In El Paso, Democrats Show Us How Low They Can Go

“Saying that President Trump has ‘fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation,’ Democratic presidential primary front-runner Joe Biden on Wednesday will directly link the president to the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas.”  ~Fox News, August 7, 2019

Long ago I concluded that the lowest form of criminal is the person who tries to pin his crime on another innocent person.  A lot of people are capable of doing the wrong thing, but it takes a special kind of corruption – a person devoid of conscience – to watch innocent people suffer for your own crimes.  That’s what’s on my mind with respect to the mass killings that took place in El Paso last week, and the Left’s mad rush to try and direct blame onto Donald Trump. 

Democrats say it was Trump’s anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric that stirred the El Paso shooter’s anger towards illegal immigrants (actually if democrats were telling this story they would have deceitfully left out the word “illegal,” but for the sake of brevity we’ll have to ignore their duplicity for a moment).  What they’ve argued, in a nutshell, is that anger inspired the shooter’s actions, therefore whoever inspired that anger is to blame for his crimes.  I wonder if the finger-pointers would stand by their self-serving logic after I’ve adeptly explained why it is they, not Trump, who are responsible for the rage that the shooter was feeling.

Frustration:
a deep chronic sense or state of insecurity and dissatisfaction arising from unresolved problems or unfulfilled needs
     ~Merriam-Webster Dictionary

First, let’s understand something about the relationship between anger and frustration.  Frustration, “a deep chronic sense or state of insecurity and dissatisfaction arising from unresolved problems or unfulfilled needs,” leads to anger.  Consider the example of the child who is treated differently from a favored sibling, i.e., held to a higher standard of behavior, punished for behaviors that the favored child is allowed to get away with, deprived of nice things that are offered to the favored child.  Imagine that child’s frustration due to his impotence over his situation.  What kind of feelings do you suppose this engenders in the mistreated child towards the favored sibling?  One would imagine that he must harbor great resentment, especially if the favored child wallows in the favoritism and is indifferent to his sibling’s pain.  Who is ultimately responsible for the child’s frustration and anger?  “The parents” is the logical answer.  They are the ones who have created this sick situation over which the child has no control, and that responsibility doesn’t shift if an outside observer points out to the mistreated child that he has every reason to be angry.

Now let’s look at who is responsible for the sick situation of illegal immigration in this nation that has frustrated most Americans.

The ILLEGAL immigration problem in this country has been continuously worsening since after WWII, when labor shortages (real or perceived) led millions of Mexican workers to come to the U.S., some illegally and some on temporary work permits.  When the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was passed and led to a wave of legal immigration as well as a huge shift in the origins of immigrants, the U.S. put a halt to the temporary worker permits for Mexican laborers, but migrants in search of work continued to come illegally.  We all know that the growing problem of illegal immigration ultimately led to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 under which Ronald Reagan, in a deal with the devil (Ted Kennedy) infamously granted amnesty for nearly three million illegal immigrants.  Thus began the age of the Left’s recognition of the value of immigration as a political weapon and as a source of division among Americans that proved helpful to Team Democrat.  The power to frustrate conservatives is an intoxicating drug to the Left; consequently, in the pursuant years they have added fuel to our frustration by heaping one reward after another onto those who trespass here.  We are forced by law to educate the children of those who trespass here illegally, and the doors of our hospitals must be opened to illegals, regardless of how it increases the cost – or the wait – for those of us who pay the bills; if illegals commit crimes or their children become gang members who threaten the safety of Americans, that’s too bad.  

Press one for English…..

Then came the Left’s typical sly strategy of linguistic slight-of-hand.  The illegals have become the “undocumented.”  This is supposed to make us forget that we are talking about criminals - people who disrespect our sovereignty, ignore our laws and take advantage of us.  And because the Left is enjoying our frustration so much, they will show us who’s boss by declaring our cities to be places of “sanctuary” for illegals, reject any attempt to secure our borders, give driver’s licenses to illegals, allow illegals to vote in our elections, denounce the men and women who enforce our borders, and suggest that illegals, too, will get “free” healthcare under their socialist schemes.  Though we have been told for more than a decade that the illegal population here is “11 million,” a joint study last year by researchers at Yale and MIT estimated the actual figure to likely be in excess of 22 million, or almost twice what the MSM has been deceitfully reporting for more than a decade; yet we cannot ascertain what the truth is because leftist groups like the ACLU, using our own courts against us, won’t allow it.

Yet it is Donald Trump, we are told, who is to blame for the anger that ravaged El Paso, because Trump dared to object out loud to what has happened in this country.  If the source of the shooter’s anger is to blame for his heinous act, then I’ll let you be the judge of who has created the conditions for that anger.

~CW

The Left’s Sick, Scorched-Earth Mindset

“It was a sickness of the mind, and where sickness thrives, bad things will follow.”       

            ~ From the movie The Hobbit 

Every so often I’ll read a news story about a parent who, estranged or divorced from the other parent, wittingly or unwittingly takes out their unhappiness, their anger or their frustration on their innocent children.  It is not uncommon for feuding ex-s to withhold visitation or to unfairly poison a child’s mind against the other parent without regard to how this hurts their child.  In extreme cases parents have been known to torture, injure or kill their own children in their blind quest for vengeance or power over their ex, or sometimes they kill the ex and make orphans of their children.  I am always dumbstruck when I hear about acts of such incomprehensible selfishness.  Who could possibly argue that something hasn’t gone wrong in the minds of these so-called parents?

It is this mentality that I am so often reminded of as I watch the increasingly selfish actions of the American Left (AL), who for decades now have demonstrated that there is nothing sacred belonging to this country that they will not allow to be sacrificed in their pursuit of the power and attention that they are hopelessly addicted to.  Our Constitution, our unity, our sovereignty, our security, or economy, our financial stability, our justice system, our patriotism, our trust in American institutions, our future…. even our unborn.  Nothing is off the table in the cold civil war being waged by AL, and I mean nothing.  

The fight over illegal immigration and border security is merely one example of AL’s scorched-earth mindset.  Like the divorced parent who spoils the child – ultimately harming the child and the rest of society – to win the child’s affection away from the other parent, Democrats see the issue of illegal immigration not as an affront to our laws and sovereignty and a problem that must be solved but as an opportunity to be exploited.  By coddling and rewarding the illegals, Democrats can portray themselves as philanthropic and generous (at no real cost to them, naturally) in contrast to the “mean, stingy” Republicans to win favor with American Hispanics, immigrants and in the pliable minds of America’s youth who are easily manipulated when complicated issues are reduced to “nice” vs. “mean.”  What does this cost Americans?  In addition to the hundreds of billions we’re forced to spend on education, healthcare, welfare, lost tax revenue, and costs  (both financial and human) related to crime, Americans are losing faith in our government and our laws.  The resentment this naturally creates towards those who are here illegally is then cynically used by AL to condemn their fellow citizens as “racists.”  This traitorous attitude with respect to illegal immigration has long been AL’s unspoken policy, but with the election of Donald Trump they’ve crossed the line into scorched-earth territory whereby no stance is too outrageous.  You want your laws upheld?  AL will show you whose boss.  They’ll use your own mayors and judges and other elected officials – paid for with your tax dollars – to protect and give sanctuary to the illegals at your expense.  Take that.  You want your sovereignty respected?  AL will show you.  They’ll propose making it legal for the illegals to vote, and they’ll drown out your voice.  That’s scorched-earth politics.

This is what the cold civil war looks like.  It looks like the surrender of U.S. autonomy in the name of “climate change” and sanctimonious declarations that “the debate is over!” whenever we dare to disagree.  It looks like applauding a movement started by a spoiled football player to disparage the American flag and all that it stands for.  It looks like the shameful Kavanaugh farce and the attempts to delegitimize conservative appointees to the Supreme Court.  It looks like blind “resistance” to a legally elected president.  It looks like threats of impeachment without basis under the Constitution.  It looks like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer lying to the cameras that they came to the White House “in good faith” to discuss funding the border wall when clearly their mission all along was to plant the seeds of a Trump government shutdown for their own political gain.  Scorched earth.  

AL blames Donald Trump.  They claim that they’ve been pushed to the edge by Trump’s lack of civility, his unacceptable behavior, his fascism, his collusion with Russia…maybe even his bad haircut.  But the hypocrisy inevitably proves the lie, right?  These are the very same people who have applauded incivility from their own kind for decades, the same people who circled the wagons around Bill Clinton and ridiculed his accusers, the same people who want the government to be all-powerful, and the same people who yawned at news reports of Barack Obama whispering sweet nothings into the ear of the Russian president and who dismissed reports of good old Hillary approving the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia in exchange for cash to her foundation.  

The fact of the matter is that AL treated George W. Bush almost as badly as they do Trump (“Bush lied, people died” – remember that neat little ditty?).  They relentlessly ridiculed Bush, viciously suggested that he orchestrated 9-11 and the murder of thousands of Americans, sabotaged the White House before he took office, maliciously doctored documents to make it look like he lied about his military service, and more.  AL deemed Bush “unfit” long before bestowing that mantle on Trump, but Trump has been an especially vexing adversary because of his refusal to play by AL’s one-sided rules of “civility (i.e. censorship of the Right),” not to mention his surprise victory over their expected ticket to power, Hillary Clinton.  

The bottom line is this:  What we’re seeing is merely the American Left as it really is, not some temporary tantrum triggered by Donald Trump.  Trump has only helped to fully expose what was there all along.  AL is determined to control this country, even if that means they must destroy it first, that much should be clear to everyone by now.  This is their “sickness of the mind,” as so brilliantly analogized for us by J. R. Tolkien and the “precious” ring that was the object of scorched-earth battles in his books.  It’s just a tragedy that people won’t know what they had until it’s gone.

~CW

To leave a comment on this post please follow this link to the site, The Pesky Truth, where it is reposted.  I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.

Dear Joel Mathis: Liberalism, Not Nationalism, Killed Compassion in America

         Here is a photo of what the “free” press allows me to freely share when I search for images of the illegal immigrant caravan/invasion heading to America.

In his essay published in The Week magazine, self-described “liberal” Joel Mathis ponders the question, “Has nationalism killed compassion in America?”  The piece is an unintentional tribute to Ronald Reagan’s famous quip, “It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.”  Follow along, and you’ll see what I mean.  My remarks are in red.

There's been some heavy lifting lately, in the non-Trumpist precincts of our politics, to rescue the idea of "nationalism" from the clutches of President Trump and his alt-right followers. Lest liberals and progressives be tempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater, we're reminded in books and essays that nationalism has its uses — forming the glue that provides us with social cohesion and a welfare state, among other goods.  These "nice-guy nationalists" make good points. There's just one problem: America's best-known nationalist is the president. And he's not much interested in social cohesion.

In the interest of time I’ll leave aside the bizarre claim that “a welfare state” is one of the benefits of nationalism in order to focus on the even stranger claim that it is Trump who isn’t interested in social cohesion.  Ever since Barack Obama emerged on the national political scene the Left has perfected the devious art of projecting their own sins on the opposition and then attacking them for it, and this notion that it is Republicans in general, and Trump in particular, who divide us is one of their most cynical projections.  Statistics show that race relations began their steep decline under Obama, the predictable consequence of Obama intentionally stoking racial tensions (“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”)  Moreover, who could plausibly deny that the entirety of the Left’s political strategy is vested in the politics of division when Democrats are continually pitting minorities against whites, women against men, poor against rich, and when it’s become the Left’s norm to openly disparage “old, white men?”  While the Right promotes the melting pot, the Left promotes multiculturalism, yet  history proves that social cohesion fails when immigrants reject assimilation or embrace the Left’s tales of perpetual victimhood. 

"You know what I am? I'm a nationalist," Trump declared Monday night in Texas. "Okay? I'm a nationalist."

To get a sense of what this means in Trump's hands, it's good to take a look at the so-called "migrant caravan" currently marching north from Guatemala to the United States border. From the accounts of people on the ground, it appears this caravan is composed largely of people fleeing deprivation and violence in their home countries. It's the sort of thing you or I would do if our families were similarly endangered; ardent nationalists have decided to treat these fleeing families like an invading military.

"An assault!" Trump told told the Texas rally.

"Migrant hordes," writer Rod Dreher blogged at The American Conservative.

Even The Associated Press got in the act, calling the caravan a "ragtag army of the poor" in a tweet that was later deleted.

But the people forming the caravan are not an army. They aren't seeking collectively to capture land or dislodge governments. They are merely individuals seeking a better life and traveling in the direction they think most likely to help them find it.

"Treating this as an 'invasion' is a bad idea, and it's going to end horribly if it is treated such as that way," an independent voter said Monday on Fox News, and that's perhaps the most sensible statement made on any cable news network this year. 

Parents sometimes refer to medicine as “candy” to entice their children to take it, and this psychology is not lost on the sly Left when they try to manipulate their way past our natural defenses by insisting that we not call things what they really are.  Illegal aliens are “undocumented,” insists the liberals in the Orwellian speak that we’ve become accustomed to.  And now an invasion is not an invasion.  It’s just an innocent, happy parade of people wanting a better life.  I might prefer to live on the French Riviera but I don’t gather 13,999 of my friends and march on France.  The U.S. has a process for considering applications for asylum.  Purposefully ignoring that process in a calculated effort to take advantage of loopholes in our immigration system and create chaos at our border is what makes this an invasion, and Democrats – always the useful idiots - are cheering it on. 

Nationalism may provide us with social cohesion — and that's good — but it is also a garment best worn lightly. That's a tricky, perhaps impossible, expectation: In many cases, nationalism asks us to disregard our own moral sense in favor of group loyalty.

Morality tells us that when people are hungry, we offer them food.

Morality tells us that when people flee violence, we offer them protection.

Morality tells us that all humans are worthy of moral consideration, no matter their origins or circumstances.

First, morality tells us that when you are hungry or need protection you don’t break down the door and help yourself to what others have worked hard for.  You knock on the door and politely ask for help, at which time it is the homeowner’s right to determine whether your need is genuine and whether you are an innocent victim or just looking for an easier way at someone else’s expense.  In America we call that respecting the rights of others, and that is the moral thing to do.  Another moral tradition we once had in America was to reject the evil temptation to falsely impugn – for political gain -  peoples’ motives by coyly suggesting that ethnicity or financial status is the reason for their objection to thousands of people marching on our border.  Never mind that this charge is rich coming from people who’ve popularized the denouncement of “old, white men;” it is the rejection of U.S. sovereignty and U.S. law that’s inspired Trump and conservatives to condemn the “caravan,” and it is Mathis himself who stoops to immorality by using the group’s shared ethnicity as an excuse to pull the tired, old race card.  By the way, wouldn’t you love to know how many poor, uneducated, non-English-speaking immigrants are included among Mr. Mathis’ close circle of friends? 

Nationalism often — not always, but often — asks us to disregard those moral considerations, or at least to quiet them a little bit, to place a higher importance on defending the integrity of arbitrarily drawn borders than we do the lives of people trying to escape inhumane situations. Nationalism tends to divide humans into "us" and "them" and tells us "they" are worth less. Frequently — and Trump has based his entire political persona on this idea — it tells us that "they" are probably bad people. Why? Mostly because they're not us. How do you get to be us? Well, it's all kind of an accident of birth, really. At best, it's absurd. In many cases, nationalism is simply racist.

There it is again of course – the race card.  The truth is, Trump has based his political persona on the concept of putting America first.  Not white America.  Not black America.  Not male or female America.  Just America.  You can see it.  You can feel it.  It’s palpable, and his focus on treating the country as a whole, rather than dividing us into subgroups as the Left always does, flies in the face of these trite accusations of racism.  Is he nationalistic according to its real definition?  Yes, in the sense that he wants to promote our interests and our culture.  There’s nothing wrong with that unless you’re a leftist mired in the standard creed of loathing America.  As for “arbitrarily drawn borders,” one could say that the borders of Mr. Mathis’ property are just as arbitrarily drawn, yet that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t fight for them if necessary. 

The nice-guy nationalists advocate a rather bloodless view of nationalism's benefits, but the history of the last century, with its wars and genocides, provides plenty of evidence that nationalism can turn very bloody, indeed. Still, it probably is utopian to think we poor humans can get very far without organizing along national lines. And "Morality Is Complex and Transcends National Lines!" is a poor riposte, politically, to the pithiness of "America First!" This column isn't going to win any elections.

The caravan keeps advancing north. So what to do? How do we balance the benefits of nationalism — and the legitimate obligation to protect our citizens and their well-being — against the need to look out for our neighbors beyond our borders?

In the short term, you can treat the caravan like what it is — a collection of needy, dispossessed humans fleeing dire circumstances — instead of as an invading army to be met with force. Instead of cutting off aid to the caravaners' countries of origin, let's figure out how to help them, now, where they are, before they get to our border. Difficult? Sure. Worth it? Probably.

In the long term, the United States can consider how its policies may actually create the refugees it so desperately wants to reject. U.S. policies, for example, helped create the circumstances that allowed the MS-13 street gang to flourish in Central America. Maybe we should do less of that kind of thing?

In the same vein, perhaps Trump — who needs to serve American interests — might come to understand he does not best serve an "America First" vision with his preferred "we-win-you-lose" deals with our allies and rivals. America's security and prosperity can best be enhanced by assisting the security and prosperity of people around the world. It's that vision, not some utopian altruism, that has guided much of the postwar world order that Trump seems ready to undo.

The migrant caravan is still hundreds of miles from the American border, but it's not too late to seek constructive solutions. Right now, though, it's the regular nationalists — not the nice-guy kind — who are running the show.

What intrigued me most about this piece was the headline asking if nationalism has killed compassion in America because I see things quite differently.  I think it is liberalism, not nationalism, that’s killing compassion in this country.  Liberals tell us that instead of teaching a man to fish so that he becomes self-sufficient that we must fish for him whether we want to or not.  We get no say in determining whether the man is capable of fishing for himself.  If he has no fish, that alone, we are told, is proof that he is entitled to our fish.  And if we have the nerve to point out that perhaps the man was napping rather than fishing or that he refuses to learn to fish, well then we are racists who should not be allowed to speak. We are told that our borders are “arbitrary,” that the people who come here by the millions to use our schools, our hospitals, our roads, our police, our courts and who – by virtue of evading the system – sometimes bring crime and disease, just want a better life.  Our own desires for a better life are of no consequence.  Conservatives’ accounting for the hundreds of billions of dollars illegal immigration costs us as Americans are rejected as “lies” by the Left, while they refuse to engage in any truthful accounting themselves.  The actions of the Left with respect to illegal immigration engender feelings of powerlessness in those of us who believe that we are entitled to have a say in the immigration policies of our nation, and who believe all our laws should be enforced, not just those that are convenient to the Left.  To whatever extent compassion is dead in this nation, THIS – this political game-playing with our laws and immigration policy – THIS is what has killed it.  Turn the mirror around, Mr. Mathis, and take a good, long look.  This is what you and your leftist friends have wrought.

One last question for Mr. Mathis and any liberals who happen to read this: 

Have you considered the moral implications of what happens now to the people truly in need of asylum after you’ve made such a mockery of our generosity?  No?  I thought not.

~CW

P.S. 

Links in Mr. Mathis' original piece did not come through when pasted here.  Follow the link in the first paragraph to see those, if you want to be extra bored.

If you want to leave a comment on this post please visit  The Pesky Truth, where it is re-posted.  I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.

Sanctuary City D.A. Scolds Trump: “We are a Nation of Laws.”

You cannot make this stuff up.

In response to Donald Trump’s calling the acquittal of Kate Steinle’s killer “disgraceful,” the District Attorney for San Francisco proclaimed in a press conference:

“It’s important for the president of the U.S. to remember this is a nation of laws.  We respect the legal process even when the outcome is one that we may not be happy with.”

Does the dear district attorney need to be reminded of what city he’s standing in???  Should we ask Chevy Chase to come out of retirement from SNL and tap him on the shoulder and whisper, “San Francisco ignores federal laws on immigration.”  If that happened would the lightbulb even turn on???

Forgive my abuse of the question marks here but I sometimes cannot come to grips with how stupidly oblivious the leftists are to their own hypocrisy.

I feel sorry for the writers at The Onion.  In a world with people like George Gascon and cities like San Francisco reality and satire are indistinguishable.

~CW

To leave a comment please see this post at The Pesky Truth.  I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.  Thanks.

Damn the Enablers

Actually Michael, we're not.

Some of you may remember seeing the news headlines when, in 1997, a mother of six was brutally murdered in the presence of her two-year-old quadruplets at her home in Sarasota, Florida.  Sheila Bellush was ambushed by a paid killer sent by her former husband and father of her two oldest daughters.  Bellush and her second husband, father of the quadruplets, had moved the family from Texas to Florida to escape the stalking and threatening behavior of the ex-husband, who they wisely feared.  The two oldest girls had been warned not to give the family’s new address to their father, but in a phone conversation with the younger one (12 at the time), the ex-husband persuaded the young girl to give him the address, and the sharing of this secret information paved the way for a horrendous crime that tragically altered the lives of Sheila Bellush and all those who loved her.  Such is the power of those who, wittingly or unwittingly, enable people with bad intentions. 

Evil people, or those hell bent on taking advantage of others, will always exist.  It is our curse in life that we must continually defend ourselves against them, but the task is made that much harder, if not impossible, by The Enablers.  You know who they are. 

•  They are leftwing judges like Monica Herranz who allowed an illegal alien, under arraignment for DUI, to slip out the back door to her judge’s chambers to avoid being deported by waiting ICE agents, even though the judge is employed by the citizens of Multnomah County.  And it is the liberals who defend Herranz rather than stand up for citizens who might have been hurt or killed if the escapee had another drunk-driving incident while ICE was tracking him down.
•  They are leftists like Michael Moore and others who ignorantly ridiculed protestors fighting to prevent the erection of a giant mosque near the site of 9-11, and who characterize common sense concerns about the spread of Islam in the U.S. as “Islamophobia” in an attempt to shame us into cultural suicide akin to what we’re seeing across Europe, where they are suffering the consequences of their own enablers for all the world to observe. 
•  They are California Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) and other California democrats who pushed aside more important issues to spend their time passing a bill that prevents the state from firing members of the Communist Party.  Communism has only killed an estimated 94 million people, so let’s make sure we undo any boring old laws that would unfairly prevent its tentacles from reaching into California’s government, right?
•  They are Barack Obama and his minions who strangely made it their top priority to empty out Guantanamo Bay and to empower terror-loving Iran in a deal aptly described by Charles Krauthammer as “… the worst deal since the Munich deal of 1938.”
•  They are the politicians who cower to the racist hate group, Black Lives Matter, and who refuse to stand up for all lives, no matter the race.
• They are legislators in the state of Minnesota who joined Washington state’s challenge to Trump’s temporary travel ban just as Minnesota’s state health commissioner “…sounded an alert on more frequent and costly threats to the public health, referencing measles, tuberculosis, and even the Zika virus and syphilis…” largely attributable to an influx of foreign born carriers.
•  They are the reporters, journalists and no-border activists who insist on trading in the word “illegal” for the new and improved (i.e. politically correct) term “undocumented” in order to reprogram our minds of any pesky, negative associations we might have been taught with respect to the crime of trespassing. 

And there’s so many more that I’m sure to be forgetting.  Please feel free to add your favorite Enabler to the list. 

A recent post by Pesky Truth resident blogger, Kathy, is a testament to the depths to which the ever-helpful Enablers have forced us to sink.  “Illegals demand subsidized healthcare, housing from Columbia University,” as reported in campusreform.org, includes a link to a list of galling demands by a group of students who don’t even have the legal right to be here, much less make demands upon their fellow human beings for free this and that.  In a sane world – i.e., a world without The Enablers – this would be laughed off and dismissed followed by the unceremonious dragging away of the undocumented snowflakes (CW’s note:  it is okay to use the term “undocumented” ONLY when it is followed by an appropriately insulting term such as “snowflake”) by ICE.  But thanks to The Enablers and the precedent they’ve helped set for legitimizing every clown who pounds his puny fist on the table, it isn’t funny.  Instead it represents yet another threat to our disappearing freedom to just say, “No.”

Getting back to the tragic story of Sheila Bellush, a 12-year old child can be, and should be, forgiven for lacking the maturity to comprehend the danger that her actions would bring and for the selfishness, typical of children, to put her own desires ahead of the safety of her family.  But what excuse is there for the Monica Herranz’s, the Michael Moore’s and the Barack Obama’s of this world?  Indeed, what excuse is there for the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of Enablers who, year after year, decade after decade, ignore the lessons of history and the pleas of their fellow citizens and become the Enablers to those intent on tearing down or taking over everything we’ve built?

There is no excuse.  Damn the Enablers.

~CW

To leave a comment please follow the link to this post at The Pesky Truth.  I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.

Don’t Call Them “Undocumented”

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

― George Orwell, 1984

I’ve lost count of the times, throughout my life, when I’ve turned on the news or opened a newspaper and discovered that a common word or name has been surreptitiously replaced with a new word or name seemingly overnight.  It always reminds me of the infamous scene in Orwell’s Animal Farm where the pigs clandestinely altered the Seven Commandments in the middle of the night.  The new word or name unvaryingly advances some facet of the leftwing agenda, and while it’s no surprise that those who relate ideologically with communism would use tools of propaganda to alter the status quo to better suit their goals, I am always left shaking my head when others go along with the scheme and start parroting the new terms as well.  Take a listen to this Fox News report in which reporter Steve Harrigan refers to illegals as “undocumented migrants:” 

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5331757720001/?#sp=show-clips

So now “undocumented migrants” is how we refer to illegal aliens in the news? 

Would someone please tell me what’s wrong with the term “illegal alien,” other than that it suggests certain truths that are inconvenient to the Left’s agenda?  “It’s a pejorative,” the Left informs us.  Hmmm.  That’s like saying we shouldn’t use the word “rapist” to describe a rapist because it’s a pejorative.  News flash to leftists:  It is the underlying behavior, not the word, that makes it a pejorative, so rather than we all start using different words for this behavior my solution for those who take offense at the term “illegal alien” is to stop engaging in such behavior.   Wouldn’t that be a much simpler way of resolving this whole “pejorative” problem? 

Understand this, folks:  people don’t just wake up one day and start renaming common terms for no reason.  Everything we do has a purpose, and there is a very pointed political calculation behind every single language alteration schemed on us by the Left.  Calling those who are here illegally the more innocuous sounding “undocumented” is for the calculated purpose of softening us to people’s crimes and diminishing our instincts to protect ourselves.  It’s propaganda, and it serves somebody but that somebody isn’t us.  Leftists are never looking out for you.  It is always about acquiring more power for themselves.

Before I settled on the George Orwell quote to introduce this essay I considered a couple of other options, including the following:

"For me, words are a form of action, capable of influencing change"

This is a quote from the book, “Combat in the Erogenous Zone,” which was written by Ingrid Bengis.  Bengis is a writer best known for the aforementioned book, but what struck me in her bio, and what makes her quote worth mentioning, is that it just so happens to have been borrowed by none other than our former dear leader, Barack Obama, who quoted Bengis in one of his 2008 campaign speeches. I could not have asked for better evidence that the Left’s elites are keenly aware of the power of language and how to use it as a weapon in their war against America as we know it.  Thanks to the Left’s takeover of the education system in this nation, we know how to read but we don’t know how to read between the lines.   That’s what makes propaganda so effective.  We need to continually fight for our language and resist the Left’s efforts to obscure truth. 

They’re illegal, not undocumented.

~CW

Want to share your thoughts?  To leave a comment on this post please visit The Pesky Truth.  For some reason I am unable to respond to comments on Blogger.

By All Means, Let’s Face the Truth Shall We?

Yesterday I heard a news report on the radio informing us that the “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists” (a “liberal activist group,” according to the report) has moved the hands on its doomsday clock from three minutes till midnight up to two and a half minutes till midnight.  Per CNN, “The group cited US President Donald Trump's "disturbing comments" about the use of nuclear weapons and views on climate change among other factors, including cyberthreats and the rise in nationalism, that have contributed to the darkened forecast.”

In a CBS report on the story, Bill Gertz of the Washington Times wasn’t too impressed:  “In a lot of ways, the Doomsday Clock is being used by the liberal left to try to promote its agenda for nuclear disarmament, for greater efforts to control climate change and other elements.” 

Sounds like par for the course, eh? 

Look, it’s not that I don’t worry about nuclear weapons in the wrong hands, of course I do.  But when a liberal group gets worked up over Trump a week into his presidency after they apparently ignored the dangerous Iran deal made by Obama, I take what they say with a large grain of salt.   How do I know that Obama’s deal with Iran was a bad deal?  Because Iran agreed to it.  And because the Obama Administration oversaw it.  That’s how.  I also happen to trust the wise Dr. Charles Krauthammer (“This is a sham from beginning to end. It’s the worst deal since Munich.”) and others who said as much. 

But what really caught my attention from the radio report was a comment by someone with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists which said something about not being able to fix a problem if you won’t face the truth about the problem.  I couldn’t find the exact quote anywhere so I’m paraphrasing from memory.  It struck home because I wholeheartedly agree.  In fact I’d been in the process of writing a post on the same premise, so it’s kind of nice that I can agree with a liberal on something for a change.

You can’t fix a problem if you won’t face the truth.

I wonder if the liberals who think the Right won’t face the truth on climate change have the same concern about an issue like, say, rampant violence in the black community, where the truth leads straight to the doorstep of failed liberal social/welfare policy? 

How about the truth with respect to high incarceration rates for black males?  Yes, systemic racism plays a small part; but the truth is that black males commit crimes at a far higher rate than other groups and our prison populations reflect this reality, as it should.  Why do black males commit more crimes?  Once again you need to follow the crumbs to the doorstep of failed liberal social policy, i.e. generational welfare.

Or what about some truth on Obamacare, like a comprehensive look at why healthcare costs in the U.S. are so unnecessarily high, and the truth that Obamacare did nothing to address these factors?  Instead, all Obamacare does is redistribute these high costs.  Another truth is that emergency rooms are overrun with the uninsured because we’ve made laws that prevent hospitals from turning people away even when their condition is not an emergency.  And what about this truth:  If you want/need healthcare, you should pay for it if you are able-bodied.  Strive to acquire the experience, skills and/or education that will get you into a job with a healthcare benefit included.  How’s that for truth?  Then you won’t need laws that provide healthcare for you at someone else’s expense.

How about some truth about illegal immigration, starting with the fact that being “undocumented” means you are here illegally, and insisting on politically correct terms is just the Left’s way of ignoring that truth.  While we’re at it, let’s be truthful when it comes to the so-called dreamers, shall we?  The truth is that it was the actions of the dreamers’ parents – not mean old Republicans – that led to their predicament.  Where is the accountability for them?  If I break into someone else’s house in search of “a better life,” that doesn’t excuse my crime.

Maybe the truth would shed some light on the Left’s myth that women are so poorly treated in this nation when it comes to equal pay.  But of course, the truth would mean there’s no reason for women to be hostile to Republicans, therefore the truth must not be faced.

If only there were enough time to look at all the truths that would help solve the problems of this nation.

Getting back to the truth about climate change, I assume there’s a corollary that says if you lie about a problem, that this also makes it impossible to find the solution, right? 

The Myth of the Climate Change '97%'

In Their Own Words: Climate Alarmists Debunk Their 'Science'

Independent Audit Panel Slams U.N.'s Climate Group

The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever

Hmmm….

                                      

~CW


Want to leave your two cents?  Visit this post at The Pesky Truth.  Thanks!