Before I post this… I just want to say how “Utopian” this ad was in reflecting how Democrats typically view the act of crossing our border. Everyone was so nice and cordial in this piece of propaganda, but there is a darker side to this. A side that — go figure — reflects reality:
According to a stunning Fusion investigation, 80 percent of women and girls crossing into the U.S. by way of Mexico are raped during their journey. That’s up from a previous estimate of 60 percent, according to an Amnesty International report… (Some Trump Sized Myths)
What these visions of everything pleasant does is it harms the female migrant… because they continue to make the trip. By building a reliable border they will not make the travel that gets the majority of them brutalized. Second, many of these crimes against women are committed by those that are crossing the border as well. By building a reliable border we will be protecting our female citizens and residents of all ethnic backgrounds from these criminals.
By painting this rosy picture that the Left falls for, nothing can get done to stop the brutality against women due to our porous border.
Two things struck me about these videos that a city-boy like me can now apply more vividly the application of some of these verses herein that many “salt-of-the-earth” folks already know well. These two things are that they literally know their masters voice… AND they also know they are going to be nourished. Wow… these verses come to life for me… enjoy
“I assure you: Anyone who doesn’t enter the sheep pen by the door but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. The doorkeeper opens it for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought all his own outside, he goes ahead of them. The sheep follow him because they recognize his voice. They will never follow a stranger; instead they will run away from him, because they don’t recognize the voice of strangers.”
Jesus gave them this illustration, but they did not understand what He was telling them.
So Jesus said again, “I assure you: I am the door of the sheep. All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep didn’t listen to them. I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved and will come in and go out and find pasture.
A thief comes only to steal and to kill and to destroy. I have come so that they may have life and have it in abundance. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired man, since he is not the shepherd and doesn’t own the sheep, leaves them and runs away when he sees a wolf coming. The wolf then snatches and scatters them. This happens because he is a hired man and doesn’t care about the sheep. I am the good shepherd.
I know My own sheep, and they know Me, as the Father knows Me, and I know the Father. I lay down My life for the sheep. But I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice. Then there will be one flock, one shepherd. This is why the Father loves Me, because I am laying down My life so I may take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down on My own. I have the right to lay it down, and I have the right to take it up again. I have received this command from My Father.”
Again a division took place among the Jews because of these words. Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and He’s crazy! Why do you listen to Him?” Others were saying, “These aren’t the words of someone demon-possessed. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You get here?” Jesus answered, “I assure you: You are looking for Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate the loaves and were filled. Don’t work for the food that perishes but for the food that lasts for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal of approval on Him.”
“What can we do to perform the works of God?” they asked. Jesus replied, “This is the work of God—that you believe in the One He has sent.”
“What sign then are You going to do so we may see and believe You?” they asked. “What are You going to perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written: He gave them bread from heaven to eat.” Jesus said to them, “I assure you: Moses didn’t give you the bread from heaven, but My Father gives you the real bread from heaven.For the bread of God is the One who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” Then they said, “Sir, give us this bread always!”
“I am the bread of life,” Jesus told them. “No one who comes to Me will ever be hungry, and no one who believes in Me will ever be thirsty again.But as I told you, you’ve seen Me, and yet you do not believe.Everyone the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me.This is the will of Him who sent Me: that I should lose none of those He has given Me but should raise them up on the last day.For this is the will of My Father: that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
Therefore the Jews started complaining about Him because He said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.”They were saying, “Isn’t this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can He now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Stop complaining among yourselves.No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day.It is written in the Prophets: And they will all be taught by God.Everyone who has listened to and learned from the Father comes to Me —not that anyone has seen the Father except the One who is from God. He has seen the Father. I assure you: Anyone who believes has eternal life.I am the bread of life.Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.This is the bread that comes down from heaven so that anyone may eat of it and not die.I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever. The bread that I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”
At that, the Jews argued among themselves, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “I assure you: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves.Anyone who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day,because My flesh is real food and My blood is real drink.The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood lives in Me, and I in him.Just as the living Father sent Me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on Me will live because of Me.This is the bread that came down from heaven; it is not like the manna your fathers ate—and they died. The one who eats this bread will live forever.”
Here is a portion of the WASHINGTON POST that Prager was reading:
One of the Obama administration’s signature efforts in education, which pumped billions of federal dollars into overhauling the nation’s worst schools, failed to produce meaningful results, according to a federal analysis.
Test scores, graduation rates and college enrollment were no different in schools that received money through the School Improvement Grants program — the largest federal investment ever targeted to failing schools — than in schools that did not.
The Education Department published the findings on the website of its research division on Wednesday, hours before President Obama’s political appointees walked out the door.
“We’re talking about millions of kids who are assigned to these failing schools, and we just spent several billion dollars promising them things were going to get better,” said Andy Smarick, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who has long been skeptical that the Obama administration’s strategy would work. “Think of what all that money could have been spent on instead.”…
The HAMMER notes well in this WASHINGTON POST opinion piece that we should be thanking God for Reid’s power grabs.
…God bless Harry Reid. It’s because of him that Gorsuch is guaranteed elevation to the court. In 2013, as Senate majority leader, Reid blew up the joint. He abolished the filibuster for federal appointments both executive (such as Cabinet) and judicial, for all district and circuit court judgeships (excluding only the Supreme Court). Thus unencumbered, the Democratic-controlled Senate packed the lower courts with Obama nominees.
Reid was warned that the day would come when Republicans would be in the majority and would exploit the new rules to equal and opposite effect. That day is here.
The result is striking. Trump’s Cabinet appointments are essentially unstoppable because Republicans need only 51 votes and they have 52. They have no need to reach 60, the number required to overcome a filibuster. Democrats are powerless to stop anyone on their own.
And equally powerless to stop Gorsuch. But isn’t the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees still standing? Yes, but if the Democrats dare try it, everyone knows that Majority Leader McConnell will do exactly what Reid did and invoke the nuclear option — filibuster abolition — for the Supreme Court, too.
Reid never fully appreciated the magnitude of his crime against the Senate. As I wrote at the time, the offense was not abolishing the filibuster — you can argue that issue either way — but that he did it by simple majority. In a serious body, a serious rule change requires a serious supermajority. (Amending the U.S. Constitution, for example, requires two-thirds of both houses plus three-quarters of all the states.) Otherwise you have rendered the place lawless. If in any given session you can summon up the day’s majority to change the institution’s fundamental rules, there are no rules.
McConnell can at any moment finish Reid’s work by extending filibuster abolition to the Supreme Court. But he hasn’t. He has neither invoked the nuclear option nor even threatened to. And he’s been asked often enough. His simple and unwavering response is that Gorsuch will be confirmed. Translation: If necessary, he will drop the big one.
It’s obvious that he prefers not to. No one wants to again devalue and destabilize the Senate by changing a major norm by simple majority vote. But Reid set the precedent….
While I like Paul Watson, I do wish to cation you… he is part of Info Wars, a crazy conspiracy arm of Alex Jones shite. Also, I bet if I talked to him he would reveal some pretty crazy conspiratorial beliefs at odds with some of his rants.
The mainstream left is tacitly supporting a fascist group that is committing terrorism to crush civil rights in the U.S.
JIHAD WATCH chimes in with the example from Richard Evans:
…Although this violence and brutalization of political opponents is a new phenomenon in American politics, it has a historical antecedent: the Nazi Brownshirts. In The Coming of the Third Reich, historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.”
To express dissent from Nazi positions became a matter of taking one’s life into one’s hands. The idea of people of opposing viewpoints airing their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful manner was gone. One was a Nazi, or one was silent (and fearful). That is just the kind of public arena that the Left has been trying to bring to the United States for years, and is bringing to us now….
BLACK BLOC “anti-fascists” attacked right-wing media figure Gavin McInnes outside a New York University building on Thursday night.
McInnes was there to give a talk to students, but was incessantly interrupted by hecklers. Afterward, masked black bloc protesters assaulted the controversial former Fox News personality and sprayed him with mace. Eleven people were eventually arrested.
“I saw Gavin McInnes and I wanted to punch him in the fucking face, but he got away,” said one protester.
Meanwhile, a woman claiming to be a professor—presumably at NYU, though this detail is unconfirmed—screamed at the police for not engaging in violence against McInnes and his followers (the so-called “Proud Boys”). Her tirade was captured on video. Watch below [press play and it should start at the 10:15 mark]:
LOL… she threw the professor moniker around like it meant something. Hahaha. Her meltdown makes more sense after she said she was a professor. “Coming from a professor” — LOL (See more at HOTAIR.)
I love this short video because it shows how people love to separate. For instance, in a discussion about same-sex marriage I was told that as a straight white man I have privilege. This understanding of separating me from being able to engage in conversation about policy comes through a long “brain-wash” (if you will) of creating classes and groups of people, and then choosing one to be the problem. Currently this is straight white males, during the below film, it was Jews. So know you have Black Lives Matter speakers saying “white people give your money, your house, your property.”
The multi-culturalism as devised by the Left creates sub-groups which create and cause pride in the “SEPARATENESS” (the “other than”) in thinking. So a person is not an American, they are an “African-American.” Or a “Mexican-American,” needing a group on college campuses to support this pride and prejudice, like La Raza… so, for instance… Cesar Chavev, the founder of the United Farm Workers Union (UFW), said this of La Raza:
Chavez was also against ethnic groups like La Raza. In fact, he saw the dangers of such organizations from the beginning. “I hear more and more Mexicans talking about la raza—to build up their pride, you know,” Chavez told Peter Matthiessen, the co-founder of the Paris Review, for a profile piece in The New Yorker in 1969. “Some people don’t look at it as racism, but when you say ‘la raza,’ you are saying an anti-gringo thing, and it won’t stop there.”…
This division ends up back-firing on the public… and truth is subverted. For instance, a sign hanging at a NAZI death camp in Germany is a quote from Hitler: “I freed Germany from the stupid and degrading fallacies of conscience and morality….” How? By causing division… here feminist philosopher Christina Hoff Sommers discusses “INTERSETIONAL FEMINISM:
And this division eventually leads to the impossibibility of application, and the break-down of societal truths:
So now we have grouping of gender that is meant to confuse and divide (which is male/female, and this celebration of gender in “male and female” creates a cohesive unity):
Agender Androgyne Androgynous Bigender Cis Cisgender Cis Female Cis Male Cis Man Cis Woman Cisgender Female Cisgender Male Cisgender Man Cisgender Woman Female to Male FTM Gender Fluid Gender Nonconforming Gender Questioning Gender Variant Genderqueer Intersex Male to Female MTF Neither Neutrois Non-binary Other
Pangender Trans Trans* Trans Female Trans* Female Trans Male Trans* Male Trans Man Trans* Man Trans Person Trans* Person Trans Woman Trans* Woman Transfeminine Transgender Transgender Female Transgender Male Transgender Man Transgender Person Transgender Woman Transmasculine Transsexual Transsexual Female Transsexual Male Transsexual Man Transsexual Person Transsexual Woman Two-Spirit
And very similarly to these trying times we now have a violent and riotess masses of young people acting out this separateness and a scapegoat. Why does violence naturally follow? Because trying to make this perceived ability to create unity from division (chaos) is an impossible task… and so violence is attempted to create unity or Utopian society.
Conservative commentator David Horowitz and Washington Times staff writer Charlie Hurt on whether President Trump should defund the University of California, Berkeley.
Conversation starts out on the Berkeley Riots. Mark Simone makes a great point about whenever one thinks of Democrats, they will have visions of fires and broken windows.
Before showing more FASCISM from the Left, I will post this bit from history:
(BREITBART) In a blog post for Foreign Policy magazine, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama administration official, outlined four ways to “get rid” of President Trump, including declaring him mentally unfit for command or carrying out a military coup: “The fourth possibility is one that until recently I would have said was unthinkable in the United States of America: a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders.”
Also note that the political leanings of the mob are not mentioned. If this were a TEA Party group, all sorts of “right” – “alt-right” – conservative” monikers would have been used:
Besides the one mention by CBS of Berkeley being a “liberal campus,” no other mention was made of political ideology of the rioters. But that doesn’t mean political labels were absent from the reports. “Conservative” and “right-wing” were both used to describe Yiannopoulos.
On CBS, correspondent John Blackstone called Yiannopoulos a “ultra conservative” known for his “outrageous comments and articles.”
ABC referred to him as “right-wing” twice, while NBC’s Almaguer described him as “a leading member of the Alt-Right movement” from the “far right.” NBC’s Hoda Kotb also called Yiannopoulos as the “controversial” editor of “right-leaning” Breitbart News.
On top of that,instead of focusing the criticism on the ones causing violence, all three networks took the opportunity to bash Yiannopoulos instead, calling him out for past controversial statements in an apparent effort to legitimize the violent riot.
NBC’s Miguel Almaguer called out Yiannopoulos in his report for his “racist and misogynistic views,” “inciting harassing tweets” and being accused of being a part of “the growing group of white nationalists.” CBS anchor Gayle King also delved into Yiannopoulos’ “racist and misogynistic” online comments.
GAY PATRIOT also notes this violence from the Left:
Hey, if torching Berkeley is how leftists protest conservative speakers, I say keep sending them until the place is burned to the ground and then salt the Earth where it stood.
Leftists at the University of California at Berkeley did not like the words that Milo Yiannopoulos had come to their campus to say. So, they smashed property and set things on fire.
[….]
With each day that passes, it becomes harder for anyone to defend the Democratic (Socialist) Left as a non-violent movement. Although it’s cute the way the reporter tries to distinguish between the violent and “peaceful” protesters… as though they are not on the same team with the same goal (and the same hateful intolerance).
Yep, military coups.
Here is some of the recent violence from the birthplace of the modern free-speech movement…
JIHAD WATCH chimes in with the example from Richard Evans:
…Although this violence and brutalization of political opponents is a new phenomenon in American politics, it has a historical antecedent: the Nazi Brownshirts. In The Coming of the Third Reich, historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.”
To express dissent from Nazi positions became a matter of taking one’s life into one’s hands. The idea of people of opposing viewpoints airing their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful manner was gone. One was a Nazi, or one was silent (and fearful). That is just the kind of public arena that the Left has been trying to bring to the United States for years, and is bringing to us now….
A Day Earlier
Let me just say that for years the Left has labeled Republicans and conservatives as racist. Now the label has changed to Nazi. BOOM, GAY PATRIOT just wrote this (2-2-16):
A sad and disappointing number of leftists have decided that the violence, vandalism, and arson committed by “Anti-Fascist” protesters in Berkeley last night was justified because Milo Yiannopoulos is a “Nazi,” and anything… *anything* … done in the name of fighting “Nazism” is justified.
As Milo has never advocated genocide, political violence against opponents, or the control of all industrial assets by the state on behalf of German workers… he does not fit the commonly accepted definition of “Nazi.” But as I am reminded constantly, “literally” now means “figuratively;” “absolutely” is an acceptable affirmation; the Oxford comma is dead, and “Nazi” now means “someone a leftist hates on the basis of their ideas.”
It used to be that if you disagreed with the left, they called you a “racist.” Now, they call you a Nazi. Coincidentally, the decision to label all opponents as “Nazis” comes only a week after the left decided it’s “OK to Punch Nazis.”…
Once someone is a crowd labels you a Nazi… they have a green light to try and kill you. Grant Chisholm preaches for a hobby… here is a video of him in action (HERE). That’s what he was there to do. But once you are labeled a Nazi (which is now a replacement of these: sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, bigoted — then you better watch your six. The Left has a long violent and deadly history. We are seeing it fomented and supported by the media and the Democrats in this nation.
…Grant Chisholm, 39, was with three other members of the Bible Believers Group…
Chisholm claimed a Trump opponent hit him three times on the head with a metallic object.
He told the Oregonian: ‘They almost killed me tonight.’
The shocking video was posted on a ‘Women for Trump‘ website. It shows the victim falling to the ground after he is punched.
Several people surround the victim until police arrived.
Chisholm said he was at the protest to preach and claimed one of the demonstrators asked him for a fight.
He was rushed to Legacy Emanuel Medical Center for emergency treatment but was released approximately two hours later after being treated for concussion.
…Even I initially thought that whoever did it was either a Republican or some backwoods, tinfoil-hat-wearing pseudo-Libertarian. Now that it’s come out he is a Democrat/Independent, it’s no surprise; virtually every assassin or would-be assassin of American presidents, both Republican and Democrat, have been leftists (to the extent that their political views are known).
Successful assassins (whose politics we know):
John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, shot and killed President Lincoln
Charles Guiteau, a member of the communist Oneida Community, shot and killed President Garfield
Leon Czolgosz, a leftist anarchist (similar to the useful idiots in the Occupy movement) shot and killed President McKinley
Lee Harvey Oswald, a communist, shot and killed President Kennedy.
Failed assassins (whose politics we know):
Severino Di Giovanni, a leftist anarchist, tried to bomb President-elect Hoover’s train
Giuseppe Zangara, a professed anti-capitalist, tried shooting President-elect Franklin Roosevelt
Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola, two Marxists, tried killing President Truman at the Blair House
Samuel Byck, who tried joining the leftist Black Panther group, attempted to kill President Nixon
Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, member of the Manson Family and also a hippie environmentalist, shot at President Ford
Sara Jane Moore tried to kill President Ford as well because, as she said, “the government had declared war on the Left.”
Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez, a leftist connected to the Occupy movement, tried getting a one-in-a-billion shot at President Obama by firing a gun at the White House
The only individual whose political motivations can be deduced as coming from the right side of the political spectrum is Francisco Martin Duran, who claims he was “incited” by conservative talk-show host Chuck Baker, but also claimed that he was trying to save the world from an alien mist which was connected by an umbilical cord to another alien in the Colorado mountains. So there’s that….
