Friday, November 26, 2021

The Democrats are the party of snobs

That's it. It's over. Bill Maher is going to be tossed into the white nationalist camp, though I'm sure some "woke" morons have already done so. This streak is bound to end soon. I'm sure he'll have a closing segment that sparks the ire of conservative America as he has done so many times before. Until then, let's just enjoy him taking a katana to the "woke" left and how if Democrats don't change course soon—yes, they're in for a brutal 2022 election cycle.

Why are people fleeing from the Democrats? It can be summed up in four words: no one likes a snob. For the better part of this decade, the Democratic Party has been the party of the elites, the rich (yes, they have more money), and the educated. The urban-based professional elites that consider places like South Carolina and even Morris County, New Jersey, as Jupiter and Mars have done a bang-up job telling the rest of us that a) they hate us, b) they hate we're not educated like them, and c) they care about everyone else but us.

If you're not wealthy, white, and progressive—you can't be part of this club. If you're pinched by inflation or the grocery store, it's your fault. Maher may speak of the average white voters with some of the talking points used by the "woke" left to make his point, but his commentary was clear: you cannot win if you denigrate most voters in this country who are white and don't hold a college degree. He rehashed how Hillary Clinton didn't have a rural voter outreach or data person until it was too late, and that person's office was based…in Brooklyn. You can't trust the young Democratic operatives to run elections because they don't know how to win. You can't with a generation that's been smothered by participation trophies.

James Carville, a hardcore liberal and the architect of Bill Clinton's 1992 win, said that wokeness cost Democrats in 2021. It's not the first time he's said this, aptly noting that normal people don't talk like the college faculty in the break room. Carville also said that Democrats focus on dumb issues that only speak to the elite, like college debt forgiveness. No one wants to hear it. No one, except rich white liberals who want the hundreds of thousands of dollars they've spent to earn their "whine like a little b****" degrees taken off their books. Yes, let's ask the tens of millions of Americans who don't have college degrees, along with those who have just paid off their loans, to finance a massive bailout for the most privileged in this country in higher education. It's a recipe for a generation of Trump-like candidates.

As Maher put it, "White people suck 2024" isn't a winning message. Also, when did "woke" become a pejorative? That's a key question since Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seems to think that only old people use that term when she was asked about its impact on the Democratic Party. She was slapping down those on her side of the aisle that know her brand of politics doesn't resonate outside of the cities. You can't win that way. It went from rallying cry to pejorative and shows yet another way the "woke" treat people who they find deplorable. If you're not with us, then you might be a neo-Nazi. Offending three-fourths of the electorate is not smart.

Maher said they should do the math, but that would be entertaining white supremacy.

The Democrats are the party of snobs. They're proud to be, which is fine. But the snobs never last. Just ask the ruling French class c. 1789. The French people sure found a way to excise this snobby element from their societal ranks. Now, I'm not saying we should wheel out the guillotines…yet. I want to see the endless stream of liberal tears after the GOP picks up 80-125 seats after Democrats ignored advice from Maher and others who saw the writing on the wall.


Will the Mob Veto the Bill of Rights?

Leftists routinely threaten conservatives with censorship and violence in order to intimidate and silence.

Rittenhouse were understandably worried whether the jury would be intimidated by the mob. After all, someone working for NBC tried to follow the van carrying the jury. There had been attempts to film the jury. Rittenhouse’s lawyer has revealed he received death threats.

In just about any other case, this would be recognized for what it was: the deprivation of a fair trial by trying to intimidate the jury and defense lawyers. That campaign failed in this case — Rittenhouse was acquitted by the jury, and his lawyers stayed on. But grassroots Patriots cannot rest easy.

This isn’t the only time these threats have turned up. There is an open question whether these tactics succeeded in the trial of Derek Chauvin or during the legal battles after the 2020 election.

Put it this way: Can anyone be sure of a fair trial when Maxine Waters can threaten riots over the “wrong” verdict and not face repercussions? What are your chances when a group like the Lincoln Project can threaten to doxx lawyers who decide to represent you with the intention of forcing their withdrawal?

If these are allowed to continue, then the right to a fair trial is a dead letter, at least for those in deep-blue parts of the country who are down the pecking order in the minds of the Left. Over the years, grassroots Patriots have developed a rational basis to believe that the Left views them as deserving less than the full panoply of rights.

You don’t need the word of your Patriot Post team: Just watch Joy Reid or others on MSNBC. Outlets like CNN and MSNBC, which have lost viewers to conservative networks, now regularly target their right-of-center competition, either through hosts like Brian Stelter or contributors like Malcolm Nance (who regularly compared Donald Trump and his supporters to ISIS).

It wasn’t just Trump who has been targeted over the years with these smears. Ask Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, and Paul Ryan about how the Left lied about them. Remember how John McCain was smeared? All of those happened before Trump ever ran for office.

Ask what that long record of lies and hatred might provoke someone receiving a steady diet of that sort of talk to do if they were an ordinary person. Then ask yourself what might happen if they had actual power. Might they decide that it was a moral obligation to “fortify” elections in one way or another in order to save America’s soul?

Keep in mind, the Left has, over the last decade, gone after the First Amendment through a variety of methods, including abuse of power, corporate redlining (whether coerced by government or not), and plain-old mob violence targeting events.

The fact is, steps must be taken to preserve our rights. Part of it may involve using our First Amendment rights to have state and local officials take the logical steps to prevent intimidation, like sequestering juries. But much will have to come from grassroots Patriots convincing their fellow Americans to act despite the threats. Because if our fellow Americans are intimidated by the mob, our rights are as good as gone.


Can the FBI Be Salvaged?

The Washington, D.C.-based FBI has lost all credibility as a disinterested investigatory agency. Now we learn from a whistleblower that the agency was allegedly investigating moms and dads worried about the teaching of critical race theory in their kids’ schools.

In truth, since 2015, the FBI has been constantly in the news—and mostly in a negative and constitutionally disturbing light.

The fired former Director James Comey injected himself into the 2016 political race by constantly editorializing his ongoing investigation of candidate Hillary Clinton’s email leaks.

In a bizarre twist, the public learned later that Comey had allowed Clinton’s own private computer contractor—CrowdStrike—to run the investigation of the hack. The private firm was allowed to keep possession of pertinent hard drives central to the investigation. How odd that CrowdStrike’s point man was Shawn Henry, a former high-ranking FBI employee.

During the Robert Mueller special investigation, the FBI implausibly claimed it had no idea how requested information on FBI cellphones had mysteriously disappeared.

It was also under Comey’s directorship that the FBI submitted inaccurate requests for warrants to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court. Elements of one affidavit to surveil Donald Trump supporter Carter Page were forged by FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who later pleaded guilty to a felony.

The FBI hired the disreputable ex-British spy Christopher Steele as a contractor, while he was peddling his fantasy—the Clinton-bought dossier—to Obama government officials and the media.

Former FBI general counsel James Baker was reportedly the subject of a federal investigation. He allegedly conducted prominent meetings both with media outlets that later leaked lurid tales from the Steele dossier. He also met repeatedly with the now-indicted Perkins Coie attorney Michael Sussman.

Comey himself, through third-party intermediaries, leaked to the media his own confidential memos detailing private meetings with Trump. His assurances both to Congress and to Trump that the president was not the current subject of FBI investigations were either misleading or outright lies.

In sworn testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Comey on some 245 occasions claimed he could not remember or had no knowledge of key elements of his own “Russian Collusion” investigation.

Comey’s replacement, acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, was fired for leaking sensitive information to the media. He then lied on at least three occasions about his role to federal attorneys and his own FBI investigators.

McCabe is now a paid CNN consultant who often has offered misleading information on the Russian collusion hoax that he helped promulgate.

Former FBI director and special counsel Robert Mueller conducted a 22-month, $40 million wild goose chase after some mythical “Russian collusion” plot. When called before Congress, Mueller claimed he had little or no knowledge about Fusion GPS or the Steele Dossier—the twin sources that birthed the entire collusion hoax.

FBI lawyer Lisa Page was removed from Mueller’s investigation, along with her paramour FBI investigator Peter Strzok. Both misused FBI communications, revealing their pro-Clinton biases during their investigations of “Russian collusion,” while hiding their own unprofessional relationship.

Mueller himself staggered their firings and delayed explanations about why they were let go from his investigation team.

When the FBI arrested pro-Trump activist Roger Stone, it did so with a huge quasi-SWAT team—to the tipped-off and lurking CNN reporters.

The FBI repeated such politicized performance art recently when it stormed the home of Project Veritas Director James O’Keefe. The agency confiscated his electronic devices on the grounds that he had knowledge of the contents of the allegedly lurid missing diary of Joe Biden’s daughter.

The FBI—an apparent retrieval service of lost Biden family embarrassments—also did not disclose that it had possession of Hunter Biden’s laptop at a time when the media was erroneously declaring the computer inauthentic.

O’Keefe was accosted in the pre-morning hours by a crowd of FBI agents, wielding a battering ram, who pushed him out of his home in his underwear.

The time and location of the FBI raid, as in the Stone case, were leaked to the media that cheered the raid shortly after it was conducted. A federal judge recently stopped the FBI’s ongoing monitoring of O’Keefe’s communications.

Wall Street Journal columnist Holman Jenkins recently detailed other FBI lapses such as downplaying evidence that former Olympic gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar was a known and chronic molester of teenage gymnasts.

The agency also extended its witch hunt against the innocent researcher wrongly accused of involvement in the anthrax attacks of 2001.

One could add to such misadventures the mysterious leadership roles of at least 12 FBI informants in the harebrained kidnapping scheme of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat.

We can also cite the agency’s inability to follow up on clear information about the dangers posed by criminals as diverse as the Tsarnaev brothers, the Boston Marathon bombers, and the sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein.

For its own moral and practical survival, the FBI should be given one last chance at redemption by moving to the nation’s heartland—perhaps Kansas—far away from the political and media tentacles that have so deeply squeezed and corrupted it.


The Pilgrims’ Progress – Honoring Our Forefathers on the 400th Anniversary of the First (and Most Expensive) Thanksgiving

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the first Thanksgiving celebrated by our Pilgrim fathers and mothers in 1621.

If this fact is news to you, I’m not surprised. After all, there was very little fanfare last year to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1620, an event which President John Quincy Adams described as the “birthday” of our nation. But that seminal moment in world history passed with barely a mention.

This year, you’ll see more about the inflated price of Thanksgiving dinner than about the 400th anniversary of the holiday. And while it’s true that Bidenflation has made this year’s turkey feast the most expensive in living memory, no one who knows the true history of the first Thanksgiving can ever doubt that the Pilgrims paid a greater price for their meal than anything we ever will.

But you would have to know their story to understand that. And these days, the Pilgrims are being airbrushed out of our cultural memory.

The Pilgrims’ Progress from Heroes to Villains

The same wokesters who are busy removing Thomas Jefferson’s statue from New York City Hall have unfairly maligned our Pilgrim fathers and reframed the history of the nation they founded.

“There appear to be few commemorations, parades, or festivals to celebrate the Pilgrims this year, perhaps in part because revisionist charlatans of the radical left have lately claimed the previous year as America’s true founding,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) said last year.

The “revisionist charlatans” he was referring to are the authors of the New York Times’ “1619 Project,” which commemorates the year that the first ship arrived in the Virginia colony carrying African slaves. Recognizing the significance of the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery is certainly worthwhile, but the 1619 Project’s authors went beyond recognition and sought to “reframe” all of American history around the events of 1619. For this, they have been roundly criticized by historians who decry their many inaccuracies and revisionist interpretations (including, for example, their claim that the American Revolution was fought in order to preserve slavery in the colonies).

Most of the criticism has focused on the Project’s controversial claim (which was later scrubbed from the New York Times’ website) that 1619 is the year of “our true founding,” not 1620 when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth and planted the seed of our democracy that ripened in 1776.

In a Times op-ed rebutting the critics, Nicholas Guyatt argues that “the 1619 Project radically challenges a core narrative of American history” by refuting the notion that “the story of the United States [is] a gradual unfolding of freedom.” Instead, the Project’s authors “describe a nation in which racism is persistent and protean. White supremacy shapeshifts through the nation’s history, finding new forms to continue the work of subjugation and exclusion.”

In other words, they think Abraham Lincoln got it wrong when he said our nation was “conceived in Liberty.” They think it was conceived in racism.

The new book by New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, “The 1619 Project: A New Origin Story” is displayed at a New York City bookstore on November 17, 2021. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

And with the push to incorporate the 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory into school curriculums, these woke revisionists are hard at work rewriting our history one school kid at a time, just as they’ve been busy for years “reframing” the history of the Pilgrims and Thanksgiving.

Ann Coulter gave an excellent summary of the woke interpretation of Thanksgiving: “As every contemporary school child knows, our Pilgrim forefathers took a break from slaughtering Indigenous Peoples to invite them to dinner and infect them with smallpox, before embarking on their mission to fry the planet.”

She’s not joking. America’s teachers have “begun a slow, complex process of ‘unlearning’ the widely accepted American narrative of Thanksgiving,” according to Education Week. To unlearn the “myth” of Thanksgiving, educators are seeking ways “to help students appreciate colonial oppression of Natives and the violence that ensued from it.” The article helpfully includes a video of PBS NewsHours’ Judy Woodruff explaining that the “quintessential feel-good holiday” of Thanksgiving actually “perpetuates a myth and dishonors Native Americans.”

The story of Thanksgiving fares even worse on college campuses, where students are taught that it should be commemorated as a “National Day of Mourning,” not a day off for food, family, and football.

“It’s kind of just based off the genocide of the indigenous people,” one student at Minnesota’s Macalester College told the College Fix. “The history of the holiday is obviously not the best. It’s very violent and oppressive,” said another.

That is malicious and historically inaccurate garbage! It’s a flat out lie.

We know who the Pilgrims are and what they did because they meticulously documented their history for posterity.

Our knowledge of the Pilgrims comes from two primary sources. The earliest account is from Edward Winslow, whose report on the founding of the Plymouth settlement was published in London in 1622, just two years after the Pilgrims arrived in the New World. The more detailed and authoritative account comes from the Pilgrims’ second governor, William Bradford, whose poignant and eloquent history Of Plymouth Plantation, written between 1630 and 1651, tells the story of the community from their formation in England to their exile in Holland and their eventual founding of the Plymouth Colony.

Any fair reading of the primary source documentation will give you all the evidence you need to understand why we chose the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth as the date of “our true founding” and as the basis of our founding myth.

There is a reason why we chose the Pilgrims and their establishment of the Plymouth Colony in 1620 as our origin story, not the Virginians who settled in Jamestown over a decade before that date. Our reasoning had everything to do with the Pilgrims’ lack of racism. Americans have always aspired to be on the right side of history, and the Pilgrims were nothing if not righteous.

Their story embodies our most sacred American values. Like Aeneas fleeing the fall of Troy, the Pilgrims saw themselves as fleeing a cataclysmic conflagration about to engulf Europe. And like the Roman hero, they too hoped to forge a new civilization with a spark from the dying embers of the old one.




No comments: