Don Surber"So, the West Hollywood City Council thought it would rid Hollywood of President Trump's Walk of Fame Star. "President Trump's supporters had other idea[s]. "
"Concerned about being attacked for the art, the group kept the name on the stars covered until they were all positioned.
“I didn’t want to get hit over the head from behind. We thought Trump Derangement Syndrome was a joke, but I’m pretty sure it’s real,” one of the artists told the Hollywood Reporter. “If no one peels these off, they could last there for 10 years.”
"Sadly, it seems that they have already been peeled off, as local businesses were worried about another maniac coming by with a pick ax."
Thomas Friedman: Media should work together to hurt Trump"Liberal New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman said the news media should work together and saturate the public with negative coverage of President Trump in order to erode his popularity among Republican voters.
"Friedman said in an op-ed published Wednesday afternoon that if the media emphasize Trump's personality instead of news about the strong economy, it may discourage enough GOP voters from continuing to support the president and benefit Democrats." . . .
The effect it all has on you when the liberal culture loves you:
How the Press Lies about Itself. . . "In the same way, you can be very much in favor of the free press but against dishonest, agenda-driven reporting – i.e., "fake news." In each set, one of these things – legal immigration and the free press – is not like the other one – illegal immigration and fake news – and that's true no matter how much somebody scruple-challenged might bleat otherwise in order to gain purchase on a fraudulent, dishonest position." . . . Wall Street Journal peddling 'blue wave' doom. . . "We have been told since at least 2008, when Obama won, that there is a blue wave. People have said, repeating Democrat talking points, that the Republicans must move left and join in with Democrats on their policies or they will never win again. Instead, the Republicans moved right with the Tea Party, advocating for smaller government and fewer regulations (which the public likes), and from 2010 to 2016, the Republicans picked up majorities in the House and the Senate and over 1,000 seats nationwide – and yet we continue to get the nostrum that Republicans had better move left and give in to illegal aliens, or else they will never win again." . . .
The collusion among the DNC, Hillary, the Obama administration, the Justice Department, the State Department, and the media to protect and elect Hillary and to destroy Trump and Republicans is much more dangerous than anything the Russians or other countries have ever done or could ever do.
TD tried several times to post a jpeg photo of Jones but the server rejected it every time, even the photo that came with this Weekly Standard article. It finally accepted this political "cartoon".
"There's no reason for conservatives to be defending this guy.
"One of the downstream effects of Trumpism is that the fact of having a President Trump has given conservatives a hair-trigger on defending every marginal figure, no matter how stupid or malicious. It’s easy to understand why: Trump is close to these people in form and substance, so allowing them to be attacked can be seen as a proxy argument against Trump. No conservatives would have felt duty-bound to defend Milo Yiannopoulos had Mitt Romney been president. "But we are where we are, so various conservatives have risen to defend Alex Jones in the wake of Facebook, YouTube, and Apple kicking him off of their platforms. Their defenses come across three vectors, each of which is flawed. "(1) It’s a First Amendment issue. Let’s dispense with this one off the top: No, it’s not. And conservatives used to understand the difference between having the right to say something and having the right to say something without consequences. "None of the tech companies that have de-platformed Jones are impinging on his right to speech. He can still record and disseminate podcasts and videos. He can still publish whatever conspiracy theories he wants. No one is threatening him with violence or jail or a fine or denying him a license to carry on as he pleases. No arm of government touches this case in any way. "All that is happening is that privately owned companies are declining to allow him to use their resources to broadcast his speech. There is no First Amendment case—none at all. "(2) It’s an equal-access issue. You might recall a couple months ago when conservatives celebrated the Masterpiece Cake Shop decision. (Rightly, in my view.) The nub of their argument was that privately held businesses ought to be allowed to refuse certain kinds of services to certain customers, provided that (1) the refusal was based on reasonable, non-discriminatory grounds and that (2) the person being refused had reasonable recourse to an alternative remedy. "That’s precisely what has happened here. Jones is being denied access based on his behavior and actions, not who or what he is. And he has an enormous, obvious, and reasonable remedy: The Internet." . . .
Rick Moran. . . "Congress is considering even more severe sanctions for Russian meddling in the 2016 election. The president and the State Department have not signed off on new sanctions, however, citing the damage new sanctions would cause U.S.-Russia bilateral relations.
"This proves, of course, that Trump is not Putin's "lap dog," nor is he being "run" by Russian intelligence. Trump's mild reaction and expressed disbelief regarding Russia's clear interference in the 2016 election is troubling to many but hardly "proof" of collusion.
"It's a shame that the left didn't display this kind of suspicion of President Obama, who enabled the terror state Iran to expand its influence in the region by lifting sanctions after negotiating a one sided, ineffective agreement on Tehran's nuclear program."
Some Dare Call It Treason"Trump’s Helsinki remarks impugned his judgment, not his loyalty, and the idea that disagreement with the intelligence agencies constitutes treason is profoundly disquieting."
"President Trump has won another victory: Germany’s central bank has terminated a $400 million cash delivery to Iran.
"Deutsche Bundesbank has previously worked with the Iranian-owned European-Iranian trade bank (EIH) to end-around sanctions the United States has placed on Iran. As Fox News reports, “The U.S. and the European Union previously sanctioned the EIH for its role in advancing Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. The sanctions on the EIH were lifted after the world powers reached an agreement to curb Iran's nuclear program in 2015.”
"In July, it was revealed that German Chancellor Angela Merkel's government was trying to circumvent the sanctions that were implemented this week. U.S. ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell urged Merkel to terminate the $400 million cash delivery." . . .
To decry her anti-white ‘racism’ gives her too much credit for originality.
"The most significant feature of Sarah Jeong, the New York Times’ embattled new editorial board member, is not that she is a “racist,” as her critics put it. It is that she is an entirely typical product of the contemporary academy. "After the New York Times announced Jeong’s hire in early August, web sleuths dug out a mother lode of tweets demonstrating an obsession with whites. Samples include “white men are [bullsh**],” “#cancelwhitepeople,” “National/ Pretty goddam white/ Radio,” “I’m tired of being mad about white dudes. I’m going to pretend they don’t exist for a week,” and “I figured it out. Powerful white women automatically receive officer status in Club Feminism. Unless they disavow.” Both the Times and Jeong blamed her posts on . . . you guessed, it, whites. Her status as a “young Asian woman,” in the Times’ words, made her a subject of frequent online harassment, to which she responded “for a period of time” by “imitating the rhetoric of her harassers.” "This argument was, to borrow a phrase, bullsh**. Jeong’s five-year tweet trail is much longer than a mere “period of time” during which she allegedly experimented with counter-trolling. But most important, her tweets are not imitative of anything other than the ideology that now rules the higher-education establishment, including UC Berkeley and Harvard Law School, both of which Jeong attended. And that ideology is taking over non-academic institutions, whether in journalism, publishing, the tech sector, or the rest of corporate America. Sarah Jeong’s tweets and blog posts are just a marker of the world we already live in." . . . NYTimes Has Embraced The BIGOTRY Of Identity Politics. . . "Why are purveyors of identity politics so committed to preventing open conversations and freedom of association? Why don’t purveyors of identity politics realize that cultivating bitterness in people condemns millions of individuals to social isolation and punishment? Or do they realize this and not care?" . . . Ann Coulter: Sarah Jeong Better Drive Carefully!. . . "But the federal “hate crimes” statute allows the feds to skirt the Constitution’s ban on double jeopardy — at least for certain kinds of “hate.”
— The stabbing of Yankel Rosenbaumby assailants yelling “Get the Jew!”: NOT a federal hate crime.
— The brutal kidnapping and murder of a young white couple in Knoxville, Tennessee, by black youths: NOT a federal hate crime.
— The torture of a mentally disabled kid in Chicago, by assailants saying “F— white people!” and “F— Trump!”: NOT a federal hate crime. (Curiously, none of the attackers was Sarah Jeong.)
— A white man killing a white woman by driving into a crowd of left-wing protesters: THAT’S a federal hate crime.
"To make their case, prosecutors did a deep dive into Fields’ social media postings to prove that, yes, while he might have killed a white woman in this particular case, he’s still a racist." . . .
Shouldn't even the left be sick of the old "it's racism" schtick by now? TD
Power Line "When President Trump assumed office, I resolved to begin watching CNN’s talk shows. Why? Because I wanted to make sure I heard reasoned criticism of the new administration.
"After about two weeks, I concluded that there was precious little reasoned criticism of Trump to be found on CNN. Typically, the network served up bloated panels with each member trying to outdo the others in mindlessly attacking the new president.
"Finding CNN unwatchable, I turned to Charlie Rose. He was insufferable, but asked mostly intelligent questions to mostly intelligent guests. We all know what became of Charlie, however.
"By then, I realized that I could get my fill of anti-Trump content — some reasoned, some not — just by reading the Washington Post every day.
"Of all the folks I watched during my brief flirtation with CNN, Don Lemon struck me as the least intelligent. Thus, although President Trump’s recent statement that Lemon is the dumbest man on television covers a vast amount of territory, I’m not about to quarrel.
"Lemon, naturally, is quarreling. But he’s doing so in a way that reinforces Trump’s assessment. Lemon claims that it is racist to call an African-American dumb, regardless, presumably, of whether he is. He said:
The president has called a lot of people stupid. Some of those people are white. But I would just like to note that referring to an African American as dumb — remember this is America — is one of the oldest canards of America’s racist past and present: that black people are of inferior intelligence.
"Here’s what Lemon is saying: Racists believe African-Americans are intellectually inferior to Whites. Donald Trump has called a few of his African-American critics, as well as some of his Whites ones, dumb. Therefore, believes African-Americans are intellectually inferior to Whites. Therefore, Donald Trump is a racist." . . .
. . . Wallace, one of the Trump administration's fiercest critics at MSNBC, didn't seem to know that as she closed her daytime program with the report—the show came back from commercial break with panelists already giggling—and noted Michael Cohen, Trump's former attorney, was apparently not the only person in the president's orbit to record their conversations. Free Beacon
"Objective journalist. But turns out with most of the things they pin their hopes on, it’s so far pretty innocuous." Via Free Beacon:
MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace sounded ebullient on Wednesday over a report that former White House aide Omarosa Manigault-Newman secretly recorded conversations with President Donald Trump.
The Daily Beast reported she secretly taped Trump and leveraged the conversations while shopping her new “tell-all” book about her time in the White House, entitled Unhinged. The report noted multiple sources “described the recorded conversations between Trump and Manigault as anodyne, everyday chatter, but said they did appear to feature Trump’s voice, either over the phone or in-person.” . . .
There are, of course, some good reviews. Randy DeSoto writes for the Western Journal. He is right when he says that the film "leaves you with a sense of pride for what the United States has stood for...." He is exactly right. If only the American left could feel pride in America and how its success as a democratic republic has benefitted the world. But they don't feel pride, they feel anger and rage. Why is a mystery to behold.
Patricia McCarthy"Unsurprisingly, Dinesh D'Souza's film Death of a Nation has made the loud voices on the left stark, raving mad. A perfect example is the film review website, Rotten Tomatoes. The eleven critics gave the film a zero. The voting audience gave it 90% approval. The same is true at all the typically leftwing sites that review films."
. . . "The hysterical reaction to this film by the left is yet another sad commentary on the state of American education. The film is thoughtful and balanced. Unlike privileged film reviewers like Scheck, D'Souza, an immigrant from India, sees so clearly what is great about America. He is grateful that it is his country now.
"Few, if any American leftists ever express gratitude for being born in America. They relentlessly complain and malign this country. They have no appreciation, no gratitude for their good fortune to be American. That's what they do. That is who they are." . . .
Knowing how the Clintons operate, and knowing how they never intend to go away, one can safely conclude that they aren't going to let this stand. There will be payback to the Democrats for this, and the Clintons will make it miserable. For Republicans, all we have to do is have some popcorn ready.
Monica Showalter. . . "Democrats are moving away from Bill Clinton like a bad smell. In New Hampshire, which up until now has been one of Clinton's strongest states, a name inextricably linked to some of Clinton's strongest political successes, as the Boston Globe notes, grassroots Democrats have yanked Clinton's name from the masthead of a big Democratic Party fundraiser, changing the whole thing to the hoary name of Eleanor Roosevelt." . . .
"It's a fall that coincides with Democratic Party operatives' efforts to separate themselves from Hillary Clinton, who's been a millstone around their neck lately, and who they've repeatedly said they wish would just go away.
"Turns out they don't want "the big he" around, either. That's a loss of clout.
"Maybe that's a cumulative thing, given that from the Democrats' point of view, as I noted here, the Clintons have selfishly drained Democratic funds away from the central mission of electing candidates toward themselves, rigged the Democratic primaries in Hillary Clinton's favor, and made themselves a public relations liability for Democrats through Hillary's continuous expressed disdain for the electorate. They aren't exactly a good thing for Democrats as they seek to rebuild from the rubble of Obamadom." . . .
. . . "Hirono in January asked Judge Kurt Engelhardt two questions about his sexual history designed to look like perjury if someone in the future accused him. Engelhardt was confirmed to the 5th Circuit despite Hirono’s questions, and has thus far not been accused of sexual misconduct. "During his Senate hearing, Hirono asked Engelhardt the following:
Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
"As Woehrle and attorney Scott Greenfield have pointed out, this is an incredibly leading question that has two unrelated parts." . . . . . . "Hirono in January asked Judge Kurt Engelhardt two questions about his sexual history designed to look like perjury if someone in the future accused him. Engelhardt was confirmed to the 5th Circuit despite Hirono’s questions, and has thus far not been accused of sexual misconduct. "During his Senate hearing, Hirono asked Engelhardt the following:
Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?
"As Woehrle and attorney Scott Greenfield have pointed out, this is an incredibly leading question that has two unrelated parts." . . .
Who indeed was the wizard of smart that assigned these colors to the parties? When attached briefly to the State Department Marine detachment the socialist color redin our possession was anathema. During an inspection, one Marine was found with a red tie in his locker and he was forced to walk around and around the squad bay with it tied around his head, shouting that he was going to the Kasbah. Red was the symbol of socialism and communism; the Red Army, the Soviet flag, Communist China flag, Red Guards, etc. And who can forget the red Soviet flag being carried outside the White House the day of Obama's inauguration? I find it hard to stomach saying that to have my party win a state is to "turn the state red". The Tunnel Dweller
Mark A. Hewitt"Since the 2000 United States presidential election, "red states" and "blue states" have referred to states whose voters predominantly choose either the Republican Party (red) or Democratic Party (blue) presidential candidates.
The current terminology of "red states" and "blue states" came into use in the United States presidential election of 2000 on an episode of the Today show on October 30, 2000, wanting to avoid any implied connection between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party. According to The Washington Post, the terms were coined by journalist Tim Russert, during his televised coverage of the 2000 presidential election. That was not the first election during which the news media used colored maps to depict voter preferences in the various states, but it was the first time a standard color scheme took hold; the colors were often reversed or different colors used before the 2000 election.
"Reversing the U.S. political colors would flip the longstanding convention of the political colors of the past, whereby red symbols (such as the Red Flag or Red Star) were associated with left-wing politics, and right-wing movements often chose blue as a contrasting color. Up until 2000, Democrats were represented by red and Republicans by blue. For 2018, Democrats should return to their past socialist glories and be represented by red. Republicans by blue. MAGA hats will have to become blue, like the background color of the field of stars on the American Flag.
"The political parties would not be immune to the color change. Lefty companies will be required to get with the program. Tesla has already embraced the color scheme. Facebook and Twitter will have to get new background colors. No longer will pale or dark blue work. The two social media giants are shutting down Republican and conservative thought – activities of the liberal and the left – with their red pens. They should change the background color of their logos to communist red, which is right between fire engine red and blood red on the color charts.
"The communists and socialists have emerged from their hole and are back in American politics with a vengeance. It's time to flip the left, turn the Democrats' blue states back to something with which they can readily identify, somewhere on the color spectrum between mayhem and murder: communist red.
"The Democratic Party is on the cusp of going full socialist with Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as its newest leaders. It's time to use the appropriate terms and political colors to accurately differentiate between states being perceived as socialist and liberal and those perceived as American and conservative."
