Left vs Right

Google Fact Checks Conservatives Sites, Not Leftist Sites

Published by Papa Giorgio

Here is some commentary by THE DAILY CALLER:

Google, the most powerful search engine in the world, is now displaying fact checks for conservative publications in its results.

No prominent liberal site receives the same treatment.

And not only is Google’s fact-checking highly partisan – perhaps reflecting the sentiments of its leaders – it is also blatantly wrong, asserting sites made “claims” they demonstrably never made.

When searching for a media outlet that leans right, like The Daily Caller (TheDC), Google gives users details on the sidebar, including what topics the site typically writes about, as well as a section titled “Reviewed Claims.”

Vox, and other left-wing outlets and blogs like Gizmodo, are not given the same fact-check treatment. When searching their names, a “Topics they write about” section appears, but there are no “Reviewed Claims.”

In fact, a review of mainstream outlets, as well as other outlets associated with liberal and conservative audiences, shows that only conservative sites feature the highly misleading, subjective analysis. Several conservative-leaning outlets like TheDC are “vetted,” while equally partisan sites like Vox, Think Progress, Slate, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Salon, Vice and Mother Jones are spared.

Occupy Democrats is apparently the only popular content provider from that end of the political spectrum with a fact-checking section.

Big name publications like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times are even given a column showcasing all of the awards they have earned over the years……

GAY PATRIOT notes the recent lawsuit by an ex-Google employee and the left-leaning cult embedded in the culture at Google:

Based on the documentation provided as part of James Damore’s discrimination suit, Google operates as a cult of left-wing progressives who promote an environment of hostility against conservatives, Republicans, Trump supporters, and white men. The Federalist has a summary, but here’s a few to give the flavor of the thing.

“Google furnishes a large number of internal mailing lists catering to employees with alternative lifestyles, including furries, polygamy, transgenderism, and plurality, for the purpose of discussing sexual topics. The only lifestyle that seems to not be openly discussed on Google’s internal forums is traditional heterosexual monogamy.”

A footnote next to the word “plurality” adds: “For instance, an employee who sexually identifies as ‘a yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin’ and ‘an expansive ornate building’ presented a talk entitled ‘Living as a Plural Being’ at an internal company event.”

[Google Manager Kim] Burchett once proposed creating a list she would personally manage of “people who make diversity difficult,” to include employees who did things like make statements “unsupportive of diversity.” She suggested the list could serve as a punishment that could incentivize “better” behavior among the offenders listed.

“You can’t support Donald Trump without also supporting his racism, misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia,” a Googler wrote in a lengthy communication on Trump supporters. “Or even worse, if you vote for Donald Trump because of his economic policy or because you feel the other party is corrupt, then what you’re saying is that economics is more important than the safety of your peers. This is where my tolerance ends: with intolerance.”

[…..]

BadThink at Google will get an employee cut off from opportunities for advancement, but blacklisted in the insutry, and even threatened in their private lives. (Sounds more than a little bit like Scientology.)

Oh, by the way, the Progressive-Left wants all of society run according to this model.  Discrimination against those who hold “politically incorrect” viewpoints (wrongthink), punishment for wrongthink, networks of informers to report on people for wrongthink, and ultimately violence against those who hold wrongthink.

California vs. America

Published by Papa Giorgio

Below are two positions taken by a left leaning columnist and a right leaning columnist that essentially say the same thing. SOMETHING, mind you, Dennis tapped into some time ago in his article entitled, “AMERICA’S SECOND CIVIL WAR.” Here are the other two articles mentioned in these audios:

  1. Tim Arango of the New York Times: “In Clash Between California and Trump, It’s One America Versus Another“
  2. Michael Walsh* at American Greatness: “Democrats Fire on Fort Sumter“

Before beginning I just wish to say that California is working against the clear Constitutional mandates that the Federal government controls and protects its borders… and the Trump administration is working against the Constitution in its trying to fight against California’s legalization of marijuana. NOTE! If you are for the state of California choosing to legalize pot, but against the state defining marriage as between one-man and one-woman… you are a confused individual who makes choices on emotion and not Constitutional foresight/understanding. When Walsh and Prager discuss “arresting California lawmakers,” in my minds eye the legal standing ta do this is Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution — which reads:

  • “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government…“

I have been warning about this for years in regard to The Golden State… California is setting itself and our country up for a world of hurt.

NEW YORK TIMES:

AMERICAN GREATNESS:

* Michael Walsh is a journalist, author, and screenwriter. He was for 16 years the music critic of Time Magazine. His works include the novels, “As Time Goes By,” “And All the Saints” (winner, 2004 American Book Award for fiction) and the “Devlin” series of thrillers; as well as the recent nonfiction bestseller, “The Devil’s Pleasure Palace.” A sequel, “The Fiery Angel,” is scheduled to appear in 2018.

Democrat Slight of Hand | Dan Bongino

Published by Papa Giorgio

I have heard Obama is tougher on immigration than Trump, always seeing a number in the millions regarding how many illegal immigrants he has deported. NOT!

Dan does what any media personality with half-a-brain should be doing. THAT IS, expressing simple common sense/logic.

Skewing stats via hiding inflation.

This is too funny! For some laughs, go to TWITCHY! Here is a comment from a forum:

  • ….if outlets like USA Today are going to “help” Dems by providing these sorts of examples for the next year, I’d say Republicans are going to be in good shape. (https://tinyurl.com/ybmjzyfh)

Top 20% Pay 95% Of Income Taxes

Do Conservatives Riot?

Published by Papa Giorgio

An excellent point is made by Dennis Prager. We hate the Kate Steinle verdict deeply. Just as deeply as other high profile cases of people getting convicted, killed, or merely showing up to give a speech. Conservatives do not riot. Anarchists (Lefties) and Socialists (Lefties) do. Here are a couple great articles:

➤ Do Conservatives Riot? (ROCKY MOUNTAIN BLACK CONSERVATIVES)
➤ New Study Shows Riots Make America Conservative (NEW YORK MAGAZINE)
➤ Violence comes from the Left (GAY PATRIOT)
➤ Why Aren’t We Having a National Conversation About Leftist Violence? (THE FEDERALIST)
➤ Leftist Violence Goes Mainstream In America (WND)
➤ Leftist Violence & Double Standards (FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE)

We Are All Going To Die

Published by Papa Giorgio

GAY PATRIOT notes the rhetoric in our Democrat Left:

Hysterically shrieking “Republican tax cuts are going to kill us all!” is the official position of the Democrat Party.

[….]

PATRIOT LISTS SOME EXAMPLES

[….]

But don’t forget, Global Warming is also going to kill us all. And repealing Obamacare is going to kill us all. Changes to the school lunch program are going to kill our children so they won’t even live long enough to commit suicide as transgender teenagers.  Even the slightest cuts to the size and scope of the Federal Bureaucracy, that’s going to kill us all, you betcha. And concealed carry reciprocity is surely going to kill us all.

But, hey, it’s better than being sent to Mike Pence’s Electrocution Death Camps.

Hard-Left Shift In Ideology

Published by Papa Giorgio

  • Distaste for Donald Trump and the leftward shift may go hand-in-hand, as Democratic leaders move the party’s overall politics left in reaction against the president. (Washington Free Beacon)

GAY PATRIOT notes the following about the above graph[s] (emphasis added):

…PEW FOUND DEMOCRATS HAVE MOVED SUBSTANTIALLY LEFT ON A VARIETY OF ISSUES WHILE REPUBLICANS’ VIEWS REMAIN RELATIVELY CONSTANT.

“In nearly every domain, across most of the roughly two dozen values questions tracked, views of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents and those of Democrats and Democratic leaners are now further apart than in the past,” Pew noted.

Emblematic of this hard-left shift is the talk that ancient Senator Dianne Feinstein — a doctrinaire liberal — may be challenged by hard-left California hairpiece Kevin de Leon (of “ghost guns that fire 30 magazine clips per second” fame.) De Leon is so hard left he makes Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren look like … um… someone just moderately left-wing. Susan Collins, maybe.

When Dianne Feinstein was first elected to the Senate, she was decidedly left-leaning, Someone like Kevin de Leon would have been considered part of the radical fringe. He’s now quite the mainstream of a party whose activist core believes that equates Free Speech with White Supremacy and due process with rapists…

See More:

✦ New Study Finds Democrats Moving Left, Driving Growing Partisan Gap (Washington Free Beacon)

…Democrats’ leftward shift helps to exacerbate an overwhelming partisan divide. Across ten questions Pew has asked of survey respondents since 1994, the difference between Democrats and Republicans averages 36 points. That is the highest rate ever, though the gap has been growing continuously since 1994, when the average difference was just 15 points. The gap between Republicans and Democrats “far exceeds divisions along basic demographic lines, such as age, education, gender and race.”

“In nearly every domain, across most of the roughly two dozen values questions tracked, views of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents and those of Democrats and Democratic leaners are now further apart than in the past,” Pew noted…

[….]

“The party is being pulled in a more liberal direction, there’s no question about that,” Bowman said. “I mean Elizabeth Warren’s comment a few weeks ago essentially that this isn’t Bill Clinton’s party, we’re not the party of welfare and crime. I think she’s reflecting the views of many of the people in her party. And I think a lot of it happened during the Obama years.”

✦ Yes, the Democratic Party’s Polarization Helps Explain Trump’s Rise (National Review)

…The point here isn’t to recommend that those on the left repress their moral convictions. It’s simply to note that, given the remarkably fast and profound ideological changes undergone by the Democratic party, and given that the rival party’s raison d’être is to resist sudden and wholesale social changes, the resulting moment was perfectly predictable and, even though it is morally problematic in numerous respects, totally understandable.

To believe that the Democratic party’s leftward drift is not in any way responsible for Trump is to bizarrely think that the party is at one and the same time the Left’s most promising and effective vehicle for change and also so socially inconsequential as to be incapable of provoking any sort of reaction from its ideological opponents.

Media Shows Their Bias by Labeling (Updated)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Great study via NEWSBUSTERS:

MRC analysts reviewed all 141 stories on the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) network evening and morning shows that mentioned the efforts of the House Freedom Caucus and their Senate counterparts during the ObamaCare repeal/replacement debate, and discovered that while congressional conservatives were overwhelmingly given ideological labels, those that opposed them were rarely, if ever, labeled by journalists.   

CBS provided the most coverage (54 stories) that mentioned House and Senate conservative efforts on the health care bill. NBC was next (49 stories) followed by ABC, which aired (38 stories) on its morning and evening newscasts during this period. 

In these stories, MRC analysts documented how network reporters assigned a whopping 223 ideological labels to House and Senate Republicans — either to individual members of Congress, or factions like the House Freedom Caucus within the GOP.

Overwhelmingly, the networks used “conservative” tags to talk about Republicans. Fully 80 percent of these labels (179) talked about “conservatives” or those on the “right;” just 20 percent (44) referred to “moderate” Republicans.

Eleven percent of the labels (20) painted conservatives as extremists: “far right,” “hardline,” “very conservative” or “ultra-conservative.” Such deliberate labeling is designed to stigmatize conservatives, casting them as outside-of-the-mainstream ideologues, as compared to their (usually unlabeled) adversaries.

Democrats were never labeled as “liberal” or “progressive.” Twice Democrats were referred to as “moderate,” both times on CBS.  

CBS led the way with 61 uses of the “conservative” label to just 17 “moderate” tags. ABC was second with 60 “conservative” labels and 15 uses of the word “moderate.” NBC had 58 “conservative” labels to just 12 “moderate” uses. 

(READ IT ALL)

An older study shows much the same… but it seems to be getting worse. POLITICO is now warning that the media bubble is worse than many think. Here are just a few of the graphs I have saved over the years… I wonder is something analogouse can be pointed out to me by a Leftist?


photo positive-negative-100-days.png
photo Gun Control_1.jpg
photo AZChartNew.jpg
photo ABCNBCCBSguncontrol.gif
photo smith khan chart.jpg
 

Democrat Policies Coming Home to Roost

Published by Papa Giorgio

THE HILL notes that Schumer is concerned… I wonder if this same concern swept over him with Clinton?

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he is concerned by Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s request for resignations from 46 U.S. attorneys appointed by former President Barack Obama.

“I’m troubled to learn of requests for resignations from the remaining U.S. attorneys, particularly that of Preet Bharara, after the President initiated a call to me in November and assured me he wanted Mr. Bharara to continue to serve as U.S. attorney for the Southern District [of New York],” he said in a statement Friday.

“While it’s true that presidents from both parties made their own choices for U.S. Attorney positions across the country, they have always done so in an orderly fashion that doesn’t put ongoing investigations at risk,” Schumer added. “They ask for letters of resignation but the attorneys are allowed to stay on the job until their successor is confirmed.”

“By asking for the immediate resignation of every remaining U.S. Attorney before their replacements have been confirmed or even nominated, the President is interrupting ongoing cases and investigations and hindering the administration of justice.”….

You don’t think firing 93-U.S. Attorneys was putting “ongoing investigations at risk”?

Pelosi about GOP health bill:

➤ “…The American people and Members have a right to know the full impact of this legislation before any vote in Committee or by the whole House.”

Pelosi on Obama-Care:

➤ “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

Are Democrats serious right now!

More Liberal Fascism

Published by Papa Giorgio

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.

(NEWSBUSTERS)

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:

Apparently, setting fire to your own campus because someone you don’t like is giving a talk is broadly supported by the coastal liberal elite.

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.

Update: Hollywood Dingbat Leftist Sarah Silverman calls for a MILITARY COUP (ALLCAPS in original) to overthrow Donald Trump.

‘Nother Update: Former Obama Administration Official (Counselor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and served as a senior adviser at Obama’s State Department) calls for Military Coup against President Trump.

I guess we need a military coup to “preserve democracy” or something.

More from GAY PATRIOT

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.

(DAILY MAIL)

I feel this is important to note:

…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….

(POLITICAL OUTCAST)