June 26, 2016

National Survival is Not Nationalism; Brexit and the New World Order

Timothy Birdnow

Helen Dyer forwards this. Please read my comments below:


From 'Brexit' To Trump, Nationalist Movements Gain Momentum Around World

When Donald Trump arrived in Scotland Friday morning, hours after the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee was quick to draw parallels between the U.K.'s political earthquake, and his own campaign for president.

"People want to take their country back," Trump said, "They want to have independence, in a sense. And you see it in Europe, all over Europe."

And while Scotland itself voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union, Trump is right. Right-wing nationalist movements, fueled by anger toward political elites and mistrust of immigration — and primarily backed by white voters — are gaining more and more momentum on the continent……

In recent decades, nationalist movements have shifted from vocal minorities to powerful parties that gained control of governments in places like Hungary, have lost national elections by the slimmest of margins in countries like Austria, and, this week, forced the United Kingdom out of the European Union…….

A contempt for the elite ruling classes

"People feel, quite rightly, that they have no real control over political systems — that the political class does what it wants and it sort of ignores ordinary people," Mounk says. "And to a large extent, that's because of the necessities of globalization."

Simple solutions

Mounk says the basic approach of many populist, nationalist candidates can be boiled down to this: "I embody the will of the people. And the problems that we face are actually completely straightforward," he said. "The problem is that the elites are corrupt. They're in cahoots with minorities, with business interests. And all that needs to happen is for me to be elected

Is nationalism here to stay?

It's clear that the factors galvanizing nationalist sentiments aren't going anywhere any time soon. Western democracies continue to become increasingly multicultural. Globalization will remain — despite attempts to stop it, like the U.K.'s Brexit vote.

And the most powerful factor — economic stagnation — appears more likely to remain, too. The Brexit vote triggered market turmoil around the globe Friday, raising questions about long-term economic affect of the move.

So nationalism will continue to be a powerful political tool, and it's clear Trump will embrace the theme through the November election, seeing Brexit as fuel.

End excerpt.

First, let me state unequivocally that we are using very bad terminology here because THIS IS NOT NATIONALISM! Even many on our side speak glibly about Nationalism and fall into the trap laid for us by our leftist buddies. Conservatives are not and never will be Nationalists. Nope. Didn't happen and won't happen. Yet we allow ourselves to be tarred with this logo, even often apply it to ourselves. But it is a terrible libel and we must correct the language if we are to not wind up with our heads rolling around inside the guillotine basket.
The horrors of Fascism and Naziism left a permanent stain on an ugly ideology known as Nationalism, and the Left, ever able to squirm and twist things out of joint, besmirched the Right by confusing Nationalism with Patriotism, with a desire to maintain the Nation State. They have so successfully confused the two that we use the words interchangeably, and as a result you can either be a Nationalistic fascist pig or a globalist. But the reality is the Right in the 19th Century were very concerned with Nationalism as a movement, for it was born not of the Conservatives but of that most chic or radical Leltist, Jean Jacques Rousseau. Roussea ccreated the concept of Nationalism as a tool to break the power of the Church and the nobility. He believed Christianity was a superstition, and an evil one at that, and he also understood it wasn't going away without some more appealing competitor. Roussea greatly admired Islam, but there was too much bad blood between the Muslims and Christendom to seriously consider making everyone bow toward Mecca, so he came up with the next best thing. Rousseau believed that the nation was the expression of the collective Will, and that all power and authority belonged with the People who were the definers of all things, not God and not any religion. Rousseau was something of a Monist, a man who sought indivisibility rather than plurality. He loved the Aunschluss of Church and State afforded by the Koran, and he hoped to create a new secular Faith by doing the same in Europe. Instead of worshipping a transcendent God he would have us worship a Nation, a mystical higher power. And, just as Christ had His Church, so too the Nation is run by7 a State, a government. This was the genesis of Fascism, which was unequivocally a product of the Left. Nationalism was never about respect for country and independence and all about elevating the State to the godhead.

Rousseau also created the internationalist type of Socialism, and the two branches have been fighting ever since. See, Fascism and Marxism were cut from the very same cloth, only they disagreed on how to establish the utopian society. But their goals were the same; empower the State, forcibly control economic activity, promote atheism and secularism, Provide a grand utopian vision, Create a "new Man". Both are revolutionary movements intended to overthrow the old ways of existence, to replace them with a new social, economic, and political order. The fact is the Nationalist has as little use for Conservatives as the Marxist. When we speak about "nationalism" when referencing patriotic movements and a desire to maintain independence from an encroaching supranational order we do ourselves a great injustice. We are Patriots, not Nationalists. It is an absolutely critical distinction. WE aren't the guys who gave the world Hitler.

That was the Left, the very people who are fathering the New World Order today.

That said, I also take umbrage with the NPR writer's claim that;

" Right-wing nationalist movements, fueled by anger toward political elites and mistrust of immigration — and primarily backed by white voters — are gaining more and more momentum on the continent…"

End quote.

Pardon me, but does this author not remember the Occupy Wall Street movement? That came on the heels of a number of mass protests at International economic summits, like the G8 meetings, where Leftists protested the world order promulgated by the elites. Who is angry about rule by the elites? Looks to me like both sides of the political divide, lest Bernie Sanders would not have made any headway in the Democratic race. Trying to cast this as purely a movement by "right wing" nutcases is not only disingenuous but factually incorrect, and it is a lie designed to marginalize the general anger at the leadership both in America and in Europe.

Black Lives Matter is as much fueled by the anti-globalist forces as anything.

Which brings us to the next logical error in this piece; …

"It's clear that the factors galvanizing nationalist sentiments aren't going anywhere any time soon. Western democracies continue to become increasingly multicultural. Globalization will remain — despite attempts to stop it, like the U.K.'s Brexit vote."

End quote.

First, we were told by these self same elites - including NPR - that globalization was such a great deal for us, that we would all be rich and happy if we stopped thinking locally and started thinking globally. But the exact opposite happened, with the global perspective leading to stagnation and social and political upheaval. In other words, they lied to us about what would happen. What is it that people see emerging from this dream of a world without borders? The nations of Europe and America are being overrun by aliens, aliens who have no intention of enculturating and becoming part of the host but rather seek to overwhelm and overthrow the nations they have invaded, and this with the blessings of the political leadership, who see people not as free children of God but as economic commodities to be used in their service. So, if you cannot get labor cheaply enough you simply import poor people to take the jobs, and to hell with those whose jobs have been stolen. Free people are a pain in the neck, always demanding accountability; better to have an ignorant rabble whose purpose is simply to work and pay taxes. The elites don't actually care about the people in any nation. They want people to be interchangeable, like machine screws.

And the people of America and Europe (and Australia) have a culture and way of life worth protecting, yet they see their leaders eager to erase that very culture and way of life. What the Left fails to understand (or more likely doesn't care about) is that this is our home, our land, our possession. It is as if someone simply moved into your house and took over, relagating you to one small room. A great deal of effort is expended on the part of everyone - especially the wealthy and elites - to protect their homes and property, up to and including the use of the military to kill potential thieves, yet the public is being told that we must not take steps to protect our collective property i.e. our nations. We are racists, bigots, colonialists if we seek that.

But borders are absolutely necessary to the smooth functioning of our world. One of the first things a child learns is to respect the boundaries, to not wander in the street or run away in the grocery store or whatnot. That is the establishment of borders, and it improves over time as children learn that the toy belongs to the other child and he can't just take it. Borders are the key to all civilization. The elites are attempting something profoundly arrogant and stupid, namely, trying to erase political boundaries in some crazy misguided attempt to create world government and to allow themselves to make money off people in other countries. It's never been done and likely won't work. I submit that our current economic doledrums are proof that globalism is a bad idea.

Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama have all followed the globalization model and we haven't had any real economic booms as a resullt. Reagan did not follow that model and America - and the world - got rich. Granted, we had a boom during the Clinton years, but that was riding the tail of the Reagan legacy, and it was paid for through illusory means. Clinton gave us the tech and housing bubbles.

The author concludes:

"And the most powerful factor — economic stagnation — appears more likely to remain, too. The Brexit vote triggered market turmoil around the globe Friday, raising questions about long-term economic affect of the move."

End excerpt.

Posh and drivel. Again, globalization was supposed to set the economy roaring, not stagnate it. Why is Brexit going to cause permanent economic dislocation? Britain will still have a strong economy, a large market that will now be better positioned to act outside of the draconian, Byzantine regulations and rules imposed by the European elites in Brussels. They'll be able to stop the influx of aliens who are swallowing British jobs and consuming british social services. They will be able to relax the strict pollution standards imposed by the E.U., thus making british goods cheaper and more abundant, reducing the need for cheap Chinese imports. And it will bestir national pride, a sense of Britishness that goes hand in hand with robust economic activity. People have to have a sense of themselves, have to feel a part of their country, or they have little motivation. The European elites sought to remove this as a way to create their Frankenstein's monster of an uber-country, and they offered in return a stronger social safety network and promises of an easier life. But Man was not made to simply take leisure, and productivity declines in a nation where nobody wants to work or accomplish anything - precisely the conditions that Europsocialism promotes. Ennui is inevitable, an anti-everything and boredom with life. Bored people don't produce, and even though they may consume they don't do it with any real goal, they merely exist. A nation that has lost a sense of itself and replaced it with mere existence will fall.

The economic chaos of Brexit was a momentary thing, and understandable when considered. Of course investors would worry; they put all their eggs in the E.U. basket. But it will come back. Britain will be stronger than she was as part of that cespool.

Anyone remember the Austro-Hungarian Empire? Everybody hated it. It was a rat's nest and it collapsed when the pressure of the First World War was applied. It was exactly what the European Union is, a multicultural entity with no national identity or sense of purpose. It had nothing to keep it alive, and nobody missed it when it passed. The E.U. has all the same failings.

So, as always, the taxpayer-funded propogandists at NPR not only miss but fail to swing the bat at all, instead kicking a soccer ball. It's time we re-evaluate the narrative we have been given for decades. The problem with lies is that they catch up with you eventually, and the whole "world without borders" and "free trade" business is imploding. Brexit showed that people are not so far gone as to committ suicde with a smile.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2265 words, total size 14 kb.

Clinton White House was den of coke, mistresses

Jack Kemp

I hate this lowlife more and more each day...I consider him and the Democratic Party my blood enemies.
Obama Bashes Whitey in Speech at Entrepreneurship Summit (Video)
Jim Hoft Jun 24th, 2016 2:23 pm 20 Comments
Barack Obama spoke at the 2016 Global Entrepreneurship Summit Friday in Palo Alto, California. This was his first speech after the Brexit vote left another mark on his years of failed leadership at home and abroad.

Here's Obama speaking:

obama whitey california
During his speech to young entrepreneurs Obama took a swipe at whitey.

Obama: When people can start their own businesses it helps people and families succeed… It offers a positive path for young people seeking to make something of themselves and can empower people who previously have been locked out of the existing social order, women, minorities, others who aren’t part of the old boys network.

Did you catch that?
According to Obama only women and minorities aren’t part of the "good old boy” networks – run by white men. And, according to Obama, all white men are granted privileges within the "good old boy” networks.
This man is so offensive – and ignorant.


He is a vile little weasle. Obama ignores the very fact that his half blackness is what has gotten him everywhere in life, that he would never have been anything had he not ridden the Affirmative Action gravytrain. HE is the good old boys network posterboy!

At best Obama would be working in the Alinsky machine in Chicago as a common vote thief.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

Conservatives face liberal ‘firewall’ on Supreme Court

A.J. Cameron

Expanding upon Mr. Horowitz's points, the literal 'elephant' in the room at this time is Mick Mobster Ryan. He is pro-amnesty and illegal importation. I say importation, because, by purposely and systematically destroying our immigration laws and offering rights intended only for legal residents, this equates to importation.

Another issue is international law. It wasn't long ago that Justice Kennedy more than suggested referencing international law to rule on U. S. legal issues. Compounding this issue is the fact that, embedded within TPP, are provisions‎ to use international law to settle legal issues, not U. S. law. Mick Mobster Ryan and Zipper-Lip McConnell are conspiring with the puppet president to ramrod TPP through during the lame duck session, following the General Election. This will 'encourage' Reps and Senators to vote for this treason, because the next election for the Reps and 1/3 of the Senate will be two years away.

We have a lot of praying to do and a lot of work to do to rescue our sovereign republic, rights and freedoms


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

New Video

Selwyn Duke sends this our way:

Another video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcGv-t8QAhY&feature=youtu.be

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.

Great Article Title

Jack Kemp

I've got nothing to say about Brexit that's not obvious, but I'd add this title to an article:

"Britons throw Churchill bust back at Obama"

Some commenter on Lucianne.com said of Hillary's attempt to interpret the Brexit vote as a need for continued establishment leadership, "Talk to the hand." I'd say in reply to Hillary, "Talk to the finger."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

Welcome Hackers! Hillary E-mail Scandal

Dana Mathewson

What more has to come out before they throw this witch into prison?


A 2010 decision temporarily disabling State Department security features to accommodate Hillary Clinton’s private server effectively laid out a "welcome mat" for hackers and foreign intelligence services, a leading IT official who oversaw computer security at the Defense Intelligence Agency told Fox News.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

Calendar Girl; Hillary Faked Her Sec State Calendar

Jack Kemp

Hillary Clinton Faked Her Calendar To Hide Meetings With Donors

I know, I know. It is heartbreaking and gobsmacking that Hillary Clinton, while on the dole as US Secretary of State, met with major donors and favor seekers behind closed doors and then falsified her official calendar to hide those meetings. Me, too. I am saddened and dismayed. My faith in the world is shaken to its very foundations.

"Television cameras rolled when Hillary Clinton appeared on the central balcony of the New York Stock Exchange to ring the opening bell — just minutes after she attended a private breakfast in September 2009 with influential Wall Street and business leaders.

But the identities of her breakfast guests would be left off of her official State Department calendar — omissions that are among scores of names and events missing from Clinton's historical record of her daily activities as secretary of state, an Associated Press review found.

Now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Clinton met that morning with a dozen chief executives, most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family's global charity, the Clinton Foundation. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her official calendar, which omitted the names of all her guests — among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

UK follows James Bond's example...

Jack Kemp


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

Clinton White House was den of coke, mistresses


This makes Trump look like Ronald Reagan, in comparison to Hillary...


Clinton White House was den of coke, mistresses: ex-Secret Service officer
By Daniel Halper
June 25, 2016

Gary J. Byrne has devoted his life, and risked it, to serve his country — as a member of the US Air Force, a uniformed White House Secret Service officer, and a federal air marshal.
And he believes it is his patriotic duty to do anything he can to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming president of the United States.
As someone who guarded the Oval Office during the Clinton presidency, Byrne, in an exclusive interview with The Post, tells how he witnessed "the Clinton machine leaving a wake of destruction in just about everything they do.”
He says he has also seen Hillary’s "dangerous,” abusive, paranoid behavior.
"It’s like hitting yourself with a hammer every day,” says Byrne, pounding a fist into his open hand, of the former First Lady’s explosive anger.
In his new book, "Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate,” out Tuesday, Byrne makes no apologies for his anti-Clinton motivations.
" ‘America first’ is in my blood,” he writes, sounding very similar to another presidential hopeful.
Modal Trigger

Byrne says he wants Americans to "vote [their] conscience,” but pledges to make sure "they have all the information that they need.”
For one, he thinks the Clintons’ own behavior bred an immoral White House culture.
Byrne revealed to The Post during the interview that Clinton staffers used cocaine on the job.

"There were some drug issues,” Byrne says. "Some people would come in to work in the morning, and they were barely walking, they would drop stuff off at the office, and go to the restroom where they would come out minutes later happy as a clown.”
He also exposes the "jogging list” for the first time.
"In the beginning of his first administration, when President Clinton was jogging outside, women who were dressed as if they were going clubbing or working out, started showing up at the southeast gate,” Byrne explains. "The agents . . . would get the women’s names, and run them to see who they were. If the women wouldn’t cooperate, they would be ushered out of the jogging group.
"Agents … insinuated that this list was used by President Clinton to try to meet these women,” Byrne says.
The book details how the president had as many as three mistresses during the same time period, including former Vice President Walter Mondale’s daughter, Eleanor, who Byrne once discovered "making out on the Map Room table” with Bill Clinton.

What bothered Byrne more than the infidelity was the way Bill Clinton programmed the entire White House to accommodate his cheating ways.
Hillary, meanwhile, was a human minefield. The Secret Service was convinced Hillary posed a physical threat to her husband, and even gave him a black eye, Byrne writes.
She also cursed out her security detail, and she and Bill would often try to evade the Secret Service, making it difficult to protect them and putting agents at greater risk, Byrne says.

But what sticks most in Byrne’s mind is the personal destruction the Clintons wrought in his own life – the fear and turmoil he
had to endure as authorities subpoenaed and harassed him as they investigated the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
It all could have been avoided, Byrne maintains, if Bill Clinton had simply told the truth.
Byrne’s revelations have come under fire recently, with some critics doubting he had the access to the Clintons he claims he had, and that his book details do not align exactly with his testimony to prosecutors nearly two decades ago.
Hillary Clinton’s spokesman has ripped the book, telling Page Six "Gary Byrne joins the ranks of Ed Klein and other ‘authors’ in this latest in a long line of books attempting to cash in on the election cycle with their nonsense. It should be put in the fantasy section of the book store.”

"Anybody who asserts that what I’m saying is not true,” Byrne says, his voice cracking with emotion, "they don’t know any better or they’re flat-out lying.”
Yet, he confesses, "I’m not completely comfortable telling the story, but I am telling it.”
He says a number of people could vouch for his access, including George Stephanopoulos, the former Bill Clinton communications director; John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign chairman, who worked in the Clinton White House; and Jennifer Palmieri, Hillary Clinton’s current campaign communications director, who worked near Byrne in the White House.

As for his testimony during the Ken Starr investigation, Byrne — who never signed a non-disclosure agreement with the Secret Service — says at the time he gave narrow answers to specific questions, as instructed.
"f my testimony wasn’t true, I would end up doing seven years,” he says.
To prove he’s being truthful, he says, he’s willing to undergo a polygraph test — if Hillary takes one too.
Byrne says he is not committed to Donald Trump, despite sharing his slogans.
"The only thing I’ve ever heard about Donald Trump,” says Byrne, "was that he built a lot of buildings and he gave a lot of money away to charity.”
But, he says, he will never vote for a Clinton.
"I know what the public image of the Clintons is and I know what the real image is,” he says. "And the real one’s dangerous.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 920 words, total size 6 kb.

Once the Whale is Gone there is Nothing Left to Eat

Jack Kemp forwards this:


Paul Krugman’s Democratic Party

John C. Goodman
Posted: Jun 25, 2016 12:01 AM

Paul Krugman may understand the Democratic Party better than most Democrats do. The New York Times editorial writer describes Democrats as a "coalition of social groups, from teachers’ unions to Planned Parenthood, seeking specific benefits from government action.” More often than not, what these groups want from government is at someone else’s expense.

That isn’t just a characteristic of the party. That’s what the Democratic Party is.
There are also groups that support Republicans: gun owners, small business owners, evangelicals, etc. But Republican groups tend to not want anything from government. More often than not they just want to be left alone. As Krugman sees it, Republicans are far more concerned with general principles or ideology.

Although Krugman often likes to characterize Republicans as Ayn Rand individualists, the typical Democrat is far more self-interested – in a bad sense of the word. Democratic groups tend to base their loyalty to the party solely on what political favors the party can deliver to the group.

There are no overriding principles here. The party is always seeking opportunities to take from Peter and give to Paul. Paul can be rich or he can be poor. Ditto for Peter. All the really matters is that Paul promises a bigger reward (in terms of votes, campaign contributions, etc.)

Think of the political system as a sort of Hobbesian jungle, in which there is dog-eat-dog rivalry among people who are only interested in what’s in it for themselves. Think of fighting over a fixed pie, for which one man’s gain is another man’s loss.

Who loses out in such a world?

* People who don’t vote (e.g., children, prisoners, unemployed youths, etc.);
* People who always vote for the same party regardless of what it does (e.g., African Americans); and
* People who are in groups only temporarily and who have no opportunity to organize politically (e.g., people who fall in and out of poverty or people who contract expensive-to-treat health conditions).

Scour the entire country and you will be hard pressed to find a Democratic politician who is trying to reform inner city public schools. The reformers are almost always Republicans or wealthy people (who may sometimes vote for Democrats). Who cares about reforming the prison system? In Texas it has been a conservative think tank and Republican politicians. Who cares about lowering the barriers to a job (occupational licensing, union monopolies, minimum wages laws, etc.)?

The White House has actually come down on the right side of occupational licensing – complaining that almost one third of all jobs in the country require a government license. But most of the time the Obama administration has marched in lock step with other Democrats – favoring the haves over any (often minority) newcomers to the job market.

Although the teachers unions are a huge factor in Democratic Party politics, the teachers will vote for a Republican over a Democrat at the drop of a hat if the Democrat threatens their agenda. And this is true of most groups that make up the Democratic Party coalition. It has not been true of African Americans, however.

As I wrote in a previous post, black voters have tended to vote for the Democrats no matter what they do. That may be why so many black families must send their children to the worst schools, why they tend to receive the worse city services and why they are disproportionately the victims of environmental degradation – as in Flint, Michigan.
When Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), they rarely spoke about the need to insure the uninsured (who, per Sen. Chuck Schumer, basically don’t vote). Instead, they talked about the pre-existing conditions, a middle class problem. Even here, however, it appears they were speaking to the large population of people who feared that pre-existing conditions might become a problem in the future.

Those for whom pre-existing conditions were an actual problem at the time were a small, disorganized group with no political power. That may explain why so many insurers in the (Obamacare) exchanges have narrow networks that exclude the best doctors and the best hospitals and have outrageously high out of pocket limits for lifesaving "specialty drugs,” needed by cancer or AIDS patients. In the health policy world, it is only the Republicans and right of center think tanks that have shown any interest in changing perverse insurer incentives.

The idea of a party made up of special interest groups is not new. It dates back to the 1930s and the Roosevelt coalition. Franklin Roosevelt successfully put together a voting alliance that included farmers, union members, southern segregationists and others – people who had nothing in common and basically didn’t even like each other. They voted for the Democrat’s because they got something they wanted for themselves, even if they detested what the party was doing for others.

The pinnacle of this type of coalition building was the National Industrial Recovery Act, modeled after the Italian fascist model in Italy. (See some of the history here.) Before it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, the act allowed (and even required) every industry and every profession to establish a cartel – setting prices and wages and controlling output.

The problem here is what economists call the "fallacy of composition.” In each separate market the producers benefit by enjoying monopoly rents. But that doesn’t mean that the aggregate effects are good. Just the reverse. Creating a monopoly in every market is terrible for the economy as a whole.

And that is the fundamental problem with Democratic Party politics. Think of political jurisdictions where there basically are no Republicans. Think Detroit, Michigan. Think Puerto Rico.
Think of sharks in a feeding frenzy, eating a dead whale.

Once the whale is gone, there is nothing left to eat.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:47 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 996 words, total size 7 kb.

June 24, 2016

Socialism v. Racism

Wil Wirtanen

Comment on one of the articles I read


§Socialism Vs. Racism

A young black kid asks his mother, "Mama, what is Socialism and what is Racism?”
"Well, Child.....Socialism is when the white folks work every day so we can get all our governmental entitlement stuff for free.
know.....like our free cell phones for each family member, rent
subsidy, food stamps, EBT, WIC, free school breakfast, lunch, and in
some places supper; free healthcare, utility subsidy, and on and
on.....you know, that’s Socialism.”
"But, mama, don't the white people get pissed off about that?”

"Sure they do, Honey. That's called Racism.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

Christians for Islam!

William Been

I just received this youtube and think it is very important to share. It ties in directly with the mass email I sent a few minutes ago concerning the concerns for America and the 2016 election.

I have a collection of documents involving one of the nine groups featured in the youtube, being the Church World Services group. Their actions and intent are frightening as they believe they are doing God's work by populating the one free Christian country in the world with Muslims. Perhaps I am a lousy Christian but I believe the very existence of Christianity is being threatened by these actions which is validated by 14 centuries of Muslim attempts to dominate the world as directed by Mohammed. The complexities dealing with this subject matter are immense and troublesome but will share info with all of you within the next week.


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

Advertising Companies to Cooperate in Promoting Radical Progressivism

A.J. Cameron

This comes from a good friend, locally.

On a day when freedom loving people all over the world should be celebrating the Braveheart-like Brexit (in spite of the Scots), we receive this sobering news.

Freedom can be fleeting with the self-appointed elites are determined to strip it from us.

We'll know the extent of this conspiracy, and how determined TPTB (the powers that be) are, if the Pope is in any of the ads, or is in support of this purposeful theft of people's freedoms and finances all over the globe.


AD TRUCE: Typically, the leaders of the world’s six largest advertising companies trade barbs and actively try to win each other’s clients. To say they don’t get along is a bit of an understatement. But as the Cannes Lions advertising festival wraps up, the top ad executives are setting aside their rivalries and coming together to help raise awareness for the United Nations’ ambitious Sustainable Development Goals to improve the planet and people’s lives, CMO Today reports. The advertising initiative, aptly named "Common Ground,” will kick off with WPP, Omnicom, Publicis, Interpublic Group, Dentsu and Havas launching a global ad campaign pro bono to highlight issues like clean water and climate change. In addition, each holding company will take up a specific initiative to promote. The goal is to get major corporations around the world to help support and fund the 17 goals, without which the U.N. says it won’t be able to hit its 2030 target.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

Why Are Americans Not Listening?

William Been

The threats are so great. The risks are huge. America needs all of us who oppose Progressivism/Socialism and Globalism and who understand the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Radical Islamists.



In the past few days, events and statements have collectively rang the loudest and clearest wakeup calls concerning the importance of the 2016 elections. There should be no doubt that the election of another Obama/Clinton administration will slam the door shut for those of us who hold traditional American values, conservative values, and libertarian values. Apparently this is ignored or not understood as current polls show Clinton ahead by 5% with the Libertarian nominee having 8% and 7% not participating.

Presented below are important sound bites that, when viewed collectively, define both national and global security concerns that must not be ignored if our freedoms and liberty are to be preserved. It appears crystal clear that the cultural demise accelerated by the Obama/Clinton regime cannot and will not be stopped without strong leadership and equally strong unity and participation behind this leadership.

The sequencing is mostly random although #1 needs to be recognized and communicated widely. Would any recipients be willing to write a personal essay covering the connections of the various items listed and your perspective of what it means to the election and the future of the USA? If you do, please send me a copy.

1. Zuhdi Jasser on Muslim Reform. Concerning moderate Muslim silence re radical Islam violence, Dr. Jasser stressed that many Muslims, including himself, are working in America to reform Islam. He then said that the problem is in Washington where reformers are not welcome and the non-reformers prevail.

2. White House infiltrated with Muslim Brotherhood who share the same goal as ISIS which is a Sunni Caliphate with worldwide dominance.

3. During his Orlando killing spree, Mateen clearly stated his dedication to ISIS.

4. Mainstream Media celebrates White House calling Orlando event an act of terrorism.

5. Obama downplays ISIL involvement in June 14 speech: "do not have any information to indicate that a foreign terrorist group directed the attack in Orlando.”

6. Obama states: "And during his killing spree, the shooter in Orlando pledged allegiance to ISIL.”

7. Obama then declares progress. ISIL "losing ground” in Iraq, Syria, Libya.

8. Obama declares our objective in this fight: "Our mission is to destroy ISIL.”

9. Obama defends unwillingness to reference "radical Islam.” Referencing radical Islam is a "political distraction.”

10. Obama argues vehemently against establishing Radical Islam as the perpetrator of the jihadist attack in Orlando. Hillary supports Obama calling the attack a jihadist attack but also refuses to identify the enemy as Radical Islam.

11. Loretta Lynch announces Orlando 911 tapes to be released without Mateen’s pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State.

12. Ex-Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi Sentenced to Life in Prison on June 18

13. Donald Trump doubles down on Muslim pause, border control, build wall

14. Jordan sealed its last entry point for Syrian refugees after suicide bomber killed Jordanians

15. Jordan stated that "its security comes first”

16. Justice Department changed Loretta Lynch edict and released a supposedly complete version of the 911 tapes revealing ISIS allegiance voiced by Mateen.

17. Michelle Bachmann calls Orlando ‘Wake-up call of all wake-up calls.’

18. Hillary Clinton speech: promises "…to remain vigilant—acknowledging the barbarity of radical jihadists” while warning against undermining international cooperation as well as the American tradition of tolerance.

19. Judicial Watch reported "Islamic refugee” stopped at U.S. border with gas pipeline plans.

20. Regional governor at Fallujah said 49 Sunni men were executed after surrendering to a Shiite faction.

21. Senate Democrats ignore Mateen declarations and filibuster for gun control.

22. While Democrats filibuster, the gun control capitol of the USA Chicago marked the 300th homicide in 2016 over the Father’s Day weekend.

23. FBI reports that U.S. homicide rate in 2014 at 51-year low

24. New Gun Ownership more than doubles in past 51 years.

25. Disney warned FBI that Mateen and wife had cased a Disney theme park in April.

26. CIA Director Brennan describes ISIL threat as severe contrary to the Obama declarations of great progress.

27. Former Homeland Security officer Phillip Haney stated that the very top of America’s vast defense system are endangering the nation’s security.

28. Haney stated that an investigation was shut down by Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the DHS because of fears that it violated the civil rights and civil liberties of Muslims.

29. Haney revealed that 28,000 Islamic jihad attacks have occurred in the world since 9/11.

30. Haney quote: "Until the day comes when we are able to honestly and courageously have a discussion about the nature of Sharia law and how it is not compatible with the U.S. Constitution, we’re not going to have the means to recover ourselves and stand up for the principles that this country was founded upon.”

31. Paul Ryan insists that "Muslims are our partners.”

32. Paul Ryan further said that he does not think a Muslim ban is reflective of our principles.

33. Paul Ryan then said the way to go is a security test, not a religious test.

34. Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate is voting on gun bills while the House Democrats sit on the floor protesting.

William E. Been

June 23, 2016

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 901 words, total size 6 kb.

AR-15 Speaks! A New — and Real — Anti-black Bigotry

By AR-15 and Selwyn Duke

Hi, my name is AR-15. Some of you know me, but many more of you know of me — through the media. But you may not know the real me.

I’m that cool, sleek-looking black gun you’ve seen profiled by the press. They put me in newspapers and on TV, showing my picture as if it’s a mug shot, even though I’ve never committed a crime. Oh, bad people have at times used (and abused) me to do bad things, but not really that often; as even The New York Times  HYPERLINK "http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?_r=0" admitted in 2014, firearms such as me — which that paper and others call "assault weapons” — are only used in two percent of gun crimes (most are perpetrated with handguns).

And that’s another thing. For a long time I didn’t mind the misnomer; it massaged my ego and made me feel like the big man on the block when I was called an "assault weapon.” But Mr. Duke convinced me that "pride goeth before a fall,” as the Good Book says. He pointed out that the term "assault weapon” was popularized by anti-gun zealot Josh Sugarmann, whose goal was to besmirch my reputation and get me banned. In fact, Sugarmann, not at all a sweet man, actually once  HYPERLINK "http://www.quotes.net/quote/17826" said, "Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”
And it’s true, especially in my case. The public knows my appearance well; people have seen my cousin and dead ringer, M-16, fired machine-gun style in war movies for decades. But, alas, I, AR-15 — the weapon available to the public — can only be fired semi-automatic. This means that every time you pull my trigger, one shot, and only one shot, is released.
So even if we accept the term "assault weapon,” that’s not me. To qualify, a gun must be capable of fully automatic fire (machine-gun style), and no such weapons are readily available to the public. So unlike cousin M-16, who originally had a select-fire feature allowing him to be shot in various ways, I’m just a one-trick pony. And, by the way, "AR” in my name doesn’t stand for "assault rifle” but "Armalite Rifle,” referencing the company that first produced me.

Despite this, I’ve become a media whipping boy. Even when those rare crimes are committed in which a gun of my class is used, but which don’t involve me personally — such as the horrific Orlando incident, where Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen used a Sig Sauer MCX — my face is front and center. In fact, that’s what finally inspired me to speak out, articles such as  HYPERLINK "http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201" this outrageous one from Daily News writer Gersh Kuntzman. Reporting on how he tried me at a Philly gun range, he actually wrote:

The recoil bruised my shoulder, which can happen if you don't know what you're doing. The brass shell casings disoriented me as they flew past my face. The smell of sulfur and destruction made me sick. The explosions — loud like a bomb — gave me a temporary form of PTSD. For at least an hour after firing the gun just a few times, I was anxious and irritable.
None of the above is true; I know because I was there. Oh, in my younger and more impetuous days I would’ve gotten a thrill out of being portrayed as such a macho guy. But the Truth will set you free (something the propagandizing Mr. Kuntzman should ponder).

And the truth is that I never bruised Mr. Kuntzman. One thing I can rightly puff up my chest over is that I have very little recoil because I’m high-tech — my mechanism is designed to absorb much of the energy of the blast. And you don’t have to take my word for it. Mr. Duke had the opportunity years ago to fire me on multiple occasions, and he says that I have by far the least kick of any firearm he ever used. And if you don’t believe him, trust your own eyes. Below is a video of a seven-year-old girl trying me for the first time (forward to the 25-second mark if you want to see just the actual firing).

[Insert video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc-hqiAlfQM]
Did the little lass say "Ow!” or register discomfort in any way? Did she rub her shoulder? A 12-gauge shotgun loaded with buckshot could have knocked that little tyke on her keister, but me? Also know that Kuntzman fired me only three times before bowing out, grousing that I was a "dangerous weapon.” And that fact, my friends, comes from Frank Stelmach, who was quoted by Kuntzman and who owns the gun range the journalist visited. You see, Mr. Duke  HYPERLINK "http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/23443-philadelphia-gun-range-owner-daily-news-reporter-kuntzman-misrepresented-ar-15-interview" actually called Stelmach, and one of the first things the man said to Duke — as he complained of how Kuntzman misrepresented his words and the experience at the range — was "It would be nice if journalists would write what you actually say!”

And by the by, Stelmach said that Kuntzman never mentioned anything about his shoulder or expressed that he was experiencing any kind of discomfort. Stelmach also called the notion that an ultra-low-recoil weapon such as me could bruise a grown man’s shoulder "nonsense.”

As for my "explosions” being "loud like a bomb,” well, I can belt out a song, but not like some other firearms. And no wonder. I fire the .223 cartridge, a small-caliber round the same diameter as a .22 (yes, .22s are those cute little rounds you put in your Marlin as a kid). Of course, my round is a lot more powerful than a .22 (in your face, Marlin!), but just take a look at  HYPERLINK "http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_killing_power_list.htm" these "killing power” rankings of rifle rounds. It’s hard to admit, but the .223 round listed — which is still more powerful than my .223 round and which I can’t fire — has the second least power of the 41 cartridges ranked. This is why many states have outlawed my use for hunting big game, such as deer. Imagine, they won’t even let me go after Bambi! In the same vein, when a lady friend of Mr. Duke’s tried me years ago, she remarked that, owing to my almost non-existent recoil, I was "like a toy.” It’s all quite emasculating.

Of course, then there are my magazines; for the Kuntzmans of the world, no, those aren’t things you read that usually contain liberal propaganda. They’re objects loaded with cartridges that, assuming they’re removable, you then insert into firearms. It’s true that high-capacity magazines are available for me. But criminals would always get them on the black market; moreover, with just a bit of effort, any gun’s removable magazine can be modified to hold a large number of rounds. So why am I singled out?

The answer is simple: my looks — and others’ prejudices.

Am I not a sharp-lookin’ guy? Black is beautiful!

But it’s also seen as "menacing,” especially by liberals in the media. Face it, since I’m functionally no different from other legal firearms — semi-automatic just as most guns sold in America are — I can only conclude that I’m profiled as dangerous because of my sleek military-like appearance and my color. If I looked like those much more powerful hunting rifles, would you really be troubling over me?

As Mr. Duke likes to put it, this is standard liberal style over substance. Never sparing my ego, he points out that assuming I’m a machine gun because I look like cousin M-16 is akin to putting a Porsche body on a Yugo chassis and expecting to go 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds. Of course, my self-image will survive, but being misunderstood, mischaracterized and discriminated against is a bit depressing.
It’s enough to make me want to shoot myself.

This piece was written by AR and edited by Selwyn Duke for grammar, punctuation and style
 HYPERLINK "mailto:selwynduke@optonline.net" Contact Selwyn Duke,  HYPERLINK "https://twitter.com/SelwynDuke" follow him on Twitter or log on to  HYPERLINK "http://www.selwynduke.com/" SelwynDuke.com
To contact the author, email the above and write "Att: AR”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1405 words, total size 9 kb.

Brexit! And the Return of te Nation State

Timothy Birdnow

I a glorious victory for common sense and self preservation, the good people of the United Kingdom have elected to leave the corrupt imperial European Union. Yes, folks, Brexit has come.

Insiders at the BBC were horrified, refering to their readers in leaked e-mails as "ghastly" ordinary Brits.

From the Daily Mail:

"The BBC 'ignores and despises' millions of Britons because they do not embrace the liberal views of a metropolitan elite, a leaked memo has revealed.

The Corporation was said to be 'completely bewildered' about how to respond to the concerns of 'ghastly' ordinary people.

There would be no end to the issues facing the broadcaster until the 'London bubble' had burst, said a report by David Cowling, former head of the BBC's political research unit.

Sensitive subjects that worried households were barely acknowledged by the political class, his analysis claimed.

Although he did not name specific issues, Mr Cowling would almost certainly have in mind mass immigration – routinely among the biggest fears of voters – and the way foreign arrivals have changed communities in the UK.

For decades, politicians and the BBC have been accused of censoring debate, branding as 'racist' those who voiced concerns about the perceived erosion of our national identity or the pressure on jobs, housing, schools and healthcare. Fury at being overlooked for so long has led to vast numbers of Britons – many casting a ballot for the first time – to vote to quit the EU in a howl of frustration at the political elite."

End excerpt.

Meanwhile, the success of Brexit may lead to another referendum on Scottish independence.

Since the Middle Ages the trend has been toward larger, more intrusive government and supranationalism across the globe, with the exception of the 1990's which saw a resurgence of nationalism. That brief period was a result of the collapse of the "evil empire", the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, and people who were forced into communion with their Marxist bretheren reclaimed their national independence. But in the West that hasn't been an issue, as most of the nations in Europe and the Americas were voluntary associations (largely; certainly the U.S. was a shotgun marriage after the Civil War.) With Brexit we may be seeing a reversal of this long term trend.

And probably a welcome one. Supranationalism has been the goal at least since WWI of the elites, and as they near their goal of a borderless world the People are starting to push back.

One must ask; what is the best form of nation? Through much of history the Empire ruled, be it monarchy, republican, or what have you. It was still empire, meaning the governing class conquered and ruled territory with People who were not voluntarily part of the nation. Prior to that we had city states, and prior to that hunter-gatherer tribes. So the trend has been towards bigger and not necessarily better. With the fall of Rome Europe was thrown into the Feudal society, but even that was imperial in anture to a degree, as the monarchs carved portions of territory as they saw fit and often the king of a foreign land ruled over people who did not even speak his language.

That changed with the union of Aragon and Castille. Now we had the Nation-State, a country that was homogenous in terms of ethnicity, language, culture, and often religion. But the efficacy of the nation state was hardly tested, because almost immediately the Europeans began building colonial empires, thus returning to the pre-Medieval days. Empires exist for the benefit of the few, and the colonial monstrosities were no different. The end result was continual warfare as each empire jockeyed for position at the top of the global heap.

The creation of the U.S. presented the world with a different type of nation state. The U.S. was a decentralized confederation of small countries, with a common heritage and culture though with distinct differences. Unlike the Spanish model the U.S. did not have an official state religion, and so there was less dissatisfaction and greater flexibility. The way the country was set up made it impossible to really strangle any group, because it was a simple matter to leave a stifling environment; we allowed free, unfettered travel between the states, and into the territories. We did not allow direct taxation, so business boomed and everyone around the world wanted to come to America, where they could make their fortune. This was true even of non-Western peoples - such as the Chinese - who came in droves despite the "racist" accusations made by modern Liberals against the country. The onlu people who did not fare well were those of African descent - a terrible injustice and tragedy. That would be remedied with millions of lives in the Civil War and through countless battles after. America wasn't perfect, but it presented a balance between large and small, between centralized power versus local autonomy.

It may well be that the American model was the most logical. Look; the human body requires certain things in moderate amounts and if it gets too much the person becomes sick or dies. Potassium, for instance; Potassium is a vital nutrient, but too much will kill you. It's used to execute criminals, in fact. I know from personal experience; I had to go to the hospital because of an excess of potassium after being put on a potassium supplement. See, greater or lesser are not necessarily the best. Modern liberals think bigger is better, more is superior to less, and they seek not local autonomy but world government, devolving down through regional governments to states then down from there. They think that if they have this wars will end, prosperity will reign, and golly gee willickers! We'll have paradise. But isn't this supranationalism just as bad as anarchy? Perhaps both are too far to the extremes and we need something in between? America certainly prospered by being in the Goldilocks spot; not too hot, not too cold, just right.

But what of other nations? Liberals point to failed states as proof we need bigger and better. Well, how much have those other nations limited themselves? Aren't most of them covetous of imperial status, of wanting to empower and grow government and enforce their will on the unwilling? That has always been the problem, and the balanced state is a rarity. That is no fault of the nation state, but of the darkness of the human heart; the lure of empire is strong to the greedy and power hungry. Empires must be ruled by force, thus making the opposition turn from loyal to seditious. America avoided those traps by limiting power, balancing power, spelling out rights and duties, etc. America was an empire-sized nation state with a common culture and language.

Was. Now America has an imperial government, is run by a cadre of elites, is rapidly being undercut by growing hordes of immigrants and university-trained barbarians. A few years ago Patrick J. Buchanan argued we were becoming an empire and in many ways he is correct, up to and including the "Pax Americana" which has sorely lacked real peace. Our national policy is no longer driven with the protection of the People in mind, but rather by plutocrats and imperials. Much of it is driven by plans hatched at the global level, U.N. schemes like Agenda 21, or the North American Union, or Global Warming initiatives. When Barack Obama refuses to enforce border security, it is not because he is lazy or stupid, but because he wants to continue the plan started under the Clinton Administration to create a North American Union, and this is a necessary step; you can't have a union and strict border control. When Obama kills coal companies, or sues oil companies, it is to enforce Agenda 21. Ditto the HUD plan to colonize wealthy neighborhoods with Section 8 recipients. All you have to do is look at the documents put out by the United Nations.

And as we promote supranationalism the People themselves suffer. It's because the damned things are too big.

So Brexit is a welcome occurance. It's time we realize we have gone too much in the direction of imperialism, and start to pull back to the nation state.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1392 words, total size 9 kb.

Trump Raises 11 Million Since Tuesday

Jack Kemp forwards this:

Trump reportedly raised at
least $11 million since Tuesday

CNN, by Theodore Schleifer & Ashley Killough


Washington Donald Trump and his joint fundraising committee have raised at least $11 million since Tuesday morning, Republicans said Wednesday, a tremendously quick haul that comes amid concerns about his fundraising ability. (Snip) "We are incredibly excited by the outpouring of support from the grassroots supporters who want to see this country experience real change," said Hope Hicks, a Trump spokeswoman. Along with the online effort, a more traditional fundraising tool -- a high-dollar fundraising event at a tony New York City restaurant -- brought in $6 million for Trump and the RNC, his son, Eric, told CNN Trump Victory, the joint

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:31 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.

Dear Tim Cook

Jack Kemp forwards this:

Dear Tim Cook: Your Hypocrisy on LGBT Issues is Deplorable…
Courtney Kirchoff Wednesday June 22 2016

Dear inheritor of Steve Jobs’ legacy,
Life hasn’t been the same since Steve passed. Your products haven’t worked as well, Apple Music was a bust, but worst of all, you’ve entered the social justice wars, only to make a complete asshat of yourself.

Maybe if you focused more energy on innovation (you know, what you’re paid to do?) rather than wading into all things liberal, I’d be willing to upgrade my AppleTV. Which now has the utility of a paperweight, thanks for asking.
But enough about how your products have been suffering. I can write about how iTunes pops up with the same brain-explodingly frustrating error message another time. This open letter is in regards to your embarrassingly hypocritical stances on all the gay things. You may be wondering if I’m joking, what with you being both super gay and super in charge. No. Worry not, I’ll break it down for you real nice like. At the very least, I promise you a smoother user experience than that of the ApplePaperweight.

It’s recently come out that Apple will boycott the Republican National Convention because of Trump, specifically his "bigoted rhetoric.” Words. Now to be fair, I’m not Trump’s greatest fan either (read Worried Yet? Donald Trump Sounds more like Michael Moore than Hillary…). Not just for his words or the hair. In fact the orange sherbet coif is the least of his problems. As a private company you’re free to boycott whomever you like, for any reason you like. Okay? Okay. The intent of this open letter isn’t to lecture your boycotting of the RNC, it’s simply a springboard into how you speak out of both sides of your gently used mouth. A delightful parlor trick on the whole, but rather unbecoming of a giant company which prides itself on "forward thinking.”

On the one hand you and your iCohorts claim to be Knights of the Rainbow Table – with you, Tim Cook, as the flamboyant, gallant leader. I know you expect me to make phallic-based sword jokes, but I promise that shan’t happen. Outside of the one that just did. Because gayness. Stop feigning surprise. Stay focused.

Sir Timothy, one of your lengthy quests has been to virtue-signal to the world and customer base, about just how much you care. Not more than a few months ago, Apple boycotted North Carolina over men not being allowed to pee with girls. As noble a cause there’s ever been for someone who lacks logic acumen. Or young daughters uncomfortable at the sight of a girthy penis. It doesn’t generate as much excitement for them as it does for you.

But on the other limp-wristed hand, Sir Timothy, you gladly do business in countries where it’s illegal to be gay at all (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, the UAE to name a few). How illegal is the gayness in these countries? Methinks one receives more than a dirty look for your ass-less chap prancersizing.

No, the punishment for gayness in these countries is one fatal toss from a rooftop. Perhaps a hanging. Maybe a simple execution via sword. Killed by your own phallic symbol! The irony. The blatantly homosexual irony.
But wait, there’s more. As noted in an article in This Week:

Cook certainly doesn’t seem to feel a burning moral need to boycott India, a place where homosexuality is punishable by life imprisonment. Instead, back in May, he received a warm welcome from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the two sat down to talk shop about Apple’s expansion into the world’s largest democracy.

So India will toss you in the clink if you fancy yourself a twink. For someone who claims to have a monopoly on all the feels, Sir Timothy, your sit down with India is inexcusable. Alas, you went ahead anyway. But Donald Trump wanting to "build a wall”?

What conclusion am I supposed to draw here, Timmy? Look, you could’ve avoided this entire kerfuffle with me had you said "We’re boycotting Trump because he wanted us to break the iPhone to help the feds.” Had you used that as your only explanation, my reaction would’ve been one of uproarious applause. We gave you plenty of credit where due when the FBI demanded you break into your own phone just because they were incompetent apes. I did a little fist bump when you politely, between the lines, told them to go screw themselves.

But that’s not why Apple is boycotting the RNC.

No, your boycotting of the RNC serves the same purpose as boycotting North Carolina. It has nothing to do with your caring about the LGBT community or its causes. Your boycott has nothing to do with Trump, either. The boycott has everything to do with scoring the feeling points in the eyes of the media, and perhaps a small fraction of your customer base. You want "atta boys” from fellow leftists. You stuck it to the right wing again, bravo!

But no. We can see you clearly, Tim. Not only are you a giant hypocrite, you’re rather an ass. You cannot claim to care about LGBT causes while glad hanging with countries which execute them.

You’re nothing but a sellout, Tim. You’ve sold out your LGBT iCohorts for money. Yet you’re trying to score points for boycotting the RNC. Do not mount your noble high horse over this boycott. You’ve done enough mounting for one day.
Written by Courtney Kirchoff

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 927 words, total size 6 kb.

Goebbles was a Piker

Dana Mathewson

From the latest group of Townhall.com articles.



D.W. Wilber - Josef Goebbels Would Be Proud
In the mid to late 1930s and throughout the World War II years, the Nazi Minister of Propaganda Josef Goebbels h...

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.

Kiddie Porn Sniffing Dog

URL dog (Facebook)

Dana Mathewson

I'll be darned!


Meet URL, the Child Porn-Sniffing Dog
Breitbart News

Meet URL -- the Electronic Detection, or "porn-sniffing", black Labrador who can sniff out child pornography and help catch the culprits

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.

<< Page 1 of 617 >>
103kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.0405 seconds.
31 queries taking 0.0088 seconds, 191 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.