Leftist Lies about Christianity

134 Views

There is a new anti-Christian meme floating around social media. And like many of these memes they paint a picture that is not true to Holy Scripture.

The latest one starts off with an individual admitting he was a sinner. And then lists his sin as being left-handed. It further states that his sin is listed in the Bible 25 times. Without referencing a single verse.

At the end of this meme the individual states that society has learned to accept left-handed people so its not longer a sin.

Now anyone who has actually READ the Holy Scriptures or who has studied them, as all believers and followers of Jesus Christ are called to do, will be able to tell you without a doubt that being left-handed is not a sin anywhere in the Bible.

Yes the Bible does talk about left-handed people from time to time. But the point is not that they are sinners because of the hand that the use. In most cases the left-handed individual is called by God to something very Holy. Just that their left-handedness is rare just as it is today. They are far more right-handed people than left-handed. But it is not a sin.

Every sin that is listed within the pages of Holy Scripture are behavioral actions done or in some cases not done. And it is clear that every human on Earth is a sinner and in need of God’s salvation through Christ.

At no point in the Bible is a sin based on the status or attribute of any person. It is always their actions or lack of actions that are an offense to God.

The meme’s purpose is to discredit Christianity, the Bible, and followers of Jesus Christ. It attempt to equate the in-born handedness with the sin behaviors of sexual immoralities, hinting that both are in-born.

This is of course a false doctrine invented by man to raise himself above his Almighty Creator in order to justify his own actions.

Society cannot and never has been able to dictate to God on what is or is not sin based on how “enlightened” that society has become. Sin is sin and will always be sin. God doesn’t change and his laws do not change either.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

127 Views

CNN has been having a bad week. Not only is it experiencing a ratings slump that puts the former cable news giant at the public access channel level, but it’s been the subject of a series of videos from the Left’s least favorite video producer, Project Veritas. Seems the Left doesn’t like it when James O’Keefe and his merry band of videographers expose their antics, almost as if the Left is doing something shady and dishonest…

And, as a result, Project Veritas is eeeeevilllllll!

Or are they? Let’s dig a little deeper, shall we?

Project Veritas

What the Left thinks it means – a group of dishonest right-wingers who selectively edit footage to make the Left look bad

What it really means – a group of people doing what the media used to do before they became Leftist lapdogs

Journalism has had its share of investigative reporters, raking through the muck to find the kernel of a story that would bring the powerful and corrupt to heel. Back in its heyday, “60 Minutes” did stunning exposes on dishonest brokers in the corporate sector. This style of “guerrilla journalism” made people like Mike Wallace feared in the deepest, darkest corners of companies because they never knew if or when they would be the next target and be caught on camera trying to defend the indefensible. “60 Minutes” gave rise to “Dateline NBC” and “20/20” and Geraldo Rivera, who took the practice to new heights, and lows as the reporters got disgraced or the companies started catching onto their shtick.

Then, something happened: journalism became PR for the Left. No longer would investigative reporters dig for sources to expose Left-leaning crooks and liars because it would hurt their careers behind the scenes. Just print what the nice DNC press release says, write a scathing piece about how evil Republicans are, and cash the checks. It was simple, albeit dishonest, work. Conservatives and independents, including your humble blogger, cited frequent examples of Leftist bias in media reporting, but these examples were brushed aside as paranoia, ignorance, or even denial of the “fact” the truth skews to the Left.

That changed when James O’Keefe decided to see what he could find behind the veneer of Leftist organizations, starting with ACORN. One series of videos later, and the Left was knocked back as one of its lesser-known branches got caught red-handed being dishonest and downright corrupt. Since then, O’Keefe started Project Veritas and released several other video series that have exposed Google, Facebook, and now CNN. Due to previous practices, critics have labeled the group as dishonest for “selectively editing” videos and engaging in dishonest tactics to try to gain visibility. Some have gone so far as to say they engage in disinformation.

To be fair, some of this criticism is valid, as they have made factual errors in their reporting and have skewed their stories to fit an agenda, namely making Leftists look like buffoons. Having said that, Project Veritas has done something their critics hate: they’ve posted raw, unedited footage of their encounters. In other words, they brought receipts, to use the slang the kids use today. Even so, Project Veritas has gained a reputation (in Leftist circles, at least) as slanted, dishonest brokers who seek to push an agenda in direct defiance of the truth.

So…they’re CNN?

The uproar over Project Veritas can be boiled down to the Left getting a taste of its own medicine, and it’s making them look like the underhanded scumbags they are. That hurts them politically, so they have to do everything possible to discredit Project Veritas, even if the information they’re putting out is inaccurate. Even the “selectively edited” line has been fact-checked into oblivion by Project Veritas putting out the unedited footage. Now, anyone can see the videos in full context.

The thing is the Left doesn’t want to do that because it ruins their narrative, and when it comes down to it, the narrative is all-powerful and must be protected. I’m talking Gollum-with-the-One-Ring-level of protection. As precioussss as that may be to the Left, it’s creepy to me, and it doesn’t square with the facts to anyone else who is paying attention. On the surface, it boggles the mind that an ideological group who insists the truth agrees with them would object to people outside of their group finding the truth for themselves. However, it’s not about the truth, and it never has been. It’s about control.

Like they do with the language, the Left loves to control what is considered to be the truth, and far too often Republicans and conservatives wind up being the victims of these efforts. With Project Veritas, the Left can’t control the narrative as easily on controversial topics, and that scares the Left. Now consider there are other groups starting to emulate what Project Veritas does and throwing open the curtains on what the Left is trying to hide. Just ask Planned Parenthood about how they pay for Lamborghinis.

Yet, as with all people seeking the truth, it’s ultimately up to us to determine their credibility. I would be doing you a disservice if I glossed over the times Project Veritas screwed up or got the facts wrong or tried to frame someone’s words a certain way. You must take the good with the bad and determine whether these folks can be trusted. By and large, I trust Project Veritas, but I always verify, as one of my heroes Ronald Reagan said. The Left doesn’t want you to do any of that. They want you to trust and believe, all to protect a narrative and their own political viability. Anyone who tells the truth will welcome the scrutiny, myself included.

The fact the Left is up in arms over Project Veritas tells you much more than they intend, and it’s not good.

1000 Days

133 Views

It’s been a 1,000 days since Donald Trump took office as the President of the United States. Duly elected, yet hounded constantly by the Left who have never accepted his election. Many of the promises he made on the campaign trail have been kept. Others have not, but most of these need the support of Congress to succeed.

Unfortunately the President is still fighting a battle in the houses of Congress. Not only against the Leftist Democratic Party that opposes and obstructs every action of this President but also against members of his own party as well.

Congress is ran by seasoned and professional politicians who want power and wealth for themselves. And this President isnt playing the game. He is working actively to drain the swap, and they don’t like it one bit.

The Washington DC swamp is large and extremely deep. It will take more than 2 terms to drain it. But even in 1000 days President Trump has taken a noticable amount from the cesspool. Thus he is constantly attacked and obstructed at every turn and every decision.

Keep the Faith Mr President. The people are behind you. We support you and your tireless work. And we will see you through a 2nd term.

Enemy Mine

131 Views

We need to dispel the myth that the Kurds are our friends. They are not. They are a radical Iranian sect of Moslims.

They were not our friends when the Shaw ruled Iran. The Kurds assisted in the over through of the Shaw during the Iranian Revolution. The Kurds have been murdering Middle Eastern Christians and Jews for centuries as well and this practice continues to this day.

And like all sects of Islam, they fight and kill one another as well.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. Yes, we armed them because they were fighting a common enemy in Syria. But that does not make them an ally or a friend of ours. Once the common enemy is routed they will turn on their older enemies which includes the United States and it’s allies.

President Trump is right to remove ourselves from that region.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

96 Views

As the impeachment kinda-sorta-but-not-really inquiry against President Donald Trump staggers along like Ted Kennedy after a weekend at the Kennedy Compound, we’re starting to get a clearer idea of what exactly the President is accused of doing this time: obstruction of justice as it pertains to an investigation into a telephone call between the United States and Ukraine. To put it simply, the Trump White House has stated no one from the Administration should participate in the House inquiry due to how the investigation is being conducted.

This is one of those cases where both the Left and the Right have the wrong idea. So, in order to try to straighten out everyone involved, I’m devoting this week’s Lexicon to delving into obstruction of justice. Get your pens and notebooks ready, kids…

obstruction of justice

What the Left thinks it means – preventing Congress from investigating the President

What the Right thinks it means – a crime the President didn’t commit because there wasn’t a crime

What it really means – preventing law enforcement from investigating a crime

Our criminal justice system is based on the idea the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, impeachment is more of a political animal than criminal justice is, so the rules get fuzzier than Nick Offerman in a lumberjack camp. In the political arena, you are guilty even if you are proven innocent in spite of a preponderance of the evidence. And impeachment is no different.

At the heart of the latest impeachment talk is obstruction of justice. This has legal implications, which in the political arena make it easier to make a case for impeachment but requires evidence. That’s where the Left and Right get it wrong. The Left says Trump preventing Administration officials hinders their investigation and, thus, preventing them from getting to the truth of the Ukraine phone call situation. (Which is to say, getting to anything that can be made into a major scandal.) The Right says there can be no obstruction of justice because there was no crime committed.

And people wonder why I take ibuprofen like Tic Tacs these days.

Here’s the deal: you can obstruct justice in absence of a crime, but there really isn’t a crime here, and the impeachment inquiry in its current form isn’t the place to make that determination.

Let’s take the first portion of that statement, well, first. If there is an investigation into an alleged crime, anything you do to obstruct that investigation is illegal. Even in jest. And, yes, even when there turns out to be no crime committed. The fact you hindered a law enforcement investigation is what will get you in trouble. Don’t wind up like Jussie Smollet, kids.

Now, for the inquiry not being the right venue to address allegations of obstruction of justice. First off, there are six House committees involved in the inquiry, five of which aren’t the Judiciary Committee. That means there are five more committees than necessary to investigate the alleged crime. That may be a Leslie Knope wet dream, but it’s wasteful and unnecessary, especially considering the amount of airtime Adam Schiff has gotten off this. And Schiff isn’t even on the House Judiciary Committee! Ironically, he’s the head of the House Intelligence Committee, but then again no one may be better qualified to reflect the intelligence of House Democrats than Schiff.

The other aspect of this that should trouble anybody with a lick of common sense is the fact this inquiry isn’t so much an inquiry as it is an inquisition. Since Democrats run the House, they write the rules, so they can set the parameters of any investigation or hearing. However, since we’re dealing with a specific illegal act, the rule of law should be followed. As it stands, it isn’t. When partisan politics gets involved, the only law that’s followed is the law of the jungle. That may make Leftists swoon in this case, but it comes with two major problems. First, it undermines the legal arguments being made in favor of President Trump’s impeachment. It’s hard to hang your hat on the rule of law when you’re not following it. And second, it sets a precedent. Remember when former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid went to a majority vote when it came to federal judge confirmations in the Senate? The Left cheered when he did it, but when current Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did it, they lost their shit. I guarantee if the House goes Republican under a Democrat President, there will be investigations galore, and it will have zero to do with the rule of law, and you won’t have a leg to stand on because you literally started it.

In the meantime, the question remains of whether President Trump obstructed justice. Based on what we’ve seen so far, it’s hard to say he did based on the Left’s reactions when he complies with their requests/demands. It’s never good enough for the Left. If Trump released his tax returns, they would ask for some obscure IRS document that ultimately wouldn’t impact his returns, but would make it appear as though Trump was hiding something. Trump released a partial translation of his call with the Ukrainian leader which ultimately showed there was no illegal activity going on (unless you consider investigating Hunter Biden’s apparently shady dealings with the Ukraine while his dad was Vice President illegal). And who backed up Trump’s assessment of the call? The Ukraine.

At this point, it’s easier to pick out the number of “impeachable offenses” Trump hasn’t been accused of than it is to count the number of ones he has been accused of. The Left is using impeachment much like it used the IRS under President Barack Obama: a political tool to bludgeon their opponents while running interference on their own shady dealings. But as far as obstruction of justice is concerned, I honestly don’t see it, and I’m saying this as someone who isn’t a Trump supporter. It sounds ominous and gives red meat (or tofu for vegetarians and vegans) to a group of people already predisposed to hate President Trump to hate him even more and call for his impeachment, removal, imprisonment, and so on.

That’s really what this whole impeachment inquiry fiasco is about. After 2016, Leftists are scared Trump could win again, and given the clown car of candidates they have this time, they are right to be afraid. That’s no excuse for running roughshod over the rule of law, especially when it comes to the impact of impeachment. To put it simply, Leftists want Donald Trump impeached for corruption because he asked an ally to assist in the investigation of corruption that may have had an impact on the 2016 Presidential Election, which is legal to do in the first place given the fact we have an agreement with that ally to do just that. That’s not obstruction of justice; that’s preservation of justice, the same justice Leftists have been demanding since 2016 when they were concerned with foreign countries interfering with our elections. But apparently it’s only a problem when that interference is against the Left’s candidates.

Leftists need to get off this obstruction of justice kick and realize they’re barking up the wrong tree. And the Right need to stop with the stupid “it’s not obstruction if there’s no crime” bullshit because it’s legally and logically wrong.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need some ibuprofen.



Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

105 Views

If you ever need a clear-cut example of how President Donald Trump lives rent-free in some Leftists’ heads, a recent phenomenon on Twitter will serve nicely. It started with a Tweet (surprise, surprise) from the President (surprise, surprise) quoting an evangelical pastor which read:

If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in the Nation from which our Country will never heal.

Perhaps a bit overdramatic, but not an unreasonable or unlikely scenario. After this tweet, the Left started going ape-shit crazy, claiming the President was inciting violence (he wasn’t) and wanted another Civil War. This started a wave of Twitter hashtags like #SecondCivilWar or #2ndCivilWar appearing on the accounts of keyboard warriors and Antifa goons.

So, saddle up the ponies and let’s ride down into the valley of Leftist Gulch.

Second Civil War

What the Left thinks it means – A war Donald Trump wants in order to scare people into opposing his impeachment

What it really means – A direct misrepresentation to imply President Trump wants a war

Read the President’s Tweet again. It literally (and, yes, I do mean literally as in, well, literally) reads “a Civil War like fracture in the Nation.” In order to get “Trump wants another Civil War” out of that requires mental gymnastics that would make Nadia Comaneci look like I do on the dance floor after I’ve had a few adult beverages. Regardless, the point is the Left is grossly misconstruing the actual message to create a narrative.

Which is by design.

Leftists love to play games with the language to create small battles they can win in the marketplace of ideas. Take “common sense gun law” for example. They try to soften what they really want (gun control laws more restrictive than a 15 sizes too small corset on Rosie O’Donnell) by throwing in a modifying phrase to lessen the blow and try to convince you what they want isn’t all that bad. In this case, though, the Left is trying to prop up the image of Donald Trump as a violent dictator by omitting key words in the Tweet. Hence, “Civil War like fracture” turns into “Civil War.”

Through this bit of linguistic trickery and intellectual dishonesty, the Left creates what is known in rhetorical circles as a “strawman argument,” designed to create a false argument that they can knock down easily in lieu of addressing the actual argument. This may fire up the base a bit, but it shows a level of weakness in how the Left addresses the issue. By skirting it, they ignore the real possibility of what Trump tweeted coming true.

In my opinion, we’re very close to another Civil War as it is, mainly because of the heated rhetoric and the equally as heated actions inspired by it. There are folks on both sides of the aisle who are taking what the President partially said to heart and are preparing for war. All because they can’t comprehend a fucking tweet.

It’s stuff like this that prevents advanced alien societies from making contact.

To be honest, I think a second Civil War may be a foregone conclusion. With political positions getting so personal, we’re one horrific event away from having the whole checkerboard overturned. And with the Left’s misrepresentation of the President’s tweet, it will lead to bloodshed…that they’ll immediately blame on Trump. And for all the times the Left claims the President incites violence, isn’t what they’re doing right now the very thing they accuse him of doing?

Yes, yes it is. But Leftists will a) never admit it, and b) never accept responsibility for it.

Meanwhile, what can we do about it? I’m not sure we can do anything to slow or stop what’s coming, but I might have a few ideas on how to make it more entertaining. Get the extremes from both sides into as large of a warehouse as will fit both sides and let them duke it out. No holds barred. Once one side defeats the other, they’re declared the winner…and then immediately deported. Repeat until both extremes are either tired of fighting/being deported or straighten up their acts.

Naturally I want the pay-per-view rights. And maybe a portion of the souvenir and concession take. You know, whatever makes the most money…I mean helps the situation.

Keep yourselves safe, kids. Oh, and call out the Left for lying about what President Trump said.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

116 Views

The big news of the past week was House Democrats finally initiated an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump for…well, I’m still not sure exactly. They’ve tossed so much mud at the walls that it’s looking like an adobe hut, so please excuse my befuddlement.

Yet, if you watch the Left, you would think they won the White House, House, and Senate for the next five generations. After the Mueller investigation came up emptier than Bill de Blasio’s Presidential Cabinet, the Left needed anything they could hang their collective hats on to continue their quest to unseat the President. So, the start of an impeachment inquiry, at least to them, is a step in the right direction.

Even so, I don’t think our Leftist friends quite understand the process. Fortunately, I’m here to help because, dammit, I care.

impeachment inquiry

What the Left thinks it means – the first step in bringing Donald Trump to justice

What it really means – much ado about something or other

For the first time in a long time, the Left has found itself behind the curve when it comes to messaging, and it’s really hurt them in the quest for impeachment because they haven’t been able to give us a single reason for impeachment. Oh, they’ve thrown out any number of reasons they believe the President should be impeached, but there isn’t a consistent argument so much as there is a lot of vague concepts that when put in a certain way make it appear as though the President committed either impeachable offenses or just pissed off the Left because feefees.

Seriously, though, some of the “impeachable offenses” Leftists have thrown out there border on the absurd and, surprise surprise, aren’t even actual impeachable offenses. The Constitution states impeachment of the President and other federal officials is limited to “high crimes and misdemeanors” which, by its very nature, heavily implies crimes have to be committed. And, having Trump as President isn’t illegal…at least not yet.

As a result of this lack of messaging, there has been a growing unrest within Leftist circles wondering where the leadership is. Then again, when your leadership idols are Adam Schiff and Ted Lieu, you’re already in a hole deeper than the Grand Canyon. For what it’s worth, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has tried to temper the temper tantrums of the “Impeach Trump Now” crowd by lowering expectations and urging caution. She has been waiting for a slam-dunk case to initiate the impeachment process while at the same time trying to get the messaging right. In both cases, I think she has failed, and she has her own party to blame for it.

The biggest problem the Left faces with the impeachment push is they don’t know when to shut up. From before Trump was President, the Left has been filling the airwaves, the column inches, and the Internet with all sorts of allegations of criminal activity and demanding someone do something. We’re going on 3 years or so of this constant drumbeat of “Impeach Trump” and the needle isn’t moving in that direction with any degree of speed, no matter how many times the Left says the same thing. Look, we get it. You want Trump removed from office. How’s about you let it not be the focal point of your entire existence for even a microsecond. Chill out. Have a Pop Tart. Watch Scooby Doo. Just give it a rest for a little while and let your reasons try to persuade us since screeching incessantly hasn’t done it yet. Although, Yoko Ono may sue you for copyright infringement.

This is an example of what I call the Firehose. When you want a drink of water, the firehose may not be your first choice, or any choice for that matter. Oh, you will get water, but you will also get drenched and possibly injured in the process.

Instead, let’s take a more measured approach to the impeachment inquiry. This is the first step in determining whether President Trump has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, and under the current House set up, there are going to be six House committees working on the inquiry. Given how slowly government works when it comes to important matters, it’s a safe bet the impeachment inquiry will take a loooooooooong time.

Which is the point. With 2020 being a Presidential election year, the Left has a vested interest in hampering President Trump by any means necessary. Don’t forget impeachment is a political process, which means it can be used as a tool, as it is in this case. However, it’s a divisive tool that can backfire for candidates and elected officials on both sides of the aisle. It’s this fact that should worry Leftists, but it doesn’t. Their hatred of Trump overrules their political reality and perception of public sensibilities.

Say, Leftists, what happened to your nose? Did it get cut off to spite your face?

While the impeachment inquiry isn’t the end of the Trump Presidency yet, I get the feeling it’s not going to end well for the Leftists who think it is. It is the first step on a longer journey, one that has the potential to turn into an utter clown show…oh, wait. Rep. Schiff already did that with his stunt of fabricating the details of a phone conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy and then saying it was a “parody.” On the plus side, Rep. Steve Cohen no longer looks like the biggest asshat in the House of Representatives.

With Schiff’s miscalculation, the impeachment inquiry is already off to a shaky start, and people outside of the Leftist hivemind won’t take too kindly to it. If anything, most of them will be indifferent because, like it or not, President Trump hasn’t done enough to sway his base to ditch him, nor has the Left presented a better alternative. With the inquiry in place, Trump has an automatic Get Out of Being Defeated in 2020 Card because he can, has, and will play the victim which will rally support for him or at least make the Left’s alternatives look less stable by comparison.

There are two ways this inquiry ends, neither of which should make thinking Leftists happy. The first is it dies quickly with a fizzle instead of a bang. Although this hurts the Left in the short term, I feel it would be better for them in the long term because it gives them time to focus on coming up with winning issues and stronger platforms. Impeachment fever may be popular in the Leftist hivemind, but with football season and the new fall shows coming out, the average person could care less about whether the President is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors.

The other way it ends is with the inquiry leading to an actual impeachment trial in the House of Representatives. Given how government works like a sloth on a NyQuil drip when it wants things done quickly and the fact there are six House committees working on the inquiry, it’s going to take a long time for impeachment to get to a floor vote. Even though this may seem like the better option because it gives the Left time to win more seats in the 2020 election, it’s still a pretty big gamble. In order for impeachment to succeed, Democrats have to retain the House while securing enough Senate seats to remove Trump from office.

In order to do that, there’s another gamble to be taken: convincing enough people Trump is doing a bad enough job to warrant his being ousted. Even if the inquiry leads to an actual impeachment trial, candidates on the campaign trail will have to decide if they support the impeachment effort. For solid blue or leaning blue Districts, that’s easy. For purple or red Districts, that’s going to be a bit tougher. These candidates will have to figure out a way to appease both the Impeach-A-Palooza crowd and the voters who are either undecided or oppose the impeachment effort. That’s a major Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads.

In the end, the Left made it their goal to get to this point, and they’ve succeeded. The next several steps, though, aren’t going to be easy. But at least I’ve stocked up on popcorn! 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

145 Views

Leftist obsessions are like Iowa weather: if you don’t like what you have now, wait a little bit and it will change. This past week saw renewed interest in Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh after a new book by two New York Times reporters revisited sexual abuse allegations that were as substantiated as…well, the first time these allegations were rolled out to the public. Regardless, the authors of the book are now peddling the fruit of their libel…I mean labors and finding themselves caught in the middle of a credibility crisis of their own creation.

Wherever you fall on the Brett Kavanaugh allegations, there is something extremely personal in the Left’s attacks on him. To better explore this, I figured we could take a few moments to try to puzzle this thing out.

Brett Kavanaugh

What the Left thinks it means – a sexual predator whose crimes were concealed by the Senate and who should have never been approved to be a Supreme Court Justice

What it really means – the reason we have due process in this country

The easiest and most obvious reason the Left hates Kavanaugh so much revolves around a fun little Supreme Court decision the kids like to call Roe v Wade. To put it bluntly, the Left has sanctified this decision that, while attempting to set up guidelines, ultimately sucked. If there were any more legal and rhetorical gymnastics in that decision, the Supreme Court would have gotten a gold medal at the Olympics. Without going too far into the decision itself, it created a construct that has been used under the guise of women’s rights to deny life and, in many cases, avoid consequences for bad decisions.

And the Left is perfectly fine with that.

Where Kavanaugh comes into play is with the current makeup of the Supreme Court itself. Based on simple party-line analysis, the Republicans have a 5-4 majority, which the Left sees as a direct threat to Roe v Wade. Kavanaugh was seen as much more conservative than the Justice he replaced, Anthony Kennedy, so naturally the Left went hard with the “Kavanaugh will overturn Roe v Wade” and they would have gotten away with it if it hadn’t been for those pesky kids and people who took the time to listen to him directly and review his rulings. Seems Kavanaugh stated repeatedly Roe v Wade was settled law and he would not take any action to overturn it. So, nothing would change with regards to the decision, and the Left would be unhappy with that?

Beyond that, I have a deeper take on why the Left hates Kavanaugh, and it all goes back to Merrick Garland in 2016. As hard as it is to believe, the Left still hold a grudge over what they call a stolen seat. (It was never his seat to begin with, so it can’t be stolen, nor can Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell be held responsible for following Senate procedures in an election year, but why split hairs?) Since McConnell beat the Left at their own game, they have been so salty merely looking at them discussing this matter will give you high blood pressure. At least until you listen to their opinions, which will give you high blood pressure for a completely different reason.

Anyway, the fact the Left couldn’t get Garland on the Supreme Court has given them a hate boner for Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch. Kavanaugh and Gorsuch could cure cancer, AIDS, and athlete’s foot and the Left would still hate them because they represent what the Left craves: power to shape judicial policy for decades to come. The Left has made it a practice to use precedent as a means to reshape the world and society when they can’t do it through the ballot box. One of the greatest stumbling blocks to that is the Supreme Court, who has the power to overturn court decisions and have no higher court to appeal to if/when the Left’s plans go awry. Once they get to the High Court, it’s one and done. Even though they’ve scored some judicial victories, the prospect of future victories gets slimmer with more conservative and more originalist Justices.

As a result, the Left is going all out to undercut Kavanaugh since their efforts to shatter confidence in Gorsuch were as successful as Beto O’Rourke’s campaign right now. When they’re not questioning his emotional stability, making vague and as-yet unsubstantiated accusations of sexual assault, or suggesting his personal debt was paid off through nefarious means, the Left will track down any and all dirt on Kavanaugh in the hopes of persuading the country to take up their cause.

Guess what, kids? You’re not reaching anyone who isn’t already on your side. And the new book isn’t helping your cause because…how can I put this delicately…you guys suck at research and keeping your stories straight. The fact Kavanaugh has already been through at least three background checks for his previous judicial positions without even a whisper of what you Leftists accuse of him of doing should tell you there might not be anything there. Not to mention, your attempts to use the Anita Hill script and change the ending so you guys win didn’t work, mainly because nobody on your side has put forth a cogent case against Kavanaugh. What you characterized as mental instability was Kavanaugh finally having enough of Democrat Senators who shouldn’t be allowed to ask questions in a game of 20 Questions, let alone in a Senate confirmation hearing, to slime him to score cheap political points.

Your case against Kavanaugh is dead, Jim. Move on and leave him alone.

Want more educational success? Support charter schools – Guest Opinion by Ari Kaufman

231 Views

Self-styled Progressives love to mock America as a “laughingstock” compared to the rest of the world in terms of obesity or gun violence or whatever topic they can obfuscate. 

One area where our great nation truly does lag behind the world is public education, a business solely owned and operated by the Left. And they have zero interest in remedying the failures; only the Right does.

Whereas the USA leads the world in everything from charitable giving, military might and medical innovation to technology, natural gas production and so many more laudable areas, any intellectually honest observer will note we fall far short in K-12 schooling.

In the wealthiest nation on earth, this is rather troubling. But the shortcomings in public education have nothing to do with money or results would have improved long ago. 

American taxpayers pay an absurd $20,000 per student per year from Kindergarten through 12th grade. That ridiculous amount is nearly double the global average of around $11,000. We also pay public school teachers on average more than any country. Yet the average student in Canada, China, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Korea, New Zealand, Norway and other nations that liberals tend to admire, consistently outperform the USA in every subject — despite spending less per pupil!

While no single policy solution can ameliorate these historic pitfalls going back nearly a century, because the issues are so vast, one area achieving grand success are charter schools and voucher programs. These initiatives, which began in 1992 in Minnesota, have long been deemed by scholars and conservative politicians as the “civil rights issue” of our time. The left talks a good game about “civil rights” when they seek votes and power, but on real matters, they balk.

I taught for five years in our country’s second largest school district — with one of the most aggressive and powerful teachers unions — and witnessed public education’s myriad issues firsthand in Los Angeles. I’ve documented them now for nearly two decades with a book and dozens of published articles in various newspapers.

Intense resistance to proven educational successes such as merit pay, tenure extension and any needed reform was intense; charter schools were specifically anathema. While Republicans have long supported charter schools and voucher programs, most Democrats are beholden to corrupt teachers unions and therefore do not. 

When asked about charter schools during their Sept. 12 presidential debate, leading Democrats, including Cory Booker who’s seen their success in his beloved Newark, conveniently tiptoed around the issue. He and the others on stage preferred to change the subject, bash the education secretary or, in the case of Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, angrily shout “pay teachers more” clichés. 

Charter and magnet schools are often based in local townships within a city’s boundaries, and thus, not bound by the bureaucracy and size of sclerotic large districts. Uniforms are frequently donned by diverse populations, discipline is enhanced, while students’ and teachers’ attitudes often change with liberation from outdated guidelines. These schools break the monopoly of “one-size-fits-all” education. Usually located just a few miles from urban decay, it’s a different world. 

Charter schools post higher results across the board than the traditional monopoly we’ve had from time immemorial. Further expansion of school choice options has the potential to liberate children, particularly poorer ones, from a dysfunctional education. The effort is worth it. Most of the country is on board; Democrat powers-that-be, teachers and unions protecting them are not.  They remain adept at perpetuating underachievement.

Evidence also shows more money for schools does not lead to success and often simply ways to waste the funds. In reform circles, there is the infamous Kansas City study, where the large district dramatically increased funding by billions in the 1980s and 1990s. This included increasing teacher salaries, adding glistening swimming pools, fancy computer labs and more. Was there an improvement in test scores and other quantitative results? Of course not. Nor was there more racial integration. Oops. This should be a telling lesson.

In addition to the absurd  “more money for schools” line peddled by vacuous politicians like Harris, a common ignorant retort toward education reformers is that those pushing for change are “anti school” or worse. With urban schools crippling our country’s most vulnerable (minority) children, advocating for experimentation with vouchers is actually “pro child.” It is progress. It is also consistent with America’s free market aspirations.

There were fewer than 2,500 charter schools when George W. Bush came into office. Eight years later, the number had doubled to nearly 5,000, and continues to grow a decade later. 

The former president’s words stand true today:

“These diverse, creative schools are proof that parents from all walks of life are willing to challenge the status quo if it means a better education for their children,” Bush said. “More competition and more choices for parents and students will raise the bar for everyone.”

Between the radical political agendas, insouciance toward students and lack of innovation, I ultimately lost the energy to keep teaching. Attempts to buck the trend and assist students were fought like the Battle of Antietam. I got along well with the parents and loved instructing the kids. But the resistance to change and browbeating of anyone seeking change demoralized me. 

Since leaving the profession and embarking on other careers, I published an entire book and dozens of articles on educational reform in various newspapers. I try so hard. Sadly, I continue to marvel at the preservation of a failed status quo. It clearly does not have to be this way.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

127 Views

This may be a first in Leftist Lexicon history. I have stumbled across a topic where they don’t have an opinion, but rest assured I will still mock them anyway.

Recently, Hong Kong experienced a somewhat peaceful uprising against government corruption. Unlike Antifa here, though, the protestors didn’t burn/break stuff, attack bystanders, or demand government give them anything. Well, that last part isn’t strictly true because the protestors are asking the US government to intervene on their behalf. So far, we’ve stayed out of the fray with the Trump Administration agreeing that these protests are an internal matter and, thus, not our problem. Meanwhile, the Left has been quiet, instead focusing on important matters like trans-friendly cartoon characters or handicap accessible eco-friendly stripper poles.

My fear, though, is we aren’t taking a close enough look at the implications of ignoring or turning away from Hong Kong right now and how this could cause problems down the line.

Hong Kong

What the Left thinks it means – let me get back to you on that

What it really means – an economic powerhouse that can make or break our economy depending on what we do

If there was a foreign city that rivals America in sheer economic potential, it would be Hong Kong. With a population of close to 7.5 million people and a history of being a trading capitol even today, Hong Kong is a major global commerce hub. After it was returned to China in 1997, there was bound to be a battle looming on the horizon between the socioeconomic ideals of the city and the nation. It’s like what we’re seeing in America right now between capitalism and Leftist ideology, where one side wants government to keep its hands off as much as possible and the other wants government to be involved in every aspect of life and the economy.

On paper, this seems like the kind of battle America would be talking about or even helping fight, but we’ve stayed above the fray as much as we can. A large portion of this, I feel, is due to the relationship the US has with China and the mess we’ve made in addressing the issues between the two countries. Sherman, set the Wayback Machine for 1989, when Chinese students were standing in front of tanks and attempting to enact similar social and economic reforms in Tiananmen Square. I was a college freshman at the time and seeing people right around my age taking such a bold and dangerous stance against a government not exactly known for playing nice struck a chord with me. (I think it was a G, but I could be wrong.)

At that time, then-President George H. W. Bush threatened the possibility of offering China Most Favored Nation status unless they dealt with their numerous human rights violations. Of course, we walked back the threat. Then, under President Bill Clinton, China was granted Most Favored Nation Status with no human rights strings attached. Heck of a job, Billy.

Since then, China has become a trading contradiction: a testament to capitalism surrounded by a testament to big government, and for the most part, that contradiction has been allowed to remain intact until lately. Also, since then, China has purchased a lot of our debt in the form of redeemable bonds. That means if China thinks we can’t pay back what they paid for the bonds, they can demand payment and we will have to either come up with the money or default. And remember, kids, these are the same folks who think they can do a better job at managing your health care and health insurance better than you can.

This fiscal Sword of Damocles may be staying our hand more than we care to admit, which is sad. There was a time when America could be counted on to fight for freedom around the world, but somewhere along the line we decided to trade in the grit in our bellies for cheap disposable crap made in China by people whose freedoms are being suppressed. But, hey, at least we’re getting cheap disposable crap, right? At least, they’re not deadly to children, pets and oursellll…okay, so they are.

And another fun fact to chew on is China is a hotbed for piracy, and not the Captain Jack Sparrow kind (although it is vastly more entertaining than the “Pirates of the Caribbean” films). Entertainment and computer piracy have been a steady side-hustle, and there are no signs that will slow down anytime soon. Given how left-leaning Hollywood, the gaming, and the computer industries have been or become, you would think the Left would be all over this, but they aren’t. They’d rather protest the President or fight for trans albino Eskimos’ rights to abortions on demand, especially if they’re male-to-female trans people.

The problem is there isn’t a clear and safe option. If we ignore the Hong Kong protestors, the best we can expect is to cut off a major economic port and market. If we engage China, they can call in the bonds, which can put us in dire economic straits. Right now, we need China more than they need us. When realism collides with idealism, the latter usually loses.

In this situation, though, we have more of a responsibility to speak up instead of forever holding our peace because the protestors look to us for inspiration and direction. The longer we stay silent or put off taking a stand, the worse it will be in the long run for everyone involved. I mean, if we can whip out the tariff threat against China more frequently than Joe Biden has a speaking gaffe, we might be able to spare a moment or two to tell China and Hong Kong to knock it off.