Saw this on the Twitter and put my own artsy spin on it.
Saw this on the Twitter and put my own artsy spin on it.
I love this. Such a great point & it’s succinct!
THE MEDIA HAS FAILED US, MISERABLY
SO IT’S NOW UP TO US
TO HOLD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE
USING ANY MEANS NECESSARY
Greg Gutfeld of Fox News has called out some fellow conservatives for lauding the email leaks made widely available by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.
“What does it say when you embrace one hack because it hurts someone, but not another. Doesn’t that make you a hack, too?”
Hacking is a part of modern life. We need to embrace its benefits while also protecting our stuff.
“All bets, and principles, are off. It’s selfish, deliberate, moral blindness that comes with team-sport politics.”
Greg, it’s not about hurting our political opponents. It’s about holding government and politicians accountable. Since bureaucrats and bureaucracies appear to be dead set on stonewalling investigations and flouting the law, we need WikiLeaks and others willing to shine light on misdeeds now more than ever.
You, along with a few others, such as Andrew Breitbart, have helped bring conservatism back to life. And for that I am thankful. So many, particularly Establishment types, have ruined the brand with their cozy backroom deals and Big Government largess.
The corrupt State has been willingly abetted by the media, so much so that figures like Julian Assange are now an essential part of democracy. He is the whistleblower who exposes the corrupt deeds of the arrogant, the abusive, the powerful. He is the man, the latest incarnation, standing athwart history yelling, “Stop!”
With the media failing miserably to their jobs, hackers are becoming an important factor in keeping Big Brother accountable.
I’ve been watching a few clips archived on YouTube where magician Penn Jillette talks about getting to know Donald Trump.
In one from 2013, he describes Trump as Scrooge McDuck, which given our nation’s looming fiscal crisis of soaring national deficits and debt doesn’t sound bad at all. In fact, it is precisely what we need. A hawk to watch over our money and protect it from the greedy and the power hungry.
E.J. Dionne, a partisan hack at The Washington Post, has written a column predicting the end of the Republican Party.
There’s some good historical background in it. He writes of Whigs and Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln. The party was born to fight slavery and the powers-that-be in the South.
“The Republicans descending on Cleveland would thus have every right to insist that all Americans owe a large debt to the GOP. We are a better, freer and more prosperous nation because their party was born.”
Well, thanks for that. At least Dionne gave us something, because the rest of his column is one giant libel against populism, conservatism, nationalism, protectionism, and Donald Trump.
“Of course it would be historically naive to pretend that time has stood still since 1856. To do so would mean ignoring that the South, which hated the original Republicans, is now the dominant force in the party.”
And yet that is precisely what Dionne does. He treats the Republicans and the South as if we are still stuck in an era where blacks can’t vote and Democrats are the only saviors of mankind.
Unlike Dionne and many of his co-horts, most of the nation has moved on from the racism of the past.
I don’t know if Roger Ailes is a habitual harasser of women. But I do have my doubts, given the circumstances. An anchor’s contract is not renewed. She sues, claiming sexual harassment.
The defendant is a huge target, no pun intended. He operates the largest TV outlet for conservatism in the United States. So, it was surprising to hear of another six women alleging wrongdoing. Honestly, I thought there’d be more. I was surprised there wasn’t a tidal wave. Because that’s what the Left does to its opponents in the political arena: character assassination en masse.
Just look to Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Ronald Reagan, Maggie Thatcher, Nancy Reagan . . . The list is endless.
I never understood why Ailes hired Gretchen Carlson in the first place. Watching her on Fox & Friends was often painful. As so many liberal watchdogs have noted, she ain’t that smart. She’s ditzy. It’s sad to say.
I don’t want to malign her. I really don’t. But she has waded into the no man’s land of a brutal war: left versus right. It’s not a good place to be when you don’t have the brains to fight. That’s how this war is fought. Through arguments and reason. She’s not equipped for this.
That’s why I am assuming someone got to her. Someone, perhaps a few feminist so-called friends, recruited her in an attempt to bring down one of the reasons why conservatism has been fighting hard and sometimes winning: the man behind Fox News, Roger Ailes.
Maybe if they’re lucky, just maybe they can bring down Fox News itself. Don’t think this isn’t a primary goal of the leftists. The Democrats sitting on the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, have been trying to do just that.
So, sadly, Gretchen Carlson appears to be the latest Anita Hill. Carlson is the latest tool in the Democratic wood shed. The enemies of conservatism and Fox News are hoping to bring the network to an untimely end, by whatever means necessary. Because conservatism is so damn dangerous in their eyes.
Once Carlson is no longer useful to these radical partisans, she will be jettisoned as easily as a bit of moldy bread. And I don’t think she realizes that. She won’t have many friends left after that.
In two recent interviews, one with the Associated Press and another with The New York Times the next day where she doubled-down, Ruth Bader Ginsburg officially waded into the politic arena, despite years of precedence otherwise. Of course, when did decades of precedence stop a Supreme Court justice?
“No wonder they call her Notorious RBG. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has just declared war against Donald Trump . . . ”
I remember reading about the Notorious RBG. Fans of the activist, who landed on the Supreme Court during a time of notorious activism thanks to supplicant Republicans, gave her the nickname years ago. It’s a play on a rapper, The Notorious B.I.G., who was gunned down in 1997 on the streets of Los Angeles.
A book with the moniker, a fawning biography of Ginsburg, was published a few years back. It was popular throughout the mainstream media, with numerous interviews of the authors on everything from NPR to MSNBC.
The writer of the second interview, employed by The New York Times, both notable allies of the Notorious RBG, was “so astounded that he warned his readers before he reported her comments that normally justices ‘diligently avoid political topics.’”
As she attacked Trump, “she was smiling ‘ruefully’.”
“It wasn’t the only line she crossed in the interview. Ginsburg also daydreamed out loud about overturning the gun-rights case known as Heller. The Times even seemed to want to protect Ginsburg from the fallout from this error of judgment, deleting it from the article until sharp-eyed readers called out the paper and the lines were restored.”
What would happen if Clarence Thomas or any other justice had spoken out against Obama? Or Hillary?
“Imagine if one of the conservative justices had said such a thing about the prospect of, say, a President Hillary Clinton. There’d be a cacophony of calls for impeachment.”
Of course, no one among her friends, no one at The New York Times — not a single, lonely soul on the Left — has said a damn thing about Ginsburg’s big mouth. They never let Scalia say anything without a bunch of snide remarks.
“So far, Ginsburg’s electioneering hasn’t been met with even a peep of protest from the editorial board of the Times — or any other Democratic Party-aligned paper. Then again, she’s a liberal.”
Admittedly, I don’t know much about Jared Kushner. He is the publisher of the New York Observer. He is married to Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka.
He has been a Democrat for many years, donating more than $100,000 to various candidates since 1992.
The recent controversies prompted him to respond to the attacks on his father-in-law.
“ . . . accusations like ‘racist’ and ‘anti-Semite’ are being thrown around with a carelessness that risks rendering these words meaningless.”
I wish more of the media would break out of the constantly rehashed talking points of the Democrats. It is just nauseating.
“It doesn’t take a ton of courage to join a mob.”
I enjoy keeping up with the news. I’m a big collector of information, stuff that interests me.
One of my staples is reading the local college papers. Whenever I am on a campus, I try to remember to pick a copy.
Recently I grabbed a copy of The Daily, the student newspaper at the University of Washington. It is only published on Wednesdays during the summer, I think.
Of course, there’s plenty of leftist drivel throughout any edition. Most of it is not worthy of comment. But one piece on gender identity got my focus.
There’s been some controversy about a video uploaded by campus activists to YouTube. According to the reporter, the video had accumulated 240,000 dislikes. This promptly got the attention of the trigger warning protection gestapo.
“ . . . YouTube disabled the comment section because the response to this sense of pride has been overwhelmingly negative.”
And, of course, this thumbs down commentary has been described as hateful and hurtful.
“This is just one, large-scale example of the many indignities that the LGBTQIA+ community, specifically transgender people, face.”
Having people give your video a thumbs down is suddenly an indignity?
“Jen Self, director of the Q Center at the UW, explained that most injustices go largely unnoticed by those unfamiliar with the transgender experience.”
Yeah, I’ve never experienced any “injustice” and whatnot. You see, I am not transgendered, so how the hell could I possibly know anything?
Differences of opinion are natural. Open debate is what a free society is all about. Or has this campus moved on from that?
When did criticism become automatically classified as bigotry? Everyone needs to grow up. Criticism is healthy. Groupthink is not.
I hate to give the campus authoritarians any ideas, but will disliking the wrong YouTube video be grounds for dragging someone in for a disciplinary hearing? Will it soon become a hate crime to comment negatively on gay pride videos?