My Reaction and Solutions to the Parkland High School Shooting

A teen gunman accused of opening fire with a semi-automatic rifle at his former high school in Parkland, Florida, has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder, officials said Thursday.

Authorities said the suspect, identified as 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, concealed himself in the crowd fleeing Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School following the massacre on Wednesday afternoon. He was arrested in nearby Coral Springs.

Fourteen others were wounded, five with life-threatening injuries, hospital officials said.

Here’s my personal reaction, as this particular blog post is very informal as I just wrote whatever came to mind, not that much editing and revision occurred after initially writing this. This is my raw reaction to the shooting and my solutions to the gun problem (where all of my ideas probably are not going to all be favored but some conservatives).


All right, so let’s walk through it. We’ve got this guy 19 year old Nikolas Cruz. He’s a ne’er-do-well. Why is he a ne’er-do-well? Well his father died. He’s adopted. His mother died. I mean this kid had it rough, so he was adopted. They moved to Florida. The adopters: Linda and Roger Kruse. All right. And then about 2005, Roger Kruse died of a heart attack. So no father in the home. And then last November the mother, Linda dies of pneumonia.

Now this seems to have set Nikolas off, the death of his mother. So therefore he had to then move around, the State didn’t know what to do with him, 19 years old. And he winds up living in a home of one of his friends, a classmate, and winds up going to school at Margory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County. The boy was expelled from the high school. But here’s what’s interesting, before that, before the expulsion, and it was for fighting we understand, he had done okay in an ROTC program. So it looks like once his mother died he went off the rails. That’s what it looks like now.

Now supposedly Nikolas Cruz gave off all kinds of signals all right after he was expelled. He went to some kind of what they call opportunity school. You get expelled from a public school, you go to another school for kids who are trouble. We don’t know what his status at that school was, but they tried to get him in there. He was working at a dollar store, but he was a troubled kid there’s no doubt about it. And he was acting out on social media postings under his name said, “I want to shoot people with an AR-15. I want to die fighting, killing.” “I am going to kill law enforcement one day, they go after the good people.” You know I mean there were a lot of flags on this kid and the FBI was told about him. We don’t really know the status of what happened after that, but the FBI indeed was told about him.

Now in Florida you can buy a rifle. (An AR-15 in this case A.R. stands for Armalite. It’s not assault rifle, it’s Armalite, it’s a semiautomatic. It takes 30 rounds but you can customize it to 100 rounds.) If you’re 18 years old in Florida, you can buy this weapon and you don’t need a license, training anything like that. If you buy from a licensed dealer, they’ll do a background check, but if you buy from somebody without a license they won’t. But Nikolas obtained the weapon legally. So he bought the rifle, he had the rifle, people knew he had the rifle. And then he had those flash grenades and things like that on him also. So the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (the ATF) will be investigating that. Florida has very liberal gun laws, in order to buy a pistol you have to be 21 but a rifle. Anybody can pick that up, if you’re over 18. Remember you can’t buy cigarettes unless you’re 21 so and you don’t have to register. You don’t have to register, you don’t really do anything. It’s a liberal state in that regard.

You know there’s some neo nazis saying that he was involved with them, we don’t know that, to be a fact, so the media outlets should stop reporting that. There are a lot of those rumors floating around.

So when the commentators got a hold of this story there was the usual hysteria and I want to give you some very interesting stats starting with Columbine.

The mass shooting in Colorado in 1999 to this day 227 people have been killed in fatal school shootings, 227. That’s a lot 23 of those elementary kids, that was in Connecticut. However, in 1999 there were 28,874 shooting deaths in America. 28,874 shooting deaths in 1999. In 2017; 15,590. That’s almost cut in half. So when the commentators tell you that “this is out of control” and that “guns are everywhere”, it’s not necessarily true (in this country anyway). These kinds of crimes, shooting crimes are going down.

Here’s the most startling fact of all. In 1999 there were 641,000 victims of gunshots wounds. Last year, 2017; 70,000 from 641,000 to 70,000. So authorities are making progress on solving this problem. No doubt about it. We are not becoming more violent as far as guns are concerned, we’re becoming less violent here in America. You’ll never hear that. You will never hear that in the national media.


Now here are my solutions, and some of them are going to be unpopular. But it is the most sensible thing to do in this situation. We cannot continue to let our schools get shot up.

Let me start with this. States are primarily responsible for gun laws, not the federal government. The Federal Government has to enforce the Constitution which is, we the people have a right to bear arms. That means you can’t ban all guns. We have a right to protect ourselves. But the individual states have a right to define how that’s carried out. And that’s the way it should be. There are different standards here in New York City than there would be for Alabama. You don’t want California law imposing itself on Texas or Florida. It’s a different mindset. The people in the states should have the right to regulate firearms for the public good, public safety the way they want to.

Number One: If I’m the governor of any state and I pass a law that says all public schools should have armed guards on campus. There was an armed guard at the school in Broward County. But for some reason we don’t know why the armed guard never caught up with the shooter though, we’ll find out why. I don’t want to demonize the man, but there was one armed guard present at this high school. But all schools, public schools in this country, need to have armed guards (NOT armed teachers, that WILL NOT solve the problem) on campus. And I’d say at least two or three you got to have, now in this day and age.

Number Two: There should be watch lists like you know the no-fly lists that the federal government has, they don’t let the terrorists on planes because they are afraid they’ll blow up the planes. They’ve got to have gun watch lists in each state. So if you’re expelled from school as this boy was, and we think it’s for fighting, you go on a watch list. If you’re involved in an altercation, even though you’re not charged, but it’s a violent altercation; you go on a watch list, in your state. And that list is published for any gun dealer, unlicensed or license. If your name is on that list, you don’t get a gun. Now you can get off the list. You can appeal it, I don’t think that’s a lifetime ban. But there has got to be watch lists of people who are demonstrating bizarre behavior, mental deficiencies. That’s what President Trump said today. Now he’s going to have a big summit meeting, the President is, to bring in everybody. I’ll tell you right now you’re expelled from school, you’re involved in a violent altercation, anything like that. You don’t have to be charged and convicted. You go on a watch list and you can appeal it. But the authorities got to know, who is more likely to commit a violent act like this Nikolas guy.

Number Three: Nobody can buy a gun, unless you’re 21 years old. I mean it just makes sense, give the maturation process a chance though. No way this kid should have been able to buy a semiautomatic rifle and nobody knew about it. 21. You’ve also got plenty of loons at 21, but you know public safety demands it and then the mental health guidelines in each state have got to be explicitly passed by the legislators.

The Sheriff of Broward County, Scott Israel, said “look we (as in the police) need the power when we get a report of a guy or gal is acting very strangely to go in and interview that person, so we can ascertain if the person is a danger to the neighborhood.” (Of course I was paraphrasing there.) Those laws have to be very, very well spelled out. Because if you look, if you go back to all of the shootings, every one of them. It’s always a strange kid, young person, trouble, everybody knew he was trouble. Well the police have got to be aware of that. This isn’t a fascist state is you you’ve got to have common sense, And the states have got to define it.


I think that’s reasonable. I think that what I put forth today it extremely reasonable and nothing to serious extreme.

Everyone knows why the kid did it. The kid didn’t have anybody. All right the school threw him out he was expelled. He didn’t have any friends and any parents, and anybody looking out for him. He just snapped and here he got a big gun, and thought to himself “I’m going to go out and I’m going to take a lot of people with me.”

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. We have to do something, what we have now isn’t working. We need reform.


Now, with any massacre involving gun violence, I always quote a quote from President Ronald Wilson Reagan (as the country should turn to Reagan quotes more often for advice and how to create solutions to problems). I’m going to end the blog post with Reagan’s quote (which can also be applied to AR-15s, assault rifles, and semiautomatic weapons) as we, as Americans (NOT as Republicans or Democrats, or as conservatives or liberals, but as AMERICANS),  need to figure out how to resolve this problem of mass shootings and need to figure out what is best for the safety of this great nation:

“I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for the defense of a home.”

Advertisements

GOP Announces Sweeping New Plan To Lose All Senate Seats By 2020 (Satire)

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Inspired by the near-impossible loss of an Alabama Senate seat to a liberal Democrat, the Republican Party Wednesday unveiled a sweeping new plan to lose all of its Senate seats within the next four years.

Laying the groundwork for the plan, the GOP will select a slate of horrible candidates they will support from the primaries all the way through the final tally, no matter what awful revelations about their past come to light.

“If we just continue picking and backing terrible candidates, we’ll be sure to hit our goal,” RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel said in an exclusive interview on Fox News. “We’ll stand by them all the way from the time they’re nominated through the moment we lose the Senate seat we could easily have won with any half-decent candidate.”

“This is the start of a big new relaunch for the GOP, in which we’ll alienate all of our constituents and lose all of our clout in absolutely no time at all,” she added.

According to inside sources, the Republicans have already floated several candidates to begin their devastating Senate loss campaign, with surefire losers like a resurrected zombie Adolf Hitler, former football star O.J. Simpson, and a half-eaten bag of pork rinds all getting full GOP support for Senate races in the coming years.


Disclaimer: The above story is satire. It is completely fictitious.

Feminist Lists 10 Questions Feminists Should Ask On A First Date…Allow Me To Answer Them

Thanks to the mainstream media’s love affair with modern feminism, I am constantly swamped with the chief social justice movement’s rhetoric, opinion, and asinine belief system. What should be a background group filled with insane ideas and beliefs is one that, given the choice, people would only look at when they need a laugh.

Take for instance the list of questions feminist Lara Witt came up with. Witt believes that in order to really like somebody, you first have to like their politics. Who they are as a person is not a factor, apparently.

In order to make sure that any good feminist can get close to anyone — if anyone is willing to undergo the labor of trying to get close to one — Witt came up with ten questions that must be asked of every date to make sure they’re a good “ally” in an article for the site Everyday Feminism titled “10 Things Every Intersectional Feminist Should Ask On a First Date.

“As a queer femme of color, I keep close relationships with people who go beyond allyship; they’re true accomplices in the fight against white supremacy, queerphobia, and misogyny,” wrote Witt. “If you’re not going to support marginalized folks, then we can’t be friends, let alone date. The personal is political.”

Witt can preemptively count on a hard “no” from me when it comes to having a relationship with her.

Regardless, I felt the need to answer her questions. I feel it will save her some time in the long run, seeing as how not many men — and I mean men in the actual sense of the term, not the “men” who subscribe to her intersectional Gestapo’s belief system — are going to answer the same way I do.

1. Do you believe that Black Lives Matter?

Yes, insofar as they’re included in the importance of the lives of white people, brown people, red people, yellow people, and purple people if they exist. I’m not going to play the game of holding up one race as more worthy of sympathy, handouts, or attention. No race will become a sacred cow for me.

But that said, I do believe black lives matter, which is why I analyze the problems in our obviously troubled black communities and withdraw facts that may be hard to hear. I then fashion solutions from these facts.

For one, I believe the black community suffers from a serious welfare dependency that breeds a whole host of problems. It encourages fatherless homes as mothers are rewarded for being single mothers with multiple children sans a husband. Seventy-two percent of black children are born out of wedlock.  These fatherless children are more prone to behavior problems, leading to becoming criminals that wind up incarcerated.

I care about black lives, so I’m willing to strip the welfare system and change it to reward work, not turning black children into cash cows. I’m for school choice so that black children have the opportunity to be taken to a much better school than the one they’re left to.

If you’re not for those, maybe you mean well, but the facts say I care more about black lives than our intersectional feminist does.

2. What are your thoughts on gender and sexual orientation?

What you do is your business. Just don’t make it mine. Don’t force people to bake cakes, or punish people for misgendering you. Don’t fashion mobs that attack people for not believing that you’re a man when you’re clearly a woman. Don’t go to schools to teach children about anal sex, or make LGBT focuses a lesson plan.

I don’t care about what gender you want to get busy with, just don’t make me applaud you for it. I won’t. Being queer doesn’t make you special.

3. How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?

I don’t. Being a good person to others should suffice. However, I’m not going to award special privileges to a female when I’m conversing or working with them. If they do something I find disagreeable, I’m going to either call them out or not bother with them. I’m not going to give them deference in everything first just because they are female. My being a male doesn’t mean I need to stand back because “privilege.”

I’m going to be as chivalrous as possible because the concept was cooked up with our differences in mind, and the concept has served us well for eons. Being a woman will definitely make me treat you differently, however being a woman doesn’t make you special. My sister, my mother, and few other female friends and family are special. Beyond those women, you’re just a person first, and a woman second.

This doesn’t make me sexist, it makes me a polite human being.

4. What are your thoughts on sex work?

Fiscally, I’m a libertarian. If you want to sell your body for sex, that’s your prerogative, but don’t make me pay for your birth control, STD tests, etcetera. I’m not your keeper.

5. Are you a supporter of the BDS movement?

I’m not going to boycott the one presence in the Middle East that has a capitalist system, holds free and fair elections, and does not support terrorists who have the murder of innocent people written into their mission statements. Also, Israel is the shining beacon on the hill in the Middle East for women’s rights. Why are you wanting to punish them in favor of cultures that believe women should have about as many rights as the goat they milk?

I thought you were a feminist. What’s up with your failure to support women in the Middle East?

6. What is your understanding of settler colonialism and indigenous rights?

I think people have been settling, colonizing, warring, and fighting for land since the Neanderthals. Before the Spanish, Europeans, and whoever else showed up to the Americas, indigenous American tribes were killing each other for all sorts of reasons, but one of them being territory. I’m not saying it’s good or right, but just because Native Americans were on the losing side of activities they also participated in, it doesn’t make the colonization of America wrong, especially today. I’m just as American as the guy living on an Indian reservation.

And if you really want to improve the lives of Native Americans, it’s those Indian reservations that have to go. Why? Because they interfere with property rights. Few residents actually have them, which lead to a whole host of problems, including the inability to improve their land or use it to make money. This leads to dilapidation and horrible conditions.  This is just one of the problems, but allowing reservation residents to actually own the land they live on as individuals would do some serious good.

7. Do you think capitalism is exploitative?

Yes, and thank God for that. Exploiting the market leads to innovation, improvement, and expansion. This results in more jobs, which lift people out of poverty. If people are willing to work for a lower wage to make a product, then they should be allowed to work that wage and improve their own lives little by little.

Capitalism isn’t perfect, but it’s the best system the world has ever seen for lifting poor people out of poverty and improving the quality of life for everyone and everything it touches.

8. Can any human be illegal?

Yes. If they aren’t here legally, they’re illegal. If they are here illegally they should work to change that status if they want to be legal.

The reason they’re illegal is oftentimes that their non-integration into the American system while simultaneously benefiting off it creates a whole host of problems. None of it has to do with hatred of race, and everything to do with economics and safety.

9. Do you support Muslim Americans and non-Muslim people from Islamic countries?

In the regard that they’re here legally, peacefully, and usefully? Absolutely. However if that means open borders to anyone who wants to come here from Islamic countries, then let’s slow it down. I only need to look at Europe’s crime problem to see that importing from Islamic countries willy-nilly is a bad idea.

For instance, sex crimes by migrants in Germany doubled in 2016, and you’ll find similar stories in many countries that allowed open migration from the Middle East. Every place that has done that has suffered serious crime and sexual assault problems.

10. Does your allyship include disabled folks?

Firstly, I’m not an ally of any social group. Someone doesn’t get my loyalty and service simply because they’re disabled, or a woman, or black, so on and so forth. I operate on an individual basis, meaning if you’re a good person, you can rely on me to help you if I can spare the time or resources.

Secondly, I’m going to have to have you clarify what “disabled” means. I’m sure people in wheelchairs, the blind, deaf, and mentally challenged are included in this, but heading to Tumblr, I can see the social justice crowd likes to throw all sorts of additional maladies into the category.

I’ve seen people say they identify as having multiple personality disorder but just reading their blog, I can tell they far from suffer from that. They treat it like a fun game. I’ve seen folk say their transgenderism is a disability too. I’ve seen people who claim their being female is a disability.

Clean up your definitions, and I’ll see if I’m willing to help.

NEWSMAX: Bill O’Reilly’s Accuser Arrested for False Allegation of Crime

Sorry to have to post this article but it is necessary to expose the evil that is in play in this country. I’m not going to say “I told you so”, but it did predict this. The Reagan Conservative is always right!


A 2015 arrest by Detroit police of a key accuser of Bill O’Reilly for giving a false report of a crime has raised serious doubts as to her credibility.

In April, O’Reilly was fired from Fox News shortly after Perquita Burgess claimed the host made sexually suggestive comments to her, including calling her “hot chocolate.”

Burgess worked at Fox News for several weeks in 2008 as a clerical temp.

Shortly after an April 1st New York Times report detailed sexual harassment allegations by several women against O’Reilly, Burgess called a 21st Century Fox hotline claiming alleged workplace misconduct by O’Reilly. 21st Century is the parent company of Fox News.

At the time her charges emerged, O’Reilly’s program, “The O’Reilly Factor,” was already in the throes of an advertiser-boycott campaign being pushed by several liberal organizations.

All of the allegations included in the Times report were more than a decade old.
Burgess’s more recent allegations, however, played a significant role in O’Reilly’s termination at the network, a source close to Fox News told Newsmax.

This article originally appeared on Newsmax. Read the full article here.

Did the Mainstream Media Forget How Obama Treated Fox News?

I know the mainstream media is always licking its wounds after President Donald Trump smacks them around in his press conferences since being in office.

And I hate to add salt to their wounds, but it seems they’ve got a case of amnesia.

It all started when President Trump went all-out against the network because they reported on an unsubstantiated 35-page document that claimed Trump is being blackmailed by the Russian government.

Trump praised those in the media who had restraint from peddling the false report.

“I have great respect for the news, great respect for freedom of the press,” Trump said, thanking those who didn’t run the unsubstantiated story, saying his opinion of them may have “gone up a notch.”

But the mainstream media rallied around CNN.

“The journalist whom Trump called on should have yielded to CNN. Don’t allow him to refuse to answer questions  from certain news outlets,” Politico reporter Peter Sterne tweeted.

Acosta whined that incoming press secretary Sean Spicer threatened to toss him out of the press conference after he repeatedly interrupted the president-elect demanding to get his question answered.

I can’t recall the mainstream media rallying around Fox News anytime over the last eight years when President Obama attacked them.

In fact, let’s review the times Obama blamed the number one name in news (AKA Fox News).


October 25, 2008

Then-candidate Obama complained he would be polling higher if Fox didn’t exist. This may work in soap operas and song lyrics, but that’s not exactly the best start to a working relationship with the press.

“I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls,” Obama told liberal journalist Matt Bai of the New York Times Magazine. “[T]he way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latté-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?”

June 16, 2009

Obama says that Fox News is entirely devoted to “attacking my administration.”

JOHN HARWOOD: Last question. When you and I spoke in January, you said–I observed that you hadn’t gotten much bad press. You said it’s coming. Media critics would say not only has it not come, but that you have gotten such favorable press, either because of bias or because you’re good box office, that it’s hurting the country, because you’re not being sufficiently held accountable for your policies. Assess that.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It’s very hard for me to swallow that one. First of all, I’ve got one television station entirely devoted to attacking my administration. I mean, you know, that’s a pretty…

HARWOOD: I assume you’re talking about Fox.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, that’s a pretty big megaphone. And you’d be hard-pressed, if you watched the entire day, to find a positive story about me on that front.

October 14, 2010

Obama admitted in a softball interview with Rolling Stone that he “disagrees” with Fox News. No shock there, but added he believes Fox has a “destructive viewpoint.”

“Look, as president, I swore to uphold the Constitution, and part of that Constitution is a free press. We’ve got a tradition in this country of a press that oftentimes is opinionated. The golden age of an objective press was a pretty narrow span of time in our history. Before that, you had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition — it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world. But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number-one concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”

December 2010

After the Democrats’ midterm election shellacking, President Obama reportedly toldlabor leaders in a private meeting that Fox News was partly responsible for him “losing white males” who tune into the network to “hear Obama is a Muslim 24/7.”

He needed someone to blame for the massive losses because the next election was his.

May 10, 2011

Obama takes a shot at Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch.

“One CEO had this to say about reform. ‘American ingenuity is a product of the openness and diversity of this society… Immigrants have made America great as the world leader in business, science, higher education and innovation.’ That’s Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News, and an immigrant himself. I don’t know if you’re familiar with his views, but let’s just say he doesn’t have an Obama bumper sticker on his car.”

January 27, 2013

Obama hits Fox News for making “compromise” a “dirty word.”

“One of the biggest factors is going to be how the media shapes debates. If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it.”

September 26, 2013

Obama went after Fox News on the campaign trail for his health care law.

“If you’ve talked to somebody who said, ‘Well, I don’t know, I was watching Fox News and they said this is horrible,’ you can say, ‘you know what? Don’t take my word for it! Go on the website.”

February 2, 2014

During a pre-Super Bowl interview, President Obama suggested Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly was being unfair for asking questions about ObamaCare’s shortcomings, the IRS scandal and Benghazi.

“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly said. “That’s what they believe.”

“And they believe it because folks like you tell them that,” Obama said, adding on the IRS scandal: “These kinds of things keep on surfacing, because folks like you will promote them.”

October 2, 2014

President Obama insisted ObamaCare is “working pretty well in the real world” despite it being a “fanged threat to freedom on Fox News” in a speech at Northwestern University.

May 12, 2015

Obama hits Fox News for anti-poverty narrative.

“There’s always been a strain in American politics where you’ve got the middle class, and the question has been, who are you mad at, if you’re struggling; if you’re working, but you don’t seem to be getting ahead. And over the last 40 years, sadly, I think there’s been an effort to either make folks mad at folks at the top, or to be mad at folks at the bottom. And I think the effort to suggest that the poor are sponges, leeches, don’t want to work, are lazy, are undeserving, got traction. And, look, it’s still being propagated.

“I mean, I have to say that if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it is a constant menu — they will find folks who make me mad. I don’t know where they find them. They’re like, ‘I don’t want to work, I just want a free Obama phone’ — or whatever. And that becomes an entire narrative, right? That gets worked up. And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress — which is much more typical — who’s raising a couple of kids and is doing everything right but still can’t pay the bills.”

September 20, 2015

Obama takes a shot at Fox News for allegedly covering him unfairly.

“I want to repeat — because somehow this never shows up on Fox News. I want to repeat — because I’ve said it a lot, unwaveringly, all the time: Our law enforcement officers do outstanding work in an incredibly difficult and dangerous job. They put their lives on the line for our safety. We appreciate them and we love them.”

October 27, 2015

Obama claims “certain televisions stations” distort his position on guns.

“And some of you who are watching certain television stations or listening to certain radio programs. Please do not believe this notion that somehow I’m out to take everybody’s guns away and every time a mass shooting happens one of the saddest ironies is suddenly the purchase of firearms and ammunitions jump up because folks are scared into thinking that Obama is going to use this as an excuse to take away our Second Amendment rights.”

November 5, 2015

Obama blames Fox News for making him “seem scary.”

“It’s interesting, because we’re talking in Iowa; people always, I think, were surprised about me connecting with folks in small-town Iowa. And the reason I did was, first of all, I had the benefit that at the time nobody expected me to win. And so I wasn’t viewed through this prism of Fox News and conservative media, and making me scary. At the time, I didn’t seem scary, other than just having a funny name. I seemed young. Sometimes I look at my pictures from then and I say, I can’t believe anybody voted for me because I look like I’m 25.”

September 18, 2016

At a Clinton fundraiser in New York City, President Obama predicted a close election “not because of Hillary’s flaws,” but because of Fox News and some blogs “that are churning out a lot of misinformation…”

November 3, 2016

Obama blames Fox News for “balkanization of the media.”

“The problem is we’ve got all these filters. Look, if I watched Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me either because you’ve got this screen—this funhouse mirror—through which people are receiving information. How to break through that is a big challenge.”

November 29, 2016

Obama blames Fox News for election loss.

“In this election, [they] turned out in huge numbers for Trump. And I think that part of it has to do with our inability, our failure, to reach those voters effectively. Part of it is Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country, but part of it is also Democrats not working at a grassroots level, being in there, showing up, making arguments.”


While the media and liberals are lamenting the fact that Trump is defending himself against CNN and other left-wing news outlets, they were largely silent as President Barack Obama routinely attacked Fox News for 8 years.

So, it happens during every presidency. The president feels a need to defend himself, so before CNN and MSNBC and other speculation news outlets have another seizure, as President Trump points out how unjustly his administration is being covered, think about all that President Obama said about his “enemy” in the media.

The irrationality in some precincts and the dishonesty of the talking heads and the absolute hysteria that surrounds some news stories is simply dumb and incredibly annoying. You get nowhere when you present the facts and they are rejected, so why bother? Facts don’t matter to these ignorant morons or conspiracists, why debate them? And the worst part is if you don’t see it the way that these far leftists do, then you’re branded as a racist.

Anti Antifa, At Last!

There was this astounding headline Monday in the Washington Post:  “Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley.”

Put aside the question of how the Post determined that the demonstrators were “right-wing.”  What makes the headline remarkable is that a major liberal newspaper finally and accurately denounced the thugs.  Antifa may be short for “anti-fascist,” but it is in fact just the opposite.

The Los Angeles Times soon chimed in, decrying “violence by far-left protesters.”  And on MSNBC, of all places, Joe Scarborough blasted the antifa goons as “fascists in their behavior.”

A few far-left politicians have also joined the anti-antifa chorus.  Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin, who actually applauded the mob that shut down Milo Yiannopoulos in February, now wants antifa officially classified as a gang.  “They come dressed in uniforms,” he observed, “and they have weapons, almost like a militia.”  Hey, Mayor Arreguin, good of you to finally notice.

And the most stunning turnaround came Tuesday, when Democrat Nancy Pelosi issued a statement condemning the “people calling themselves antifa.”  She added that they “deserve unequivocal condemnation.”

What makes all this notable is that just over a week ago Reuters referred to the antifa agitators as “peace activists,” while Democrats refused to say anything mean about the masked warriors.  So what happened to turn the tide?  Let us put forth some educated speculation.

First, professor and philosopher Noam Chomsky openly questioned antifa’s goals and tactics.  Chomsky, always anti-capitalist and often anti-American, has been the guru of the radical left for decades.  When he speaks, progressives listen.

Two weeks ago Chomsky described antifa as “a miniscule fringe of the Left,” and called their violence “a major gift to the right.”  The professor also hammered antifa for shutting down speakers with whom it disagrees.

A few days later, professor and attorney Alan Dershowitz, another lion of the left, warned that antifa-like groups are “trying to tear down America.”  He denigrated antifa as “radical, anti-American, anti-free market, socialist, communist, hard left censorial organization.”

All this criticism was pre-Berkeley, which was another black mark against the black clad antifa crew.  Last weekend the left-wing gangsters assaulted a handful of people who gathered in Berkeley to march against Marxism.

The antifa radicals, their faces masked as always, chased and beat down people whom they considered Trump supporters.  It was an especially ugly scene, even by antifa standards, after which more than a dozen radicals were arrested.

If antifa and other self-styled anti-fascist groups occupied the moral high ground after Charlottesville, they surrendered it last weekend in Berkeley.

But perhaps the biggest reason for the recent opinion shift is old-fashioned politics.  Democrats can read polls as well as anyone else, probably better.  They know that most Americans do not are repulsed by masked marauders running wild in the streets.  That could explain Nancy Pelosi’s surprising statement.  She desperately wants a Democratic majority in 2018, and she won’t get it by ignoring or endorsing violence.

In the Senate, the two darlings of the far left – Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders – have yet to call out antifa by name, although Senator Sanders did speak out against lefties who shout down campus speakers.

Antifa will always have supporters, especially on elite campuses.  A Dartmouth lecturer named Mark Bray has become a frequent guest on mainstream networks, where he rationalizes and defends violence.  Dartmouth’s president actually criticized Bray for “supporting violent protest,” a rare show of courage from a university administrator.  Naturally, the left-wing Dartmouth faculty was angry not with Bray, but with the president.

But college professors aside, antifa may have overplayed its ugly hand with all the recent violence and vitriol.  Pay close attention the next time there are masked antifa protesters fomenting violence and pelting cops with urine.

Law enforcement, which once looked the other way, might step in to quickly stop the madness.  And Democrats, who were once acquiescent, might rise up in unison to denounce antifa.

That may be wishful thinking, but it would be a very welcome sign in extremely troubled times.

Clemson Professor Must Apologize Or Resign After Defaming All Republicans As Racists

This past week an Assistant Professor of Human-Centered Computing at Clemson University, Bart Knijnenburg, took to social media to attack all Republicans as racists deserving of violence and scorn.

Mr. Knijnenburg wrote that “All Trump supporters, nay, all Republicans, are racist scum” on his social media account, comments which have prompted passionate debate. In response to a dissenting comment on his post, he went further writing that “All Republicans, yes, your complacency made this happen. Pick a side: denounce your affiliation, or admit that you’re a racist.” The professor’s comments are derogatory and defamatory to the majority of South Carolina voters and millions of Americans who are supporters of the Republican Party.

I denounce this sort of hate-filled rhetoric directed at Republicans. As you are well aware, the South Carolina Republican Party helped elect our state’s first-ever female, Indian-American Governor in our friend Nikki Haley. U.S. Senator Tim Scott, one of conservative champions of the United States Senate, is the first African American U.S. Senator from South Carolina and he is a member of the Republican Party. The Republican Party is diverse, young, and growing, and it is not exclusive to any one race, ethnicity, or gender. An attack on all Republicans as racist because of the actions of alt-right fanatics in Charlottesville is absurd. The so-called “alt-right” isn’t right, and they certainly do not speak for conservatives like me.

President Clements issued a well-worded response, but did not call on Assistant Professor Knijnenburg to apologize for his hateful rhetoric. While I appreciate Dr. Clements’s response, it still constitutes a double standard. If Mr. Knijnenburg was a Republican, and he had defamed the Democrats, he would have been escorted off campus by security. It is time that all Americans, regardless of our political party or principles, treat one another with dignity and respect. The hateful rhetoric surrounding race, ideology, and party affiliation has reached a fever-pitch not known since the 1960s, and this tenor is untenable. I do hope that Clemson University President Clements asks Mr. Knijnenburg to apologize, and for his resignation if he does not. Mr. Knijnenburg was also involved with Clemson’s Black Lives Matter spin-off “See the Stripes”. In response to Milo Yiannopoulos’ speaking event (that was scheduled for October 18th, 2016) at Clemson University a group of Left-leaning students and their respective organizations formed the “Anti-Milo Event Committee” to protest against the conservative speaker. The Clemson chapters of Students for a Democratic Society (whose motto is “crush the right”) and “See the Stripes” are the primary instigators of the protest committee. Here, you can listen to an audio recording of one of their meetings, trying to stop people’s right to the first amendment:

dad176a714f04cc498bec86685cd8baf

In these difficult times for our country, we certainly cannot afford to have academic leaders using their platforms at public universities to fan the flames of division. I hope that Clemson President James Clements can appreciate this fact.