The Ultimate Duping of America

A recent CNN interview failed to reveal the truth about Harris and instead we were treated to another round of lies and evasion.

by Ed Brodow for American Greatness

I shouldn’t be surprised when I witness the duping of the American public. Madison Avenue does it every day, so it is not unusual. But seeing now as it plays out in the presidential election is making me ill.

Up until a month ago, Kamala Harris was the butt of incessant jokes. Her word salad and cackling made her into a public fool. An NBC News poll last June found her to be the single least popular vice president in American history—only 32% of Americans had a positive view of her. Then the unthinkable occurred. Harris became the Democrat nominee for president, and the Democrat-controlled media set out to rehabilitate her. In the blink of an eye, she became the reincarnation of Lincoln. Will the voting public buy it?

I have said it before, and I will say it again. No one in his right mind should support Harris. She is, to borrow from a Wall Street Journal editorial, an insult to American voters. Oddly enough, her public fool persona is not the worst thing about Harris. Her personal attributes are eclipsed by her extreme leftist views. “She is farther left than 97 percent of the Democrats,” said Mark Levin, “the most extreme radical politician ever to run for high office in the United States of America.”

Make no mistake, she was chosen because she is a stooge for the left. Harris has no ideological grounding. She will do as she is told. Regardless of the meaningless answers she gives in response to questions, she can be relied upon to fulfill what Obama started 16 years ago. Her policies, fed to her by her Marxist handlers, will transform the nation into a replica of Venezuela.

What Harris conveniently leaves out is the Marxist platform she serves: how she intends to destroy the country with price controls, a war on fossil fuels, a 25 percent tax on unrealized gains, higher corporate tax rates, and a forever open border. By avoiding interviews and press conferences, she has cleverly kept the real Kamala Harris under wraps.

Ah, but on August 29, Harris deigned to give a faux interview to another mental midget, Dana Bash of CNN. As Sky News in Australia was quick to point out, this was not a real interview. It was a promotional piece worthy of the best Madison Avenue has to offer. Instead of revealing the truth about Harris, we were treated to another round of lies and evasion.

We waited for this interview with bated breath. Harris had been under pressure to explain her policy positions. Instead, we got idiotic questions such as, “Tell us about when Joe called you.” Barf. When Bash got around to asking Harris why she has flip-flopped on many of her positions, Harris neglected to answer the question. Instead, Harris offered one of her word salads about “my values haven’t changed.”

Apparently nothing has changed. She has stated her values over and over: open borders, disband ICE, defund the police, Green New Deal, throw Israel under the bus, stop bail for criminals, raise taxes on corporations, stop fracking, and censor political opponents.

When asked why she hasn’t taken action to fix the economy, Harris said, “I’ve already laid out a number of proposals to bring down the cost of everyday goods.” We were hoping to hear what they were, but no such luck.

Asked to describe her day-one objectives should she win the election, Harris did not list any specific steps. “One of my highest priorities,” she said, “is to do what we can to support and strengthen the middle class.” How? She wouldn’t say.

Will Harris stop the avalanche of illegal border crossings that have characterized the Biden/Harris presidency? Harris sidestepped the issue by stating that she prosecuted criminals in the past. She has no intention of closing the border. Instead, she blamed Trump. “Trump killed my border bill.” A terrible bill, by the way, which deserved to be killed.

If making changes is Harris’ priority, she could have been making them for the last three and a half years. She could be doing it during the next five months. She could be doing it now. What is stopping her? If she is incapable of doing it now, why should we think she could or would do it in 2025? Her interview provided no answers, only a continuation of the duping of America.

X22, On the Fringe, and more- September 3rd

 

Daddy Government Is Afraid of His Rebellious Children

posted by J.B. Shurk at American Thinker 

Negotiation is the art of getting an opponent to advocate for your position.  You want one thousand dollars for an old car.  You ask for two.  The buyer works you down to one, and you shake on the “deal.”  

Parents employ similar skills.  A toddler who is unhappy about being put in the stroller might be given a choice: we can either go to the park or take a nap.  Cries often disappear when the alternative to play is less fun.  Of course, children quickly learn this game, too.  Some will double-down on crying until mom throws up her hands and offers to renegotiate: and we can stop for ice cream on the way!  Teenagers realize that either-or offers invite workarounds.  “Do your homework or you’re grounded” succeeds as a negotiating position only if Junior can’t climb out the window after dark.  

From an early age, we grasp that successful negotiations take advantage of (1) asymmetric information and (2) asymmetric authority.  Individuals who know more than their opponents and who are capable of restricting the range of available outcomes to any dispute are likely to get what they want.

Governments use such asymmetries to maintain control.  By knowing more than the public and by exercising complete authority over what is permissible, their bargaining power far exceeds that of the lowly citizen.  In the United States, the Department of Justice maintains an almost perfect conviction rate.  Is that because prosecutors pursue only the guilty?  Or is it because lone defendants are up against federal law enforcement agencies with huge bureaucratic workforces and immense investigatory resources?  When the “United States of America” is a party to any case, the underdog sits on the other side.

Governments also relish playing parent.  Before their deaths, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and Hugo Chávez embraced the role of father to their respective nations.  Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping assume that role today.  Even in so-called “democratic” countries, it is common to treat the heads of government as family patriarchs (or the matriarch, as was the case with the late Queen Elizabeth II).  Right now in America, the Democrat Party is doing its best to brand vice presidential nominee Tim Walz, “America’s Dad.”  Dictatorships, monarchies, and constitutional republics, it seems, all love to turn their rulers into daddy and mommy figures.

Why wouldn’t they?  There is a great deal of perceived authority and omniscience ascribed to parents.  Who else could get away with answering, “Why should I do that?” with this one-two punch: because I’m your mother, and I said so.  That’s the kind of power that governments adore.  How come we have to change our doctors and embrace socialized medicine?  Barack: because I said so.  Why can’t we talk about mail-in-ballot fraud and stolen elections?  Pelosi’s J6 committee: because we said so.  Why can’t we exercise free speech and engage in vigorous debate?  Disinformation Governance Board: because we said so.  Why can’t we enforce existing immigration law and secure America’s borders?  D.C.’s Uniparty and corporate paymasters: because we said so.  Why should we elect an unlikable and incompetent politician just because she’s a woman?  Hillary and Kamala: because we said so.  No wonder governments use a combination of regulatory sticks and welfare carrots to punish and reward their children.  Nobody dares to question Daddy Government when he scowls across the kitchen table and threatens to throw the misbehaving public over his lap!

Does this seem absurd?  I certainly think so!  I find it bizarre that so many adults are comfortable with others telling them what they can and cannot do.  I don’t need Facebook and Google to censor words because they might be “scary.”  I don’t need the Department of Homeland Security to “save me” from foreign points of view.  I don’t need self-described “public health experts” to filter knowledge based upon an article’s likelihood to “harm” my thoughts.  I don’t need some bureaucratic “parent” questioning my reasoning skills or decisions.  Adulthood requires some semblance of personal responsibility and a willingness to utilize the organ resting between one’s ears.  Human equality requires the exact same things.  It is no surprise, then, that governments of all stripes work so hard to infantilize their citizens.  When Daddy Government “knows best,” obedient children behave.  No civic or political equality survives government paternalism.

As a negotiating strategy, however, government paternalism is highly effective.  Should a citizen question why we must rush into war, the NSA, CIA, or Pentagon can simply say, “That’s classified.”  If anyone asks why we must take an experimental “vaccine” with unproven effectiveness, the CDC and FDA can answer, “We’re working at the speed of science.”  If someone wonders why it’s okay for the government to ban certain political viewpoints, public censors can explain, “We’re experts in disinformation.”  Like any good negotiator, the more that government actors depend upon (1) secret knowledge and (2) special authority, the easier it is for them to get what they want.  Daddy Government is such a good negotiator that he can get peaceniks to cheer for war, medical doctors to wear six useless paper masks, and free speech enthusiasts to warn against the dangers of unregulated speech!

How does Daddy Government negotiate so well?  He’s a “nudger” really.  He always has been.  He asks, “Don’t you care about freedom and the American flag?”  And answers, “If so, you’ll agree to fight and die overseas.”  He will never suggest, however, that you fight and die for freedom right here!  He tells us every problem has a government solution.  Too much interstate crime?  That’s why we need the FBI!  Too much economic uncertainty?  That’s why we need the Federal Reserve!  Too many evil regimes plotting our demise?  That’s why we need the CIA!  Too many domestic enemies in our midst?  That’s why we need the NSA to spy on everything we say!  

Daddy Government succeeds when his children are conditioned to root for bigger and more intrusive government.  After all, negotiation is the art of getting an adversary to convince you that your opinion is right!  When more government is the only answer to any perceived problem, who wins the negotiation?  Daddy Government!  That’s why he’s a master negotiator!

When we speak about a “Great Awakening” happening in America and throughout the West, what we are talking about is a growing public recognition among citizens that their governments have long been “negotiating” in bad faith.  Censorship is not free speech.  Mandatory vaccination is not healthcare.  Energy cartels, fiat currencies, central banks, overseas slave labor, and heavily regulated domestic economies do not constitute free markets.  Endless war does not produce endless peace.  Governments that have long “nudged” us into believing such lies are being broadly exposed.  You take thirty years of a relatively open Internet, combine it with enlightened public conversations that transcend national boundaries, add a handful of technologies that provide workarounds to mass surveillance, mix in a few revelations from the likes of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, and what do you get?  You get a large number of citizens who realize that they are in an abusive relationship with their government.  

Americans who once believed that tyranny could not happen here now know better.  Western Europeans who believed that totalitarianism had been beaten know better, too.  This change in social consciousness is why governments have swapped their “nudge patrols” for authoritarian armies that push and shove.  Government coercion and violence are on the rise because Westerners see through the rigged “negotiations” of their fake “democracies.”  It’s why Germany disenfranchises conservatives, France arrests the CEOs of free speech platforms, Brazil bans Elon Musk’s X, the UK treats “anti-Establishment rhetoric” as a crime, and the United States persecutes J6 political prisoners.  

Daddy Government is afraid because his “children” are done negotiating.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Can RFK Jr.’s Anti-Establishment Coalition Help Swing The Election For Trump?

Pollsters and corporate media aren’t attuned to the disaffected, hidden voting blocks bound together only by their common hatred of the establishment.

posted by Brian Robertson at The Federalist

The consensus that emerged among pollsters and pundits across the political spectrum after RFK Jr.’s shock endorsement of Donald Trump was that it would have little effect on the outcome. But does that consensus reflect the same groupthink that missed the Trump surprise in 2016?

The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal warned that while Kennedy’s backing could possibly help Trump marginally in battleground states, “the price could be high if it includes putting Mr. Kennedy in a second Trump Administration,” concluding that “Mr. Trump’s best response is to thank RFK Jr. for his support, make no promises about the future, and by all means avoid joint campaign appearances” to avoid the taint of association with his fringe positions.

ABC News’ 538 polling site assured readers that “our analysis of the polling data suggests Kennedy’s endorsement of Trump will have a minimal impact on the race. Kennedy, who has consistently polled around 5 percent since Vice President Kamala Harris became the presumptive nominee, was drawing roughly equally from both Trump and Harris … [T]he effect of his departure on overall support for either candidate will be small.”

The New York Times’ analysis of the move asserts that the endorsement “is unlikely to change the nature of the race … in part because it is hard to know how many of Mr. Kennedy’s supporters will vote in November. They are less likely than others to have voted in 2020, and are also less likely to say they will vote come November.”

What these static, conventional assessments miss is the very dynamic that stunned the political world in 2016 when Trump outperformed polling averages by unprecedented margins to win a victory that virtually no one in the establishment saw coming: The activation of the disaffected, hidden voting blocks bound together only by their common hatred of that establishment.

Kennedy’s supporters number far more than the 5 percent of the electorate reflected in recent polling after the major party establishments and corporate media marginalized his campaign. Polls taken before he was frozen out of the presidential debate (despite exceeding the established criteria) showed nearly a quarter of the electorate supporting his candidacy, with even stronger levels of support among younger voters. Thirty-two years ago, Ross Perot won 19 percent of the vote in the general election on the strength of his debate performances; it was a foregone conclusion that RFK Jr.’s support would inevitably melt away without access to the only platform that bestows legitimacy in the eyes of most voters. 

The truth is, few in Kennedy’s coalition of anti-war, medical freedom, and free-speech advocates against the D.C. power structure would have felt highly motivated to turn out for either of the major party alternatives if RFK Jr. had simply withdrawn from the race. The fact that Kennedy not only endorsed Trump but indicated that he would likely be taking a role in policy and personnel decisions in another Trump administration gives his supporters the opportunity to cast a vote for his agenda rather than for Donald Trump, about whom they are unenthusiastic at best. With Kennedy actively campaigning for Trump and making the case that a Harris-Walz administration would be catastrophic on every issue they care about means it is highly likely they will turn out for Bobby rather than stay at home, even if they are too embarrassed to tell pollsters or acquaintances that they are voting for Orange Man Bad.

Each part of this coalition — those opposing the foreign policy control of the military-industrial complex, those concerned about the chronic health epidemic, those gravely troubled by the continuing assaults on free speech — is highly informed and highly motivated on their issues. Most of them feel they have no voice in the current system and no leverage in the current power structure. RFK Jr. may have just changed that calculus.

Some of the more perceptive pollsters acknowledged after their historic miss in 2016 that they simply weren’t picking up on the hidden voters, the anti-establishment Bernie Bros and right-wing hippies who saw a vote for Trump as their opportunity to give a giant middle finger to the establishment that had left them and the issues they cared about behind. Many of them were mightily disillusioned by Trump’s inability to drain the swamp in his first term. That coalition, the least likely of all to show up in polling data, has once again been activated.

Left-Wing German Coalition Government Stunned by Nationalist Wins in Eastern Germany

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

We have often said the American people are in an abusive relationship with our government; meaning the priorities and important policies of the majority of Americans (specifically immigration, economic nationalism, Ukraine spending, and the core elements that have created the Trump/RFK Jr coalition), are not represented in the legislative outcomes of a UniParty congress.

In essence, the USA government, both parties, are deaf to the voices of American citizens.  This is stunningly visible around the issue of congress using U.S taxpayer funds to support the Ukraine government and the Ukraine budget.

However, this is not just an American problem.  We can see the same disconnect in Canada, Australia, the U.K. and parts of the EU including France and more recently, Germany.

In the Eastern German elections held Sunday, the AfD party (Alternate for Deutschland) won resounding victories.  Essentially, the center-left party and the UniParty coalition, was disregarded. The election was won by pragmatic nationalists on the key issues of immigration, the economy and Ukraine policy.

(Wall Street Journal) […] Projections by public broadcaster ZDF showed the AfD getting around 33.4% of the votes in Thuringia and 31.4% in Saxony, with Scholz’s center-left SPD scoring under 8% in both states, with its two coalition partners trailing it. (more)

In response there is an almost laughable reactive article in Politico, where they push the same favored MSM narrative of “far right, Nazis, surging again just like 1945,” etc. etc. blah, blah, blah.  Laughably, they use language like, “The far-right Alternative for Germany just keeps rising despite efforts to stop it.”…  I mean, seriously; have you ever seen a more perfect encapsulation of the disconnect.

In order for the professional political leftists to continue what they do best, which is to destroy everything, they must pretend not to know things.  In this example the entire media ecosphere pretends not to know that what they are seeing happen in all of these elections is a reaction to globalism being pushed by the governing body, while the citizens are against it.

In the USA you might say, Donald Trump is not the cause of the Republican party problems, he is our direct response to it.   In Germany you can say the rise of the AfD is not the cause of the government problem, it is the citizens response to the problem they have with government.

BERLIN — Germany’s far right is here — and it’s here to stay.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) on Sunday scored a stunning win in an eastern German state election, amid rising voter discontent at Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s center-left national government.

The AfD’s victory in Thuringia and strong second place in Saxony has prompted a new round of soul searching in Berlin, a year out from national elections which could see EU powerhouse Germany tilt to the right.

“Our country cannot and must not get used to this,” Scholz told Reuters after the results came in. “The AfD is damaging Germany. It is weakening the economy, dividing society and ruining our country’s reputation.”

In Thuringia, the AfD — which has been classified as extremist in some German states — gained a clear victory with nearly 33 percent of the vote. In the more populous state of Saxony, the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) eked out a victory with around 32 percent of the vote, with the AfD trailing close behind.

[…] Germany’s mainstream leaders have made a concerted effort to stop the rise of the AfD by warning voters of the party’s growing extremism, with some leaders even calling it a Nazi party.

State-level domestic intelligence authorities have classified the local branches of the party in both Saxony and Thuringia as extremist organizations aiming to undermine German democracy. Earlier this year, Saskia Esken, the co-chief of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), came out in favor of discussing a ban of the AfD — if only, as she put it, to “shake voters” out of their complacency. (read more)

You can just as easily replace “German far-right” with the USA version of “MAGA Republicans” and get the exact same scenario.

Both the AfD in Germany and the MAGA movement in the USA labeled as “domestic extremists” simply for wanting controls of immigration policy, sensible energy policy and a stopping of the insufferable war effort in Ukraine.

Apparently, the German government is shocked, SHOCKED, and didn’t see this coming.   Yet, again, western media play along and pretend not to know things….

Biden Goes Full-On Incoherent in Pittsburgh, What He Says About Kamala Is Incredible

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Joe Biden is back before the cameras. 

In some ways, it would be better if he stayed on vacation, as he may do less damage then when he's actually before the cameras and talking. How wrong it is that the Democrats have put us in that position with him, by not being honest about his condition. Kamala Harris is chief among those who has not been honest with the American people about Biden's issues. 

After making bizarre comments before and after a meeting in the Situation Room about the situation in Israel, Biden went with Harris to Pittsburgh for a campaign event with union people. 

I'm not sure if they understand that every time she appears with him, it just emphasizes that she's responsible for all his failures as well. And it also emphasizes that she had to know about his cognitive issues, which were once again on display when he spoke. 

Does he even know what he is saying anymore? 

I think he meant "greatest manufacturing country" but he couldn't even figure out how to say it, that's how far gone he was. 

He was barely intelligible here as he screamed out union people's names. 

He seemed to forget for a moment that he wasn't a candidate, he had to correct himself. 

Of course couldn't do an event without a bunch of lies. He lied about creating "16 million new jobs."

He contradicted what his account just said on Sunday about 10 million of those being "recovered" from the pandemic -- meaning they weren't new jobs and he didn't do a darn thing to create any jobs. 

He can't even keep the lies straight anymore. 

Then this might be one of my favorites in terms of the level of the delusion as he mocked people who said he was going to tank the economy and drive interest rates up. 

Um, Joe? Have you looked at the economy lately? People can't buy homes because of how much you have driven the interest rates up.  

He told a bizarre story about his great-grandfather being accused of being a "Molly Maguire," a group of people he defined as being murderers, and he joked that he was "so disappointed." 

Watch Kamala as he goes on and on, check her face, you know she's saying inside, "Oh, no." 

Biden tripped all over his words saying that the "best decision he ever made" in the position was to nominate Harris. 

If that's the "best decision," you know how bad his decisions have been.  

But I don't think there's any question about what the worst thing, the most offensive thing he said was. It was pretty incredible and he should have known better, as an alleged Catholic. He claimed that Kamala had the "backbone of a ramrod" and the "moral compass of a saint." 

Um, can we talk about how she rose to power and all the lies that she's told now that she has been in power? It's insulting to saints to make such a comment and truly how dare he? There are few people less saintly. And if she had a "moral compass of a saint," I doubt she would have attached herself to Biden, all the failed policies that she's embraced, and the radical agenda she's touted in the past. 

I Was A California Prosecutor For 24 Years. Kamala Harris’ ‘Tough On Crime’ Schtick Is A Sham

Harris wants to continue on her “progressive” path and forget about enforcing the laws passed by a democratically elected legislature, while ignoring threats to public safety.

posted by Grover Trask at The Federalist

Harris’s 2024 sham campaign ads tout her as a “tough on crime” 20-year prosecutor in an attempt to hide her true colors.

I served for 24 years as the elected Riverside County district attorney (the fourth-largest DA’s office in California), with bipartisan support. Viewed from within the profession, Harris was a failed prosecutor, both as San Francisco DA and California attorney general. Harris’ record, social media posts, and own words reveal her as a far-left politician — not a fair-minded and tough, nonpartisan prosecutor. Her actions reveal more sympathy for criminals than for crime victims and law-abiding members of the public.

District attorneys should be nonpartisan, professional prosecutors seeking justice with integrity and ethics as their cornerstone. Their job is to protect public safety by enforcing the law and prosecuting criminals. To the contrary, as a “progressive” prosecutor, Harris refused to file a death-penalty case against a gang member who gunned down a young police officer; had numerous ethical lapses and constitutional violations, causing the dismissal of over 1,000 criminal drug cases; and disregarded victims’ requests for help dealing with Catholic clergy sexual abuse cases, failing to prosecute any related cases as DA or AG.

Far from following her oath to uphold the Constitution and to protect public safety, she has advocated for open borders, welcoming the inevitable criminal element of such policies into our cities and towns. She also supported defunding the police and removing ICE as an enforcement tool. Unbelievably, she continues to promote “no cash” bail, allowing serious and violent criminals back on the streets to re-offend.

Further, as AG, her misleading ballot description led to the passage of the hoax Proposition 47, ironically called the “The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act.” This law created a prison-to-homelessness pipeline that sent thousands of state prisoners back into local communities.

As a result, theft and drug abuse throughout California soared, causing significant harm to thousands of victims. The law enforcement community dubbed Prop 47 the “get out of jail free card.” Ten years later, there is no accountability for the victimization or jobs lost and businesses closed due to Prop 47 crime.

During the 2020 Minneapolis riots after George Floyd’s tragic death, rather than denouncing violence and standing up for law and order, Harris supported violent rioters who had been arrested and jailed. On social media, she urged followers to donate money to a nonprofit group to bail out the rioters, later stating, “They’re not going to let up. And they should not. And we should not.” The Minneapolis riots resulted in over 600 arrests, 160-plus cases of arson, including the burning of a police station, two riot-related deaths, and $500 million dollars of damage to homes and businesses. 

These are not the actions of a no-nonsense top law enforcement official, but the actions of a radical leftist politician who disregards the safety of the community for political purposes.

True to her leftist form, if elected president, Harris wants to “transform” and “reimagine” public safety. As stated in Harris’ book The Truths We Hold, she wants “to look out for the overlooked, to speak up for those whose voices aren’t being heard, to see and address the causes of crime, not just their consequences.”

In plain language, this means she wants to continue on her “progressive” path and forget about enforcing the laws passed by a democratically elected legislature, while ignoring threats to public safety. Voters need only look to San Francisco and Minneapolis to understand how Harris’ anti-law-and-order policies will impact the country.