Hillary Fears Greatness

Hillary Fears GreatnessHillary Fears Greatness

That part of what passes for Hillary’s campaign that hasn’t simply focused on how her reproductive organs entitle her to the Presidency has largely been focused on deriding and attacking her opponent, Donald Trump. And yet, little to none of Hillary’s negative campaigning against Trump has actually attacked the efficacy of his policy positions or his demeanor and rhetoric. Simply put, it seems not that she believes that Trump is wrong but that she fears – indeed, is terrified of – Trump’s success and the restoration of America’s greatness.

This is both very telling and completed expected and rational. Hillary’s aspirations require her constituency and her constituency can’t survive a resurgence in American greatness. This is not to say that the majority of them literally wouldn’t survive it. Instead the majority of her constituency would thrive under it and no longer be the sort to support her. That is Hillary’s greatest fear and the greatest fear of the cynical leaders of the various agendist movements that support her and other Liberals and Progressives.

That’s the thing about these sorts. They can only gain power when and if they can convince the masses that possess some “protected trait” that they’re disadvantaged and that this is because of the actions or, as is more often the case these days, inaction of the unprotected, normative members of society.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

An Unsafe Opinion

Bryan StascavageLast month Bryan Stascavage, a 30-year-old Wesleyan University (WSA) economics major and decorated veteran who served two tours as an military intelligence analyst for the US Army in Iraq penned an unsafe opinion about the Black Live Matter (#BlackLivesMatter) movement in an op-ed for his the school newspaper, The Wesleyan Argus. The previous winner of WSA’s Chadbourne Prize was shocked by the result.

His op-ed, “Why Black Lives Matter Isn’t What You Think,” wasn’t a glowing endorsement of the Blacks’ movement and, therefor, was met with a shitstorm of hate and vitriol from the Blacks and the Liberals and Progressives who pander to- and enable them.

That was, in itself, completely to be expected and it’s hard to generate any true sympathy for Mr. Stascavage who should have known what he was buying for himself by not adhering to the Left’s and their minority sharecroppers’ orthodox dogma of total submission to their doctrine.

No. What is horrific is a subset of these vermin’s response, not against Mr. Stascavage directly, but against the The Wesleyan Argus which published his opinion piece and, thereby, exposed the student body to it. The Liberals, Progressives, and their minority sharecroppers are demanding that Wesleyan University defund the Argus because of it.

A petition demanding the Wesleyan Argus lose funding unless it meets certain demands has signatures from at least 172 students, staff and recent alumni. Signatories threatened to boycott the paper because they said it fails to “provide a safe space for the voices of students of color and we are doubtful that it will in the future.”

They also demand that commitment be made by the Argus to create work study/course credit positions; a monthly report on allocation of funds and leadership structure; a required once-per-semester Social Justice/Diversity training for all student publications; active recruitment and advertisement; and open space on the front page in the publication dedicated to marginalized groups/voices, specifying that if no submissions are received, The Argus will print a section labeled “for your voice.”

This is what now passes for students in these Affirmative Action times and in the wake of what the “Civil Rights” movement has degenerated into. They demand that White voices be silenced in favor of “Social Justice” and providing Liberal, Progressive, and Minority students total freedom from any opinion or subject matter that might may them uncomfortable in some way, shape, or form by not rigorously adhering to their sensitivities.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Image Control

I can understand the Liberals’ and Progressives’ panic over “Militarized Police.” As these Leftists have always been against the police and are equally always more attached to image than substance, their doomsaying and strident complaints about law enforcement being well-equipped to handle rioting, looting, gangs, and other serious threat is consistent with the Liberals’ and Progressives’ normal behavior.

Some so-called Militarized Police
So-Called Militarized Police

What I have a harder time understanding is that Americans seems to be exhibiting the same reactions to well-armed and well-armored police units as the Liberals and Progressives are. This strikes me as odd because, much like the Liberals’ and Progressives’ gun control agenda, this is issue all about image control and nothing about substance. Normally Americans are better than that.

“Assault Weapon” and “Militarized Police” Are the Same Fiction

The terms “Assault Weapon” and “Militarized Police” are the same sort of fiction and manufactured concern. In both cases it is a phobia based upon something looking scary or dangerous without regard to whether it is more so or less than other exemplars of its kind. Also, both fears are predicated upon the delusion that having certain equipment causes one to behave in certain manners.

I really thought that Americans were better than that.

That was Then, This is Now

The simple truth of the matter, despite all the hype created and promulgated to the contrary, is that local and state law enforcement departments are less heavily armed than they were in past decades and that there are far, far, far fewer casualties during riots and (un)civil protests than there were in days gone by.

The “Non-Militarized Police” Of The Past

Sure, modern police tactical and riot response units look “scary” but their actual armaments are far less “militarized” than their predecessors’ were. From the 1920s through the early 1970s it was common for local and state law enforcement departments to have at their disposal Thompson submachine guns.

So, in America’s past our police forces were armed with fully automatic weapons, whereas now they armed with semi-automatic weapons. What they have now that they didn’t have in the past are: tactically practical uniforms, top flight body armor, and trained, specialized units to respond to more intense levels of threat. That is what “militarization” actually is – increasing the survivability of police officers in more intense and dangerous threat situations.

This may be a large part why there are far fewer fatalities resulting from riots, (un)civil protests, and any of the variations of gang-related police operations now than there were in the past.

As I said, I can understand the Liberals’ and Progressives’ panic over “Militarized Police” but I cannot understand why that same sentiment is so prevalent among Americans.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Merry Crisis

Well it seems that Congress has gotten together and passed a nice, little class warfare bill in order to avoid the manufactured crisis of the Fiscal Cliff. It was pretty standard fair – eat the rich and keep the troughs full for the eaters and takers, just neither quite so big of a bite out of the American people – for now – and not quite so gourmet slops for worthless.

Merry Crisis and a Happy New Fear
Merry Crisis And A Happy New Fear

So now we’re forced to wonder what the next looming economic catastrophe the Democrats will concoct and instruct their pet media to promulgate. As it won’t be anything to do with entitlement spending or unemployment, two things that are hallmarks of the Democrat party, they may have to get a bit esoteric in their search for our new fear.

Tags: | | | | | | | |

That’s Exactly Right!

It’s quite rare that can read or hear anything that this trumped-up, little, bastard by-blow of 1960’s rebellion, Obama says and say, “That’s exactly right!” It does happen upon rare occasions though.

That’s exactly right. And and, you know, a year from now I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.

— President Obama
February 02, 2009, The Today Show

Well, it’s been over three years and, if improving the American economy was what he was supposedly going to “get done,” he’s made no progress. Indeed, he’s made matters far worse – far worse even then his Liberal cronies in Congress have managed to do – with his incessantly repeated class-warfare and anti-business sentiments.

Boy! You’ve got nascent but still huge and stinking economic catastrophe on your hands. You did built that! Nobody else made that happen.

Even more than ObamaCare’s overwhelming costs to businesses – costs all centered upon adding or maintaining employees, it is the climate of fear that Obama has instill in businesses that is keeping American unemployment numbers grievously high. Every time Obama attacks businesses, threatens to bypass Congress to do things via Executive Orders, or voices support for the rabble of OWS, he increases this climate of fear and causes corporations to tighten their purses in order to hopefully weather the storm that they fear Obama will bring.

Obama Has a Dream
Obama’s Dream – An American Nightmare

So yes, Obama is exactly right and there must be a one-term proposition, no matter what that takes, if America is going to recover in our lifetime or, possibly, ever.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |