of communism/socialism. These elites are oblivious to the potential devastation to the bulk of society in becoming co-conspirators with the true believers in their midst.

As these destabilizing doctrines – the latest iterations focus on racial grievance and “equity” -- inexorably penetrate into societal leadership groups, they become the basis on which...

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

AMERICAN-HATING AMERICANS ARE THE ULTIMATE INGRATES AND HYPOCRITES



With his usual flair for hyperbole ... Donald Trump last week tweet-blasted the so-called “Squad” of female freshman Congressmen “of color” for slandering America as racist, sexist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and numerous other empty epithets. Though Trump was careless for suggesting, “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came”––since only one, Ilhan Omar, was born abroad––his sentiment is still valid, and has been shared for decades by millions of Americans angry over their homeland being demonized by immigrants and fellow citizens alike.

This sentiment was memorably captured by country singer Merle Haggard in his hit “Fightin’ Side of Me.” Released in December 1969, the song expressed the anger of the “Silent Majority” that had just put Richard Nixon in the White House. And the lyrics identified who Americans were angry at: the free, comfortable New Leftists, college students, bougie hippies, and liberal elite fellow-travelers who burned the American Flag, slandered our soldiers as baby-killers, and called their country “AmeriKKKa.” Haggard especially targeted the antiwar activists who insulted our troops even as they were fighting and dying, and who “love our milk and honey” but “preach about some other way of livin’.” Sound familiar?

But it was one line in the chorus that summed up many Americans’ attitude: “If you don’t love it leave it.” This blunt phrase became that era’s ultimate “trigger” of leftist spluttering rage and hysterical spouting of the same question-begging epithets that today inundate the rhetoric of progressive politicians and pundits––exactly the response to Trump’s later suggestion to the “Squad,” “If you’re not happy here, then you can leave.” And like today, for self-proclaimed sophisticated cosmopolitans who fancied themselves too smart for patriotism, such a déclassé love of country was fit only for the xenophobic deplorables clinging to their guns and religion.

As usual, the common sense of the masses is smarter than the received wisdom of the credentialed elite. Haggard’s line “they love our milk and honey” exposed the moral idiocy of American anti-Americanism: its hypocrisy and shameless ingratitude. So too some immigrants...

Monday, August 16, 2021

OMG! The Taliban Have Now Crossed The Line!!!


 

I Mean, Even So, They Are Still More Redeemable Than Deplorables:



Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Totalitarian Left Promises Purges And Punishment For All Trump Voters











By trying to name and shame Trump supporters, the ‘Trump Accountability Project’ betrays a preference for Soviet-style retribution over a commitment to basic decency.

If 2020 didn’t already feel enough of a Kafkaesque nightmare, the latest bit of depravity from the “hate has no home here” totalitarian left is a ghoulish scheme announced by three former Barack Obama and Pete Buttigieg staffers on Twitter last week called “The Trump Accountability Project.” Aspiring apparatchiks Emily Abrams, Michael Simon, and Hari Sevugan lauded the website whose stated mission is to “never forget those who furthered the Trump agenda.”

According to the now privatized site, whose internet archives were captured, anyone associated with the Trump administration, including those who elected him, staffed his government, funded him, endorsed him, worked in law firms for him, and who supported him in general, should be “held accountable.”

The site includes a comprehensive list of “known collaborators,” including U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, White House Chief of Staff Mike Meadows, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, campaign advisors Kellyanne Conway and Steve Bannon, and the 56 federal judges, including U.S. Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by President Trump. No one is spared: assistants, receptionists, stenographers, calligraphers—our diligent Comrades know how to name names.

The idea of punishing people who have supported Trump also surfaced among media types including Jake Tapper of CNN and Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post. All of them have called for at least social recriminations such as keeping the “guilty” from being able to support themselves and their families through paid employment.

So what exactly are these Trump deplorables going to be “held accountable” for? The reasons cited are the administration’s purported assault on democracy, separation of children from their families, encouragement of racism, and “the country’s failed response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Is this reasonable? Has the Trump administration, aided and abetted by its staff, supporters, donors, endorsers, and even independent judges, produced so horrific an environment that, even as we enter our glorious post-Trump One Party era, we should implement a program of purges and punishment?

The allegations regarding democracy are preposterous. The Democratic Party’s various policies and tactics since 2016 overwhelmingly surpass the most exaggerated allegations of Trump “authoritarianism,” and the left knows it.

Also questionable are factually selective cries about children being separated from...

Monday, April 8, 2019

The Case for Trump and a Look at 2020



The Case for Trump by the political and military scholar Victor Davis Hanson is a book dedicated to the "Deplorables." It is a fact-based analysis of why Donald Trump was able to win the presidency in 2016. Beyond that, Hanson sat down with American Thinker and discussed the presidential election in 2020.

Donald Trump ran against both political parties and the East Coast establishment in the 2016 presidential election. He was the first man ever elected to the nation's highest office without prior experience in government, politics, or the military. In a nutshell, Trump appealed to a forgotten but sizable portion of the population: the working and middle classes most negatively impacted by decades of globalism. Through direct quotes from various individuals on both sides, Hanson makes a powerful case that the elite of both parties hold immense disdain for these middle Americans.

Hanson told American Thinker, "He was not supposed to win. With the victory, he interrupted sixteen years of a planned progressive agenda. This election was a referendum on prior credibility. His victory meant all those who were consulted in the past would be isolated because Trump was not necessarily going to listen to those in the World Bank, the Brookings Institution, Hoover Institution where I work, and the Council on Foreign Affairs, nor was he going to call past presidents for advice. This was an affront to the entire political establishment."

Before Trump, Republicans and conservatives usually did not take the initiative, nor did they go on the offense. "Trump did just the opposite. His aggression was very popular among the frustrated Republican voters. They did not want a John McCain or a Mitt Romney whose often passive attitude they saw as a cancer. McCain had ignored attacking Reverend Wright and his outrageous comments, while Romney never really objected to what 'moderator' Candy Crowley did in the second debate. Conservative voters were ready for someone who fights back. They might not like all Trump's wild comments and tweeting, but they thought Trump's combative attitude was worth it."

Hanson went on to explain that many voters saw Trump as authentic. Regardless of what audience he was speaking to, he always wore a suit and a tie. "He never adopted a southern accent when speaking to voters in that region as Hillary Clinton did, or changed his tone when speaking to the inner city as Barack Obama had, or wore jeans and a flannel shirt at state fairs as Joe Biden did. Even though he is a multibillionaire, people found Trump more authentic and empathetic. For example, after Hillary Clinton said she wanted to shut down the coal industry, he went into West Virginia and said he loved the 'big and beautiful coal.' He also gives straight answers, not the 50-50 type, such as 'on the one hand, in theory, maybe we will take a look at that, that is a good question to explore.'"

Fast-forwarding to 2020, Hanson believes that Trump's track record is pretty good. He is creating economic opportunity through growth, redressing longstanding trade inequities, reducing costly and poorly conceived overseas entanglements, cutting red tape that restricts business activity, and restricting illegal immigration that threatens...

Thursday, September 19, 2019

Desperate Dems turning to fatally flawed Warren

Okay, so Joe Biden is proving such an embarrassment that he can’t be trusted to remain plausibly coherent for the 14 long moths until the election. And Kamala Harris, the Great Intersectional Hope, is so transparently phony that voters are abandoning her. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders is no longer the anti-Hillary alternative that he was in 2016, and his cranky persona is wearing thin.

So, what’s a member of the Democrats’ gentry – the educated professional classes – to do? Steven Hayward of Powerline, a very astute observer, thinks that Elizabeth Warren is the next candidate who will take the lead.

Pollster Mark Murray points out that only 9 percent of Democrats say their mind is made up; Warren has emerged as the leading second-choice candidate if Biden stumbles, and Warren’s supporters show the highest intensity/enthusiasm level, which is always something successful campaigns build on. You can almost sense the media starting to get behind her. Biden has the look of Bob Dole in 1996: an old party warhorse that Democrats might accept, but without great enthusiasm, as this chart shows:

She’s lefty like Bernie, but with an intellectual veneer that comes with having been a tenured professor at Harvard Law School. That she snagged that prestigious job by faking Native American heritage is her first fatal flaw. Blacks, who comprise a quarter of the Democrats’ vote in presidential elections, are simply not going to turn out for someone who appropriated victim status and the preferences that accompany it today. It’s not just an “uphill” struggle, as The Hill delicately puts it, it’s a futile struggle.

Black turnout either makes or breaks a Democrat running for president. This skinny, white, old lady is just not going to inspire a lot of African-Americans.

And now, seeking feminist credibility, she is turning on the male half of the population:

Miranda Device elaborates in The New York Post:
Elizabeth Warren made the political calculation this week that she doesn’t need men to win the presidency.

“We’re not here today because of famous arches or famous men,” she told a rally in Washington Square Park Monday night.

“In fact, we’re not here because of men at all,” she said, emphasizing the “m” word like an expletive.

Great. Then she won’t mind if men don’t vote for her, nor women who like men.

It’s a losing strategy, taken straight out of the playbook of Hillary Clinton, from whom, reportedly and inexplicably, Warren has been taking advice.
Millions of American women showed in 2016 that they weren’t prepared to vote for Clinton just because she had a second X chromosome. White, noncollege-educated women in particular voted almost 2-to-1 for Donald Trump in 2016.

Most likely, they didn’t approve of the denigration of their menfolk as “deplorables” abusing “white male privilege” when the truth is that...

Monday, April 27, 2020

Our Virus Is a Violent Teacher











For a brief season in time, we glimpsed from the awful epidemic what was wheat and what was chaff, what was mahogany beneath and what a scrapped thin veneer above, who were the V8s and who the mere gaudy, tail fins—and how America ultimately got by and how it almost didn’t.


By Victor Davis Hanson • April 26, 2020

“War is a violent teacher.”—Thucydides

Before this virus has passed, those of the New York Symphony, like the defeated Redcoats at proverbial Yorktown, will be playing the real “The World Turned Upside Down”:

And then strange motions will abound.
Yet let’s be content, and the times lament,
you see the world turn’d upside down.

Before the virus, apparently we were prepping for our brave new progressive, centrally planned dystopia.

During the Barack Obama years, government agencies had begun to chart a new inclusive future for hoi polloi Americans. We were lectured frequently that the Obama arc of the moral universe was long, but it always bent toward his sense of justice. Translated that meant, like it or not, we Americans had a preordained moral rendezvous with a progressive destiny.

Suburban lifestyles, yards, grass, rural living, and commute driving were to be phased out. High rises, government run-buses, and high-speed rail were in: more people in less space, with less energy consumed, meant less trouble. Granny was better off in a green rest home, not the back bedroom.

Ohio was over; the EU was our future. Clean coal was a 20th-century embarrassment; the next and future Solyndra would be cutting-edge. The idea that the United States ought to be self-sufficient in energy and food seemed worthy of yawns.

Instead of the backyard barbeque and a lawn, apartment dwellers would enjoy shared green belts around their communal towers—albeit not as large as the Martha’s Vineyard estate of Barack Obama or the palazzo of Nancy Pelosi.

Universities were to speak truth to power in new race/class/gender missions and diversity/inclusion/equality agendas. The old boring curriculum of math, science, engineering, literature, language, history, and Western Civ were sputtering out, or recalibrated to include social activist themes.

After all, China and India would supply the world’s next boring generation of rote engineers. But they could not invent, compute, or formulate without our brilliant peace studies and ethnic studies geniuses to give them moral instruction.

“Knowledge” became a relative construct, not an absolute that could be roughly calibrated. Students needed to appreciate that traditional curricula and grades were merely models of leveraging power by arbitrarily setting “standards”—pathologies that could only be understood by appreciating how the marginalized “Other” was victimized by them.

Being “woke” meant fathoming how unmet personal expectations ought always to be attributed to the fault of someone else—and, even worse, that “someone else” might be dead or alive. The Squad just told us so. Now Chairman Xi agrees.

Billions of dollars of university capital and budgets were diverted to new administration and faculty investments that might focus on how young people thought of themselves rather than what they actually knew. Everyone understood the job of vice provost for diversity, equity, and inclusion might easily disappear in a nanosecond and never be missed. No one dared to hint at the suggestion.

All were cynically aware that the vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion made enough money to avoid living in a “diverse” neighborhood, put his own kids in a school where all were equally not poor, and wanted to be included among the elite.

There were new winners and losers in a transnational United States, and such university administrators were among the winners.

Globalization was to be seen as some sort of ultimate talent meter that finally told us not only who was talented but, more important, who was worthy. The dumb un-globalized losers could not figure out how to code, or lacked a communications major or international relations degree, or had not spent a semester abroad in China, or did not understand global investment. They clung to some ancient shibboleth—“Made in America”—as if producing stuff here really mattered.

So the deplorables and Lysol drinkers more or less deserved the hollowed-out manufacturing landscape, closed assembly plants, and industrial wasteland of the nation’s interior that anachronistically and foolishly had bet that muscular labor still had a place in the postmodern world.

Erasing Reality

Dummies! Fitness comes from the Peloton, not mastery of masonry or welding. Drones, artificial intelligence, and robots could easily crawl under the house and fix the drainpipe, or shimmy into the attic to...

Friday, September 30, 2016

Deplorables, Let's Make A New Start In November!


Thursday, January 18, 2018

Basket Of Deplorables... Old School...


Saturday, October 7, 2023

Hillary Clinton Wants Trump Voters To Undergo A ‘Formal Deprogramming’






Failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton believes half of the country needs to be forcibly re-educated to abandon the ideology that led them to vote for former President Donald Trump.

In a sitdown interview with CNN on Thursday, Clinton — who infamously said in 2016 that half of Trump’s supporters belonged in a “basket of deplorables” — alleged that “MAGA extremists” who only “take their marching orders from Donald Trump” deserve to be brainwashed.

“When do they break with him?” Clinton pondered aloud. “Because at some point, maybe there needs to be a formal deprogramming of the cult members. But something needs to happen.”

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, who conducted the interview, nodded in response.

The longtime sore loser implied that she’s used to partisan “bitter battles” over issues like “gun control and climate change and the economy and taxes.” When it comes to engaging with the GOP under Trump, however, she can’t stomach it without suggesting mass indoctrination.

“There wasn’t this little tail of extremism waving, you know, wagging the dog of the Republican Party as it is today,” Clinton insisted.

The former secretary of state not only accused GOP politicians and voters of saying and doing things that “they know better than to say or do,” but suggested those who dissent from Democrats’ preferred narrative should face consequences.

“It will require us defeating those most extreme measures and the people who promote them in order to try to get to some common ground where people can, again, work together,” Clinton said.

Clinton claimed Trump voters “don’t like migrants, maybe they don’t like gay people or black people or the woman who got the promotion at work” and that they are being emotionally and psychologically manipulated by the top Republican.

“It’s a classic tale of an authoritarian, populist, who really has a grip on the emotional, psychological needs and desires of a portion of the population,” Clinton said. “And the base of the Republican Party, for whatever combination of reasons — and it is emotional and psychological — sees in him someone who speaks for them.”

Clinton said propelling Biden to victory in 2024 and returning power to old-guard, establishment pawns, “the right people inside the Republican Party,” are the only ways to quell Trump-era populism.

“It is like a cult and somebody has to break that momentum. And that’s why I believe Joe Biden will defeat him and hopefully then, that will be the end and the fever will break,” Clinton said.

Removing Trump from the equation, Clinton assured Amanpour, will get Republicans “to get back to fighting about issues among themselves and electing people who are least responsible and accountable.”

Long before Clinton complained about Trump voters to CNN, members of the current regime including President Joe Biden, his White House, Democrats in Congress, Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and other officials named Trump voters and “domestic extremism” or other coded words used to disparage them as the nation’s biggest threat. Their collective campaign against what they deemed Republican wrongthink has manifested in the political prosecution of their No. 1 political opponent and his...

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Just A Reminder Fellow Deplorables...


Thursday, October 11, 2018

Hillary Clinton Is Dangerous

Neither she nor her party can be trusted with power anymore.

Many Americans have been wondering when the Democrats are finally going to calm down and accept the will of the voters as expressed in the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton provided the answer Tuesday afternoon — never. She clearly believes that Republican control of Congress or the Presidency is, by definition, illegitimate and must be resisted by any means necessary. During an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour she said, “[Y]ou cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for.” She went on to say that “civility can start again” when the Democrats regain control of the government.

She declared, in other words, that the peaceful transfer of power which has long been the hallmark of our system of government now applies only when her side wins and that she won’t stop stoking unrest until the “deplorables” learn their place: “But until then,” she said, “the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.” By “strength” she means “violence,” as experienced by Republicans Steve Scalise and Rand Paul. The last time leading Democrats utilized such irresponsible language was in 1860, when their refusal to accept the result of an election caused a war that got 600,000 Americans killed.

If this analogy seems over the top, consider that she has been employing this kind of rhetoric for nearly two years and has worked her minions into such a demented state that the Senate had to be converted into an armed camp last week to guarantee the safety of Republicans carrying out what should have been a dignified and sedate process — the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice. And remember that it was on the floor of this very chamber, “the world’s greatest deliberative body,” that pro-slavery Democrat Preston Brooks attacked Republican Senator Charles Sumner with a cane and very nearly killed him on May 22, 1856:

Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself.… Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers.

Like the passive onlookers to the attack on Senator Sumner, Clinton’s fellow Democrats have been silent concerning her thinly veiled incitement of violence. Only one of the self-styled moderate Democrats, Senator Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, found Clinton’s remarks worthy of comment, much less condemnation. And, make no mistake about it, their silence equals consent. By refusing to call out this power-hungry harridan for deliberately casting doubt on the legitimacy of the democratic process and encouraging violence, these cowards render themselves complicit in the inevitable....

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

The Pathetic Democratic Pantheon


Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi are of no use to the Left in the midterms because it is their radical ideology that was finally enacted and wrecked the country.

Over the last few months the four icons of the Democratic Party—Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Nancy Pelosi—have hit the campaign trail.

They’ve weighed in on everything from “right-wing violence” and “election denialists” to the now tired “un-American” semi-fascist MAGA voter—and had nothing much to say about inflation, the border, crime, energy, or the Afghanistan debacle. In this, they remind us just how impoverished and calcified is this left-wing pantheon.

So why should we take anything they say seriously, given their own records—and especially given their mastery of projecting their own shortcomings upon others as some sort of private exculpation or preemptive political strategy?
Still Hopin’ and Changin’?

Barack Obama this past week has assumed the role of surrogate president. He is storming the country, while Joe Biden mopes at home or visits shrinking blue enclaves so he can claim post facto, “At least I was out there stumping.”

Over the last six years, we have become accustomed to Obama’s periodic getaways from one of his three estates. It is always the same. From time to time, he reenters politics to remind us that he did not just cash in on his presidency to become a multi-millionaire. Instead, he is still the Chicago “community activist” of his youth. And so, Obama will not be overshadowed by the Biden crew that is enacting all the crazy things he as president had warned were a bit much even for him.

At the funeral of the late John Lewis, Obama turned his eulogy into a political rant. He weighed in on the “racist” filibuster, the “Jim Crow relic” that he desperately sought in vain to use to stop the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito.

At campaign stops, he deplores “divisions” that he, more than any modern figure, helped create. The entire left-wing vocabulary of disparagement for the white lower-working classes (e.g., deplorables, dregs, chumps, irredeemables, etc.) got its start with Obama’s putdown of Pennsylvania voters who rejected him in the 2008 primaries as “clingers.”

In interviews, Obama suddenly now blasts harsh rhetoric—this from the wannabe tough guy who stole the “The Untouchables” line about bringing a knife to a gun fight. Well before crazy Maxine Waters’ calls to arms, Obama advised his supporters “get in their faces.”

Still, on the campaign trail, Obama appears not so much animated as stale. It is as if he has been suddenly stirred from a long coma that commenced in 2008. It’s the same old, same old—sleeves rolled up. He still resorts to the scripted outbursts of mock anger. And the nerdy prep school graduate still amateurishly modulates his patois—now policy wonk, now breaking into the Southern African-American pastor accent when an audience needs more preachy authenticity.

He still tries to rev up his crowds with the familiar attacks: Republican demons will cut Social Security, the MAGA semi-fascists are captives of Donald Trump (as if the Democrats have not ceded their souls to woke hysterics), the Republican fanatics will all but kill women by denying abortions, and extremists unlike himself are dividing the country.

On and on, Obama shouts about social justice. And then he wraps up and must decide to which of his mansions he will fly home (via private jet)—Kalorama, Martha’s Vineyard, Hyde Park, or soon the Waimanalo estate.

Obama offers no solutions much less hints at his own culpability in his sermons. There is nothing about the open border he helped birth. Nothing about Biden’s failed energy policies now bankrupting the middle class that were simply a reification of his energy secretary Steven Chu’s perverse wishes for European-priced gas (“Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”).

There is nothing about Obama’s old boasts about shutting down coal plants and skyrocketing electricity (“Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”).

Nothing is said about the Skip Gates psychodrama and his blanket stereotyped attack on police, the tossing of his own grandmother under the racial bus, the Trayvon Martin racial editorialization, the Ferguson mythologies, and all his efforts to create a binary nation of oppressors and oppressed, as Obama himself determined who is the victim, who the...