The Trouble With Tactical Imitation of the Left

Some of the Left’s actors are so peculiarly leftist that it is hard to see how our side could imitate them.

by Paul Gottfried for American Greatness

My young colleague at Chronicles, Pedro Gonzalez, recently published a blog piece on Mark Elias that went viral. Our readers resonated to Pedro’s assessment of the Democratic activist Elias, as someone whom we on the Right should admire for his fixing skills. Indeed, we should be looking for our own Mark Elias, who would crush the Democrats with lawsuits every time it appeared they had somehow pulled out an election.

Since I myself have written often in the same vein, I can’t criticize Pedro for his wishful thinking. I too have ridiculed the GOP establishment and Conservatism, Inc. for their lack of “thumos” and have held up the fanaticism and competitiveness of the Democratic Left as qualities we on the Right should want to emulate. There are of course certain obvious reasons that we couldn’t get away with the Left’s bullying behavior, starting with how the woke leftist media would portray our bold actions. The Left is allowed and even encouraged to attack the headquarters of pro-life activists, and they can threaten the lives of judges whom they don’t like with impunity. Pro-life advocates by contrast will incur the wrath of the media and may even have the FBI come after them if they do anything as subversive as sing hymns in front of an abortion center.

While the Left continues to depict counterfactually the events at Charlottesville in August 2018 and the Capitol break-in on January 6, 2020, as attempted Nazi or fascist coups, the same media try to wipe from our consciousness anything that does not fit its narrative of “democracy” being threatened by a surging “white nationalist” presence. The black racist who ran over a crowd in Waukesha, Wisconsin last Christmas was allegedly a poor soul who had trouble controlling his vehicle; while the hundred or so riots, some of them paid for by Democrats, during the “Summer of Love” in 2020 are recast as understandable reactions to the racist death of George Floyd. No matter how the Right reacts to the other side, the media will denounce its action as a “threat to democracy.”

There is, however, another reason that I couldn’t imagine a serious American Right that successfully imitates its enemy’s behavior, except in a limited tactical way. Some of the Left’s actors are so peculiarly leftist that it is hard to see how our side could imitate them. What would be the right-wing equivalent of Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Beto O’Rourke, or the “ladies” on “The View”? I couldn’t begin to imagine how we’d offer our own version of these whinging guilt-mongers or splenetic true believers. 

Is there for example a right-wing equivalent of my least favorite Democratic congressman, Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who represents the Maryland/D.C.-suburb where I used to live? Raskin rants nonstop against all the hobgoblins of the Democratic Left. Those who question the CDC’s hardly consistent instructions on how to deal with COVID or dispute climate change have become for Raskin the organized legions of anti-Reason. Thus he proposed on the floor of Congress a National Day of Reason to support Democratic talking points, against the “science-deniers.” Raskin also spoke movingly about his religious rebirth experience upon receiving the COVID vaccine. Getting vaxxed with government-approved serum became for Raskin something profoundly spiritual. 

As a supercharged member of the January 6 committee, Raskin is incessantly telling us that Republicans who question the last presidential election constitute a unique threat to “American democracy.” Presumably no high-ranking Democrat ever challenged a Republican electoral victory and if one or more Democrats did, (well!) that’s hardly worth mentioning. The break-in on January 6, moreover, was not what it seems to have been, that is, unlawful trespassing aided by cooperative police. It was a right-wing insurrection engineered by Donald Trump to overthrow Our Democracy™, and let’s not forget that.

Even more interestingly, this Maryland lawmaker wishes us to redouble our efforts to fight Vladimir Putin. What is at stake in this cosmic struggle is more than the territorial integrity of Ukraine. For Raskin, Putin is a Christian fanatic and a “fascist” who has brazenly opposed the redemptive light of LGBT. In a statement last week Raskin warned other progressives against scaling back support in the “war against Putin”: “Moscow right now is a world center of antifeminism, antigay, anti-trans hatred, as well as the home of replacement theory for export.” Raskin stalwartly resists any plan for making peace between Ukraine and Russia. Instead, we must go on fighting this leftist holy war, no matter what the cost to our crusader state, until we have vanquished the enemy of our sacred woke ideology. 

I’ve no idea what a right-wing version of Raskin would look like. His combination of self-importance and drooling party-lining may have no equivalent on any politically useful right. How exactly would our side use such a fool even if he suddenly and unexpectedly switched sides?

X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- Nov 1st

 

You all probably don't need a reminder, but there's a week left to go before basically our whole world changes for the better. How are you are feeling?

Here's tonight's news:

Elon Musk Limits Employee Access to Twitter Censorship Tools

Allum Bokhari for BREITBART

Elon Musk Sparks Media Freakout by Limiting Employee Access to Twitter Censorship Tools

 

By Allum Bokhari
Published 1 Nov 2022

Elon Musk has limited Twitter employees’ access to content moderation tools in his first week of ownership, as he promises a radical change in course on censorship. The media, predictably, is claiming that the sky is falling.

Bloomberg reports that Elon Musk’s Twitter has frozen some employees’ access to tools designed to enforce the site’s content moderation policies, curtailing the power of employees to ban accounts, remove posts, and other acts of censorship, in what the outlet says “curb[s] the staff’s ability to clamp down on misinformation ahead of a major U.S. election.”

Most people who work in Twitter’s Trust and Safety organization are currently unable to alter or penalize accounts that break rules around misleading information, offensive posts and hate speech, except for the most high-impact violations that would involve real-world harm, according to people familiar with the matter. Those posts were prioritized for manual enforcement, they said.

People who were on call to enforce Twitter’s policies during Brazil’s presidential election did get access to the internal tools on Sunday, but in a limited capacity, according to two of the people. The company is still utilizing automated enforcement technology, and third-party contractors, according to one person, though the highest-profile violations are typically reviewed by Twitter employees.

CONTINUE READING...

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

Scandal-Ridden San Francisco FBI Field Office Involved in Pelosi Investigation

Given the highly partisan nature of the FBI, and the San Francisco field office in particular, there is no reason to believe FBI brass will do anything more than run cover for the Pelosis.

Julie Kelly reporting for American Greatness

No one should accept at face value the strange account of what happened to Paul Pelosi, husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), at their California home last week.

Plenty of factors—a wholly dishonest news media, unsubstantiated claims the attacker was a foiled assassin who planned to kill the speaker of the House, and Mr. Pelosi’s recent legal troubles, to name a few—feed justified skepticism surrounding the alleged break-in and hammer attack that occurred in the wee hours of October 28. Details continue to change while leading Democrats including Hillary Clinton blame the incident, without evidence, on Republicans and Donald Trump.

This situation is yet another example of how the public’s complete lack of faith in major institutions is fueling doubt and suspicion. Unfortunately, that level of distrust extends to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a once-revered agency that has blown its reputation in service to the Democratic Party. And news that the San Francisco FBI field office is taking a lead role in the Pelosi investigation offers little comfort that the American people will ever find out the truth of the matter.

The San Francisco field office, like the bureau’s Washington, D.C. headquarters and many other offices across the country, is mired in scandal. It’s particularly true as it relates to the FBI’s cozy ties to Big Tech—and the San Francisco FBI office is ground zero for that quid pro quo relationship. Rather than investigate the nearly 300 Big Tech companies within its Silicon Valley jurisdiction for various offenses such as election interference, the San Francisco FBI office appears instead to be in cahoots with these powerful corporate interests to do the Democratic Party’s dirty work.

Few people benefit more than Nancy Pelosi, who of course happens to live in San Francisco. Democratic candidates and lawmakers are flush with campaign donations from Big Tech; in 2020 alone, Facebook and Twitter—the latter located in Pelosi’s congressional district and the former located just outside its boundaries—donated at least $5.5 million to Democrats and only a paltry $435,000 to Republicans, a 12-1 ratio in favor of Pelosi’s party. Conversely, threats made by leading Democrats to break up Big Tech or hold congressional hearings into alleged malfeasance have been slow-walked since Pelosi reclaimed the speaker’s gavel.

Fortunately, a lawsuit recently filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt laid bare how this lucrative back-scratching operation works. Elvis Chan, a top cyber FBI agent working in the San Francisco office, was in routine communication with Big Tech giants prior to the 2020 election to warn companies of “foreign disinformation” spread on their platforms—and the discussions just happened to coincide with the release of explosive materials found on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Chan is named as a co-defendant in Schmitt’s sweeping civil suit seeking to hold accountable government officials working behind-the-scenes with Big Tech to censor information considered hostile to the regime.

“Defendant Elvis M. Chan is Supervisory Special Agent of Squad in the San Francisco Division of the FBI.” Schmitt wrote in a recent filing. “On information and belief, he has authority over cybersecurity issues for FBI in that geographical region, which includes the headquarters of major social-media platforms, and he plays a critical role for FBI—in coordinating with social-media platforms relating to censorship and suppression of speech on their platforms. Meta [Facebook’s parent company] has identified Elvis Chan as involved in the communications between the FBI and Meta that led to Facebook’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story.”

Chan, for his part, publicly brags about his influence in Silicon Valley, boasting how he “was very involved in helping to protect the U.S. elections in 2020” by communicating “on a weekly basis” with Big Tech titans “That’s where the FBI and the U.S. government can actually help companies,” Chan said during a June 2022 podcast interview.

In other words, Chan is the power couple’s hand holder. (The Department of Justice is fighting a court order for Chan’s deposition on the grounds his involvement in the Hunter Biden laptop suppression effort was misrepresented.) And there is no indication the partnership will end anytime soon. Social media platforms continue to collaborate with the FBI to excavate incriminating evidence from the deleted accounts of January 6 defendants; Facebook is collecting private messages between users expressing “anti-government” or “anti-authority” sentiment—read: conservatives—and turning over those texts to the FBI without a subpoena. 

The Intercept reported Monday that the FBI and Department of Homeland Security plan to accelerate its joint effort to censor “misinformation” spread online. Targeted topics include posts critical of COVID vaccines, the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, and support for Ukraine. FBI counterrorism agents are being “reassigned” from critical surveillance of potential threats overseas to spy on American citizens. 

“They work on an undercover basis online to penetrate social networking chat rooms, online forums, and blogs to detect, enter, dismantle, and disrupt existing and emerging terrorist organizations via online forums, chat rooms, bulletin boards, blogs, websites, and social networking,” one anonymous FBI agents told The Intercept.

There are other problems at the San Francisco FBI office. In early October, a California jury convicted a former FBI special agent for accepting at least $150,000 in cash and gifts on behalf of a corrupt Armenian businessman with ties to organized crime. Babak Broumand was the head of national security investigations at the San Francisco FBI field office at the time of his arrest in 2018. According to the indictment, “Broumand accepted cash, checks, private jet flights, a Ducati motorcycle, hotel stays, escorts, meals, and other items of value from an organized crime-linked lawyer.”

He was found guilty of four counts including bribery of a public official; Broumand will be sentenced in January and faces up to 45 years in prison.

Which could explain why FBI Director Christopher Wray quietly replaced the head of the San Francisco field office in September. Robert Tripp was just moved from the bureau’s inspection division (the FBI’s version of internal affairs) in Washington to take over the San Francisco operation.

Late Monday afternoon, Tripp and Justice Department officials announced federal charges against the alleged attacker, David DePape, including the attempted kidnapping of Speaker Pelosi—a confusing charge, considering Pelosi wasn’t home and DePape clearly had no physical or mental capacity to do so. It appears more than anything to be political narrative-building by Biden’s Justice Department to bolster the idea that Trump and Republicans inspired another “kidnapping” attempt. The complaint, signed by a special agent assigned to domestic terror investigations in the San Francisco FBI office, also offers a conflicting account as to what happened when officers arrived and an incomplete timeline of events.

Given the highly partisan nature of the FBI, and the San Francisco field office in particular, there is no reason to believe FBI brass will do anything more than run cover for the Pelosis and conceal any damaging or contradictory facts about the confrontation. Prayers for Paul Pelosi are in order as he remains hospitalized for his injuries—a full investigation free from political interference also is in order. It’s unlikely, however, the FBI will proceed accordingly.

When Corrupt Media Bother To Talk About The Border Crisis At All, They Go Full Pinocchio

The media have not only largely ignored the border crisis 

but have actively deceived Americans about how bad it is.

Mark Morgan reporting for The Federalist

Since Joe Biden’s first days in office, there has been an existential crisis raging at our country’s southern border.

This crisis is apparent to anyone willing to remove their political blinders and observe the reality on the ground. Sadly, though, most of the political establishment in Washington, the coastal elites in their gated communities, and the open-borders bureaucracy have shown they are unwilling to do just that. They would, however, prefer to remain ignorant. As would the corporate media.

Some journalists have done exemplary work covering the border crisis for months — Bill Melugin and Griff Jenkins of Fox News, Townhall’s Julio Rosas, Jennie Taer of The Daily Caller, NewsNation’s Ali Bradley, and Newsmax’s Jaeson Jones all come to mind.

But for the most part, the media have not only largely ignored the border crisis but have actively participated in the Democrats’ campaign to mislead and deceive Americans about the scope, scale, and causes of the crisis. 

I experienced this deception firsthand last week. The Heritage Foundation, where I serve as a visiting fellow, was contacted by two reporters from The Arizona Republic — Rafael Carranza and Daniel Gonzalez — who wanted to speak with someone about the number of illegal aliens who have entered the United States since Biden took office. I agreed to the interview, and despite encountering fierce resistance to the case I made, I laid out in great detail the facts about the number and quality of people who have entered this country under Biden.

In the end, The Arizona Republic published a piece that actively misleads its readers. Carranza, whose name appeared on the byline, failed to accurately report the number of individuals who have improperly entered the country, under-counting the correct number by more than half a million.

Even more egregiously, he failed to mention the massive number of got-aways who have illegally crossed into our country and never get apprehended by Border Patrol.

Known got-aways, or those whom Border Patrol know come across the border because they’re caught on cameras, sensors, or even seen by agents, have totaled more than 1 million since Biden assumed office. And that number continues to grow as more and more agents are pulled off the frontline.

Border Patrol also knows that every month, a certain number of illegal aliens slip across the border and are not further tracked. As someone who used to oversee the Border Patrol, I can tell you this number can be up to twice as many as the known got-aways. This means there is very likely another 1-2 million unaccounted-for illegal migrants who could have easily entered the country under the Biden administration. 

Carranza included none of these figures and omitted others I gave. In doing so, he reported a conclusion about the number of improper border crossings that was inaccurate and misleading. The rest of his piece contained further attempts to downplay the border crisis and make excuses for why it’s occurring. 

He even went so far as to blame the historic number of apprehensions of illegal aliens on recurring arrests of repeat offenders. But because of how Border Patrol records repeat offenders, this simply can’t be the case. More importantly, whether it’s a first-time offender or someone crossing for the 10th time, that individual consumes the time and resources of Border Patrol agents and prevents them from maintaining guard.

Incidents like this demonstrate why trust in corporate media is hitting an all-time low. Instead of reporting the facts and letting Americans make up their own minds, activists withhold vital information that would provide more context and clarity to stories that affect the daily lives of the American people.

Most of the time, these outlets are content to simply ignore the crisis, pretending it doesn’t exist. But when they weigh in, they either miss the truth or willfully mislead the public.

A recent Los Angeles Times op-ed asserted, “There is no question that there is a crisis at the border. … But it is a humanitarian crisis exacerbated by political posturing, not one caused by an uncontrolled border.” A columnist for the Arizona Daily Star wrote about the “five ways you can tell today’s border panic is trumped up.” And without a hint of irony, in August 2021, a CNN fact-check concluded, “While migrants continue to arrive at the US-Mexico border in record numbers, it’s false to claim that the border is ‘open.’”

Reporters may disagree with the vast majority of Americans who support securing our borders and enforcing the law, but they cross the line when they lie about the dire reality we’re facing.

Latest 'Liberal' Move Against Elon May Just Be Funniest and Dumbest Thing Yet

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Elon Musk is already bringing some changes to Twitter including asking questions about the Paul Pelosi case and challenging Hillary Clinton’s lies. He’s also cleaning house — firing the dead wood at the top as well as cutting some of the other employees. digging into conservative complaints about shadow banning and censorship.

The meltdown by the left has been sweet, with folks like Jimmy Kimmel losing his mind and calling Musk “a well-formed piece of sh*t.”

What are they upset about? Musk hasn’t promised to ban people or toss them off the site. Quite the opposite. His crime? He wants free speech and he’s shown he’s willing to hang in there against the odds to try to achieve it, despite all the slings and arrows being shot against him by the left. He wants to have Twitter be a platform and not an arbiter of a narrative to push out. The left is upset that they no longer have complete control of the narrative, and that’s their issue.

But I’d have to say the reaction of Sirius XM host Dean Obeidallah has to be right up there at the top of the delicious and dumb responses.

Elon tweeted messages he’d found so far. He alleged Twitter hid some things from him and the court during their legal battle over how many bots there were on the site.

Obeidallah responded that he was going to make a FOIA request for Musk’s application for U.S. citizenship and said if he lied anywhere on the application, “we will move to strip him of US citizenship.”

Now they can’t get the records unless he gives permission. Obeidallah knows this and figures that Elon wouldn’t give that permission. So then he can scream, “What is he hiding?” It’s an effort to do a “Harry Reid” move, as Reid did against Mitt Romney, claiming Romney hadn’t paid his taxes.

How desperate are you when you resort to nonsensical things like this?

These are the “liberal” people who are so intolerant that someone might disagree with them that they want to shut him up and boot him out of the country. Again, this is how they respond to the possibility of free speech. So can we talk about how anti-immigrant and fascist that truly is?

Obeidallah also got called out by a former FOIA officer.

What makes it funnier is that this guy was promoting nonsense about the GOP wanting to “ban” things, yet he’s effectively advocating for trying to “ban” Elon from the country because he disagrees with him.

So who are the real fascists here?

Where's Joe? Biden Avoids Battleground States With One Week to Go Before Midterms

Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

You’d think that a sitting president would visit key states before a midterm election, but deeply unpopular Joe Biden is avoiding battleground states like Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada even as he claims this election is “one of the most important… in our lifetime.” Key congressional and gubernatorial races will be decided on election day, November 8, but Biden is staying away, according to the Wall Street Journal:

Of the 14 states with some of the most competitive Senate and governor races, based on ratings from the Cook Political Report, Mr. Biden has visited six since Sept. 1. He hasn’t been to Arizona, Nevada or Georgia, three states with high-profile midterm races that also helped put him in the White House.

He’s probably smart to stay away, given that polls show over half of Americans don’t approve of his job performance. After the debacle in Afghanistan, inflation, insane gas prices, and the border crisis, there’s not a lot for him to brag about. Also, as we’ve reported, some candidates like  Georgia gubernatorial hopeful Stacey Abrams and Senate candidate (and current Ohio representative) Tim Ryan are keeping their distance from him, hoping his stench of failure won’t rub off. Some strategists now claim that Biden is a “drag” on Democratic midterm hopes and that he will be the “fall guy” if things don’t go their way.

The Journal elaborates:

As some Democratic candidates keep their distance, he is focusing on official events to promote his agenda, policy speeches at the White House and fundraisers. The approach differs from that of former presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama, who both campaigned more during the first midterm election after they took the White House, but their parties still faced heavy losses.

Says Democratic strategist Chris Kofinis:

The problem this cycle, in terms of where we are today and where we are headed, is that it’s not clear what is safe anymore. I’m not surprised he’s not going to Arizona or Nevada. The question is—is he helping or hurting in Pennsylvania or New York? That part is not clear. I don’t see many candidates clamoring for him to come.

Time to trot out the savior: Barack Obama! The former president campaigned in Michigan and Wisconsin over the weekend and will visit Arizona and Nevada next. In other words, all the places where Biden is basically persona non grata. Not everyone thinks Obama can save the day, however:

DailyMail reports that Biden’s campaign schedule is unusually light compared to his predecessors:

Looking at Barack Obama’s schedule for October 2010, before his first midterm election, the then-president made 22 campaign-related trips.

Biden, in comparison, has made eight campaign-related trips in October 2022, according to an analysis of presidential travel by DailyMail.com.

It’s a sign of just how far Biden’s status has fallen since his inauguration. Two years ago he supposedly received over 80 million votes; today he has even losing candidates shunning him. He has done such an awful job as president that his presence is seen by many as an embarrassment.

He’s mainly been relegated to shoring up deep blue areas. Stumping for Kathy Hochul in New York’s gubernatorial race, which at one point had challenger Lee Zeldin down by 25 points, is hardly a sign of confidence in Democrat prospects. He also attempted to prop up Pennsylvania Senate candidate John Fetterman, an event that unsurprisingly turned out poorly.

I don’t think even Barack can save him, and I’m predicting a red tsunami. An impotent Biden will realize he has no chance in 2024 and will announce he is not running. The race to be the next Democrat presidential nominee will begin in full force.

I’m betting on it. Because the alternative isn’t pretty for the US of A.

Leftist Writing for The Atlantic Wants to Let Bygones be Bygones: “Pandemic Amnesty” – Sorry, Not Happening

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

Brown University Professor Emily Oster, writing for The Atlantic wants to heal divisions created during the COVID-19 pandemic, let bygones be bygones and accept a pandemic amnesty; now that the nonsense covid positions of the professional left are shown to have been built upon lies, falsehoods and social manipulation….

{Read Article Here}

…. Sorry, not happening.

The professional political leftists are starting to rebrand themselves as having fallen victim to the “bureaucracy of COVID”, and according to those high-minded people who think very highly of themselves, we are supposed to embrace this new enlightenment from the same people who were demanding our acquiescence to their dictates and sneering at those who did not comply.

This example of “THE AWAKENING” from Brown University Professor Emily Oster is supposed to be something I am told to appreciate.  Fat chance.

I/We are expected to appreciate the same people who demanded our acquiescence to every policy that was created by their ridiculous fear, simply because they now admit ‘oops, my bad‘?   Sorry, not happening.

For two years they shoved their intolerant fingers in our faces, destroyed lives and livelihoods, made ridiculous demands in order to sustain their own fear, threatened our children, destroyed the economy, used COVID as an excuse to destroy families and steal an election, attempted to force us to kneel at the altar of their mask wearing and never-ending vaccine crap, took our jobs if we refused their mandates… and we’re just supposed to what, forgive them?

I want, heck, need, to see these people destroyed with the heat of a thousand supernovas.

The vulgar lies and verbal filth have been extreme for two years as these ideological parasites utilized their microphones and typeset in a brutal attempt to tear down our nation.   We have all been witness.  Anyone trying to convince us this assembly of our union is not tenuous might want to revisit their proximity to reason, because they’re not just out of the city – they’re also out of the same state the ballpark is located in.

David Mamet had a famous saying, I repeat it often because it helps people break the cycle of abuse.   Essentially: …‘in order for democrats, liberals, progressives et al to continue their illogical belief systems they have to pretend not to know a lot of things’…

By pretending ‘not to know’, the professional left carries no guilt, no actual connection to conscience.  Denial of truth allows easier trespass, and that is exactly what Professor Emily Oster is attempting in that article.

This hate-filled Democrat, leftist and social ideology relies on our willingness to reconcile their presentations and grant benefit within their seeds of doubt.

Sorry, forgiveness is for the next generation…. 

We need to destroy those who carried out this abuse.

Our parents were forced to die alone in isolation while we were forbidden from holding their hand or being with them.

Thousands never had the opportunity to say goodbye.

We know exactly what the covenant of marriage is all about; and it has nothing to do with being forced to stand outside hospitals, screaming in unbearable choking anguish, while our wives and husbands took their last breaths…. ALONE!

You want forgiveness for that?

I do not possess that capacity.

I refuse to give any “coming to the right side” credit to the vile, intolerant, hate-filled and insane leftists who demanded all the totalitarian bulls**t they now accept as futile nonsense. Professor Oster et al should be shunned, mocked and cast into the pit of irrelevance.

Additionally, the high-minded, reach-across-the-aisle crew can continue bleating philosophically about how we must grow our ranks by accepting the newly found recalcitrance of those who have carried out this nonsense.  However, the constant granting of benefit to those who abuse us is the epitome of battered conservative syndrome.

You cull a herd for a reason.

You do not demand the herd lower its genetic strength to accommodate the weakest denominator.

Professional apologists for the right wing of the UniParty can keep trying to make the big government vulture a better sandwich in the hopes that eventually it will stop abusing us.  Meanwhile, prudent people, those slow to anger but resolute upon arrival, accept the leftists and Democrats for who they are, toxic abusers’ intent on destroying the liberty and freedom the aisle-reachers claim to cherish.

The professional political left would like nothing more than their victims to be comfortable forgiving them for their openly hostile attacks. Within that dynamic, the abuser is free to repeat the cycle, and make no mistake – they will repeat the cycle, eventually.

Actions have consequences.  We are not fast to the sentiment of hate; we know the damage that sensibility can create within oneself.  However, eventually, reluctantly, decisions are reached.

Those who perpetrated two years of hell need to be held to account, and unfortunately, this type of accountability is so severe in consequence there can be no quarter provided or terms which might provide even the most remote possibility of a reoccurrence.

It is uncomfortable to accept that our response needs to be of such severity that our children will be witness to a visible anger they did not know their parents were capable of.  But witness they must if we are to ensure these vile and intolerant leftist creatures are destroyed forever.

I would rather provide the opportunity for my children to forgive me, than to see them forever living in a hopeless land of totalitarianism where freedom and liberty have been dispatched from their lives.  At least in the former their choice is possible.

The professional political left must be destroyed with extreme prejudice.

A shield, or cry of micro-aggression should be given no benefit, nor quarter. Delicate sensibilities must be dispatched like a feather in a hurricane.

Americans are still tolerant and patient people, the most compassionate and generous people in the history of all mankind, but we are also very purposeful.

The professional political left could have stopped with us, but they did not.  Instead, they came for our children.

You see Ms. Oster, when pushed far enough, hard decisions are reached…

…And they have pushed us much further than simply ‘far enough‘.