As we’ve been reminded over these past 14 days, the culture is where the battle for our future will be won or lost.
HERE IS TUCKER’S TAKE ON SEATTLE
#Thread Tucker Carlson Segment On The BLM Seattle Autonomous Zone
Tucker on Governor Inslee’s weak response: “As long as we have leaders like that & as long as they refuse to stand up to extremists, we’re going to get more extremism. That’s happening.” 1/ pic.twitter.com/pMBpdoxgN3
As the realities of Obamacare continue to sink in, more and more people are getting letters from their health insurance providers telling them that their plans no longer comply with federal requirements under Obamacare. We just brought you the story of “Trick Shot Titus” and his family facing significant increases in the cost of their health care plans.
Now, a community blogger on the far-left Daily Kos website has penned a blog post complaining that both he and his wife are facing a nearly 100 percent increase in their monthly premiums. He claims he is canceling his insurance and refuses to pay any “f***ing penalty.”
Blogger “Tirge Caps” explains:
My wife and I just got our updates from Kaiser telling us what our 2014 rates will be. Her monthly has been $168 this year, mine $150. We have a high deductible. We are generally healthy people who don’t go to the doctor often. I barely ever go. The insurance is in case of a major catastrophe.
Well, now, because of Obamacare, my wife’s rate is gong to $302 per month and mine is jumping to $284.
I am canceling insurance for us and I am not paying any f***ing penalty. What the hell kind of reform is this?
The blogger also notes he and his wife may qualify for some “government assistance,” but that it’s just “another hoop” to jump through to get assistance that he may or may not be eligible for…
…Conversely, the right believes that, “Man is flawed from Day One, and that there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs. And whatever you do to deal with man’s flaws, it creates another problem.”
“But you try to get the best trade-off you can get. And that’s all you can hope for.”
So when presented with leftist idealism as to how to fix the world, here is the first question to ask: “Compared to what?” The leftist idea is the solution, compared to what?
Look at the argument for government healthcare. ‘Government healthcare serves the poor.’ Compared to what? Strong arguments can be made that the poor are better off in terms of care and options under a free market system.
The second question Sowell presented is: “At what price?” What price will be paid for the leftist ideal to be implemented? This leads to the discussion of if it is worth it or not … or even realistic.
For this example, consider the argument for open borders. Strong arguments based on “at what price” can be made against having open borders. There are financial costs, national security costs, personal safety costs, national identity costs, functional government costs, national economy costs, job costs, and many more.
The “feel good” concept of no borders is nothing more than a “feel good” concept. It cannot withstand close scrutiny in terms of cost and practical implementation.
The final question is: “What hard evidence do you have?” This one is a doozy, since so much virtue signalling and “feel good” ideology is part and parcel of leftist ideology.
Oftentimes, even when “evidence” is presented, it is not authoritative, hard evidence. It is opinion or cherry-picked, out-of-context, questionable or even debunked in its “facts” and sourcing.
This presents a prime opportunity to then show hard evidence for the right’s argument. It may require time and patience, but if you have a willing audience, it can be well worth the investment to lead the way to why conservatives believe their answers are better.
Sowell noted that conservative arguments tend to be able to pass all three questions because “they don’t assume there is a solution out there.”…
After having a run in with these guys a few years back in the SCV and noting that Texas voted in a Democrat from the group, I looked into them a bit. I ended up posting 3-times on them in the past (and as a warning, many of the links in those posts may be dead).
What I found out is that they do stuff to grab attention. In the past however, their tactics allowed the mainstream media to portend that the TEA Party peeps were right-wing racist by highlighting in their stories posters of Obama with a Hitler stache at the TEA Party events. But as my two June posts show clearly is that an elected Democrat was holding the same signs, as she was part of this organization. And the founder himself (Lyndon LaRouche) ran for office 7-times… as a Democrat.
Well, this Leftist Political Cult (more cult than Leftist) is at it again in grabbing headlines. What irked me is that many of the conservative sites I went to assumed this lady was an AOC fan. As soon as I watched the video I knew it was a prank of some kind… I just thought it was some comedian or radio morning show prank. The newly silk screened shirt gave it away. But I wasn’t tracking with it being a LaRouchite ploy.
Here is the video (look how caught off guard AOC looks — if anything, the look on her face meeting people from a crazier cult than she is from is priceless:
Here are examples of just how wrong people got the the “baby eating” troll by this LaRouchite chapter. GLENN BECK said this was an “environmentalist activist,” Emma Vigeland of THE YOUNG TURKS said this was a “Trump Troll.” Even Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claimed that the woman who suggested “eating babies” was a solution to climate change “was a Trump supporter.” Others claimed she was mentally ill.
As an aside, all the sites that say AOC should have clearly denounced cannibalism [eating babies] otherwise she by default supports it are wrong. She doesn’t have to denounce it because it is automatically assumed this position is sick and the nuance of publicly rejecting it is silly. JUST LIKE those asking Trump to continually reject “white nationalism” are just as silly as rejecting eating babies.
Here is the tracking down of this woman on Twitter and her affiliation with The Lyndon LaRouche cult:
So who was this woman? Not a climate activist. Not even, perhaps, someone with a mental illness. She is a representative of the bizarre political cult once led by Lyndon LaRouche. Previous targets for this kind of stunt include @Janefonda Olof Palme & Michael Dukakis. Now @AOC. pic.twitter.com/0JVsfn6vCn
THE DAILY CALLER had a good post on the group/incident. In it Shelby Talcott (the article’s author) rightly notes the following (EMPHASIZED):
The LaRouche PAC, a fringe political action committee, took credit for the stunt Thursday evening on Twitter. The group responded to multiple tweets on the incident, writing “it was us” repeatedly, The Washington Post reported.
THE GROUP’S STUNT IS “A FAIRLY WELL-ESTABLISHED TACTIC” FOR IT, MATTHEW SWEET, A HISTORIAN WHO HAS DOCUMENTED THE GROUP, SAID ACCORDING TO WAPO. CONSPIRACY THEORIST LYNDON H. LAROUCHE JR. FOUNDED THE LAROUCHE PAC.
“THEY’VE BEEN DOING THIS SINCE THE ’70S,”
Sweet told WaPo. “The tactic is you go to a political meeting and you create a disturbance that disrupts the meeting, and more importantly, that creates a kind of chaos.”
The article continues on with all the finger pointing going on in our “immediate” social media world. (I just told my own two sons to wait a couple of days to see where the chips fall.) The article then continues on with the more important issue of the groups history and aims:
LaRouche Jr. built up his following, which reaches across the world, “based on conspiracy theories, economic doom, anti-Semitism, homophobia and racism,” WaPo wrote in an obituary on LaRouche Jr., who died in 2019. He ran for president eight times between 1976 and 2004.
A judge sentenced LaRouche Jr., who once was a member of the U.S. Labor Party, to 15 years in prison in 1989 for defaulting on over $30 million in loans from his supporters and planning to defraud the IRS, The Associated Press reported.
He “has managed to attract a small but fanatical following to his conspiratorial view of the world,” the conservative Heritage Foundation said in a 1984 report according to WaPo. The cult advocates for economic recovery and wants to implement its four economic laws, according to its website.
LaRouche’s four laws are restoring the Glass-Steagall Act, making a new national bank, creating a crash program to develop fusion power and space, and increasing productivity for credit applications, Newsweek reported….
The instigator is right about the Swedish professor though. The professor spoke about cannibalism being a sustainable food source (the report in the Swedish language can be seen HERE) — and if you haven’t heard of this guy yet, here is CLIMATE DEPOT’S post on professor Söderlund’s ideas, pre-ceeded by Ezra Levent’s show with Marc Morano:
….A conference about the food of the future called Gastro Summit being held in Stockholm Sweden featured a presentation by Magnus Söderlund claiming that we must get used to the idea of eating human flesh in the future, as a way of combating the effects of climate change.
In a talk titled: “Can you Imagine Eating Human Flesh,” behavioral Scientist and Marketing Strategist Behavioral Scientist and Marketing Strategist Magnus Söderlund from “Handelshögskolan” (College of Commerce) argues for the breaking down of the ancient taboos against desecrating the human corpse and eating human flesh
Boy that makes me very happy I keep Kosher because humans don’t have split hooves and chew their cud, so I won’t be eating human flesh.
Söderlund refers to the taboos against it as “conservative.” Yep, he claims those who don’t want to eat your dead relatives are old fogys who don’t want to save the planet. He adds that people can be sold on the idea little by little, first by persuading people to just taste it. Tasting it? Over my dead body—-er maybe that’s not the correct phrase, but you get the idea.
Conflating resistance to eating human flesh with capitalist selfishness, the seminar’s talking points ask:
“Are we humans too selfish to live sustainably?
Capitalist selfishness? Just another reason to hate Socialism.
“Is Cannibalism the solution to food sustainability in the future? Does Generation Z have the answers to our food challenges? Can consumers be tricked into making the right decisions? At GastroSummit you will get some answers to these questions—and also partake in the latest scientific findings and get to meet the leading experts.”
In his talk, Söderlund asks the audience how many would be open to the idea. Not many hands go up. Some groaning is heard. When interviewed after his talk, he reports brightly that 8 percent of conference participants said they would be open to trying it. When asked if he himself would try it, he replies: “I feel somewhat hesitant but to not appear overly conservative…I’d have to say….I’d be open to at least tasting it.
What about the fact that science has proven that eating other people can make you crazy.
It’s bad enough that fans of the climate change hypothesis want to destroy the economy for their worldwide redistribution of income scheme, but this is just too gross….
Mind you, this isn’t the first time a “wild eyed” proposal was made by crazies! The Guillotine was proposed by a Democrat Georgia House of Representatives, Doug Teper (D-61), as a better way to impose the death penalty on others. Rep Teper did receive an award: Honors and Awards Young Democrats of DeKalb DEDICATION TO THE ENVIRONMENT.
In 1996 in the US, Georgia State Representative Doug Teper unsuccessfully sponsored a bill to replace that state’s electric chair with the guillotine.
Another blogpost post zeroes in on the possible animus for such proposals (and mind you, I am speaking of this partly to put into the record here at RPT these old proposals by Democrats to put them into the search history of my site to recall them in discussion):
…The Arizona assembly considered a bill that would give prisoners a choice of their method of execution: lethal injection or having their organs harvested for transplant. The bill was voted down in light of the American College of Physicians statement that physicians should not be involved in the execution process.
Georgia State Representative Doug Teper proposed writing legislation that would give prisoners a choice between death by electrocution or guillotine. Those opting for the guillotine would be given the option to donate their organs. The legislation was never brought before the state senate…
NOQ had a good post relaying the Democrats slamming AOC:
…As it turns out, the “toxic emissions” she thought she was viewing were actually just heat signatures and the “fracking” site she thought she was exposing wasn’t doing any fracking. This information came from multiple sources questioning her claims, most notably from a Democratic lawmaker in the area who scolded her for her false alarmism.
According to Mary Throne, a Wyoming Democratic public service commissioner, Ocasio-Cortez needs to stop ignoring “science and facts.”
Interesting video, but @AOC there is no fracking occurring at the site as shown and no way to determine compliance or lack thereof with CO air standards. As Dems, we do ourselves no favors when we ignore science and facts. Happy to discuss energy and the West any time. https://t.co/zI2WBXeGM2
“Statements regarding an infrared (FLIR) video tweeted by Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez yesterday evening are categorically false,” Brian Cain, a spokesman for Extraction Oil & Gas, told The Daily Caller. “In the short video, the congresswoman claimed to see ‘toxic emissions’ through a camera and stated that the air was being ‘poisoned’ by oil and gas development. In reality, the operations she was viewing have been lauded as among the best anywhere in the United States for their management practices and facility designs that protect air quality, public health and the environment.”
“Using an infrared camera, the Congresswoman claimed to see ‘invisible emissions,’ when she was actually witnessing a heat signature caused by high-temperature (200-plus degrees) synthetic drilling mud being circulated to the surface against cooler fall temperatures in Broomfield,” Cain continued. “In fact, the camera angle used in the video viewed an area of our site that does not even include a possible source for the types of emissions being claimed.”
The sad part about all of this is that after 13K retweets and 40K likes of her original post, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans who will see her original Tweet and think it’s real. As for Throne’s debunking Tweet, it has 6 retweets….
Former NY State Assembly Member DOV HIKIND comes on to THE LARRY ELDER SHOW to talk about the current state of the Democratic Party, AOC, the BDS movement, and more. (This is only a portion of the fuller interview.) Dov Hikind is a Democrat by-the-by. He is founder of Americans Against Antisemitism.
Here are a couple stories (and a TWEET) regarding Dov:
Please @AOC do us all a favor and spend just a few minutes learning some actual history. 6 million Jews were exterminated in the Holocaust. You demean their memory and disgrace yourself with comments like this. https://t.co/NX5KPPb2Hl
Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is angry that Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) correctly described the horrors of the Holocaust by noting that the evil Nazis systematically targeted 6,000,000+ Jews for extermination pic.twitter.com/iAzYGxrAL2
…what I took from it is that this Commie wants to be elected (or have some other tyrant commie elected) leader for life… like a Stalin, Mao, Castro, or Chavez. I don’t think it’s cute or funny.
The second thing I wish to note from this past weekend is the civil war in the Democrat Party. Here is a partial introduction via the WASHINGTON EXAMINER, and what the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is trying to do is stop a casting call socialist from getting elected:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., spoke out Saturday against a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee plan to help incumbents fight off challengers in the Democratic primary.
“The @DCCC’s new rule to blacklist+boycott anyone who does business w/ primary challengers is extremely divisive & harmful to the party,” Ocasio-Cortez said on Twitter. “My recommendation, if you’re a small-dollar donor: pause your donations to DCCC & give directly to swing candidates instead.”
Ocasio-Cortez was elected last fall as part of a Democratic freshman class which included the most women ever in Congress and many progressive representatives. She defeated longtime Rep. Joe Crowley, who was chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, in their primary.
The new policy from the campaign arm for House Democrats targets primary challengers’ ability to raise funds and build up their campaign organization, saying specifically that their “core mission” is to protect incumbents. “[T]he DCCC will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting Member of the House Democratic Caucus,” the DCCC said in their statement on the policy.
A number of left-wing Democrats are dismayed by the policy, including Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., the vice chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who called it “totally tone-deaf to the grassroots activists across our nation.”
Rep. Ayanna Pressley D-Mass., who also ran as a progressive challenger against an establishment candidate, also spoke out against the DCCC’s new rule in a long Twitter thread….
TWITCHY says — “Ha! We hope the DNC enjoys the company of their party’s newest star.”
While I like their rants (Paul Watson, Mark Dice, and others) and these commentaries hold much truth in them, I do wish to caution you… he is part of Info Wars/Prison Planet network of yahoos, a crazy conspiracy arm of Alex Jones shite. Also, I bet if I talked to him he would reveal some pretty-crazy conspiratorial beliefs that would naturally undermine and be at-odds-with some of his rants. Just to be clear, I do not endorse these people or orgs.
We came to the conclusion that even if Google and others had led the way toward a wholesale adoption of renewable energy, that switch would not have resulted in significant reductions of carbon dioxide emissions. Trying to combat climate change exclusively with today’s renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.
“Even if one were to electrify all of transport, industry, heating and so on, so much renewable generation and balancing/storage equipment would be needed to power it that astronomical new requirements for steel, concrete, copper, glass, carbon fibre, neodymium, shipping and haulage etc etc would appear. All these things are made using mammoth amounts of energy: far from achieving massive energy savings, which most plans for a renewables future rely on implicitly, we would wind up needing far more energy, which would mean even more vast renewables farms – and even more materials and energy to make and maintain them and so on. The scale of the building would be like nothing ever attempted by the human race.”
Google Joins the Common Sense Crew On Renewable Energies ~ Finally! (RPT)
John and Ken interview Mark Mills about the impossibility of society going fully “green energy.” The PDF report by Mark Mills via the Manhattan Institute can be found here:
Larry Elder takes Media Matter to the tool shed and excoriates the headline grasping leftist org:
Fox News guest co-host claims that FDR’s New Deal created the Great Depression (MEDIA MATTERS)
In this opening segment of his show, Larry sets forth a strong case for his view in 8-minutes.
I wanted to also have the first 2-hours of his show included in another upload (they were excellent), but alas, I am too tired and am working long hours. (I wish I could do this for a living! 870AM should have their own YouTube with uploads like National Review and other orgs.) Here are two articles mentioned during the show: