Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts

Friday, November 29, 2019

Liberals Talk A Lot But Their Actions Prove They Are Frauds.


FLASHBACK: 10 Hollywood liberals who promised to leave if Trump won

The liberal meltdown over President Donald Trump’s stunning victory in 2016 didn’t just impact the mainstream media.
Scores of liberal Hollywood celebrities vowed they’d leave the United States if Trump was elected — but three years later, not a single one has packed their bags!
So The Horn News thought we’d do the world a favor and remind America’s left of their promises.
Don’t let the door hit you where the good Lord split you!
1. Jon Stewart — Stewart told People Magazine that if Trump won, he “would consider getting in a rocket and going to another planet, because clearly this planet’s gone bonkers.”
It has been a year, Jon… isn’t it time for liftoff yet!?
2. George Lopez — During the election, Lopez discussed Trump’s immigration policies in an interview with TMZ saying, “If he wins, he won’t have to worry about immigration, we’ll all go back.”
For someone who hates America so much, it seems he’s spending an awful long time packing his bags to “go back.”
3. Cher –– The music superstar, who had a series of Twitter feuds with Trump, promised would move to Jupiter if Trump won the election.
Maybe Cher and Jon Stewart can split the rocket fuel costs!
4. Miley Cyrus –– In a series of Instagram posts Cyrus explicitly told her followers, “We’re all just f—ing jam between his rich ass toes! Honestly f— this s— I am moving if this is my president! I don’t say things I don’t mean!”
Three years later, maybe Miley needs a reminder that she promised to get out.
5. Rev. Al Sharpton — Al Sharpton said at a Center for American Progress event in Washington D.C., “If Donald Trump is the nominee, I’m reserving my ticket to get out of here. Only because he’d probably have me deported anyhow.”
Hurry up, you don’t want to miss that reservation, Sharpton.
6. Whoopi Goldberg — Goldberg promised in January 2015 on ‘The View’ that she would leave the country because “I can afford to go.”
Since then, she’s spent her time complaining… but not leaving.
What’s wrong, Whoopi, you can’t afford it?
Or is it that you’re not welcome anywhere else?
7. Amy Schumer — The controversial actor and comedian told BBC’s Newsnight, “I will move to Spain or somewhere. It’s beyond my comprehension if Trump won. It’s just too crazy.”
She hasn’t left for Madrid yet. Maybe she can start comprehending Trump’s appeal to voters when she finally packs?
8. Eddie Griffin — The actor and comedian cited Trump’s call for a Mexican border wall when he claimed he would move to Africa if Trump became commander-in-chief.
So far, Eddie hasn’t bothered to leave Los Angeles. What are you waiting for?!
9. Lena Dunham — Star of HBO’s ‘Girls’, the extremely left liberal Dunham announced in April 2015 that she would move to Canada saying, “I know a lovely place in Vancouver, and I can get my work done from there. I know a lot of people have been threatening to do this, but I really will.”
Really? We hear Canada is lovely this time of the year. So what are you waiting for?
10. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg — This is the best one, of course. In a controversial interview with The New York Times, Democratic Justice Ginsberg suggested if Trump won, her late husband would have said, “Now its time for us to move to New Zealand.”
Thoughout the election she took the unprecedented step of bashing Trump, saying, “For the country it could be four years, for the court it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that.”
Well Justice, we will personally help you pack your bags, because that’s one more seat Trump can fill with a conservative Justice. When are you leaving?

Friday, July 5, 2019

Interesting Questions...


Enigmas...
(1) Isn't it weird that in America our flag and our
culture offend so many people, but our benefits
don't? (2)
How can the federal government ask U.S. citizens to pay back
student loans, when illegal aliens are receiving a free
education? (3)
Only in America are legal citizens labeled
"racists" and "Nazis," but illegal
aliens are called
"Dreamers." (4)
Liberals say, "If confiscating all guns saves just one
life, it's worth it."  Well then, if deporting
all illegals saves just one life, wouldn't that be
worth it? (5) I
can't quite figure out how you can proudly wave the flag
of another country but consider it punishment to be sent
back there. (6)
The Constitution: It doesn't need to be rewritten; it
needs to be reread. ( 7)
William F. Buckley said: "Liberals claim to want to
give a hearing to other points of view and are then shocked
and offended when they discover there are other points of
view." (8)
Joseph Sobran said: "'Need' now means wanting
someone else's money.  'Greed' means wanting to
keep your own.  'Compassion' is when a politician
arranges the transfer." (9)
Florida has had 119 hurricanes since 1850, but some people
still insist the last one was due to climate
change.  You
can't fix stupid, no matter how much duct tape you
use. 
 
 Robert
Edmonston 

Wednesday, January 2, 2019

If Only They Would Listen

OPINION

The Worst Enemy of Black People

Walter E. Williams
|
Posted: Jan 02, 2019 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
The Worst Enemy of Black People
  
Malcolm X was a Muslim minister and human rights activist. Born in 1925, he met his death at the hands of an assassin in 1965. Malcolm X was a courageous advocate for black civil rights, but unlike Martin Luther King, he was not that forgiving of whites for their crimes against black Americans. He did not eschew violence as a tool to achieve civil and human rights. His black and white detractors accused him of preaching racism and violence. Despite the controversy, he has been called one of the greatest and most influential black Americans.
Many black Americans have great respect for Malcolm X. Many schools bear his name, and many streets have been renamed in honor of him, both at home and abroad. But while black Americans honor Malcolm X, one of his basic teachings goes largely ignored. I think it's an important lesson, so I will quote a large part of it.
Malcolm X said: "The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have. If the Negro wasn't taken, tricked or deceived by the white liberal, then Negros would get together and solve our own problems. I only cite these things to show you that in America, the history of the white liberal has been nothing but a series of trickery designed to make Negros think that the white liberal was going to solve our problems. Our problems will never be solved by the white man."
There's a historical tidbit that those much younger than I (almost 83 years old) are ignorant of. In black history, we have been called -- and called ourselves -- several different names. Among the more respectable have been "colored," "Negro," "black," "Afro-American" and "African-American." I recall when Mrs. Viola Meekins, when I was a student at Stoddart-Fleisher Junior High School in the late 1940s, had our class go page by page through a textbook and correct each instance in which Negro was printed with a lowercase "n." In Malcolm X's day, and mine, Negro was a proud name and not used derisively by blacks as it is today.
Malcolm X was absolutely right about our finding solutions to our own problems. The most devastating problems that black people face today have absolutely nothing to do with our history of slavery and discrimination. Chief among them is the breakdown of the black family, wherein 75 percent of blacks are born to single, often young, mothers. In some cities and neighborhoods, the percentage of out-of-wedlock births is over 80. Actually, "breakdown" is the wrong term; the black family doesn't form in the first place. This is entirely new among blacks.
According to the 1938 Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, that year only 11 percent of black children were born to unwed mothers. As late as 1950, female-headed households constituted only 18 percent of the black population. Today it's close to 70 percent. In much earlier times, during the late 1800s, there were only slight differences between the black family structure and those of other ethnic groups. In New York City in 1925, 85 percent of kin-related black households were two-parent households. Welfare has encouraged young women to have children out of wedlock. The social stigma once associated with unwed pregnancy is all but gone. Plus, "shotgun" weddings are a thing of the past. That was when male members of a girl's family made the boy who got her pregnant live up to his responsibilities.
The high crime rates in so many black communities impose huge personal costs and have turned once-thriving communities into economic wastelands. The Ku Klux Klan couldn't sabotage chances for black academic excellence more effectively than the public school system in most cities. Politics and white liberals will not solve these and other problems. As Malcolm X said, "our problems will never be solved by the white man."

Saturday, October 6, 2018

Is Scalia's Daughter-in-Law An Indicator Of What May Occur In November Or An Outlier?

Scalia’s Daughter-in-Law Goes Nuclear on Democrats over Kavanaugh

 Print
Democrats desperately hoped that their antics surrounding the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh would keep him off the Supreme Court … but their actions seem to have seriously backfired.
Instead of stopping the conservative judge, liberals appear to have unified the right.
Recent polls show that voters are re-energized to support Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections, and a majority of citizens of all backgrounds disapprove of how Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, in particular, handled the unproven accusations against Kavanaugh.
The former justice may have been known as a conservative, but Adele Scalia is not.
TRENDING: As FBI Investigates & Testimony Falls Apart, Ford Withholds Key Evidence
“I’ve always considered myself politically moderate: I am unapologetically pro-life, but my views on affirmative action, Black Lives Matter, and gun control made me sympathize strongly with Democratic perspectives and occasionally led to arguments with my husband and father-in-law,” she wrote in an Op-Ed piece published by The Federalist.
Scalia checks many of the identity politics boxes revered by modern liberals. She’s a female, of course, and is also a “person of color” who immigrated from Trinidad and Tobago. As she pointed out herself in her article, she was never completely comfortable with the Republican party for a variety of reasons.
All that changed thanks to the appalling treatment of Kavanaugh by Democrats, and their rejection of evidence or presumption of innocence in favor of a political witch hunt.
“I have become a unicorn,” Scalia wrote.

Will the Kavanaugh process drive more voters away from Democrats?

  
Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Tribune news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
“All it took was Democrats’ treatment of Brett Kavanaugh over the last few weeks to turn me into that elusive creature: a minority, immigrant woman who supports Republicans,” the former attorney and stay-at-home mother said.
Mincing no words, Scalia declared that what she saw happen over the last few weeks “convinced me that Democrats are not who they claim to be.”
“The party that established itself as a champion for the voiceless, powerless, and wrongfully accused, betrayed its values and launched a vicious attack on Kavanaugh that left him voiceless, powerless, and completely incapable of defending himself,” she wrote.
Scalia pointed out something that a few others have also noticed: Despite constantly pretending to stand for the rights of the accused when it comes to urban minorities, the left betrayed those principles when it came to a conservative white male.
“Against all logic and good faith, they released uncorroborated allegations of sexual misconduct to the public, counting on the backdrop of the ‘Me Too’ movement to make them that much harder to criticize or ignore. I still cannot reconcile these actions with the social and criminal justice reform platforms that Democrats campaign on,” she wrote.
RELATED: Watchdog Group Obtains Shock Docs on What Happened Day Scalia Died
Then she revealed something that should be a red alert to Democrats: For the first time since legally entering the country, Scalia feels compelled to officially become a full citizen so she can vote … for Republicans.
“These events opened my eyes to the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party,” Scalia declared, summarizing the problem.
The left just created a new minority, female immigrant conservative voter — and there could be many more previously undecided voters who have been motivated by the kangaroo court of last two weeks.
Well done, Democrats.

Monday, August 27, 2018

Isn't It Interesting How The Left Reacts To Anti-White Actions Verses Anti-Black Ones

Tucker Carlson Tackles South African Farm Murders And Land Appropriation Efforts - Liberal Heads Explode

Scott Morefield
|
Posted: Aug 27, 2018 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
Tucker Carlson Tackles South African Farm Murders And Land Appropriation Efforts - Liberal Heads Explode
  
Tucker Carlson is a man who’s never been afraid of tackling sacred cows, but when the Fox News host waded into the South Africa land appropriation issue last Wednesday night, even he was likely not prepared for the backlash he was about to endure.
Indeed, Carlson’s Wednesday segment calling South African President Cyril Ramaphosa "a racist" and decrying the U.S. State Department’s lackluster response to the spectre of uncompensated land grabs and the ongoing slaughter of (mostly) white South African farmers brought the ire of all the ‘Usual Suspects,’ including the Anti-Defamation League, Right Wing Watch, the establishment media, liberals of all stripes, and even the South African government itself.
Because if you take umbrage at the targeting of white people because of their race, you must be a “white nationalist,” or something.
But the wailing and gnashing of teeth hit a stratospheric level when President Trump himself, a regular Tucker Carlson Tonight viewer, promised via tweet to look into the issue along with a mention for Carlson and Fox News.
Needless to say, if it hadn’t happened before, liberal heads were definitely exploding all over the place now. And predictably, they played the “R-word” with gusto. 
“White farmers: how a far-right idea was planted in Donald Trump's mind,” read the Guardian headline, as if white people being murdered and displaced is somehow only a “far right” concern. (To the Guardian - To paraphrase something my mother said a time or two - If the “far right” were against jumping off bridges, would you be for it?”)
“WTF,” tweeted David Rothkopf. “Seriously, WTF.  The president, who doesn't know where South Africa is and wonders when they changed the name from South Shithole is concerned about the appropriation of land from 'white farmers'?!  Down deep beneath his racist veneer are many layers of even deeper racism.”
“Cool that Tucker Carlson is acting as direct pathway communicating narratives between white nationalists and the President of the United States,” tweeted Reveal’s Aaron Sankin.
HuffPost’s Jessica Schulberg called Trump’s tweet a “blatant nod to white nationalists in South Africa.”
The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, who mockingly calls Carlson’s show “White Grievance Tonight,” noted a couple of minor differences in the Fox News host’s Wednesday and Thursday broadcasts, one of which included a stunning revelation by Wemple himself. 
“And whereas Carlson on Wednesday accused Ramaphosa of changing the country’s constitution to facilitate stealing, here’s how he phrased matters on Thursday night: ‘The president of the country, Cyril Ramaphosa, has pledged to change South Africa’s Constitution in order to legalize the seizure of property without compensation. That’s currently being debated in the Parliament in South Africa.’ Sounds like democracy in action.”
Did you catch that last sentence? - “Sounds like democracy in action.”
In other words, The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple is totally cool with “democracy” “acting” to steal people’s land without compensation. 
At least we know where he stands.
There’s plenty more, but you get the picture. Only “white nationalists” and “racists” are against South African farm murders and taking people’s land without compensation, because only “white nationalists” and “racists” would be concerned that the victims this time happen to be white people and seem to be targeted simply because of that one immutable characteristic.
By that logic, should those us concerned when blacks are victimized on the basis of race be considered “black nationalists?”
Carlson himself spoke to the double-standard the next day. 
“As land seizures based on skin color shows, South Africa is once again becoming a place where an entire group of people is targeted for discrimination and violence on the basis of their skin color,” Carlson said on Thursday as he addressed some of the blowback from his previous day’s segment. “We oppose that obviously. It was wrong 25 years ago, it is wrong now.”
"In the west, we punish only the guilty. We do not punish their descendants or everyone with the same hair and eye color ... No one is alleging that the individual farmers in South Africa stole their land, they're saying that people who resemble them, [hundreds of years ago] did, and that is enough,” he continued. “The elites see no problem with this standpoint, and that should worry you. A lot."
By the logic liberal elites and the South African would-be land grabbers employ, the United States should give all its land back to the descendants of Native Americans. Hell, maybe Israel should find out who the descendants of the Canaanite tribes are so they can give their land back too.
"This is not an appeal to a racial group," Carlson told the Chicago Tribune Friday in an interview. "This is an appeal to universal principles that protect all racial groups that are true regardless of people's color. We don't mete out justice based on what people look like."
The Tribune piece, entitled “Fox's Tucker Carlson stunned by reaction to stories on South Africa,” goes on to paint the issue as a “white nationalist” one alone. But Carlson had a comeback for that too - “Joseph Stalin loved his daughter. I love my daughters. Does that make me a Stalinist? That's such a stupid question I don't know what to say.”
Predictably, none of the media hand-wringers gave the Fox News host a modicum of credit for also opposing Apartheid:
"Everyone in the country understands what these are, they're racial attacks,” Carlson said on his show. “OK say defenders of the South African government in this country, the [white] South African government also seized land on racial grounds. That is absolutely true, they did do that. And it is one of the reasons so many decent people opposed Apartheid. Apartheid was evil and wrong.”
“Things have changed though,” he added. “Now our elites endorse the idea of a racial spoils system, and that is the scariest part. Our ruling class now believes in collective punishment. That is the opposite of justice."
It’s also the opposite of human decency, given that these vilified “white farmers” generally aren’t out there robbing, raping, murdering, and running drugs. Instead they are, you know, FEEDING the entire freaking country. 
Sadly, people who draw comparisons to Zimbabwe aren’t far off. The Daily Caller’s Chris White reported that country’s similar land confiscation effort “destroyed the country’s once thriving agricultural sector and forced the government to rely on international aid to feed 25 percent of its population,” resulting in a $12 billion decline in agricultural revenue between 2000 and 2009.
None of that will matter to liberals, of course, because to them, the perception of being against murdering white people and taking their land for free is far worse than actual starving black children. 
Though they’ll often defend the land grabs, it’s hard for even a liberal to defend the outright farm murders, at least vocally. So instead they cite reports, like this one by AgriSA, saying farm attacks are “down” to “only” 561 attacks and 47 murders (of course, “down” also are the numbers of farmers - you know, what with all the rapes and gruesome murders and all), still making the job of being a South African farmer literally the “most dangerous job in the world.” 
As to exactly how many, DailyMail reports that “none of the figures can be verified because the South African government has refused to release farm murder statistics since 2007. Some of the killings are reported to have been barbaric, with farm owners tortured, raped, burned alive and slaughtered in front of their families.”
But even so, it’s a “conspiracy theory” to say white people are being persecuted,” despite the above evidence ... and the below quote from a prominent South African leader:
“I’m saying to you, we’ve not called for the killing of white people, at least for now. I can’t guarantee the future,” South African politician and leader of the country’s third largest political party Julius Malema told Turkish media earlier this year in a clip played by Carlson. Further, the man who once said he wants to “cut the throat of whiteness” responded with a hearty “"cry babies, cry babies!" when asked if he understood that his statement could be considered a call to genocide.
Move along. There’s nothing to see here, and you’d better shut up. You wouldn’t want someone to call you a “white nationalist,” now would you?