“I don’t feel like I’ve left the label; it’s just more that it’s left me.”
An interesting line with a lot of history to it from Sen. Jon Fetterman on dumping the “progressive” label he used to use.
“I don’t feel like I’ve left the label; it’s just more that it’s left me.”
President Reagan would often quip, “I didn’t leave the Democratic party, the Democratic Party left me.” Similar lines have been used by everyone from Bill Maher, “It’s not me who’s changed, it is the left” to Elon Musk.
It’s hard to say exactly what’s going on with Fetterman after his medical issues, but a dividing line seems to have been the Left’s support for Hamas, but he’s also embraced a species of economic populism, fighting against land sales to China, and Japan’s takeover of U.S. Steel.
While Fetterman had never been a foreign policy guy, he did explicitly break with the far left on Israel during his campaign.
“I would also respectfully say that I’m not really a progressive in that sense,” he added. “Our campaign is based on core Democratic values and principles, and always has been, and there is no daylight between myself and these kinds of unwavering commitments to Israel’s security.”
Still, Fetterman said he was “eager to affirm” his positions on the record, lest there be any uncertainty among supporters of Israel who have similar questions. “I want to go out of my way to make sure that it’s absolutely clear,” he told JI, “that the views that I hold in no way go along the lines of some of the more fringe or extreme wings of our party.”
The Left did not take that seriously and assumed he was just pandering. Now they’re finding out that he really meant it.
So this did not come out of nowhere. And it’s not just about Israel.
He has also publicly encouraged Democrats in recent days to engage in border negotiations with Republicans, talks that have outraged progressives who object to efforts to clamp down on migration through the United States border with Mexico.
“I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a secured border,” Mr. Fetterman said in the interview, conducted over Zoom. “I would never put Dreamers in harm’s way, or support any kind of cruelty or mass expulsion of hundreds of thousands of people. But it’s a reasonable conversation to talk about the border.”
Now this may be a canny rebranding.
A moderate Democrat who emphasizes economic populism, border security and steers clear of crazier leftist stuff, has much better odds of holding on to a Pennsylvania Senate seat.
Fetterman would never have taken office if Republicans hadn’t run a Turkish Muslim leftist trainwreck like Mehmet Oz who appealed to no one except Oprah viewers (and they mostly vote Democrat anyway). Next time, Republicans may actually find a candidate that people might actually vote for. But next time around is a long time away and Fetterman doesn’t need to be picking fights with the Left.
The short version seems to be that he may be a leftist, but he’s an old-school leftist who actually doesn’t much like the Left.
The media castigates him for associating with Bernie Sanders, but Bernie was actually an old-school leftist who used to be against identity politics, culture wars and open borders. Under pressure, he jettisoned all of his views and became a generic woke. (At which point most people lost interest in him. Eventually so did the Left.)
Fetterman has pushed back against the pressure. Unlike Bernie, he refuses to be intimidated by people screaming at him.
Despite the headline, he hasn’t left the Left, but he’s not interested in the progressive label which tends to signify upper class wokeness.
The Pennsylvania senator said he still aligns with many progressive goals, including a $15 minimum wage, universal health care, legalizing marijuana and abolishing the Senate filibuster.
But he said he no longer relates to the overarching label of “progressive” — especially as the left has become more interested in demanding what he described as “purity tests.”
“It’s just a place where I’m not,” he said. “I don’t feel like I’ve left the label; it’s just more that it’s left me.
“I’m not critical if someone is a progressive,” he added. “I believe different things.”
Fetterman is currently for fracking, and also for lots of social welfare. That is old-school leftism. It’s also fairly popular.
There’s a whole lot more support for social welfare than there is for culture wars, drag queens and Islamic terrorism. Not to mention radical environmentalism.
The old progressives used to argue (not even all that long ago) that they should run on a straight class warfare platform while shedding all the other garbage. This used to be the main argument for a Bernie Sanders campaign. Except that garbage is hard to shed. Just ask Bernie.
Fetterman is shedding a lot of the garbage. This doesn’t make him an ex-leftist or a friend to conservatives, but it makes him something worse: a serious threat to the Left as it currently is.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2023-12-23 06:34:502023-12-23 06:53:07Fetterman: I Didn’t Leave the Left, It Left Me
For background on the Marxist Hernández, see here. Meanwhile, the claim that no one at the pro-jihad rally was pro-Hamas is silly. There is no action for “Palestinian human rights” that doesn’t display open and gleeful support for Hamas jihadis and other forces of like mind.
Colorado State Rep @_timhernandez refuses to condemn the rape and murder of women, the slaughtering of over 900 innocent men, women, and children, and hundreds of innocent people including Americans taken hostage by terrorists pic.twitter.com/ZDw9LZDk6U
Hours after the terrorist organization Hamas launched a surprise holiday attack on Israel, Colorado Rep. Tim Hernández joined around three dozen participants at a rally at the state Capitol and waved a Palestinian flag.
The Palestine Solidarity Rally was described in a flyer as “An Emergency protest for Palestinian Resistance.” It appeared to be organized by the Colorado Palestinian Coalition.
Hernández’s place among the crowd may have gone unnoticed except that it was caught by television cameras gathering footage of the event.
Almost immediately, lawmakers on both sides jumped on Hernández’ action.
“He voiced his approval of the slaughter of innocent people,” said Rep. Lisa Frizell, R-Castle Rock. “I find that to be contrary to anything that I hold dear.”
There is no rule that prohibits legislative house members from participating in a rally or protest. Still, Frizell bemoaned Hernández’s “absence of decorum,” saying she doesn’t believe he “respects the institution he was appointed to.”
But Rep. Iman Jodeh, D-Aurora, said it is unfair to single out Hernandez for “expressing his beliefs that all people should be afforded human rights.” She pointed out that there has been “massive precedent” of other elected officials who have also attended rallies, voicing opinions on the west steps of the state Capitol during the repeal of Roe v. Wade and most recently when conflicts arose in Sudan and Ethiopia.
“Let me be clear,” Jodeh said. “As far as I know, no one held that rally for Hamas. People were rallying for Palestinian human rights.” To equate Hernández’ actions with Hamas, she said, is “reckless.”…
Miguel de la Torre argues that “hope” is a “white concept,” which would come as a surprise to St. Paul. In typical fashion, Sean McFarland, Carlow University Public Relations & Communications Manager, defends the university’s featuring of de la Torre’s message of fashionable racial hatred, resentment, and rage by claiming that the university exposes students to a wide variety of perspectives in order to encourage critical thinking. Is that so? All right: when was the last time the university hosted a foe of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women? Why, never, because that would be “Islamophobic”? That’s what I thought. So what’s that you were saying about free thought and free expression, McFarland?
Universities today are indoctrination camps for the hard Left. Flee them.
by Katelynn Richardson, College Fix, April 1, 2022:
Carlow University recently hosted an event on “Rejecting White Christianity” that featured a speaker who argued white people should “crucify their whiteness,” called for the embrace of “hopelessness,” and urged people to “ethically lie” to make right for past wrongs….
The March 3 event was sponsored by Carlow’s Atkins Center for Ethics and featured Miguel De La Torre, professor of social ethics and Latinx studies at the Iliff School of Theology in Denver, Colorado.
De La Torre began his presentation by lambasting evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump, according to a video of the speech.
“When eight out of ten white evangelicals voted for a person who is completely against everything Christianity stands for, I don’t know what Christianity they are practicing,” he said. “But I want nothing to do with that Christianity.”
He then distinguished “white theology and ethics” from “Latinx ethics” and noted that the term white does not refer to skin pigmentation but is an “ontological concept.”
“Those of us who are colored, some of us can also be white. But the good news is there is salvation,” he said. Later, he explained that this salvation means “we [who are colored] have to crucify our colonized minds, and for our white brothers and sisters, they need to crucify their whiteness.”
Torre’s speech focused on the idea of “hope,” which he rejected and characterized as a white concept.
“We embrace Euro-centric concepts like hope because it helps to pacify the oppressed during their oppression,” he said. “It leads to spiritual liberation, and ignores physical liberation.”…
Action for De La Torre means using what he called a “trickster ethic” to transform society.
The ethic covers things like “how to ethically lie so we can discover what is true, how to ethically steal so we can feed those who are hungry…[and] how to disrupt the structures that have trained us to oppress ourselves and to take upon our body our own discipline,” he said.
“This empire was built on stolen resources and cheap labor,” De La Torre said. “So hospitality is really the wrong word. What we need is restitution…By seeing this dilemma through the eyes of the margin, we come to a very different understanding of what the Christian response should be.”…
Sean McFarland, Carlow University Public Relations & Communications Manager, told The College Fix that “viewpoints of lecturers should not be taken as either an endorsement or opposition of how the University feels about a particular issue.”
“Rather, the intent of our university’s liberal arts tradition is to expose students to a variety of worldly perspectives and encourage them to think critically and individually on how they feel about the topic(s) in question,” McFarland said.
“Carlow University is proud of our Catholic heritage and mercy mission, which welcomes all. As such, the University welcomes respectful discourse and multiple perspectives, including being open to hosting speakers like Dr. De La Torre whose topic may engender thoughtful reflection and dialogue.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-04-07 10:29:362022-04-07 10:31:56Pittsburgh: Catholic university hosts speaker who calls on white people to ‘crucify their whiteness’
Editor’s note: The following is a translation by Ibn Warraq and Robert Kerr of Michel Onfray’s L’Art d’Etre Francais (The Art of Being French, Bouquins, 2021), published here for the first time. Part 1 is here. Part 2 is here. Part 3 is here. Part 4 is here. Part 5 is here.
Let us note in passing that this gratuitous and rather unscientific association of the working classes of yesterday with xenophobia remains to be demonstrated: on the other hand, we know that many journalists, intellectuals, publishers, writers, philosophers, academics, actors, comedians, lawyers, academics, and composers were certainly not latecomers in endorsing Vichy’s xenophobia, racism, and antisemitism. When de Gaulle launched his appeal of June 18[10], it was modest sailors who were the first to respond, not academics.
The sociologist refuses to use the term “Muslims” claiming that it is a fiction, a “phantasmatic category”. However, he has no difficulty in talking about the French, the Germans and the English by reactivating the old theory of the character of peoples. The French woman will do this, the English intellectual that, the Russian thinker something else…
Moreover, the book uses and abuses this rejected concept. Essentially, one may therefore not use the term “Muslims” if one has misgivings [scil. about Islam], but if one speaks well of them, one may. Muslims are thus all followers of a “minority religion adhered to by a disadvantaged group” – the italics are the author’s…
Of course, another platitude of the Islamo-leftist method, is that the young people (largely of North African descent) who burn cars in the Parisian banlieues cannot be considered delinquents; they ransack the property of the poor out of love for France and its republican values, since this is how they can reclaim the equality that the motto of the Republic promises them. An unprecedented patriotism indeed…
Another cliché of Islamo-leftism is the criticism of secularism, which is said to be a covert weapon of war to attack Muslims alone. Our sociologist then passes from secularism to laicism, which he presents as an intolerant religion. The right to blasphemy is for him “the right to spit on the religion of the weak” – nevertheless, in his conclusion he defends it all the same…
The researcher having discovered this additionally decrees that atheism necessarily accompanies “a world devoid of meaning and a human species without purpose”. It is therefore “a generator of anguish”. The Marxist thesis of religion as the opium of the people is no longer valid: the Muslim religion is understood as the ideology of legitimate salvation to which poor Muslim victims are forced by evil capitalism…
To the question: what is the seductive appeal of Islam? Emmanuel Todd answers: “The existence of an ideal combining individual morality, a collective project and the possibility of a beautiful future can help people in their effort to become something more than frail animals let loose in a world devoid of meaning. That is why we must consider the possibility that Islam contributes positively, in certain circumstances and in some of its manifestations, to the psychological equilibrium of individuals, to good school results and to successful integration into French society” (emphasis of Onfray). Let us recall that this ‘demonstration’ is found in a book that condemns those who marched to denounce the attacks…
If Islam provides for an ideal, a morality, a project, a beauty, a balance, good school results, successful social integration, this would merit more than peremptory assertions: we would like to see the reputed figures, those indispensable tables, the incontrovertible statistics that would validate the scientific nature of what, otherwise, is just showmanship! Unfortunately, we have a lot of figures that rather tend to prove the opposite.
If Emmanuel Todd believes that the category “Muslim” is phantasmatic, he also thinks that Islam has little to do with the Qur’an! Which is why he can turn a religion whose founding text reveals itself to be misogynistic, phallocratic, anti-Semitic and warmongering, in more than one place, into an ideology that is… egalitarian! In Indonesia, it is even an opportunity for women!
Of course, our sociologist, even if he is not specialized in religion, is aware that there are verses that frankly endorse the inequality of men and women or that theorize that a woman’s testimony is not equal to that of a man, in addition to the fact that in the case of inheritance, the shares are unequally distributed depending on one’s gender. How does one get out of such a conundrum? By denying outright – contrary to all that we know to be true and against all evidence – that these verses are still in force in the modern world.
Thus Emmanuel Todd writes: “Nowhere in the Muslim world are the rules of inheritance found in the Qur’an applied.” I doubt that in Afghanistan or Yemen, in Qatar or Saudi Arabia, to mention only two or three countries that come to mind, the Qur’an is trashed in favor of Olympe de Gouges’[11]Declaration of Women’s Rights.
In the same way, young people in the suburbs are also, according to our sociologist, more devoted to the feminist revolution than to Sharia law. Todd goes so far as to assert that the beurs[12] of the suburbs have gone “nine or ten tenths of the way towards an egalitarian conception of the status of men and women.” One can appreciate the scientific character of such an assertion: one can imagine that Max Weber would not have been satisfied with a method that could be described as “give or take”, the notorious “nine or ten”; Libération, on the other hand, even more so! Emmanuel Todd proposes a genealogy of anti-Semitism that is really something else: for him, there is no point in questioning the quranic text itself, which is full of anti-Semitic passages, or even consulting the Hadiths that confirm hatred against Jews, for whom Allah ordains slaughter, or indeed the wars waged against the Jews by the Prophet himself – anti-Semitism rather is the product… of Islamophobia!
[10] The Appeal of 18 June (French: L’Appel du 18 juin) was the first speech made by Charles de Gaulle after his arrival in London in 1940 following the Fall of France. Broadcast to France by the radio services of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), it is often considered to have marked the beginning of the French Resistance in World War II. It is regarded as one of the most important speeches in French history. A part of the speech goes like this: “I, General de Gaulle, currently in London, invite the officers and the French soldiers who are located in British territory or who would come there, with their weapons or without their weapons, I invite the engineers and the special workers of armament industries who are located in British territory or who would come there, to put themselves in contact with me…“
[11] Olympe de Gouges [1748-1793] In her Declaration of the Rights of Woman and of the Female Citizen (1791), she challenged the practice of male authority and the notion of male-female inequality. She was executed by guillotine during the Reign of Terror [1793-1794].
[12] Beurs: Beur (or alternatively, Rebeu) is a colloquial term, sometimes considered pejorative, in French to designate European-born people whose parents or grandparents are immigrants from the Maghreb [NWAfrica]. The equivalent term for a female beur is a beurette.
The following was entered into the Congressional record by Albert Sydney Herlong Jr. who was an American politician from Florida who served in the United States House of Representatives from 1949 to 1969 as a member of the Democratic Party.
Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
Current Communist Goals
EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 10, 1963
Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.” (Remember these goals were published to expose them in 1958) Coincidence?
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“] united force [“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2020-07-20 06:53:472020-07-20 07:41:00SOUND FAMILIAR? The Communist Goals as read into the Congressional Record on January 10, 1963
This is what antifa rioters have been systemically doing to the security cameras in downtown. They climb up and use weapons to destroy them. @MultCoSO is asking for help in identifying this vandal: pic.twitter.com/Q6QX6EtL1A
Is it a case of ordained fate we cannot escape or is it that We the People are too dense to learn from our own mistakes? Paging through humanity’s history, time and again we find numerous instances of costly mistakes where people ignore facts and reason by entrusting their lives to a “savior.” And time and again, we have ended up paying the price for our folly. If we are not genetically doomed to make these ruinous mistakes—which I am certain we are not—then do we commit them out of wishful thinking, laziness, desperation, or some combination of the three?
To illustrate how mistake-prone we are, a few examples will suffice. In order to address economic disparity, a pivotal concern of humanity, Karl Marx showed up trumpeting his battle cry, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Marx announced that the proletariat is the producer of wealth and that capitalists are leeches robbing them of the fruits of their labor.
In effect, Karl Marx originated the concept of class warfare, the poor against the rich. He urged the workers to rise, rid themselves of the rich and take full possession of their own self-produced goods. Humanity’s poor masses found their messiah in this ideologue, rallied behind him, and got to experience a Marxist paradise. While Marx’s summons was aimed at the laboring class of industrial Europe, the peasantry in both Russia and later in China enthusiastically answered his call. The results: many of the rich went to early graves, only to be replaced by a new class of overlord apparatchiks, and the poor continued to be poor. In the process, the disciples of Marx and Lenin such as Stalin and Mao subjected over 100 million to death, and untold millions suffered for many decades while the promised workers paradise never materialized.
Democrats and Incentive
Dis-incentive was the “Achilles Heel” of Marxism. Except for the ruling class, whether you worked hard or loafed, you basically got the same incentive under Marxism. The Democrats and Biden basically want to transform America to cultural-Marxism: a failed economic philosophy, in a poorly disguised form that this Party has been relentlessly pushing throughout the ages. Democrats’ redistribution of wealth does nothing but dis-incentivize an individual’s prime motive force “self-exertion” for “self-reward.” Democrats feel the rich have too much and the poor should simply get a much bigger share of what the rich have. If that is not the exact Marxist failed philosophy, then what is it?
While Marx’s workers’ paradise ideal continued to struggle, and kept failing miserably to deliver its promises, its offshoots such as European Socialism and now American Redistributionism under Democratic leadership are still aims to create a society where those who succeed in generating wealth turn over the major share of their earnings to those who do not.
Dis-incentivizing individual exertion through confiscatory taxes is the surest way to reduce the overall wealth of any society. The rich resort to strategies that shelter their wealth, become discouraged in investing their funds, and then the overall wealth of the society declines. It is investment by those who have funds that creates wealth and jobs. And it is jobs that are the best way to help the have-nots, not government handouts.
In order to address economic issues effectively, government policies should facilitate all individuals and companies to create more wealth, not penalize those who have managed to create and acquire wealth by over-regulation and excessive taxation. The last thing any government should do is to use the ineffective deadly weapon of classism, pitting the poor against the rich.
Hitlerian ‘Salvation’
Not long after the launch of Marxism, another “savior,” by the name of Adolph Hitler, rose to power on the promise of fixing humanity’s economic and other problems at its very foundation based on nationalism. Specifically, he proposed ridding the world of its burden of undesirables and unfit, with Jews on top of his list. Marx’s trump “card” was class warfare. Hitler flashed the ethnic-race card. He claimed that the Aryan race was the cream of humanity’s crop that brought nothing but good to the table, while Semitic, black and yellow people represented exploiters and aberrations to be eliminated. For good measure, he lumped in the mentally challenged, homosexuals and the physically handicapped as humanity’s misfits as well to be rid of.
Picking a scapegoat has always worked magic over the millennia, and even Hitler’s syphilitic brain recognized its value for his campaign of mass genocide. The results: Millions died, among them some of mankind’s best-educated and productive Jews. Hitlerism and Communism, for all intents and purposes, either died or went on life support, providing ample opportunities for other saviors.
Islam to the Rescue
In no time at all Islam, long fractured, lethargic and dormant, found a new vitality under the leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran, who raised the Black Standard and promised Allah’s paradise to the totality of mankind for the simple price of accepting his Shiite brand of Islam. A naïve dreamer of an American President, Jimmy Carter, hailed Khomeini as a saint-savior, an answer to a prayer, so to speak. Not to be left out, shortly after the Shiite Khomeini’s lightning success in Iran that deposed the Shah and established the Islamic Republic, a Sunni Muslim “Osama Bin Laden” launched his campaign of bringing about a worldwide Caliphate, as the sure cure for humanity’s ills.
In contrast to Marx’s class warfare and Hitler’s ethnic-race rallying cries, Khomeini and Bin Laden hoisted the ever-effective battle call of religion. The very concept of religion that stands for uniting people has been subverted, time and again, by clever and devious opportunists as means of pitting people against each other.
America at a Critical Point
The great nation of all nations, America, is at a critical point and crossroads. The current uprising under the direction of George Soros/Obama and the DNC has been abysmal in all areas vital to our nation. Islamist jihadists are on the march and democracy is in retreat. The Islamic Republic of Iran is rapidly moving toward acquiring nuclear weapon capability.
Domestically, our house is in shambles. The national debt is staggering. If Biden is elected, the nation’s debt will exceed that of our obligation under all other previous administrations combined. Our children and grandchildren will have to service this debt at economically soaring rates. Even today, forty cents of the Federal tax dollar go to servicing the loans—much of it to China and foreign entities.
It is imperative that we, as a nation, live within our means, just like families do. In like manner that families should cut back on everything they can, in order to live within their means, the Federal Government needs do the same. It must reduce the size of government and eliminate hundreds of bureaucracies that are redundant or completely useless as President Trump has done. We, as responsible citizens, must make sure that President Trump is reelected.
If the Democrats take over the White House, America, as we know it, will not be recognizable.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Amil Imanihttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAmil Imani2020-07-08 08:48:052020-07-08 08:54:26The Left and the Rise of Marxism
Some of America’s largest corporations have pledged or donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the main Black Lives Matter organization, founded by “trained Marxists,” that calls for replacing the nuclear family with a “village.”
Prominent brands giving money include Amazon, Microsoft, Nabisco, Gatorade, Airbnb, and the Atlantic and Warner record labels.
Black Lives Matter as a movement or sentiment is not necessarily tied to the radical organization, called the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, but it has become the greatest beneficiary of corporate largesse.
The Daily Signal previously reported that the website for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation notes that replacing the nuclear family structure and promoting the LGBT political agenda are central to its mission. A co-founder also has said that she and other “trained Marxists” formed the network foundation.
In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>
The BLM Global Network Foundation began in 2016 with the fiscal sponsorship of Thousand Currents, a liberal nonprofit group. Susan Rosenberg, convicted and imprisoned in 1984 for domestic terrorism, is vice chairwoman of Thousand Currents’ board of directors, The Daily Signal also reported.
At least 18 companies have donated or pledged to donate money to the BLM Global Network Foundation, according to a list compiled by the Washington-based Capital Research Center, which monitors nonprofits and charities. Another seven companies have not been clear which Black Lives Matter entity they chose for contributions.
Thousand Currents has said that all donations filtered through it, corporate and otherwise, “are received as restricted donations to support the activities of BLM.”
The Daily Signal contacted spokespersons for all the companies mentioned in this report several times over the course of a week, seeking comment about their financial support for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.
The Daily Signal asked whether the companies supported that organization’s stated beliefs and goals, which extend well beyond advocating racial equality and opposing police brutality.
Several companies state merely that they are giving to “Black Lives Matter,” without specifying which organization. The BLM Global Network Foundation likely is the recipient, given its prominence, but that isn’t always clear in an announcement.
It also is possible that, similar to the tech giant Cisco, other companies gave to the Black Lives Matter cause through donations to traditional civil rights groups such as the NAACP and the Urban League.
A growing roster of corporations has issued press releases, memos, and tweets vowing financial support for “Black Lives Matter,” linking directly to or using the Twitter handle of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. Here are 18 of them, plus some examples of ambiguous giving.
1. DoorDash
DoorDash, which delivers prepared food, gave $500,000 to the organization. In an email to The Daily Signal, DoorDash spokesperson Liz Jarvis-Shean wrote:
In partnership with our Black@DoorDash Employee Resource Group (ERG), DoorDash pledged a total of $1 million in donations, with $500,000 going to Black Lives Matter via the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation and $500,000 to create a fund to be directed by the Black@DoorDash ERG towards state and local organizations.
Our goal with these donations and the other actions we announced is to stand with our employees and community members to fight injustice, inequality and discrimination and to support organizations that are working to root out structural and systemic racism and providing local community development, mentorship, education and entrepreneurship programs to support Black communities across the country.
2. Deckers
“Deckers as a company is standing together in solidarity to fight for equality,” Deckers Brands said in an email to The Daily Signal.
“To show immediate support, we are donating a total of $500,000 to the following organizations,” the company said, listing seven organizations, including “Black Lives Matter Foundation,” which it said “builds power to bring justice, healing, and freedom to Black people across the globe.”
Although a smaller organization called the Black Lives Matter Foundation exists, as does another called Movement for Black Lives, a blog post from the Deckers brand Ugg links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation. That post uses language similar to the email from Deckers to The Daily Signal.
3. Amazon
Amazon linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation in a press release June 9, identifying it as among 12 groups that would get a total of $10 million from the online retail giant. Amazon announced:
As part of that effort, Amazon will donate a total of $10 million to organizations that are working to bring about social justice and improve the lives of Black and African Americans. Recipients—selected with the help of Amazon’s Black Employee Network (BEN)—include groups focused on combating systemic racism through the legal system as well as those dedicated to expanding educational and economic opportunities for Black communities.
4. Gatorade
Gatorade, the sports drink maker, identified the BLM Global Network Foundation as being among groups benefiting from a $500,000 donation.
Microsoft announced June 5 that it would donate $250,000 to the “Black Lives Matter Foundation,” but linked to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.
Microsoft also named five other civil rights organizations with whom it would “deepen our engagement” by donating $250,000 apiece.
6. Glossier
Glossier, a skin care and makeup company, said in a May 30 press release that it would divide $500,000 among five organizations, including “Black Lives Matter,” and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation’s website.
7. 23andMe
23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki announced June 2 that the company and its employees would donate to “Black Lives Matter” and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
8. Airbnb
Airbnb announced on Twitter that it was splitting a $500,000 donation between the NAACP and the “@Blklivesmatter Foundation,” using the organization’s Twitter handle.
We stand with #BlackLivesMatter. We are donating a total of $500,000 to the @NAACP and the @Blklivesmatter Foundation in support of their fight for equality and justice, and we'll be matching employee donations to both groups. Because a world where we all belong takes all of us. pic.twitter.com/lIfsLgvq2H
We will not stay silent on the issue of systemic racism. We stand with the Black community and recognize the importance of taking action to drive change. As a first step towards this, Degree is pledging $100K to @Blklivesmatter#BlackLivesMatterpic.twitter.com/YHP5nfzJTK
Bungie didn’t provide a dollar amount, but said it would make “financial contributions” to six organizations and linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
Ritz, a cracker brand from Nabisco, announced June 4 that it and sister brands were donating $500,000 to the NAACP and to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
We've come together as sister brands to support @NAACP and @blklivesmatter with a $500,000 donation as an important step in our commitment to helping impact change. pic.twitter.com/VLB87auphS
Dropbox founder and CEO Drew Houston announced June 3 that the company was giving $500,000 to the BLM Global Network Foundation, tagging the group on Twitter.
Systemic racism and police brutality in this country must end. I’m personally donating $500,000 to @Blklivesmatter to fight racial injustice. I’ll also match every @Dropbox employee’s donation on top of the company’s match. pic.twitter.com/9pTSu7Q0Ej
Individual employees of Devolver Digital donated $65,000 to the BLM Global Network Foundation as of June 2 through the company’s ActBlue online giving account.
The individual employees of Devolver Digital and the company itself have donated $65,000 in support of the Black Lives Matter movement through the link below.
— Devolver Digital (@devolverdigital) June 2, 2020
15. Skillshare
Skillshare CEO Matt Cooper, in an online message June 1, said the company was “donating to the following organizations” and referred to the “official #BlackLivesMatter Global Network,” which it said “builds power to bring justice, freedom, and space for imagination and innovation to Black people.”Skillshare was among the few businesses to specifically name the network foundation.
16. Square Enix
Square Enix, a game developer, announced that it was giving $250,000 to the NAACP and Black Lives Matter, linking to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
In one tweet, That Game Co. announced plans to give a total of $20,000 to both the NAACP and Black Lives Matter. In a follow-up, the company linked to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
Tinder, the online dating network, announced that it was donating and provided a link to the BLM Global Network Foundation.
Ambiguous Giving
The California-based tech firm Cisco identifies @Blklivesmatter, the Twitter handle for the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, as among recipients of $5 million in donations.
But a Cisco spokesperson says the company isn’t contributing to that main group.
Cisco’s Robyn Blum told The Daily Signal in an email:
With our recently announced $5M donation, we are pleased to be able to pledge funds to these organizations:
• Equal Justice Initiative–a private, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization providing legal representation to people who have been illegally convicted, unfairly sentenced, or abused in state jails and prisons.
• The NAACP Legal Defense Fund–a premier civil rights law organization fighting for racial justice through litigation, advocacy, & public education.
• Color Of Change–America’s largest online racial justice organization.
Contacted again by The Daily Signal with reference to that tweet, Blum said the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation was not among recipients of Cisco’s donations.
The tech company Intel, in a May 31 memo from CEO Bob Swan, announced that the business would donate “$1 million in support of efforts to address social injustice and anti-racism across various nonprofits and community organizations.”
“I also encourage employees to consider donating to organizations focused on equity and social justice, including the Black Lives Matter Foundation, the Center for Policing Equity and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, all of which are eligible for Intel’s Donation Matching Program,” Swan said.
However, the Intel CEO’s memo didn’t provide a link to a Black Lives Matter group. Nor did it specify which foundation—the larger and more prominent BLM Global Network Foundation or the smaller Black Lives Matter Foundation.
The Daily Signal sought clarification from Intel, but it did not respond before publication of this report.
The Pokemon Co. is another example of a company that didn’t specify which organization, but said it was donating $100,000 to Black Lives Matter.
Atlantic Records announced that it “will be contributing to Black Lives Matter and other organizations that are doing crucial work to combat injustice.” But the legendary record company didn’t specify whether it was donating to the BLM Global Network Foundation and didn’t respond to multiple inquiries.
— Atlantic Records (@AtlanticRecords) May 30, 2020
Similarly, Warner Records announced that it would contribute “to Black Lives Matter and other organizations that are doing crucial work to combat racial injustice.”
Discord, a communications company, announced that it is donating to the “Black Lives Matter movement.” It did not respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal about the specific organization.
Pusheen, the company behind the cartoon cat of the same name, called on fans and followers to join it in donating to Black Lives Matter among other organizations, but didn’t specify which BLM entity.
Ubisoft also said that it was contributing $100,000 to both the NAACP and Black Lives Matter, without specifying which organization or affiliate.
We stand in solidarity with Black team members, players, and the Black community. We are making a $100,000 contribution to the NAACP and Black Lives Matter and encourage those who are able to, to donate. #BlackLivesMatterpic.twitter.com/KpHZCF6VWx
This is a critical year in the history of our country. With the country polarized and divided on a number of issues and with roughly half of the country clamoring for increased government control—over health care, socialism, increased regulations, and open borders—we must turn to America’s founding for the answers on how best to proceed into the future.
The Heritage Foundation has compiled input from more than 100 constitutional scholars and legal experts into the country’s most thorough and compelling review of the freedoms promised to us within the United States Constitution into a free digital guide called Heritage’s Guide to the Constitution.
They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2020-07-08 08:10:042020-07-08 08:17:28These 18 Corporations Gave Money to Radical Black Lives Matter Group
PHILADELPHIA, PA /PRNewswire/ — What would America look like under Socialism? Startup Company, Diogenes Games says they don’t know, but developed a satirical version of Monopoly to find out. They call it SOCIALISM: The Game.
The small startup is proud to announce the commencement of a Kickstarter campaign to promote their parody tabletop game “SOCIALISM”.
A hilarious sendup of the classic board game Monopoly, SOCIALISM: The Game has a radically different goal than the original – the object of the game is to achieve total fairness and equality through the renting and selling of property under a modern, progressive, and populist public policy. The game is over when everyone has $300or less, and uses caricatures of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders to replace the game’s original mascot, Rich Uncle Pennybags.
“We discovered that our game was a fun way to hypothesize what might happen if trends in public policy, trends that have recently entered mainstream political debate, were extrapolated to their logical conclusions in the capitalistic world of Hasbro’s real estate trading game Monopoly,” said John Elliott, CEO and founder of Diogenes Games.
Elliott says the results “aren’t pretty,” but thinks that they just might change the way people think about campaigns, elections, and politics in general. One of the ways the game accomplishes this is through an “enlightened” rulebook that contains sarcastic-yet-realistic changes:
There’s no more “banker” – all dealings are with the Federal Directorate of Redistributive Services
You don’t “go to jail,” you “go to rehab”
You don’t have title cards, you are granted a public “concession” to manage a property
No more hotels; public “housing towers” are the highest and best use
Chance and Community Chest? Nope. “Fat Chance” and “Communism Chest”
The “Fat Chance” and “Communism Chest” cards also reflect the satirical nature of the game, with gems like “Advance to income tax” and “Bernout! Power grid fails on a cloudy windless day. Flick the lights off, pay the player on your right $100 for a black market generator.”
After months of development, design, and play testing, the game is currently in production and is expected to ship in June, if not sooner.
For decades I have said America’s number one national security threat is the Islamic ideology. Now in April 2016 as I have became a bit wiser about the ‘Big Picture’ of our world and how an elite few liberals control much of the world events, I feel there is a need to update my national security threat analysis.
Of course the Islamic ideology is dangerous and a threat to the entire world, but the question we must ask ourselves is how is Islam allowed to thrive in America despite many intelligent people understanding it can and likely will destroy the world.
Liberals in America, currently being led by America’s worst U.S. President (Obama), and by far the President who hates America and what it has stood for since it’s birth are the leading forces behind why the violent ideology of Islam is allowed to grow, flourish, and be accepted into all areas of Americans lives.
There are several definitions of a liberal, but my definition is the one you will never hear our media or politicians use. “Liberals in America are everything but American. Liberals are traitors to this great country and are the cause behind America’s destruction from within. Although many U.S. liberals were born here, they do not uphold basic American values and for this reason they are America’s number one threat to our nation security, our country’s survival, and the future of our children”.
There are a dozen or so legitimate counter-terrorism professionals in America. There are hundreds of self appointed fake counter-terrorism professionals in America who have fooled the American public into believing they know Islamic based terrorism issues inside and out. A few of the fakes include all major media people who pose as journalists, such as O’Reilly and Hannity. More such fakes are senior law enforcement officials at all levels of our government. Finally the leading fakes are Christian and Jewish leaders who pose as religious heads close to God and who by the very nature of their ‘jobs’ feel they understand Islam and Islamic based terrorism better than all others. Thankfully we do have a handful of Christian and Jewish leaders who truly understand the threat of Islam, but they are out numbered by a ration of 1000 to 1!.
Counter-terrorism professionals have proven over and over and over that the Islamic ideology is dangerous, violent, a threat to the entire world, and it’s poison has entrenched all corners of the world and America. Then why has the Islamic ideology, Islamic terrorists, Islamic supporters, and Islamic Centers been allowed to thrive and multiply in America? The answer is that liberals (American traitors) allow it to thrive. Liberals believe that the Islamic scholars and Jihadists throughout the world will give them a break when it comes to enforcing Sharia law in America, such as beheadings, being set on fire, rape of women, and death for the most minute obscure failings of human beings.
Liberals are very wrong of course. When Islam dominates America, there will be no safe zones for liberals or for any person who does not give their 100% allegiance to Islam.
Liberals are the people who advocate allowing illegal (criminals) to enter America, allowing mosques to advocate and promote violence, and even child marriages in America.
Liberals are the ones who advocate refugees who have not been properly vetted to come into our country by the hundreds of thousands.
Liberals are the one’s who give Islamic terrorist organizations such as CAIR, ISNA, MANA, and all mosques in America tax free non profit status.
Liberals are the one’s who allow the school text books of our children to be drafted by Islamic terrorists from such countries as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
Liberals are the people who allow Islamic terrorists from GITMO to be freed and allowed once again to target and kill our troops worldwide.
Liberals are the people who support Islamic based terrorists before they will American service members who have fought for America.
Liberals are the people who fight major wars using minor league rules and tactics.
Liberals are the people who voted an American traitor into office as our President.
Liberals are the people who support anti-Americans such as H. Clinton and a Socialist/Communist B. Sanders as possibly our next President.
Liberals are the people who will NEVER acknowledge that Islam is anything other than a peaceful religion that has been hijacked by a few.
Abe Lincoln, one of America’s greatest Presidents (the 1st President from the Republican Party) said, “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves”.
Will Patriotic Americans defeat the liberals who are posing as Americans in America? Will true Americans save America before liberals destroy us forever? My answer is we could, but Americans have been so brainwashed by liberal thought for decades, that it is unlikely we can reverse the dangerous course of destruction we are on.
TIP OF THE DAY: “Black Lives Matter is a Propaganda tool of liberals and Islamic based terrorist groups”
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/democrat-party-islamic-state-logos.jpg358640Dave Gaubatzhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDave Gaubatz2016-04-10 09:57:382016-04-10 09:59:06Which Group Poses the Gravest National Security Threat to America?
It can be pretty depressing to witness more and more Americans protesting in favor of oppression and against liberty. Yes indeed, increasing numbers of Sovereign citizens want the government boot-heel on their necks or the lash on their backsides. A primary root of this trend can be traced directly to the mega, one size fits all, government school system. For over fifty years, government school educators have been used to fundamentally change America. This has been accomplished by systematically lowering some standards and eliminating others altogether.
American history courses have been degenerated to nothing more than anti United States of America propaganda dogma. The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and Federalist Papers are mere mentions without credible or in depth study. The education system or more appropriately, the dens of indoctrination are wasting an average of $15 thousand dollars per student in cities like Detroit, where at least a forty percent literacy rate is not uncommon at many schools.
So now, America is lumbering along with at least two generations of students who believe that the communist inspired concept of the common good trumping individual rights or rational self-interest is the way to go. That is why bigoted progressive political marxists like Hillary Clinton openly state that “they’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”
Another indication of Americans preferring in this case indirect oppression over liberty, whether self-induced or directly from the government, was a recent episode of Late Night hosted by progressive host Stephen Colbert. His guest that particular Friday night was Ohio governor John Kasich. He is a moderately conservative republican who has overseen the Buckeye States successful economic recovery. He also eliminated the Ohio budgetary deficit and increased economic activity has fostered a two or three billion dollar surplus.
But the major focus of Colbert’s interest was presenting nagging questions about the voters of Ohio choosing not to approve the legalization of marijuana for medicinal or recreational use. That is indicative of the progressive elitist democrats and some rino republicans want Americans to have. In other words, they would prefer that we light up and not focus on concrete issues like illegal immigration, or higher gasoline taxes coming in 2017 for Michigan residents. The progressives don’t want us to remember that president Obama has not made one concrete decision that would benefit America economically, morally, militarily, constitutionally, environmentally, or educationally.
When one reads the numerous quotes of the founding fathers, it is quite apparent that they were concerned about the possibility of the United States evolving from the land of the free and home of the brave, into the land of the dominated and home of the cowardly. Neither you or I can accurately tell how many times we have heard that according to certain pols, Americans support gun control and gender neutral bathrooms for example. Many other such wedge issues on the progressive agenda ae promoting illegal immigration, false allegations of racism and supposedly hating the poor.
Those wedge issues have a certain prominence because people have been dumbed down to a lower level of thinking politically, morally and economically. If Americans were properly schooled on the benefits of our constitution and economics, along with virtue, I seriously doubt that the federal government would be so bloated and working to implode our nation on behalf of the United Nations and muslims.
Properly informed or schooled Americans would not entertain the fool-hearty concept that one is xenophobic because they simply want people to obey our laws and immigrate into the United States legally. Also, perhaps American voters would not have twice elected an individual who literally wants to bring tens of thousands of American hating muslims into our country to try and change our American culture into a bastion of rights inhibiting sharia law.
In order to rescue the United States from utter ruin, we must make genuine efforts to teach Christian virtues, real United States history, critical thinking, real math, etc. to the up and coming generations. If not, our beloved republic will simply end up slip, slipping away. Despite the current troubles and travails throughout the land I am still optimistic that America the beautiful will be truly great again. Our cities will once again be undimmed by human tears. She will of course soon reestablish a closer walk with the one who shed His grace upon her and benefit from His Providential guidance.
Do you believe?
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/alinsky-obama-marx-e1447411773498.jpg406640Ron Edwardshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRon Edwards2015-11-13 05:50:252015-11-13 05:50:25The Alinsky Affect Taking Hold in America
What is noteworthy about this is how selective and one-sided Maher and Dawkins are. They’re all upset about the Marxist anti-Semite Maryam Namazie being banned from speaking at a university because of her views on Islam, but have never said a word while for years Pamela Geller and I and others who tell the same truths about Islam that Namazie tells (and more consistently than she does because we do not support the “Palestinian” jihad as she does) have received the same treatment from universities and other venues. Maher and Dawkins would never think of speaking out on our behalf because they would likely think of us as “right-wing bigots” — as Sam Harris last year dismissed critics of jihad terror besides himself and his friends as “fascists.”
What Maher, Dawkins and Harris don’t seem to realize is that they only think of us as “fascists” because the same Leftist/Islamic supremacist smear machine (including their pal Namazie) that is now going after them for their “bigotry” has for years defamed us in exactly the same way, for saying essentially the same things they do about Islam. We are “right-wing” because the smear machine has called us “right-wing” for years — when I have never taken a public position on anyissue other than those involving jihad and Sharia, and the claim that defending free societies against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism is a right-wing issue, or constitutes “fascism,” is a media fiction.
I expect that Maher, Dawkins, and Harris wouldn’t be caught dead in the company of Pamela Geller or me, even though we note the same truths they do and defend the same freedoms they’re defending. That is testimony only to the effectiveness of the defamation campaign that has now turned against them, for the same reason its organizers targeted us. And as long as their indignation about the threat to the freedom of speech and the hollow truncheon of the “Islamophobia” charge remains restricted only to those on the Left, it remains inconsistent and hypocritical.
“Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins Slam Liberals for Giving Islam ‘Free Pass’ Despite Link to Terrorism,” by Stoyan Zaimov, Christian Post, October 5, 2015:
Two of the most famous atheists in the world, HBO host Bill Maher and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, slammed liberals who they say are giving Islam a “free pass,” despite the human rights abuses being committed in Muslim countries and by Islamic extremist groups around the world today.
Dawkins was a guest on Maher’s “Real Time” on Friday, where Maher said it is “ridiculous” that some make out Muslims to be a “protected species.”
Dawkins added that people sometimes believe that those criticizing Muslims are racists.
Maher and Dawkins both took aim at liberals they said would shoot down free speech in order to protect Muslim sensitivities. Dawkins pointed out the case of Warwick University’s students’ union declining atheist and critic of extremist Islam Maryam Namazie the opportunity to speak at the school in October, out of fear of offending the religion.
Maher has himself faced push-back for his own university appearances, with University of California at Berkeley students starting a petition last year seeking to bar the HBO host from speaking at 2014’s fall commencement ceremony, due to his “racist” views on Muslims.
“If you can’t speak your mind at a university campus, where can you? I mean that’s what universities are about. It’s about free speech,” Dawkins said.
“So they think that if you you criticize Islam you’re being racist and you’re absolutely right that the regressive [liberals] give a free pass to Islam,” the atheist author continued. “They’re kind of right about everything else, I mean, they’re right about misogyny and all of the other good things. But in the case of Islam, it just gets a free pass and I think it is because of the terror of being thought racist.”
Maher added that those who criticize Islam are also called “Islamophobes,” which he said was a “silly word that means nothing.”
Maher, Dawkins, and other atheist authors, such as Sam Harris, have been criticized by religious commentators, such as Reza Aslan, for blaming Islam for the rise of terrorism….
Aslan added that such anti-theists get their ideas “from the most simplistic, the most unsophisticated and the most knee-jerk reaction to the very real problem of religious violence around the world,” and argued that it is “nothing less than idiotic to blame religion for religious violence without recognizing the multiple factors that are involved in violence of any sort.”
“Multiple factors” are “involved in violence of any sort.” This from a man who accused Pamela Geller and me of complicity in a murder that was initially blamed on “Islamophobia” but that turned out to be an Islamic honor killing. Aslan, of course, refused to retract.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Bill-Maher-Richard-Dawkins-e1444123186776.jpg370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2015-10-06 05:21:242015-10-06 05:21:48Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins slam Left for giving Islam “free pass” despite Muslim terrorism
Here’s a quick run down on the two opposing forces in the USA.
Ayn Rand wrote a short nineteen page paper asking: What is the basic issue facing the world today? Rand, in her paper makes the case that, “The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism.” Rand defines these two principles as follows:
Individualism – Each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
Collectivism – Each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/collectivism-vs-individualism.jpg360640Bill Finlayhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBill Finlay2015-06-06 14:37:402015-06-12 08:35:58Team Left vs Team Right
What evil deed must be done to win the “Greatest Liberal in the World” award?
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/greatest-liberal-award.jpg365640Bill Finlayhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBill Finlay2015-02-02 15:39:082015-02-02 15:39:22The Greatest Liberal in the World
Liberals are the closest thing we will see to a zombie apocalypse. I expose the amazing similarities: Godless, run in packs, kill wantonly and have no souls.
Have you noticed how liberal intellectuals are drawn to various dictators? Largely unknown to most Americans is the history of many intellectuals who expressed their disdain for “the masses”, all those millions who work in manufacturing, have small businesses, and hold onto the American dream of success, having a home of their own, and other elements of a good life based on hard work.
Those ordinary Americans don’t worry about “income inequality” because there has always been income inequality and because America provides income mobility. You can earn more if you want to. You can change jobs. You can open a business. You can acquire wealth. There were 53,000 new millionaires in America last year. We have a President who criticized “millionaires and billionaires” throughout his first term.
In his book, “The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Has Undermined the Middle Class” by Fred Seigel (Encounter Books), he provides a history of liberalism that dates back to the early years of the last century and the rise of communism; particularly in the Soviet Union that collapsed in 1991 from its implementation.
You may be surprised to learn that authors like H.G. Wells (1866-1946), the famed science fiction writer, were early advocates of socialism—communism-light. “Liberals thought themselves smarter than other people because they had seen through the supposed Victorian verities to a future not yet born,” says Seigel, noting that one of his books, “Anticipations”, was described by Wells “was designed to undermine and destroy…monogamy, faith in God, and respectability, all under the guise of a speculation about motor cars and electrical heating.”
The “success” of liberalism has given us a nation where a million unborn are killed every year, where marriage is subject to a 50% divorce rate, where same-sex marriage is now law in several states, the middle class is heavily taxed, and—not surprisingly—an increasing number of Americans regard Big Government as the biggest threat to their liberty and freedom.
It is also a nation that has twice elected a Marxist named Barack Hussein Obama who is now openly equating any criticism of his failed policies as a form of racism.
The early liberals “looked to a new elite, a separate caste with the wisdom to lead society to social salvation by breaking with the conventions of middle-class Victorian morality.” It was an early liberal, the literary critic Van Wyck Brooks, who coined the terms “highbrow” and “middlebrow” to demarcate the levels of taste in American life. America’s entry into World War I put the liberals into high gear as they regarded the war years as revealing “American society and democracy (as) agents of repression.”
Seigel writes of liberals that “They had no doubt that the American masses were culturally diseased people, playthings in the hands of America’s philistine plutocrats. For the critics of mass culture, World War I had discredited not the Kaiser and German militarism, but democracy.” Those attitudes from the 1920s persist today.
So now we have a President who daily reveals his contempt for the Constitution and wants to rule by executive order rather than work with the Congress. We have a President who disdains the U.S. military, has been engaged in a purge of many top generals and admirals, and whose view that America is not an exceptional nation, has triggered and supported a growing disrespect of America, contributing to its declining influence on global events and trends.
By the 1940s and 50s, liberals—often Soviet agents—had infiltrated the U.S. government to such an extent that many Americans became concerned, but Sen. Joseph McCarthy who tried to expose them was attacked by liberals who have turned “McCarthyism” into a term for anyone who seeks to expose them.
The intellectuals who led liberalism had a deep disdain for the masses and the egalitarianism of American democracy which they regarded as a degraded form of government that in one’s description discouraged “respect or esteem for superior individuals.” That, too, remains a major theme among the current generation of intellectuals. Obama’s administration is filled with people who never ran a business or worked in one. Government for them is the ultimate means to control Americans, not serve them.
Over the course of the 1960s, “national income had doubled. The poverty rate was cut in half as unemployment dropped to only 3.5 percent and inflation-adjusted personal income grew by nearly 40 percent. Home ownership reached record highs that have been difficult to surpass.” Yet it was the 1960s in which Lyndon Johnson launched his “War on Poverty” saying that the “days of the dole in this country are numbered.”
Under Obama, the most liberal President ever to hold the office, unemployment is estimated to be over 13 percent and millions are on some form of government dole. Liberals still do not make a connection between liberal policies and actual outcomes. Facts do not concern them.
The 1960s also marked the takeover the American system of education and what we are witnessing today has much to do with the indoctrination of socialist values in the generations that attended schools and universities since then.
The 1960s also saw the beginning of the environmental movement. Now don’t get me wrong. America needs clean air and clean water, but it does not need an out-of-control Environmental Protection Agency whose real agenda is to undermine the provision of energy and the entire economy. It is environmentalism that led the government to ban incandescent light bulbs, to mandate a reduction in the amount of water in your toilet seat, and generates countless other idiotic regulations whose real purpose is to control all aspects of your life.
In 1962, a baseless screed against the pesticides that protect human health and property against the onslaught of many pest insect species was published. It was Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring.” The establishment of Earth Day followed in 1970 and ever since liberals have corrupted science to claim that humans were destroying the Earth and to advance the greatest hoax of the modern era, global warming.
The liberal disdain for humanity—the masses—was reflected in Paul Ehrlich’s “The Population Bomb”, published in 1968, that claimed that “the battle to feed all of humanity is over.” Like environmentalism, it was a fear-mongering theme designed to influence public policies. Liberals not only disliked humanity, they disliked the industrial societies that gave them the opportunity to live better lives with innovative technologies.
As Seigel notes, “Before the 1960s, government regulation was aimed at specific industries. But with the creation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1964) the Environmental Protection Agency (1970), the Consumer Products Safety Commission (1972)m and the vast expansion of the Federal Trade Commission, government asserted its influence over the entire economy.”
Now the nation is sharply divided between liberals and conservatives. The problems encountered in the decades since the 1960s have not had any impact on the views of liberals. As Seigel says, “Liberal interests never examined their assumptions, even when faced with social and political failure.” They turned to the courts to achieve their goals and have been successful in transforming the nation through them.
The greatest transformation is the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare—that has seized one sixth of the nation’s economy while depriving millions of Americans of their personal health plans, forcing many to give up their personal physicians, and is negatively affecting the entire economy. The fact that it is such a disaster is the only good thing that can be said for it because it will likely force many who favor such liberal programs to rethink their views. It will likely have a major political backlash toward more conservative candidates.
The lesson is clear. It is liberals who have been working very hard to undermine the U.S. Constitution, our democracy, and our freedoms.
