A Two-Tiered Moral Standard (2)

nazi-justice-demsNietzsche’s Superman Edition

The Problem

Screen Shot 2019-07-15 at 5.47.36 AM

“Proof” that V.P. Pence is a Nazi!

Is there any visible group in U.S. politics who more often and strenuously accuse their opponents of being “fascists” and “Nazis” than do the Justice Democrats?  I don’t think so. Were you to take their rhetoric at face value you’d think that they wouldn’t come within a King’s Mile of anyone who collaborated with Nazis.  But you would be completely wrong.

In point of fact, the Queen Priestess of the Justice Democrats, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) recently identified with and favorably quoted the wife of a well known Nazi collaborator, Evita Peron (see the above figure, emphasis added to the following quote).

Mr. Peron helped many Nazis fleeing Europe after the Second World War to find a safe haven in Argentina, including Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele.
According to the new book: “It is still suspected that among her [Eva Peron’s] possessions, there were pieces of Nazi treasure, that came from rich Jewish families killed in concentration camps.

And, when confronted with this fact she doubled down and favorably re-

Screen Shot 2019-07-16 at 5.57.43 AM

AOC doubles down on quoting a Nazi collaborator.

quoted Peron.

Then there’s the curious case of AOC’s recent Chief of Staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, who regularly  wears a Subhas Chandra Bose t-shirt.  And who is Bose?  Here’s an enlightening summary of his close and enthusiastic collaboration with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan during WW2.

Screen Shot 2019-07-16 at 6.24.56 AMSubhas Chandra Bose, a dissident Indian nationalist recognized by Adolf Hitler as the leader of the Free India Government. In exchange, Bose enlisted tens of thousands of Indian men to support the Japanese invasion of British India in 1944 and help fight the British in Europe for Hitler. The Indian Legion Bose raised for Germany trained as a regiment of the SS.

He also broadcast propaganda for Hitler on a radio network set up by Bose to encourage Indians to fight for freedom. Bose met with Hitler in Germany in 1942.

If you find this information credible, then you’re also likely pretty confused.  For in the normal world populated by mere humans the contradiction between their stated beliefs (We’re anti-fascists!) and their behavior (We positively identify with fascist collaborators!) is insurmountable.

A Possible Explanation

What you must understand is that people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Saikat Chakrabarti likely don’t consider themselves to be living in a “normal” moral world.  Nor do they likely consider themselves to be “mere humans.”  No, they apparently believe themselves to be something like Nietzsche’s Supermen: beings that transcend normal human morality, who’s will to power justifies their existence.


Nietzsche’s “Superman”

Superman, German Übermensch, in philosophy, the superior man, who justifies the existence of the human race. “Superman” is a term significantly used by Friedrich Nietzsche… This superior man would not be a product of long evolution; rather, he would emerge when any man with superior potential completely masters himself and strikes off conventional Christian “herd morality” to create his own values, which are completely rooted in life on this earth.

You see, since they live on plane far above that defined by “Christian herd morality,” anything that they conclude will advance their “will to power” is not just permissible, but actually proper for use.  This is a key reason that you will never see these Justice Democrats apologize for any lie, any moral failure, or any intellectual contradiction.  For since they are pursuing ends that are obviously perfect, they are freed to utilize any and all means necessary.

It takes a shocking combination of ignorance AND immorality to occupy this presumed higher moral plane.  May God have mercy on us if they ever achieve the totalitarian power which they pursue.  They have warned us by openly identifying with the 20th century’s fascist collaborators.  If that is permitted by their “superior morality” then what isn’t?


Progressive Insanity (1)


For those of you who blessedly aren’t familiar with Progressive mob speech, the obscured words are mo***rf***er and

Ignoring the Real Top Story

I turned on the TV yesterday and came across a cable news show from the Wall Street Journal in which they were discussing some esoteric facet of government policy as if we are living in a sane nation.  What’s really going on of importance is that one of our two political parties has gone certifiably insane and is now stoking hate, division and outright violence against anyone who insufficiently supports (let alone opposes) their madness.

For one glaring example, a Progressive mob descended on Senate Majority Mitch McConnell’s home and threatened to murder him.  The did so after multiple Democrat presidential candidates accused President Trump and his supporters of being “white supremacists” who are directly responsible for the El Paso mass shooting.

FOX News reports:

Protesters gather outside McConnell’s Kentucky home, one calls for his stabbing ‘in the heart’

A group of protesters supporting gun control gathered outside the home of Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. where one expressed that someone should “stab the motherf—er in the heart.”

The protest took place on Sunday night in the wake of mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. McConnell is currently recovering from a fall he had over the weekend, leaving him with a fractured shoulder.

Approximately 25 demonstrators stood on the sidewalk near McConnell’s Louisville home, shouting “No Trump, no KKK, no Fascist USA!” while others called him names like “Murder Turtle” and made loud noises by banging objects and dragging a shovel back and forth on the ground as a group of security personnel stood between the protestors and the home, WLKY reported.

“The b—- is home — we keep seeing the lights go on and off,” another protester can be heard shouting. “This h– really thought he was going to get ready to be at home after he hurt his little punk ass shoulder. B—-, don’t nobody give a f—! F–k your thoughts and prayers, Mitch. F— you, f— your wife, f— everything you stand for.”

And what happened when McConnell’s media team posted a video of the mob and their threats on Twitter…wait for it…Twitter banned the McConnell account!



The Democrat Party has revealed itself to hate half of the country they claim the right to govern.  Their supporters in social media are silencing anyone, including the Senate Majority Leader, if they dare to push back against the hateful and violent rhetoric.

This is the top story.  And we are still almost 15 months away from the 2020 election.

A few brave liberals have joined the fray on the side of civilization in the face of this growing mob if violent insane Progressives (obscenity obscured from original).

Pretty soon, America might have to start asking: what exactly is “progressive” about going insane? I think we’re getting close to answering that, and the answer is: nothing. The Left has managed to drain the meaning from the word “progressive.” We will not be able to take it seriously for generations to come (if there are any generations to come). The Left has applied every possible gimmick from the bad faith trick-bag to disable thinking in this republic generally, and the language that serves thinking. But its contorted maledictions are working mainly against itself as one preposterous idea after another bursts out of its collective pie-hole and into the blue-checked Twitter windows.

Speaking of “stabbing mo***rfu****s in the heart,” why are the “progressives” who moiled outside Senator Mitch McConnell’s house the other night not cooling their heels in a federal lock-up for threatening to assassinate a public official? That’s the usual procedure. How difficult would it be to locate them? Nobody has even asked — a peculiar development.

Twitter boss Jack Dorsey took the predictable “progressive” action of banning Senator McConnell’s election campaign account for posting a video of the very mob looking to “stab mo***rfu****s in the heart” outside his house. That should be good, at least, for a hearty lawsuit against Twitter that might raise the consciousness of the 23-year-old wokester myrmidons Jack Dorsey hired to pretend that their diligent bannings of non-woke Tweeters are the work of supposed “algorithms” — as well as Mr. Dorsey himself

I could write a dozen more posts (and likely eventually will) about this growing violent insanity, but I hope this is enough to get you thinking about where our country could be headed, and about how to prevent something terrible from happening.

A Two-Tiered Moral Standard (1)

Screen Shot 2019-06-18 at 5.12.43 AM

A Bernie Sanders supporter, James T. Hodgkinson, carefully planed and then conducted an attempted mass murder of Congressional Republicans.  He came within a hair’s breadth of achieving the greatest political mass murder in American history.  After Steve Scalise survived near death from the shooting a Progressive PAC proposes a billboard with the message “Take out Scalise.”

The fact is that the bar for condemnation of non-Progressive speech and behavior is an order of magnitude (at least) lower than for the opposite.  For example:

  • mask-head

    It’s unforgivable to wear an Obama mask; it’s easily forgivable to hold a mock decapitated head of Trump

    Disrespect (or much worse) towards the President

  • Freedom of the Press
    • President Obama’s Record
      • “This is an administration that prosecutes people for leaking information to the press that would hold it accountable, and which continually obfuscates journalists’ and citizens’ efforts to extract any information from it at all.
      • “This is an administration that has used the Espionage Act to punish whistleblowers at least seven times. By contrast, before Obama’s presidency, the act, in place since the first world war, was used to prosecute government officials who leaked to the media just three times.”
      • “This

        President Obama uses government power to suppress the press while President Trump says critical things about the press.  Not a peep of press criticism about Obama, a press firestorm against Trump.

        is an administration that has gone after journalists who report on information obtained from leakers by secretly obtaining months’ worth of phone records. That spent seven years trying to compel the New York Times’ James Risen to reveal his sources. That snooped through Fox News’ James Rosen’s private emails and accused the reporter of possibly being a “co-conspirator” in order to get a warrant to do so, and to then keep that warrant secret.”

    • President Trump’s Record
      • President Donald Trump’s “war on the media” has journalists wailing that freedom of the press is under attack. The hand-wringing is happening on both sides of the aisle, as politicians and pundits alike claim that Trump’s partisan war on the press and dissemination of misinformation and propaganda is “unprecedented” and the “absolute worst” in American history.”
      • “Trump has made no bones about his approach to the press. He’s said, “As you know, I have a running war with the media. They are among the most dishonest human beings on the earth.”
  • Political Rhetoric
    • Pelosi attacks Senate McConnell’s “One term president” statement
      • Pelosi appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday where she brought up McConnell’s old quote from an inter­view that appeared in the National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010.”Let me re­mind you that when the Re­pub­lic­ans took pow­er when President Obama was president of the United States, what Mitch McConnell said is, ‘The most im­port­ant thing we can do is to make sure he does not suc­ceed.’ If that wasn’t a rac­ist state­ment. That is un­think­a­ble,”

        It’s “racist” to oppose reelection of an opposing President; it’s not “Fascist” to threaten an opposing president with prison.

        Pelosi said.

      • Note: It’s “racist” and “unthinkable” for a leader of the Conservative opposition party to seek election defeat of a President who happens to be black!
    • Crickets over House Speaker’s President Trump “in prison” statement
      • “Speaker Nancy Pelosi told senior Democrats that she’d like to see President Donald Trump “in prison” as she clashed with House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler in a meeting on Tuesday night over whether to launch impeachment proceedings.”
      • Note: It’s perfectly fine for a leader of the Progressive opposition party to threaten the sitting president with prison.

(CNN)  “James T. Hodgkinson, the man identified as shooting a Republican member of congress and four others on Wednesday morning, was a small business owner in Illinois who defined himself publicly by his firm support of Bernie Sanders’ progressive politics — and his hatred of conservatives and President Donald Trump.”

So, yes, the Progressive behavior is generally different in kind to that of Conservatives.  They can get away with it due to their dominance in the media and government bureaucracy, among other powerful institutions.  They also benefit from the silence of Progressives who know better but are intimidated by the radical lunatic fringe of their movement.  Behind this wall of institutional power and tribal loyalty a truly vile and vicious culture of cruelty has grown.  If the near massacre of Congressional Republicans by a hate filled Progressive supporter of Bernie Sanders hasn’t sobered them up then nothing likely will.

What’s changed is that millions of U.S. citizens now see this situation clearly and are willing to oppose it in the privacy of the voting booth if not in public.

Occasional Confirmations (3)

gnd-communistThe Green New Deal is about Socialism, Not Climate Change

You may recall a recent post in which I pointed out that the Green New Deal (GND) could only be implemented by turning the United States into a hard core Socialist nation (i.e., Communism).  I’m not claiming this conclusion as an intellectual feat because it’s obvious if only you (1) actually read the entire thing and (2) are willing to consider the implications with a mind unclouded by climate change hysteria.

But I had no idea that the Justice Progressives would be careless enough to let this obvious truth slip out into the open.  This happened when Saikat Chakrabarti, Chief of Staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) met Sam Ricketts, Climate Director for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D).  The curtain was raised in the truth in a Washington Post article that covered this meeting.

Chakrabarti had an unexpected disclosure. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal,” he said, “is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.” Ricketts greeted this startling notion with an attentive poker face. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

Wow,  Thanks for the confirmation Comrade Chakrabarti!


Racism Unbound (4)

corruption-catastropheThe Catastrophe of Unaccountability


A primary theme of this blog has been unmasking the moral corruption and intellectual incompetence of the Progressive movement.  What’s shocking is the brazen manner in which the members of this movement now advertise these appalling traits.  In decades past there was a carefully orchestrated attempt to advance Progressive goals under the cloak of moral seriousness and intellectual superiority.

What is currently occurring in the Progressive movement is the catastrophic success of this strategy.  That is, so successfully did the Progressive Left seize the moral and intellectual high ground that they achieved dominance in our nation’s primary organizational and bureaucratic power centers (as they also did in other nations and international bodies).  This dominance has allowed Progressives to fall into a state of intellectual and moral atrophy that has led to this current situation.

In the 1940s and 1950s this near dominance gave what we now call Progressives an advantage at the margins of intellectual and moral conduct.  However, as far back as 1969 we can find an example in the Chappaquiddick incident of a powerful Democratic politician (Ted Kennedy) getting away with at least negligent homicide due to a news media that was unwilling to demand answers or accountability.

Over time, as the Progressive grip on our institutions increased, what had been a marginal advantage turned into almost total lack of accountability.  For, in effect there was no-one in their power-bubble who would ever question their premises or challenge their conclusions.


We all powerful Progressives are the creators of reality rather than subject to it!

It is in this environment that the Progressive elite so lost contact with reality that they began to believe that they were the creators of reality rather then subject to it.  This is a difficult idea to explain, but one author has made a good start thusly.  The specific issue is the recent Robert Mueller testimony debacle, but one can generalize to cover the larger scope of this post.

Todd diagnosed the Democrats’ problem thusly: “The fact is we are living in this 21st century new type of asymmetrical media warfare that we’re in. And you have a propaganda machine on the right. And that’s what it is. It’s a full-fledged propaganda machine on the right that the Democrats haven’t figured out how to combat very well yet.”

I would feel better about the news media if I thought Todd was just a liar, but, no, I think he is actually clueless. Because as an American journalist he is, just like the Democrats, surrounded by people who reflect and echo his ideas. There’s no one near him to ask: What propaganda machine, Chuck? Aside from one cable station — Fox News — what network, what newspaper, what university, what comedian or movie-maker or search engine or social media does anything but spew left-wing propaganda all day every day? There’s no one to demand he produce his evidence. There’s no one to require him to show his work.

Thus Progressives have concluded that they need not do the hard and uncertain work of debate and persuasion in order to get their way.  Rather, they leverage their positions of power to intimidate opponents into submission to any idea that they decide to be true.  I’ve written before about this situation.

However, I believe the argument can be credibly made that, due to their undeniable success in occupying most key positions of social and organizational power, the Progressive movement has become far too dependent on intimidation at the expense of persuasion.

This strategy is pursued by never acknowledging opposition as being legitimate and by insisting that opposing points of view are motivated by moral defects.  Thus they are not seeking to persuade peers to see their point of view, but rather using social and/or organizational force to obtain submission.

And, the most extreme form of this intimidation is the application of the epithet racist to any person who in any way opposes the Progressive project, be it based on criticism of policy or person.

This is simply a special case of the general Progressive position of dehumanizing any person who they consider to be in opposition to their goals, and particularly those who are a a threat.  To the radical elite Progressives we nonconformists are only one or two steps above a zombie.  They can therefore attack us by any means necessary without shame or human sympathy.  Of course most Progressives don’t go to this extreme.  However, neither do they generally speak out against their fellow Progressives who do.  And, that silence is in effect an endorsement of these vile tactics.

The sad truth is that Progressives have so misused and overused the word “racist” that it has lost all meaning.  For when everyone who voted for President Trump, anyone on the Left who doesn’t blindly follow The Squad’s lead, any black, brown, Muslim, queer

Screen Shot 2019-07-28 at 2.38.22 PM

Oh come on, you’ll have to do better than that to prove your wokeness!

or female who doesn’t submit to woke intersectional ideology or anyone else who is insufficiently supportive of Progressive goals is a “racist” then that includes everyone but the most radical of the Progressive elite (and they’re starting to wonder about each other).  Thus “racist” has become unbound from any connection to reality to become an all-purpose emotional club by which to beat any opposition into submission.

Perhaps that’s why Senator Cory Booker (D. NJ) had to recently call President Trump “worse than a racist.”  For when 95% of the country is already “racist” then a way of proclaiming President Trump to be worse must be found.

But, what a pathetic attempt.  If Senator Booker wants to impress The Squad then he needs to at least go with “worse than Hitler!”

Racism Unbound (3)


Republican politicians who have been the victim of actual physical violence.  Rep. Steve Scalise (left) after his attempted murder by a Progressive supporter of Bernie Sanders; and Sen. Rand Paul (right) after a brutal surprise attack by his Socialist neighbor.

The True Nature of Contemporary Political Violence

In the previous post I said that death threats against anyone, most certainly including The Squad members are terrible.  That being understood, I must point out that The Squad, “some of” whom have received death threats are in no way unique in this regard. The fact is that visible, outspoken politicians (and others) of all parties, skin colors, genders, personalities, religions and ideologies are highly likely to receive death threats.  Thus for Rep. Rashida Tlaib to claim special victimhood because “some of” The Squad has received death threats is incredible.

However, if we peer past The Squad’s hysterics it’s impossible to miss that it is Republican politicians who have been the victims of actual recent violence.  I must ask, has any Progressive politician, regardless of group identity, been the target of a mass murder attempt, as were the Congressional Republicans?  Rep. Steve Scalise (the House Majority Whip) received serious gunshot wounds.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) is in stable condition after being shot early Wednesday at a baseball practice field in a Washington, D.C., suburb, according to multiple reports.

Scalise was one of several people shot at the practice in Alexandria, Va., where it is believed a single gunman fired dozens of shots at lawmakers and aides who scrambled for cover.

An Illinois man who volunteered for Sen. Bernie Sanders‘s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign in Iowa has been identified in multiple media reports as the shooter. James T. Hodgkinson was shot at the scene and later died from his injuries. 

Scalise’s office said he was in good spirits and had talked to his wife before undergoing emergency surgery after being shot in the hip.

“He is grateful for the brave actions of U.S. Capitol Police, first responders, and colleagues,” the office said. “We ask that you keep the Whip and others harmed in this incident in your thoughts and prayers.”

Had there not been two brave and armed officers present who stopped James Hodgkinson there could have been more than a dozen murdered Congressional Republicans that day.

Or how about Sen. Rand Paul, who was brutally surprise attacked from behind by a Socialist neighbor.  With regard to the physical attack itself:

The Associated Press story described how injuries like this “can lead to life-threatening injuries,” with pain lingering for “weeks or months.”

With regard to the political beliefs and actions of Sen. Paul’s attacker:

The man responsible for attacking Sen. Rand Paul Friday afternoon was an avowed liberal who frequently fought with his neighbors about politics, according to a report Sunday from The Washington Post.

Local citizens say Rene Boucher, the 59-year-old man who assaulted Paul, was a socialist who frequently fought with neighbors about health care policies and other liberal issues. Boucher and Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, are on the opposite end of the political spectrum, they told reporters.

Jeff Jones, a registered nurse who worked with Boucher at the Bowling Green Medical Center, described Paul’s attacker’s politics as “liberal.”

“He was active on social media and said some negative things about the Republican agenda,” Jones said of Boucher, a Bowling Green, Ky., citizen who lives in the same gated community as Paul. “I think it was unfortunate that they lived so close together.”

Boucher is a divorced socialist who is “pretty much the opposite of Rand Paul in every way,” Jim Bullington, a former member of the city commission who knows both men well, told reporters Sunday.

A Facebook account Boucher maintained before the attack contains numerous anti-Republican postings.

Boucher wrote “May Robert Mueller fry Trump’s gonads” in a May post referencing the former FBI director’s investigation into possible collusion between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russian government.


Kathy Griffin ‘beheads’ Trump in a graphic photo

To these actual acts of violence we can add numerous cases of death threats and public violence, public statements by Progressives threatening violence, and violence pornography against President Trump and Republicans in general (see accompanying photos).  On top of this, it is only Republicans who have been driven out of restaurants by angry, threatening mobs.

Can anyone provide anything close to this level for vicious actual and spoken violence against The Squad or any other Progressive politician?  Heres’s a small sampling of the violent rhetoric being deployed against Republicans.

  • Kathy Griffin ‘Beheads’ Trump in a graphic photo
  • Madonna: “I’ve thought a lot about blowing up the White House.”
  • Snoop Dogg: “Shoots” Trump in the head in a music video
  • Robert De Niro: “I’d Like to punch him in the face”
  • Joss Whedon: “I want a rhino to [F—] Paul Ryan to death”
  • Shakespeare in the Park: Stabs ‘Trump’ to death in performances of ‘Julius Caesar’
  • Rapper YG Threatens Trump with “[F—] Donald Trump” song
  • Marilyn Manson: kills ‘Trump” in music video
  • Stephen Colbert’s Late Show: Puts Stephen Miller’s head (a senior advisor for policy for President Donald Trump) on a spike.

Stephen Colbert’s Late Show puts Stephen Miller’s head on a spike

I challenge any Progressive to generate an equivalent list of violent statements and actions by Conservatives against Progressives.  The sad reality is that it is the Progressive camp that most often uses violence, threatened or actual, against their political opponents.

I’m not saying that Progressive politicians aren’t under threat.  I am saying that they are being dishonest and hysterical when they pretend to be under greater or even similar threat to that of their Republican colleagues.  And, this applies particularly to The Squad, who have leveraged their presumed state of victimhood to claims of heightened threat to their personal safety.

Of course, this situation could change in the blink of the eye, so all threats against all politicians (and other citizens) must be investigated, and appropriate protective measures taken.


Racism Unbound (2)

the squad 1

The Squad (left to right): Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Presley

A Cowardly and Dishonest Epithet

There’s no point in mincing words.  The Squad has made it absolutely clear that while they are free to hurl hatred for the United States, Israel, Jews, their very own Speaker, President Trump and anyone else they deem fit; anyone who dares to oppose or even criticize them is designated to be a racist. Some of you may be doubtful.  So, here are the words of Rep. Rashida Tlaib in The Squad’s interview with “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King.  Note that this statement is with regard to Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House from their own party.

She is Speaker of the House. She can ask for a meeting to sit down with us for clarification. The fact of the knowledge is and I’ve done racial justice work in our country for a long time. Acknowledge the fact that we are women of color, so when you do single us out, be aware of that and what you’re doing especially because some of us are getting death threats, because some of us are being singled out in many ways because of our backgrounds, because of our experiences and so forth.

Rep. Tlaib is clearly saying that even Speaker Nancy Pelosi shouldn’t single them out for criticism because of their race, gender and backgrounds.  And, they are doing so by claiming special protection due to the implicit victimhood associated with these characteristics.

The one specific claim is that some of them have received death threats.  We can all agree that no-one should be receiving death threats.  I can only imagine the upset and fear that reception of such a communication would cause.  However, is it credible that The Squad, because of their race, gender and backgrounds are uniquely threatened?  Do they have the most credible reasons to fear actual physical violence against themselves?  These questions will be explored in the following post.

For now let it be said that these four freshmen Congresswomen claim immunity from any criticism from anyone because of their race.  Thus, anyone who dares to criticize them is by definition acting out of racism to some significant degree; even Nancy Pelosi, Democrat Speaker of the House of Representatives!

Do you imagine that this derangement is limited only to The Squad?  Absolutely not so.  Here’s what powerful Progressive media figures have been saying about Speaker Pelosi.

The Squad has plenty of friends in high places. One such is Karen Attiah, global opinions editor of The Washington Post. On July 14, taking note of Trump’s most recent anti-Squad animadversion—the instantly notorious “go back” tweet—Attiah volleyed her own strong tweeting: “Make no mistake: Nancy Pelosi’s dogwhistling snipes at @AOC, Ilhan Omar, @RashidaTlaib and @RepPressley helped pave the way for this vicious, racist attack from the president.”

Today, through this infidels versus heretics prism, we can see plenty more evidence underscoring Woke anti-Pelosi ferocity. On July 22, left-wing YouTuber Cenk Uygur went even further, declaring in The Wall Street Journal, “Democrats Should Unify Behind AOC, Not Pelosi.” In Uygur’s opinion, “Democratic voters were clear in 2018 that they want Mr. Trump impeached.” And yet, he continued, “There is not a single public official doing more to protect Mr. Trump than she is.” That pro-Trump “she,” of course, is Nancy Pelosi.

But it’s even worse than this.  For the Squad doesn’t apply this immunity from criticism to all people who can claim victimhood under their Intersectional ideology.  In fact, if you are brown, black, Muslim or gay and don’t toe their Progressive line you are persona non grata.  Here are the words of Rep. Ayanna Presley at the Netroots Nation conference explicitly making this point.

Screen Shot 2019-07-21 at 8.32.43 AM

For example, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), who despite their black and brown skin decided to vote en masse with the racist Democrat House Speaker rather then with the true “brown, black and Muslim” Squad.  The BCB must be racist (or maybe just traitors to their race)!

“I don’t want to bring a chair to an old table. This is the time to shake the table. This is the time to redefine that table. Because if you’re going to come to this table, all of you who have aspirations of running for office. If you’re not prepared to come to that table and represent that voice, don’t come, because we don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice. If you’re worried about being marginalized and stereotyped, please don’t even show up because we need you to represent that voice.”

Do you see?  The Squad has no respect for any person, be they brown, black, Muslim, queer (or a white woman) who doesn’t think exactly like them.  If you are a member of these groups and stray out of the the Progressive camp then you are fair game.  And, if you are outside of these groups then any criticism is racism.

This is not courage or honesty.  No, it is the exact opposite.

The Passing Progressive Parade (3)


Only a small sample of the fraudulent “climate change will end the world in X years” predictions.

Endless Climate Hysteria Insanity Edition

Here’s a vignette that captures the insanity of the climate change true believers.

My family and I were visiting the Milwaukee Art Museum at least a decade ago.  We took an elevator and were joined by two employees of the museum.  One was speaking to the other in the most highbrow, pompous way imaginable about the certainty that the world was going to end if we didn’t do something soon about global warming.  The other employee listened in a posture of deep respect and concern.

It’s safe to say that the speaker wouldn’t know the scientific method if it hit him in the head.  It’s absolutely certain that he knew zero about the intricacies and problems associated with use of computer models to predict complex, chaotic physical phenomena.   But none of that prevented this man from presuming a position of intellectual and moral superiority on “climate change.”  He is my personal poster-child for all the know-it-alls who repeatedly go into hysterics over serially false predictions that “climate change will end the world in X years!”

Oh, I know, “97% of all scientists agree about climate change.”*  In the first place, this statement utterly contradicts the scientific method.  Science is not decided by vote, but rather by evidence and successful prediction of future events (more on this later).  In 1633 know-it-alls could have said “97% of all scientists believe that the earth is the center of the universe.”  In the early 1900s they could have said “97% of all scientists believe the the Newtonian theory of physics is completely accurate.”  Pardon me if I’m less than impressed.

Let’s now return to the issue of the predictive power of a scientific theory.  Here’s how one source describes this concept.

If a theory explains available data, then it should be able to predict what currently unavailable data should look like. … These responses suggest that, at any level in the scientific hierarchy, from a hypothesis to a fully formed theory, the ability to make testable predictions is absolutely essential to science. What constitutes a prediction, and how readily testable they are may vary from field to field, but this quality appears central.

So, I’m compelled to ask: “What is the track record of predictive power for climate science?”  The answer is “pathetically failed!”

And yet, so powerful is the social compulsion to belong to the in-group, so pleasurable is the experience of emotional posturing, that people cast off any semblance of critical thinking even after dozens of failed predictions over decades.

This is indeed the definition of insanity.  But, hey, if it feels good it must be a valid scientific theory!©**

* Note: This claim has been shown to be based on studies that use imprecise, even deceptive methodologies.  The percentage of scientists who believe in the catastrophic climate change theory is likely far lower than the 97% claimed.

** Copyright 1692, Salem Massachusetts.

Lemmings at the cliff

Yes, we must “fundamentally transform” our nation into a Socialist cesspool based on a fraudulent scientific theory to ensure that the planet survives!


The Progressive Compulsion for Cruelty (4)


But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

Hebrews 10:39 (AKJV)

The Road to Perdition

How can people descend to this level of depravity while simultaneously having unshakable confidence in their moral superiority?  And, how can the Progressive community provide support for this depravity either implicitly by their silence or explicitly by their approval?

I have been, in effect, asking these questions for quite awhile (e.g., search this blog on “Decoding Progressivism” and “Making Sense of Progressive Nonsense”).  My recent post on the appalling self-righteousness exhibited by the Progressive community before and after the 2016 Presidential Election is a good first step towards understanding.  However, describing a key symptom doesn’t explain the underlying causes.

end-means-genocideThe Ends Justify the Means

Progressivism is a dangerous combination of utopianism and collectivism.  That is, they believe that human society can be perfected by the application of properly directed collective action.

It is the ends embraced by Progressivism that encourage the descent into extreme self-righteousness.  For if your presumed ends are a utopian state in which all evil has been defeated and all good obtained then to oppose these ends can only be viewed as the rejection of good in favor of evil.  It is within this dynamic that Progressives are capable of hateful, vicious, dehumanizing behavior towards anyone who opposes them, or even who insufficiently support them.

Since their ends are not those which naturally occur in human society an external power must be applied.  That power is found in ever increasing government and institutional authority.  Progressives are forever proclaiming their love for humankind while instituting policies that grind individual humans into the dust.  There is simply no room in their moral universe for ideological diversity.  Therefore it is their collectivist love of humanity that enables their extreme viciousness towards individual humans without the slightest sense of shame or remorse.

victim-cultureIntersectionality and Victim-Based Morality

The ends/means dynamic has been a sufficient driver of Progressive hate for decades past.  However, the more recent addition of victim-based moral superiority under the ideology of intersectionality has turbocharged Progressive temptation to evil.

One helpful definition of intersectionality can be found here.

 the complex and cumulative way that the effects of different forms of discrimination (such as racism, sexism, and classism) combine, overlap, and yes, intersect—especially in the experiences of marginalized people or groups.

It is the combination of group identity and victimization that creates the witches brew of unlimited self-righteousness at play today in Progressive politics.  The following excerpt provides a good summary of our current situation.

For instance, the idea that certain groups have suffered more historical oppression than others and are therefore owed certain entitlements is hardly novel, but the intersectional prescription that historical victimization can be understood as a kind of mathematical equation of oppression, in which the intersection of our various identities creates an imposed moral hierarchy, with the victims at the top and the privileged at the bottom, is a fairly recent phenomenon. It has been ramped up to include ever more historically marginalized groups and encapsulates an ever broader systemic process of oppression. These ideas have become the norm among my generation (millennial), providing an a priori perceptual framework, which leads us to approach many modern problems through the lens of group identity and historical oppression—sorting out the noble victims from the privileged victimizers to establish who symbolically represents the good and who is emblematic of evil. Such a totalizing ideology is primed to stoke reactionary flames on both sides of the political aisle and feed into the culture war in America and elsewhere.

Note that each person associated with extremely vicious moral conduct from the previous posts belonged to at least one victim group:

  • GillibrandTweetVictoria Bissell Brown: feminist woman;
  • Brian Sims: gay;
  • John Roger: black;
  • Kirsten Gillibrand: feminist woman, explicitly embraces intersectionality;
  • Norma Torres: hispanic woman.

Given the identity group based presumption of moral superiority, the “good vs. evil” and “ends justify the means” mentality of Progressive ideology it’s unsurprising that these people feel entitled to conduct themselves in this manner.

The incentive to jump onboard the victim train is so overwhelming that even Progressive white men (the bottom of the barrel in victim-based morality) can’t resist.  For example:

James Livingston, a Rutgers history professor: “OK, officially, I now hate white people. … I hereby resign from my race. F— these people.”


James Livingston (left) and Michael Avenatti (right): white guys denouncing whiteness and white guys.  Perhaps hoping that the crocodile eats them last.

The good white male professor wasn’t done virtue signaling his intersectional  wokeness.

… Livingston wrote on Facebook on May 31 that he’d come from a Harlem burger restaurant that was “overrun with little Caucasian a-holes.”

“OK, officially, I now hate white people,” wrote Livingston. “I am a white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them—us—us out of my neighborhood?”

And then there’s the MSNBC/CNN endorsed white male presidential candidate:

Michael Avenatti, criticizing the GOP senators during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings: “These old white men still don’t understand that assault victims and women deserve respect and to be heard.”

This ideology by which human beings are assigned moral superiority or inferiority simply by their membership in identity groups has resulted in a whole new level of viciousness in Progressive rhetoric and action.  We haven’t hit anything approaching bottom yet.

Screen Shot 2019-06-15 at 8.32.14 PMThe Abolition of God

The ultimate root cause of this self-righteous madness is the abandonment of the Christian religion (which is based on transcendent revelation) in favor of a secular religion based on Progressive human ideology.  We return to the previously excerpted article for an excellent summation.

Intersectionality is a secular religion: it advocates an all-encompassing worldview, which explains the vast interlocking mechanism of human oppression at the expense of critical reasoning. It even functions like a religion, operating on the basis of an original sin of privilege, excommunicating heretics, awaiting a judgment day in which all oppression with be understood and overcome, and promoting figures who are considered beyond reproach (saints) who purportedly embody the doctrine’s best representatives. Ultimately, intersectionality is a quest for meaning in a world from which religion has been thoroughly uprooted. And, like all religions, it functions in accordance with our deeply felt unconscious needs, rather than our conscious choices and actions. Of course, one can no more reject the human impulse towards religious experience than the existence of gravity, but we can engage in our own personal line of inquiry—in which questions hold more meaning than answers. This is our only bulwark against human vice. And always will be.

Fortunately there are many citizens in the United States who are not subject to this evil ideology.  However the question of their willingness to understand and then effectively oppose this terrorizing creed remains in the balance.

The Progressive Compulsion for Cruelty (3)

Screen Shot 2019-05-13 at 5.41.28 AM

Loud and proud!  A state representative in Pennsylvania accosts young girls and old women with vile accusations and intimidation as they peacefully pray in front of an abortion clinic.

The Totalitarian Face of Abortion Revealed

We have entered a new and shocking phase of Progressive abortion support.  Long gone are the days of “safe, legal and rare.”  In its place we now find the claim that abortion support is a pinnacle of virtue.  Even more appalling, it’s no longer abortion under constrained circumstances, but rather up to the moment of birth and even after birth (i.e., infanticide).  It is this murderous position that Progressives now consider to justify absolutely vile public conduct.

Hateful Harasser of Young Girls and Old Women

For Exhibit A I give you Brian Sims, the Pennsylvania State Representative (D) who publicly assaults young girls and an old woman as they peacefully pray and demonstrate in front of abortion clinics.  His actions are well summarized by Rep. Jerry Knowles (R) and his memo seeking Sims’ censure.

On the first occasion, Representative Sims recorded himself berating, harassing, and violating the First Amendment rights of an individual, whom he labeled, an “old, white lady” for peacefully protesting and praying in public.

On the second occasion, Representative Sims again recorded himself berating, harassing others. He went a step further the second time, though, calling for the “doxing” of three minor children and one adult female. By soliciting strangers on the internet for their personal identifying information (i.e. names and addresses), Sims placed these citizens in reasonable fear for their own safety, merely because they were exercising their constitutional right to peacefully protest.

It should be noted that Representative Sims also used his elected position to intimidate the individuals with whom he was interacting, clearly stating on the videos that he was a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.

Bloody Minded Madness

Screen Shot 2019-06-12 at 5.20.33 AM

Alabama State Rep. John Rogers (D)

Exhibit B is another state representative, this one being Alabama State Rep. John Rogers (D) during a hearing on a proposed abortion bill.  Apparently this statement was intended to change the hearts and minds of those supporting the bill (emphasis added).

“All I’m saying to you is it ought to be the woman’s choice,” Rogers said. “I’m not about to be the male telling a woman what to do with her body. She has a right to make that decision herself. Through rape or incest. Some kids are unwanted. So you kill them now or you kill them later. You bring them in the world unwanted, unloved, you send them to the electric chair. So, you kill them now or you kill them later. But the bottom line is just that I think we shouldn’t be making that decision.”

Since 1983 sixty-six people have been executed in the state of Alabama.  The last execution by electric chair occurred in 2002 (all have been by lethal injection since then).  In other words, less than two people per year have been executed since 1983.  Between 2006 and 2015 an average of 9,641 abortions per year have been preformed in Alabama.  So, by the logic of this bloody minded monster were abortion eliminated:

  • Un-aborted babies would grow up by the thousands to commit capital crimes;
  • The number of executions would rise from less than two per year to thousands;
  • Alabama would reinstitute the electric chair to execute these thousands of new capital criminals per year.

This is the generous but implausible interpretation.  He most likely means that mothers should have the right to condemn their unwanted children to death after birth.

But this vile man wasn’t done (emphasis added).

This [above statement] set off a firestorm, with the president’s son tweeting, “This is stomach curling and makes Ralph Northam look like a moderate on abortion.”

Rogers fired back Thursday, defending his remarks on abortion and personally attacking Trump saying, “That’s an honor. Thank God. Right on … Him being born is the very good defense that I have for abortion. His mother should’ve aborted him when he was born, and then he wouldn’t have made that stupid statement.

Note that this second quote supports the less generous interpretation of this man’s beliefs.

So where were the supposedly morally superior Democrats on this man’s evil rantings, virtually nowhere (emphasis added).

On Wednesday, Republicans denounced comments by State Rep. John Rogers, D-Birmingham, suggesting that children killed in abortions would have to be killed in the electric chair later if they had lived.

Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 6.29.07 AMMorally Vacuous Presidential Candidate

Lest you leave with the misapprehension that this moral idiocy is limited to low level state politicians I give you the vacuous musings of a U.S. Senator and presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand (D., New York).

“If you are a person of the Christian faith, one of the tenets of our faith is free will. One of the tenets of our democracy is that we have a separation of church and state, and under no circumstances are we supposed to be imposing our faith on other people. And I think this is an example of that effort.”

I challenge anyone to discover the logical progression of ideas within they statement.

But Senator Gillibrand wasn’t done.  Later on she compared pro-life beliefs to racism, anti-semitism and homophobia.  Here’s what she said while discussing appointments to the judiciary.

“I think there’s some issues that have such moral clarity that we have as a society decided that the other side is not acceptable,” she said.

“Imagine saying that it’s okay to appoint a judge who’s racist or anti-Semitic or homophobic. Asking someone to appoint someone who takes away basic human rights of any group of people in America—I don’t think that those are political issues anymore.”

In what moral universe does a presidential candidate denigrate roughly half the population as the equivalent to racists, ant-semites and haters of homosexuals for being pro-life?  In the Progressive moral universe exposed by the 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.


Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 6.27.51 AM

U.S. Representative Norma Torres (D., CA)

Just when I was finishing composition of this post the following pathetic example rolled-in (emphasis added).

A routine House debate nearly exploded Wednesday when California Democrat Norma J. Torres implied her Republican colleagues were “sex-starved males” for opposing abortion.

Mr. Speaker, it is tiring to hear from so many sex-starved males on this floor talk about a woman’s right to choose,” Torres said as lawmakers debated a rule setting up amendment consideration for a four-bill spending package that includes funding for public health programs.

Torres, one of the newest members of the House Rules Committee, clearly broke House Rules — members cannot personally impugn their colleagues on the floor.

Note that this item nicely ties together the feminist misandry of the previous post with the abortion totalitarianism of this one.

No further comment is necessary.