This is not the first instance of actual hate speech to be seen, and it certainly won’t be the last.
Actress and producer Ellen Barkin tweeted out (and later deleted those tweets) that she hopes comedian Louis C.K. “gets raped” and “shot at”.
This is in apparent response to the comedian’s leaked audio of a recent comedy routine in which he ripped “gender neutral” millennials and Parkland school shooting survivors for their insane gun control activism.
While C.K.’s routine is certainly out there and not for everyone, it’s simply comedy. But in a day and age when speech is limited and policed heavily, comedy is among the most notorious and saddest victims. For any comedian to make fun of anyone apart from Trump, conservatives and Christ or Christians, that comedian must be rebuked, put to shame, and wished literal rape and death upon.
Any comedian that dares even make fun of a Leftist is someone that ought to be arrested and overall destroyed in the minds of the Left, even if that person tends to be more progressive in general and not a conservative themselves.
But it’s not simply the destruction and enchaining of comedy that destroys a civilized society. It’s both the unending desire to limit speech for anyone that even seemingly disagrees with the collective think-tank of the Left and the casual response to such disagreement coming in the form of the very hate speech these people supposedly fight against.
And while Barkin wound up deleting those tweets, she first made sure to defend them by attacking those who would rebuke her and by lying about the comedian.
“For all of you ready to jump on my back, think for a minute about how Louis C.K. must talk about the women who outed him? What do you think he wishes on them? Do you think he will assault a woman again? Read up on serial sexual assault.”
Louis C.K. did not assault anyone. He was accused of sexual misconduct (and C.K. admitted to it) about masturbating in front of female comedians after he would ask permission to do so. Still not a good thing whatsoever for anyone to do, and C.K. has apologized for it. That’s definitely a bad thing to do, but it’s a far cry from the sexual assault the actress is claiming.
Now, the most interesting part of this thing, in my opinion, comes in what was essentially the actress blowing a lid. I mentioned earlier that she would push back against those who would try to call her out on her poor choice of words. This is what she had to say to them:
“Interesting that most of the aggressive responders to my tweet are anti-choice, anti-science, anti-immigrant, anti-poc (people of color) Christians. I’m a Jew, an eye for an eye has its place for me. This sociopath & serial predator will continue harming. Stay safe while you clap.”
She’s not done: “If all you racist, anti-semitic, woman-hating muthaf**ckers are so distraught over my tweets, why the f**k are you following me? Cuz you’re dumb af. (that means *as f**k).”
I say this is the most interesting part in my opinion because it’s basically a goldmine for me. There’s so much that I can talk about here, even within the larger point of the destruction of civilized society.
First, I find it hilarious that her go-to response to people that are rightfully calling her out for her hate speech is calling people racist, sexist, xenophobes. We on the Right like to make fun of the Left for using this sort of response, but we usually exaggerate how much the Left does this. She’s literally giving the list of things that we make fun of the Left over.
Second, I highly doubt that “an eye for an eye” has its place in this woman. If that were the case, she would not have said what she said and she would not have tried to defend it. If she truly believes in the concept of an eye for an eye, then what exactly does she expect from wishing that someone gets raped and shot at?
Lastly, the reason this also has its part in the destruction of a civilized society is that these very tweets highlight our inability to have a civilized conversation anymore and that the words “gets raped” and “shot at” are being hurled in a serious conversation highlight the fact that we are normalizing this sort of hate speech.
I’m not going to say we never had hate speech in the past, but it’s certainly not progressive to hurl such hateful speech at someone just because you don’t like someone’s comedy routine.
I’ve heard C.K.’s latest comedy routine. Again, it’s definitely out there and I would not recommend audiences younger than 18 to listen to it, but it’s still just comedy.
To react in such a manner is not an indication as to how terrible and offensive C.K.’s routine was, but of how poorly people can take a joke in this day and age, and there is no sign of things getting better in that area.
It’s also an indication that the Left can hurl any sort of hateful speech they want at anyone they want so long as the collective Left is in agreement. Although, this is nothing new either.
People can literally wish death upon the Trump family, upon Christians, Republicans, conservatives all they want with minimal, next to nonexistent, repercussions. So long as the collective Left is in agreement about who can be targeted, hate speech is more than acceptable.
I say this because I remember a story some time ago about a feminist being suspended by Facebook for her stance against transgender women being counted as women. Transgenders are not someone people can negatively talk about in any way, so the feminist, one of the Left’s own people, was punished.
But in this instance, the hateful woman is hateful towards a seemingly acceptable target (seemingly because many other Leftists went bananas over the leaked comedy routine), so her hatred is allowed to carry on.
The reason I say this is all an indication of the destruction of civilized society is because this is the precise language people in the Middle East would use against someone they didn’t like. For example, when Asia Bibi was imprisoned and released years later (oversimplifying things here), people called for her head because she was considered a blasphemer.
Whenever someone does something the Muslims deem unacceptable, the people demand bloodshed, and often enough, they get it.
I draw this comparison between the Muslim world and Barkin’s hateful rhetoric because the Muslim world is not a civilized society (as evidenced by far more things than I have even shared here).
The fact that Barkin spreads hateful words that are so similar to what Muslims would say is an indication of the destruction of a civilized society in America. More-so when taking into account she tweeted those things so casually, went as far as to defend them and call those who would rebuke her as “racists”, etc., and that she ultimately decided to delete those tweets but never apologized for them.
Inwardly, and often outwardly, the Left is no more civilized than the Muslim world. They demand that others obey them and those who refuse are to be targeted and destroyed by any means necessary.
With that last sentence alone, you honestly could not even tell whether I was talking about the Left or Islam.
1 John 2:9
“Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
If you want to find the perfect instance of a Leftist showing their true colors and showing a damn-near demonic side to them, look no further than Illinois’ House of Representatives, where Democrat Representative Stephanie Kifowit detailed exactly what she wishes she could do to GOP Representative Peter Breen and his family.
You better hold on to your gut, because what she says is sickening, depraved and horrifying.
Here’s what the she-demon said: “I would like to make him a broth of Legionella and pump it into the water system of his loved ones so that they can be infected, they can be mistreated, they can sit and suffer by getting aspirin instead of being properly treated and ultimately die.”
For further context, Rep. Breen has a wife and two adopted kids aged 2 years old and 2 months old. And the Legionella bacteria is a bacteria that causes a pneumonia-type disease called Legionnaires’ disease and a mild flu-like illness called Pontiac fever.
GOP Representative Jeanne Ives, in response, blasted the witch: “How dare you concoct up some sort of story about brewing up some batch of Legionella and having him feed it to his family… How dare you… wish death on my colleague Peter Breen, his wife, and his 2 adopted kids.”
Breen also said that her attacks came “out of left field” and if the monster “made those statements in the parking lot, or left a message on an answering machine in my office, she would be in custody.”
The House also voted unanimously to “expunge Kifowit’s statement from the record,” according to the Daily Herald.
And do you want to know the worst part? Oh, yes, it’s even worse than what I’ve already mentioned. The worst part is she’s not apologetic – she’s defensive.
The she-devil said: “And so to misinterpret my words, and of course these are all transcribed, and my words will be clear… So for the fact that it being misinterpreted, I’m going to say that what was said earlier is a mischaracterization of what my words were.”
WOMAN, YOU LITERALLY WISHED DEATH AND SUFFERING UPON A COLLEAGUE! THERE IS NO MISINTERPRETATION OF THAT!
Does she not even realize what she actually said?! She says that it’s all transcribed and the words are clear. Does she not even realize what she said? Did she undergo some sort of demon possession when she said those words and has no clear recollection of what she said?
Doubtful, since if that were the case, she would be apologizing for her words, rather than trying to say that she did not say those things or those things were “mischaracterized and misinterpreted”. What a lying, hateful scumbag she must be.
And I hate calling people names, as I believe that to be the lowest form of argument, apart from repeating what someone said in a mocking tone or mockingly laughing at someone’s argument. I don’t tend to call people names, but I just can’t help it here.
This woman is a she-devil. Look closely at the words she used. Does that sound like something someone just comes up with out of the blue? To specifically say that she would want to batch up a broth of a specific kind of bacteria, “pump it” into Breen’s family’s water supply so that they may be infected, mistreated, suffer and ultimately die? That was way too specific and way too detailed for that to have come up out of nowhere. She must’ve thought about this previously. Not to say she might actually do it, but it’s pretty clear these are the words of someone who has thought about this sort of thing in the past.
There’s something copywriters do when writing advertisements for a restaurant or a particular food. They will sometimes paint a picture of what it might be like to taste and eat the food. For example, one could say: “The sweet aroma of Restaurant X’s special steak will cause you to wish to dig in right away, but the sweet, succulent and voluminous taste of the steak, marinated in thick, rich barbeque sauce, will cause you to take a step back and relish in the overall richness of the dish.”
For a copywriter to come up with a sort of story like that to paint the picture of a delicious $20 steak, careful thought and consideration must take place. The same can be said for someone who uses this specific sort of language. Of course, this example is a bit more detailed than what Fem-Satan said, but it’s just as specific. The way she phrased that takes you down specific roads and alleyways of thought and paints a clear, but grim, picture of the suffering and ultimate demise of a family.
I’m not accusing the monster of actually killing or planning to kill anyone, but these are disturbing thoughts that don’t appear to have been random, but carefully thought out.
But regardless of whether or not this was thought out, it still signifies a deeply-rooted hatred within her heart, that is shared by others in the Democrat Party and even the media.
I don’t know what the previous conversation was about, but no context could possibly justify the very specific words that she seemingly denies saying.
And actually, the aforementioned GOP Representative who stood up for Breen, Rep. Jeanne Ives, went to the jugular, bringing up something that seemingly occurred during the 2018 midterm election cycle, where Breen and another GOP colleague were painted as supporters of child predators. She said: “That’s what you guys (Democrats) think. That’s the kind of garbage you spew into people’s minds.” She also said that fellow Democrats clapped and agreed with Kifowit’s statements, which if true, further proves my previous statement that such hatred is shared by the Democrat Party.
The wish to infect, make suffer, and ultimately kill with what is basically a biological weapon at that point, is something that can only come from someone who harbors Satan in their heart. The same could be said for anyone who agrees with the sentiment. And that is the reason I call the Democrat Party the Party of Satan. It’s his. His ideology reigns supreme in the Democrat Party. His unending hatred is shared among Party members (not necessarily all of them, but far too many for me to believe otherwise).
I mean, just last week, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) said he would nuke gun owners who would defy the government if the government were to take away people’s guns (paraphrasing). Bernie Sanders, before a socialist madman shot up a baseball field full of Republican congressmen, said that Republicans wanted to kill people by “taking away their healthcare”. David Brooks said, following Trump’s election victory, that Trump had to choose between being impeached, resigning, or being assassinated. Madonna, in the first “Women’s March” against Trump, said that she “thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.”
The Left HATES people. They particularly hate anyone that is not like them, in a very similar fashion to Adolf Hitler. And since anti-Semitism seems to be on the rise on the Left, day by day, they appear to embody the Nazi Party of Germany more and more, minus the nationalism part.
Historically speaking, it’s only been those on the Left who have wanted, or gone as far as to actually kill, opposition. The communists (no matter what country you talk about) do it, the socialists (no matter what country you talk about) do it, the fascists do it. Generally speaking, the wish of death upon anyone who dares defy the Left is par for the course regarding this witch. But just because it’s par for the course definitely does not make it right.
The fact that this is just who the Left is is downright terrifying. They have no respect or regard for human life. They don’t even have respect for themselves, at the end of the day, so why would they respect anyone else?
As often as I get the chance (which is very often), I expose the fact that the Left is evil. And this is why. Their hearts are full of evil, so they naturally gravitate towards the ideologies of Satan. They may not necessarily believe in Satan, but they do not have to. Satan doesn’t care if people believe in him or not. Matter of fact, he’d rather people not believe in him, so that people don’t feel the need to seek God for salvation.
I sincerely hope this woman finds Christ. I don’t say that in spite of what she said, I say that precisely BECAUSE of what she said. She needs Christ. Granted, so does everyone else, but she desperately needs Him.
But as it stands, her heart belongs to Satan and it will remain that way, barring God’s desire to save her.
“The face of the Lord is against those who do evil, to cut off the memory of them from the earth.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
That is an incredibly obvious title and an undeniable fact of politics. The Left only tolerates you when you happen to agree with them, but the minute you dare think for yourself, you become the embodiment of Hitler. That is what Trump has had to deal with for 2 years now and what he will likely have to deal with for the rest of his life. And that extends to the rest of his family, too.
But why am I talking about this? Well, recently, pothead rapper Snoop Dogg (real name Calvin Broadus Jr.) released a video of himself outside the White House saying things like “F*** the President”.
This isn’t the first time the rapper who has more letters in his name than IQ points left has come out publicly against the President, with him releasing a new album called “Make America Crip Again” which featured a dead body covered by a flag with a toe tag that read “TRUMP”, and back in March of 2017, he released a music video that shows him shooting a fake gun at a clown-like Trump character with exaggerated orange paint on his face.
Not to mention that he’s not the only celebrity that has publicly come out against Trump, with the likes of Robert DeNiro, Merryl Streep, Samuel L. Jackson and just about anyone who has a big voice in Hollywood attacking the President.
While I don’t know if each of them personally knew Trump and liked him in the past, I imagine they at least tolerated him.
In the past, Trump used to be a bit more like a Democrat. That makes sense, since he sought to build buildings in New York City and you kind of have to be pretty friendly with those in the government to get things done quickly and efficiently, and Democrats have had control of NYC for a long time now.
Because he used to be more friendly towards Democrats, those who would vote for Democrats loved him.
Recently, I have been watching The Apprentice. As you may know, the show used to air on NBC. It was wildly popular and a lot of organizations, companies and people wanted to be a part of it.
Having watched an entire season of the show (Season 6, to be precise), I noticed some people in it who now say the sort of things Snoop Dogg recently said. Among which was Snoop Dogg.
Allow me to explain some things, in case you are unfamiliar with how the show runs. Trump selects a large number of people (usually 18 candidates) to participate in the show to be his next Apprentice, someone who will join Trump on a project he wants the Apprentice to lead. He divides the candidates into two teams who are given a project. Whatever team does better in that project wins and receives some form of reward for their good work.
In the season I watched, one of the rewards that were given to the winner of each particular project was visiting the Los Angeles Lakers’ practice facility (this season was shot in L.A. instead of the usual NYC) to play a pickup game of basketball and meet legends Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, James Worthy and then-Lakers coach Phil Jackson.
Another reward was visiting Snoop Dogg’s recording studio, getting to meet him, and just hang around (though not smoking pot).
So it was pretty clear that Snoop Dogg and the Los Angeles Lakers (who are not necessarily openly against Trump, but Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has been vocal) used to at least be fairly chummy with Trump if they were on his show.
Donald Trump, before running, used to be admired by both the Left and the Right. He was (is) the embodiment of the fullest potential of the American Dream. Not everyone will achieve it, but with time, hard work, dedication, passion and intelligence, it can definitely be achieved.
The Right loved him because he embodied the American Dream. The Left loved him because he was friendly towards them and he helped them out with financial contributions to their campaigns.
According to an article on US News dating back to January of 2016, before Trump was even the GOP nominee, “his political contributions over the last two and a half decades show that prior to the 2008 election cycle, Trump favored Democrats. He donated more than $10,000 to Hillary Clinton between 2002 and 2007, and Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is his top beneficiary, raking in $18,350 over the years.”
So he donated a good amount of money to Democrats over the years, among whom was his bitter rival Hillary Clinton. Of course, he also donated to Republicans, too. According to that same article, “On the Republican side, Arizona Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Rep. Mark Foley and former Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Spector also benefited from Trump’s generosity.”
So he donated money to yet another person in politics, though supposedly on the Right, who hated him upon his decision to run for POTUS in John McCain.
Trump also donated money, according to US News, to Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell (who is apparently cool with Trump now) and, perhaps most laughably of all, Kirsten Gillibrand. Although, I suppose that last one makes sense, since she has been a New York Senator since 2009.
So he used to be friendly with a lot of people in Washington on both sides of the aisle. Now, the article did mention that he donated more frequently to Democrats until 2008. Afterwards, he began donating more and more to Republicans. And who can blame him when the leader of the Democrat Party was the communist called Barack Hussein Obama?
But even still, I don’t quite remember the Left flat out hating Trump like they do now when he started donating more to Republicans. I suppose part of it was that he was still donating to Democrats (again, Gillibrand has been a senator since 2009), so things were kind of okay between them, but still. They only started to really hate him when he decided to run for office as a Republican.
Well, actually, that may not be entirely accurate. If you remember, the media used to mock him and thought he was a joke of a candidate who wouldn’t get far, but was good for ratings. So maybe they didn’t quite hate him at that point, but the fact that he decided to run as a Republican probably meant severing ties with Democrats from that point on, even if he had lost.
Once Trump became a serious threat to Hillary and the Democrat Party, not to mention his agenda was one that was 180 degrees backwards from the Left’s, meant that they harbored a deep-rooted hatred for him.
Now, I’m not saying they’re not allowed to not like someone who is now on the other side of their political ideologies. There are a lot of Never Trump conservatives whom I used to like but no longer do, namely people like Glenn Beck and Shepherd Smith among others. And if there is someone who used to be a conservative but now is a liberal, I’m not gonna like that person and think they are either idiotic or giving up to the pressure from the Left.
But I could not say I hate any one of them. The difference between someone who abandons the Left for the Right and someone who abandons the Right for the Left is that the Right won’t go bananas over someone leaving them to the point where they give speeches saying they “f*** person X” or “I want to beat up person X” and going to where they live, saying basically what Snoop Dogg is saying.
The fact that Leftists are the ones who do this means their hatred is at their core, to the point they go out of their own way to hurl insults. No right-winger will go out of their own way to insult someone on the Left.
Remember when Kanye West shared a picture of himself wearing a MAGA hat? Remember the slew of people hating on him for it? The people mocking him? This is what happens when you leave the Democrat slave plantation of thought. You get hunted down, attacked and harassed.
Until he altogether decided to stay away from politics (can’t blame him), he was hounded and harassed. Remember when two of Don Lemon’s guests made racist remarks towards him, saying that that’s what happens when an n-word doesn’t read?
They loved him when he said George Bush didn’t care about black people and hated him to the core when he showed himself wearing a MAGA hat, which to them, in their ridiculous world of insanity, is basically the equivalent of a swastika.
They “loved” Kanye until they realized he thought for himself. They “loved” Trump until the money stopped pouring in and ran against Hillary. They “love” anyone until that person disagrees with them or stops helping them. And when that person disagrees with them, all hell breaks loose.
NBC used to host The Apprentice. Snoop Dogg, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and likely other celebrities (again, I’ve only watched season 6) have been on the show as part of the rewards. And let's not forget that NBC used to air CELEBRITY APPRENTICE, where, as the title suggests, a bunch of celebrities try to get hired by Trump as his Apprentice (though Celebrity Apprentice basically replaced The Apprentice).
But once Trump dared to go against the Left, he became enemy number 1. Once anyone dares defy the Left, they become targets of hatred and ire.
One can hardly say the Left loves anyone. They don’t. They don’t even love themselves, how can they possibly love others? What they do is merely tolerate others as long as they agree with the Leftist agenda. That’s not love, and obviously, that’s not even tolerance.
Love is supposed to be unconditional. That’s not what the Left feels for anyone including themselves. So when someone like Trump comes along and defies them, it’s no surprise the kind of toxicity that oozes out of them henceforth.
Their hearts are filled with hatred. They are not tolerant; they are not loving; they are evil, plain and simple.
“The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to subscribe today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
I hardly need a poll to tell me what I know to be true: the fake news media is far more divisive than Trump ever could be. However, that does not mean I do not smile at seeing many people agreeing with me on this issue.
Recently, a Morning Consult poll was released, asking 2,435 voters (so a large sample size) if Trump and the media have done more to divide the country than unite it. According to the poll, an overwhelming 64% of registered voters “said the press has done more to divide the country than unite it since Trump took office…”
56% said the same about Trump, but we’ll get to that momentarily.
The poll also shows percentages according to political party affiliation. According to the poll, 88% of Democrats said Trump was divisive, but a surprising 46% said the press was divisive.
With Independents, 67% said the media was divisive, compared to 54% who said that of Trump.
With Republicans, 80% said the press was divisive and 25% said Trump was.
Many of these numbers are pretty fascinating and good, in my opinion.
That 88% of Dems saying Trump is divisive does not surprise me. Frankly, what surprises me is that it’s not in the 90 percentile. However, that 46% of Dems saying the press was divisive is quite incredible and says an awful lot about the lack of credibility the fake news media has with their own target demographic, who should theoretically always support them.
It’s not exactly a majority, being less than 50%, but it’s incredibly close. As for Independents, who tend to go one way or the other, depending on the person (Sanders is technically an Independent, though he’s a far-Left Independent), they tend to be people who are dissatisfied with both parties, and given the Left’s recent behavior, I suspect there are more Independents today than even a few years ago, given the recent Walk Away movement.
67% of Independents saying the media is divisive is not a good thing for Democrats. And while 54% also say Trump is divisive, that’s still far less than those who point towards the media’s divisiveness.
As far as Republicans go, neither number really surprises me too much. I would think more than just 80% of Republicans would say the media is divisive, and I know very well that there are NeverTrump Republicans out there, so that 25% is actually fairly low and also a good sign for Trump.
Another Morning Consult/Politico poll back in July found that “28 percent of voters said they had ‘a lot’ of confidence in the presidency – more than twice the 13 percent who said the same of television news and double the 14 percent who said the same of newspapers.”
But these numbers generally point out what should really be crystal clear to anyone paying attention: the media is largely responsible for the divisiveness in our country.
Now, Trump being President, and being one who pushes back against the Left, naturally will also cause some divisiveness. The only reason Democrats and the media could say today that Bush was less divisive is because he was nowhere near as much of a fighter against the Left as Trump is. Let’s not forget that much of Bush’s early presidency was marred with Democrats being bitter about the Supreme Court deciding the election, thinking it was stolen from them. (ring any bells?)
The biggest reason Trump is characterized as divisive is because he actually fights back against the Democrats and the media, who have gotten used to Republicans quaking in their boots and apologizing for breathing.
But in this rhetoric of Trump’s divisiveness, and with pretty much every other rhetoric the media throws out there, it is the media that is largely to blame for the division in our country.
Who can blame people for thinking this way, when you have Don Lemon calling for people (aka Trump and Republicans) to stop demonizing people and in the same breath he demonizes white people and Republicans? When you have Julia Ioffe saying Trump has radicalized more people than ISIS has? When you have people calling Trump “Hitler” and Trump’s supporters “Nazis”? When you have people defending the vandalism and destruction that Antifa causes, calling them “angels”? When you have people defending acts of violence and/or harassment of Republican members of Congress or Trump’s staff?
Who can blame people for believing the media divides people when the media fought tooth and nail to spread lies and slander about a Supreme Court nominee with zero evidence? When the media pins the blame of any shooting anywhere on Trump and Republicans? When the media supports the narrative that Trump colluded with Russia, despite zero evidence ever having turned up? When the media defends one of the most crooked Presidents and presidential nominees we have ever seen in Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton respectively?
Who can blame people for believing this way when the media calls for others to tone down on the rhetoric, and in the same breath will tone up their OWN rhetoric? When over 90% of the coverage of Trump is negative?
And these are all just examples that come to immediate mind. I’m sure there are countless other examples of the media being divisive that I am forgetting. But it’s because of all of these examples, both the ones I listed and the ones I am certainly forgetting, that the people cannot come to trust what the media tells them.
Now, earlier, I mentioned that I would get to the 56% of people who said Trump was divisive. Again, he’s the President. The position tends to naturally divide people, at least to some extent. But the arguments made against him that he’s divisive ultimately come down to “he’s not apologizing like every other Republican ever”. Sure, that is never said outright, but that is ultimately the Left’s complaint with Trump. He doesn’t apologize for being who he is, for saying what he says and for doing what he’s doing. And it’s part of this defiance of the status quo of Republicans apologizing for daring to take a breath of air that makes Trump as successful and popular as he is.
Of course, that is only part of it, but it is a substantial part. And it’s this success that comes with his attitude that further drives the Left to insanity. Nothing they have tried has worked. No narrative, no rhetoric; no tried and true method of destroying Republicans has even made a dent. If anything, these attacks have had the opposite effect. The attacks were supposed to tear his approval numbers to shreds. He sits at the mid to high-40s, with some having him at 50% approval, which has him higher than Obama was at this point in his own presidency.
Granted, much of that is due to the fact that Trump is actually Making America Great Again, but the constant attacks against Trump are what drive his supporters closer to him.
I have often said that Trump’s election victory, and his subsequent success post-election, have driven the Left to near insanity, if they aren’t already there. They had a thermonuclear reaction to Trump’s victory, the effects of which we are still seeing and will continue to see for a very long time, most likely. This being the case, who can blame people for trying to distance themselves from what is highly radioactive and toxic?
64% of voters said the media is dividing the country. In all honesty, that number should be at 100% or somewhere close to that. Of course, that would be living in a perfect world where people don’t buy into the crap the Left sells and we do not live in such a world. But for this being an imperfect world, I will gladly take 64% of people believing and KNOWING the media is dividing the country.
I just hope that one day, that number will be very, very low, and we can have a news-media world that reports the truth rather than distorts it – that reflects narratives and beliefs, not create them.
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes entirely free of charge. Unlike the fake news media that will lie to you about pretty much everything, you can rest assured that it is not a lie when I tell you that this is completely free. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
If you know me, you know I do not tend to insult people. I always argue Leftists’ dumb arguments but never really call those people dumb. I call them out for what they are, but typically without insulting them. And if I insult them, it’s typically a part of a joke, to some extent.
As for Don Lemon, I will not insult him, since that’s beneath me. However, this needs to be made completely clear: he is, without a shadow of a doubt, a disgustingly hypocritical slimeball.
Recently, Don Lemon said some things that will leave anyone to cringe in utter disgust with the man.
First, on a CNN panel on Monday, he argued that he doesn’t see Democrats killing people because of political motivations. That the mail-bomber and the Tree of Life shooter were both right-wingers and that that is to blame for the violence.
When the issue of the shooter who tried to kill Republicans came up, he argued that there is no equivalency there. No comparison. Of course, that being bullcrap, Lemon does not explain why it’s different.
Second, talking with Chris Cuomo, Lemon said “we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right. And we have to start doing something about them… There is no white guy ban.”
In the same sentence, in the same breath, Lemon urges people not to demonize others, all-the-while demonizing white people and Republicans. It’s truly sickening what goes on in this guy’s mind and what comes out of his mouth. So allow me to slowly, but surely dismantle this guy’s arguments and properly call him out for exactly what he is.
Let’s begin with the argument that he doesn’t see Democrats killing people and that the socialist shooter is different from the synagogue shooter and mail-bomber.
First of all, even this hypocrite can’t tell me the socialist shooter wasn’t trying to kill people. The socialist shooter didn’t bring his AR-15 to the baseball field and start shooting Republicans because he wanted to have a civil conversation about healthcare. He went there because Bernie Sanders said prior to the shooting that Republicans were going to kill millions of people by getting rid of healthcare or changing it in the least.
The socialist shooter was reportedly shouting “this is for healthcare!” while he was shooting. Miraculously, that nut-job didn’t kill anyone. But he definitely tried to, given he was FIRING AT OTHER PEOPLE!
Second of all, the mail-bomber already had a history of violence, and even sending bombs in the mail in the past. Not to mention that the bombs were inoperable. They didn’t blow up and were not designed to. If Lemon can’t see Democrats killing people because the socialist shooter didn’t actually kill anyone, then by that logic, we can’t see the mail bomber killing anyone because he didn’t. Lemon’s argument here is largely based on the fortunate technicality that the socialist shooter didn’t manage to kill anyone. But let’s not forget that he was definitely trying to and sent Rep. Steve Scalise to the hospital.
Third of all, the Tree of Life shooter was not a right-winger. He was an ardent anti-Trumper who hated the fact that Trump was so pro-Jew and pro-Israel. That line of thinking falls more in line with anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan, Linda Sarsour, Al Sharpton, etc., who are all Leftists.
Beyond the socialist shooter, there are countless other stories of Leftists threatening the lives of anyone they disagree with and committing acts of violence. I’ve already written about that sort of thing TWICE, listing the rap sheet from Breitbart about the number of Leftist and media-incited/ignored/acceptable acts of violence against the Right.
I don’ trust that any of them wouldn’t go as far as to kill someone they disagree with should they have the chance to. That’s one of the reasons we have the second amendment and why we carry guns, just in case someone threatens and fully intends to take our lives.
If they are willing to actually terrorize people they disagree with, the next step is to actually kill them. The only political groups that have shown this tendency and attitude are Leftist political groups like Black Lives Matter, some of whom HAVE gone as far as to kill cops, and Antifa, who are one successful killing away from being labeled a terrorist organization the likes of ISIS, Hamas, etc.
Finally, let’s not forget that a Democrat HAS ACTUALLY KILLED a Republican in the past. Need I remind you that John Wilkes Booth successfully assassinated Republican President Abraham Lincoln? Booth was from the Democrat South, which hated that Lincoln was fighting them over their supposed “right” to own a human being.
So if Lemon can’t see a Democrat killing anyone for political reasons, he is completely ignorant of history. Not something that surprises me, but something that must be pointed out here.
Now, let’s move on to the racially-charged comment that honestly makes me, a Latino man, sick to my stomach.
The hypocrisy of that comment leaves me in utter shock. Not because I didn’t expect it – I certainly did - but because within the same breath, he calls on people to stop demonizing others and proceeds to demonize others.
What he means by that statement is that Trump and Republicans need to stop demonizing the media and the Left and just take that same demonization themselves. The media definitely doesn’t need to stop demonizing Republicans. Democrats definitely don’t need to stop demonizing Republicans. The Left doesn’t need to tone down on the inflammatory rhetoric, but Trump and Republicans do. Matter of fact, slimeballs like Lemon will flat out deny that their rhetoric is in any way inflammatory.
I don’t really know what else to say. Lemon’s comment speaks for itself. Aside from being hugely hypocritical, it is disgustingly racist. Saying that white people are a terror threat? How is this guy allowed on television? Trying to bring up the supposed “Muslim” ban (which doesn’t ban Muslims, just people from a list of Islamic-terror-related countries, and they know that, but they don’t care) and suggesting that maybe there should be a “white guy” ban?
Do you see now why I call him a hypocritical slimeball? His rhetoric is more inflammatory than he could claim Trump’s is, his arguments are illogical and flat out racist, and he, as well as the entirety of CNN, all believe what he is saying is acceptable and even right and correct.
And this comes in the same week that Far-Left writer Julia Ioffe said, on CNN, that Trump has “radicalized so many more people than ISIS ever did.”
She later “apologized” by saying she was “exaggerating”. But that, of course, leads us to believe she fully believes Trump has and is radicalizing people much in the same way ISIS does.
These two are not the only ones at CNN (or the broader Fake News media, for that matter) who have claimed Trump is to blame for the actions of the mail-bomber and synagogue shooter and is to blame for the current political climate.
But in doing all of this, apart from dodging the truth about those two nut-jobs (mail-bomber having a criminal history and the shooter being anti-Trump), they use the same inflammatory rhetoric they claim Trump is using, but even more so.
These people are unapologetic about their rhetoric. If they were, they wouldn’t be using it. For all their claims that Trump is dividing the nation, in reality, it is them who are doing that.
Trump, after the Tree of Life shooting, decided to go to Pittsburgh. The Left’s response? Attacking him, saying he shouldn’t be there. Trump, after the mail-bombing suspect was caught, gave a strong speech condemning his actions. The Left’s response? Trump is not being sincere.
While Trump’s use of “enemy of the people” to describe the FAKE news media (I capitalize the word fake because people tend to omit that part) might be inflammatory, it is nonetheless true. The fake news media constantly lies about everything, but that is the least of their sins that label them as the “enemy of the people”. Apart from straight up lying to people, they constantly label those they disagree with as racist, bigot, homophobe, etc. They label others as Nazis and fascists. They call Trump Hitler and a WaPo article even said he’s worse than Hitler.
In this labeling, they label everyone who supports Trump as a Nazi. Everyone who even slightly disagrees with them on anything as a Nazi. And Lemon, right here, is labeling those he disagrees with (and white people in general) as terror threats.
These people are filled to the brim with hatred. They hate Trump for everything he does and manages to do. They hate us for having ever defied their narcissistic behinds and choosing to support him. And in this hatred, they excuse actual threats and acts of violence against conservatives and right-wingers, all-the-while insisting it is us who are the real threat to democracy, to America, to people.
As human beings, I don’t consider the fake news media to be my enemy. As a Christian, I don’t do that. But as a political commentator, someone who wants what is best for the country, I consider them the enemy of the state.
Everything they want works towards the systemic dismantling of America as founded. That’s what the 8 years of Obama were all about. That’s what Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, and every other Democrat is about. The fundamental destruction of the United States and the fundamental change towards a socialist nation in the likes of China, Venezuela, Soviet Russia, etc.
What they want is dangerous, and what they spew is dangerous. No, I would never harm any of them and anyone who wishes harm upon them, I disavow and no longer consider them conservatives because a true conservative would never want or do that.
But it truly must be understood that these people don’t care for America. THAT is what makes them the enemy of the people.
As for Lemon himself, I have nothing else to say. He’s a disgusting, hypocritical slimeball. I only have respect for him in that I respect his life and his right to his own opinion. Apart from that, he does not get nor deserve any sort of respect from anyone, let alone me.
I think he is someone in dire need of Christ. Looking into his eyes, I see someone who is dead inside. A typical trait for those who do not have faith in the Lord, and particularly for those on the Left. I sincerely hope he finds Christ. That is the best I can wish for him.
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. Unlike the fake news media, I won’t lie to you about something being free. When I say this newsletter is free, that is the truth. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
It is safe to say that our current political climate has gone well-beyond toxic and entered the realm of violence. Not only are you not allowed to think a certain way, you will be punished for thinking a certain way. Anyone who utters a conservative thought, who dons a MAGA hat, who openly supports this country or their local GOP candidate is considered less than human, and thus, expendable.
Though we have not quite gotten to the point where we are outright killing each other Civil War-style, that certainly seems to be the direction we’re headed. Tensions aren’t being de-escalated, and it certainly doesn’t help that nut-jobs like Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Maxine Waters and many in the MSM, particularly CNN, encourage this violent behavior against the Right.
But here’s the thing: these Leftists, as unhinged, dangerous and evil as they might be, are also huge cowards.
Allow me to elaborate. One particular trend I’ve noticed as of late is that whenever there is violent confrontation between Leftists and Right-wingers, the Left had some sort of advantage. Be it strength in numbers, strength in weaponry, or simply physical strength against someone who is of the fairer sex.
Breitbart News has documented 603 acts of violence and/or harassment that the media has approved of thus far. But you can add another 2 to that list, since in Nevada, a Leftist operative of a Soros-funded organization physically assaulted the female Republican campaign manager for GOP gubernatorial nominee Adam Laxalt. According to the Daily Wire, this is the nut-job’s second time being arrested for assaulting a Republican woman.
The second would be a small Antifa group in Portland, OR, where I used to live, harassing and verbally accosting a 9/11 widow until a group of counter-protesters, some of whom were larger men than the “man” who accosted the widow, chased the small group away from the woman.
Looking over the rap sheet of acts of violence/harassment, we can see things like: Sen. Susan Collins being sent a letter filled with ricin to her home, a Republican candidate being sucker-punched in a Minnesota restaurant, a FEMALE Republican State Representative being assaulted in Minnesota, a female conservative reporter being threatened with rape by an elderly Leftist man (and feminists defending said man, even though we’re supposed to believe all women), CNN anchor Don Lemon defending the mob that chased Ted Cruz and his family out of a restaurant by saying the mob had the Constitutional right to do that (spoiler alert: they didn’t), and perhaps more prominently, a Leftist protester kicking a pro-life woman.
There are also other things, such as a Leftist attacking a Republican House candidate in Northern California with a switchblade, a Trump supporter being attacked by a punk rocker in one of the rocker’s own shows (and being kept from fighting back by the other attendees), and who could forget the shooting at a Virginia baseball practice that targeted Republicans and sent Rep. Steve Scalise to the hospital?
What many of these incidents have in common is that the Leftist attackers have the confidence to attack or harass someone. But when an equal or greater force meets these Leftists, they deflate like a badly baked soufflé. I’m sure you’ve seen some videos of Leftist thugs getting beaten up by counter-protesters. When things get a little too violent and the Left thinks they can take someone on, if they don’t have some sort of advantage, they completely fall apart and retreat.
Because at that point it’s either that or getting their butts kicked.
But the entire thing exposes these two things about the Left: 1) they are evil, otherwise they would never dare harass or attack someone for a petty reason like a political disagreement and 2) they are cowardly, only daring to take action when they feel they have some sort of advantage, be it a weapon, physical dominance over a woman, or strength in numbers.
Whenever we talk about gun control, the Left will always utter taunts like “why do you need a weapon? Are you just not manly enough?” which is especially rich considering that they heavily scrutinize any man that even remotely appears to do something manly, and considering the fact that many on the Left could easily be considered beta males.
But they utter such a taunt because they want to make gun-owners appear to be cowardly, hiding behind a gun. And yet, it is strictly the Left who uses guns to do a shooting. You will never see a conservative shooting up an establishment with the intention of killing Democrats. That’s something only the Left has been documented to do. Why? Because of the previously-listed reasons: they are evil and cowardly.
The Virginia baseball field shooter was reportedly shouting about healthcare. Instead of trying to win elections, he opted to simply exterminate the Republicans in Congress, or at least as many as he could. That is not only evil, but also massively cowardly.
As are the rest of Antifa and anyone who wants to pretend to fight for something worthwhile on the Left (of which there is nothing). They accost Right-wingers whenever they feel they have some sort of advantage. But at the first sign of equal or greater opposition, they become emasculated and retreat.
Now, if this were a war, that’d be understandable. Only someone with a death-wish would willingly throw themselves into a disadvantage. You attack when you feel you have some sort of advantage, for the most part. However, this is not war (yet) and these are not soldiers fighting for their country.
These are children who failed to grow up, at least mentally and emotionally, and pretend to fight fascism all-the-while employing the exact same tactics the Fascist black-shirts and the Nazi brown-shirts employed to gain power. These are not soldiers fighting the Taliban. These are children fighting law-abiding citizens who disagree with them. People who are simply trying to enjoy a meal, or walk down the street, or express their beliefs.
These are people that think they are expressing their beliefs by acting in the way they do. People who simultaneously deny others their right to free speech if that speech is different from their own.
Earlier, I mentioned Don Lemon saying these mobsters have a Constitutional right to do what they did to Ted Cruz and his family. To quote, here’s what he said: “… But that doesn’t mean that people don’t get to object. That’s your right as an American to object. It’s covered in the First Amendment… In the Constitution, you can protest whenever and wherever you want. It doesn’t tell you that you can’t do it in a restaurant, that you can’t do it on a football field. It doesn’t tell you that you can’t do it on a cable news – you can do it wherever you want.”
Aside from being a notorious racist, Don Lemon is also a massive moron. You can protest in public areas, but not in private property. You need the permission of the owner to protest in private property. But beyond arguing against such a stupid argument, let me take a step back here. THESE ARE NOT PROTESTERS! THESE ARE RAGE-FILLED MOBS CHASING PEOPLE OUT OF RESTAURANTS!
A peaceful protester will not accost someone. That goes against the definition of a peaceful protest. To call these people anything other than a mob is asinine. And I find it fascinating that Don Lemon thinks these people have the right to do this, but Ted Cruz and his family don’t have the right to enjoy a meal in a restaurant.
But anyway, that’s mostly just a tangent that I really wanted to cover here just to expose Don Lemon as the piece of crap that he is. A racist, a hypocrite and a massive moron.
Returning to the overall point, it becomes clear to anyone with eyes and a functioning brain that these “protesters” are nothing but a mob. That these people are evil and cowardly, only daring to get violent if they feel they have some sort of advantage.
Again, these are not soldiers. These are very privileged children who have yet to face reality. If there ever is another Civil War in this country, it will be a quick one.
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord and their vindication from me, declares the Lord.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes entirely free of charge. No hidden fees. What you get it a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Recently, CampusReform’s Cabot Phillips went to the University of Georgia, offering students $100 if they could answer this simple question: “Can you offer an example of a liberal speaker being shouted down by conservative students?”
Of course, this is coming from the fact that there have been multiple cases of college speakers getting shouted down and events being cancelled. And it really should come as no surprise to anyone that every speaker that was shouted down was either conservative (Ben Shapiro and others) or simply said things that the Leftist students disagreed with.
So for $100, Cabot challenged a number of students to see if any of them could think of even one example of conservative students shouting down a liberal event in any way. As you could imagine, not one student was $100 richer that day.
No student could recall such an event happening either because they were not necessarily paying attention (not that there even is an example even if you were paying attention) or simply because they legitimately could not picture even one time when conservative students shouted down a liberal speaker.
One of the students admitted: “No, I don’t think I can name any. I wish I could, but no…”
I won’t get too much into that particular answer, since seeing the video, I take that to mean “I wish I could tell you so I could get that $100” and not “I wish I could tell you so that I can own conservatives.”
His demeanor was not one of someone who was frustrated at not being able to come up with an example.
Another student said: “I honestly would believe that that hasn’t happened before.” Which is quite an interesting answer, all things considered.
Now, unsurprisingly, pretty much all of them still tried to say that the Left was more tolerant and open-minded. One of them said: “I just think people are a bit more open on the liberal side.” The interesting thing is that Cabot tried to reason with him, saying that, knowing conservatives don’t shut down liberal speakers, wouldn’t it make more sense to consider the conservatives to be more open-minded? The student briefly agreed with Cabot, but ultimately went with: “… I think it’s both sides.”
It really isn’t.
Another student, when faced by the same question of who is more tolerant, said: “I think so. I think if they (conservatives) did it, they’d know there’d be more backlash.”
A very fascinating point he makes. If it were conservatives shouting down liberal speakers, there would absolutely be more backlash. And deservedly so, because conservatives believe in freedom of speech. But then, this raises another question: “why don’t the liberals face the kind of backlash this student believes would go to conservatives if they did the exact same thing?”
Why is it that when liberal students threaten violence or actually perpetrate violence against a speaker they disagree with, they do not receive much if any backlash at all? Of course, we all know the answer to this. Academia and the media are both owned by the Left. The media won’t report on it, and when they do, they usually back the students who threatened violence.
Anyway, back to the students. Some of them still tried to make the case that liberals are more open-minded than conservatives. Emphasis on the word “tried”. The ones that argued in favor of liberals being more open-minded either eventually came to an agreement or concession of their point, like the student I mentioned some paragraphs ago, or they simply had their tongues-tied and could not properly make an argument.
It’s because of those things that I titled this article like I did. The proof is in the pudding.
The overlords at Google define tolerance as: “the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.”
Going by this definition owned by Leftists themselves, we can see that liberal students do not express tolerance towards conservative speakers. They have neither the ability nor the willingness to tolerate opinions that differ from their own.
Much like the Nazi brown shirts or the Fascist black shirts, liberal college students try to suppress and deny other people’s opinions. Beyond not wanting to hear those opinions, they do not want those opinions even uttered.
It is one thing to be a liberal, see that your college is hosting Ben Shapiro, and choosing not to go to the event. It is an entirely different thing to be a liberal, see that your college is hosting Ben Shapiro, and organize a mob to shut down the event altogether and keep Shapiro from speaking at all.
You have the right to not hear someone’s opinion, but you do not have the right to bully and threaten and keep someone from expressing their opinion. Like the student said, if conservatives were to do it to liberals, there would be a lot of backlash, even from the Right, as well there should be. No real conservative would shut down the speech of another person just because they disagree with them.
But those are not the rules the Left lives by. Knowing this, and the fact that they are the only ones who do this to anyone, then one cannot realistically argue that liberals are at least equally as tolerant or even more tolerant than conservatives. That is simply the opposite of reality.
Not one of these students got $100 because not one of these students could come up with an example of conservatives shutting down liberal events. That’s because that sort of thing does not happen. We may attend liberal events and challenge the ideas of the speakers, much like some liberals attend conservative events and challenge the speaker, but we never adamantly keep someone from expressing their beliefs, as erroneous and messed up as they might be.
This is all because conservatives are truly tolerant, while the Left is not. Now, one thing needs to be clarified: it is okay to be intolerant sometimes. Definitely not when your desire is to shut down someone else’s opinion and keep them from uttering it. But definitely when someone is doing something wrong.
What do I mean by this? Well, this all comes down to right and wrong. For example, we should not be tolerant of terrorism. While sissy countries like the U.K. and France seemingly tolerate terrorism (see London Mayor Sadiq Khan saying it’s part and parcel of living in a big city), no one should really tolerate such a despicable act. No country should lay down and accept that as part of life. No one should tolerate radical Islamic extremists killing people in the name of Allah or Sharia Law or sex with goats or whatever.
At that point, tolerating terrorism is not tolerance, it’s surrender. And doing this is extremely dangerous in multiple levels.
So it’s okay to not be tolerant of everything. If we had to tolerate everything, then we would have had to tolerate Nazism. It’s good to tolerate things, so long as those things are not adamantly evil and a horrible thing in this world.
Regardless, I hope this experience leaves some of those kids with something to think about. If they are logical, they should come to the conclusion that liberals are really the ones who don’t tolerate things and that conservatives are the ones who tolerate others.
2 Peter 3:18
“But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. It contains a compilation of the week’s articles delivered straight into your inbox. And as the name suggests, it comes completely free of charge. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Since the Brett Kavanaugh story has been the most talked-about story in the past few weeks, it makes sense for me to still be talking about it. However, rather than focusing on the story in and of itself, I will focus on what this story is doing to American people who follow the MSM and believe everything they say.
What the Left is doing here, as will be shown by the following story, is creating mind-numbed robots programmed to believe certain things and answer in certain ways when challenged. This tends to be prominent in climate change debates, abortion, etc. But with the Brett Kavanaugh case, the effects of the Left are in full display.
Allow me to elaborate and give you context. Recently, many anti-Kavanaugh protests have been held in Republican offices, with stories of vandalism and unruliness. However, while that comes as part of the overall idea of the Left creating mind-numbed robots, I will not be focusing on those particular stories. I will focus on one particular story about a Republican Congressman, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) actually pushing back against the claims and accusations of a female anti-Kavanaugh protester.
The video (below) begins with the protester asking Cassidy: “Why are you supporting Kavanaugh?” Cassidy simply replied with: “Why wouldn’t I support Kavanaugh?”
The protester then said: “Because rapists are bad.”
Now, personally, I could go on and on about this woman’s likely hypocrisy if she supports Bill Clinton and even going as far as to point out that, to the Left, Kavanaugh is guilty of a horrific crime just because a woman said so. The key word here is “woman” because they make it a point to say that all women must be believed, regardless of the evidence presented (or lack thereof)… except for Monica Lewinsky, Juanita Broaddrick, Karen Monahan or anyone else who accuses Democrats of anything.
But I will not focus on that, at least quite yet.
To continue, Cassidy then said: “Wait a second – everybody there said that it did not happen. So why am I going to-“ before being cut-off by the protester who said: “So you’re going to believe Mark Judge over a woman?”
Again, I could point out the fact that the only thing that matters is the gender of the accuser and that just because she’s a woman, she immediately is credible. A sexist belief, no matter what way you slice it.
Still, Cassidy responded by saying: “No, I’m going to believe her best friend.” To which the protester said: “Her best friend didn’t say it didn’t happen. Her best friend said she wasn’t told about it.”
Cassidy replied: “She said she didn’t remember.”
Then, we get into the meat of the conversation. The protester hilariously and baselessly said to Cassidy: “So you’re ok as a doctor to harm a woman?”
First, I don’t know how you take “Ford’s best friend said she didn’t remember” and assume that to mean “I’m okay with women getting hurt.” You have to have some missing brain cells to try and make such a connection there. There is no connection whatsoever.
Second, that really displays the sort of damage the Left is making. They are actually dumbing people down if that is her response.
But Cassidy’s reply is the absolute best: “Wait a second – are you ok as a person to go ahead and to accept a non-corroborated charge to destroy someone’s life? If it destroyed your life, your son’s life, or your husband’s? Wait a second, answer my question. If it was your husband, your son, your father, whose life has been destroyed by uncorroborated, would you like that?”
A fantastic question that no honest liberal can answer. They always ask: “what if it was your daughter or sister or mother who was up there claiming a person assaulted her?” They never ask: “what if it was your son or brother or mother who was up there being accused of something the accusers cannot prove they did and get utterly destroyed by it?” We can answer their question. They can’t answer ours because this is a matter of fairness and they have to know on a fundamental level, even if they don’t say it outright, that the treatment of Kavanaugh is wholly unfair. The protester’s subsequent answer highlights that she cannot answer the question because she fundamentally believes this is unfair but doesn’t want to give Kavanaugh a break.
The protester, in her mind-numbed robot manner, replied: “I would support a full FBI investigation.”
That doesn’t even begin to answer the Senator’s question. It’s not a matter of whether she would approve an FBI investigation. It’s a matter of whether she would be okay with a male member of her family being utterly destroyed over something he did not do and has not been proven to have done.
But Cassidy tried to get her to answer the question he provided and even pointed out that she could not answer the question because she knows it’s unfair. These are the answers, in order, that she gave to the same question of whether she would like for this to happen to a male member of her family who was innocent: “I wouldn’t marry somebody that was a drunk”, “I would stand up”, “I would fight. And I would make sure women are heard. Clearly you’re ok if a rapist goes on the Supreme Court.”
I will get to the answers momentarily. For now, I will share Cassidy’s final reply because it is absolutely terrific: “No, I’m not. But then, on the other hand, clearly you’re ok, the absence of evidence obviously means nothing to you.”
To which the protester replied, hilariously: “No, there is evidence. Look at the standard. How many people are in jail for less?”
Again, you have to be a special kind of person to believe “look at the standard” and “people are jailed for less” to be evidence for this specific case. It’s honestly a stupid argument, and even then, calling that an argument would be to give it too much credit. It’s not an argument; it’s stupidity in verbal form.
But as I promised, let’s look at the answers she gave to the question Cassidy proposed: “I wouldn’t marry somebody that was a drunk”. First, that also doesn’t answer the question. Second, that’s fine, but what about a son, father or brother? What do you do with them if they are in this position? Not be the mother of a drunk? Not be the daughter of a drunk? Not be the sister of a drunk? This answer is entirely flawed even despite the fact that it’s not an answer to Cassidy’s question.
“I would stand up.” To whom? And for whom? Would she really stand up with a woman who would not and cannot corroborate her claims of sexual assault being directed at someone in her own family? Would she really trust the word of a woman who is not credible over the word of her own family member just because the family member is male or just because the accuser is female?
Even this begs the question: what if she were being accused by a man of sexual assault and he provided no evidence? Is an accusation all it takes to destroy someone, evidence be damned?
“I would fight. And I would make sure women are heard.” They are being heard. No one is keeping them from expressing their supposed or real grief. The Republicans in the SJC bent over backwards to make sure Ford would be heard. For a couple of weeks, she kept herself from being heard with flimsy excuses.
But this also points out the sexist nature of her argument against Kavanaugh. “Make sure women are heard.” What about male victims? Are they not to be trusted, credible or even allowed to be heard because they are men? If a woman is accused of rape (and it happens. Not as often, but it happens) then is the woman to be credible? Is she to be believed over the accuser, even if the accuser provides solid evidence against her?
This is the problem the #MeToo movement is creating: women’s words over truth. But this all stems from the larger problem the Left altogether is creating: feelings over facts; Leftist agenda over truth.
I mocked the woman’s answers to Cassidy’s question. But it sadly highlights the kind of damage the Left is causing. She did not care to answer his question, just offer more Leftist talking points. She’s like a computer, picking up on certain key words being thrown into the conversation and offering answers that often do not make sense. Trying to hold a conversation with that protester is like trying to hold a conversation with Siri – you just can’t do it.
Have you ever tried holding a conversation with Siri? You’ll notice that she doesn’t pay attention to the flow of the conversation or even what was said before the last thing you said. She answers to specific key words in each, individual sentence you speak. She’s a robot, so we can understand her limitations. But this woman is real (as far as we can tell). She has no excuse for offering answers that don’t really answer the question.
I literally asked Siri the same question Cassidy asked the woman: “Are you ok as a person to go ahead and to accept a non-corroborated charge to destroy someone’s life?” Siri replied: “I don’t have an answer to that…”
Siri is more honest than the Leftist protester. Then again, this is a question surrounding morality. A robot can’t answer a question about morality because a robot does not understand morality. But a human being should be able to. The Left always considers itself to be morally right, to be tolerant, to be the good guys. I imagine Hitler thought he was morally right to kill the Jews. I imagine he thought he was the good guy.
The reality is that, like Hitler, the Left is entirely immoral. What they support is that which is immoral. Abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism, men using women’s restrooms (which ironically would lead to more #MeToo stories that they say they want to end), the use of recreational drugs that destroy one’s own body in the name of “fun”, and many more. The Left is deeply immoral and as part of this immorality, they damage the people they reach.
That woman needs some serious help. I doubt anyone can logically convince her that what she is doing, accusing Kavanaugh of rape based solely on what is nothing more than hearsay at this point, is anything but moral and right. That what Ford, Ramirez and especially Swetnik are doing is morally wrong. That what the MSM and the Democrat Party are doing is morally wrong.
She cannot see the horrors the Left is perpetuating. This is the systematic destruction of the rule of law and it’s being applauded by those who consider themselves Leftists.
The point of this article isn’t to try to convince other Leftists that what they are doing is morally wrong and illogical. They will never admit that or even briefly consider it as the truth. The point of this article, and really of most if not all of my articles, is to show everyone else the lunacy that is the Left. You cannot possibly argue that anything the protester argued was logical and outside the realm of lunacy. She is emotionally invested in the destruction of Kavanaugh and in the Left’s #MeToo movement to destroy any and all conservative men.
No logical person would even consider aligning themselves with this lunacy.
I will wrap this up soon because this article is getting a bit too long, but I want to point something out: Charlie Kirk recently wrote on Breitbart that Andrew Breitbart, the founder of Breitbart News, abandoned his liberal views and became a conservative during and after the Clarence Thomas hearing that was reminiscent of the Kavanaugh story. He makes the point that one can hardly imagine how many Andrew Breitbarts were born after this Kavanaugh story and with the way the media has run this story.
I mention this because Breitbart was a logical person. The people who are still adamantly against Kavanaugh and believe the accusations solely because women are making them, despite the lack of evidence presented, are all examples of illogical people. But within the Democrat Party, there have to be at least some people who are seeing this and are disgusted by it.
I certainly hope that’s the case, because what the Left is creating is horrible, but the good news is that it’s not for everyone. Logical thinkers will leave this lunatic culture that exists within the Democrat Party and rethink some things.
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness, who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that is 100% free of any cost. It contains a compilation of the week’s articles put together in a single email. Check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
You look at the state of today’s world of politics and all you will find is rabid hatred that goes well beyond reason on one side and constant push back against such things on the other (mainly Trump, but a few others as well like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz).
We see tech giants like Facebook and Twitter punishing those who think differently from them while allowing terrorist organizations, former terrorist leaders and open racists to continually sow discord and hateful bigotry just because they side with the Left or are Muslim (or both).
But on an individual basis, things aren’t particularly great either. What do I mean by that? Well, before I get much more into it, allow me to talk about the big reason I decided to write this at this time.
Recently, a conservative pro-life activist, journalist and commentator named DC McAllister was subject to seemingly legitimate threats of rape and murder, not only of her, but even her family.
Obviously, such threats and actions go further beyond Twitter and Facebook’s tendency to simply ban someone and effectively silencing them. Such threats are not only meant to silence people, but to terrorize them. And if those threats are legitimate, they go even beyond, to the point where physical, emotional and mental harm is caused to a human being.
But what did McAllister do or say that would garner such response? Apparently, this tweet: “At the root of #abortion hysteria is women’s unhinged desire for irresponsible sex. Sex is their god. Abortion is their sacrament. It’s abhorrent as women have flung themselves from their heights of being the world’s civilizing force to the muck and mire of dehumanizing depravity.”
Harsh, but truthful words. There is nothing in that tweet that I disagree with. But naturally, there are those who disagree tremendously.
Now, it’s one thing to disagree with this. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and to expressing their own opinion. However, what NO ONE is entitled to is making threats to other people that they will rape them and/or kill them. NO ONE has that right. But it’s when people do these sort of things that we really see the death of civil discourse.
I don’t think I have to explain to you how such threats are not civil. Whenever someone threatens violence against someone else, that is when you have a break in civil discourse. This is what annoys me about Antifa thugs and the way they are portrayed. The media will defend them and call them “angels” when they are being devilishly evil, threatening people, destroying property and often times harming others. They're breaking the law.
And there are countless times that I can recall where conservatives have fallen victim to this break in civil discourse and venturing into barbarism.
While nothing has yet happened to DC McAllister, and we hope and pray nothing does, this would not be the first time someone has at least made threats against someone, let alone actually tried something.
Last year, we had a socialist Bernie supporter use the Left’s most hated weapon, an AR-15, to shoot Republicans during a baseball game between members of Congress with the intention to kill as many Republicans as possible. The Left went on to blame this on Republicans two days later.
About a year ago, Sen. Rand Paul was assaulted by a Leftist neighbor. Recently, a socialist threatened to shoot up a MAGA event at a Trump Hotel in D.C. And there have been countless other times in which deranged socialists have threatened to assassinate Trump or kill conservatives.
Hollywood actors have stated their desire to beat Trump to a pulp. Even former VP Joe Biden has done this multiple times. Recently, a Broadway actress “joked”: “where is John Wilkes Booth when you need him?” And shortly after Trump was elected, David Brooks casually mentioned that Trump should consider whether he wanted to resign, be impeached or be assassinated.
Putting together the tasteless jokes, the open desire to use violence against someone they disagree with, the threats made against conservatives’ lives and even the actual attempts at taking people’s lives, I really do have to ask: how is any of this considered tolerable or OK? How can anyone say to me that Leftists are tolerant?
From what I can see, Leftists are the most intolerant people around! Doing a simple Google search for the definition of “tolerance”, what Google comes up with is the following: “the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinion or behaviors that one does not necessarily agree with.”
Ignoring the fact that Google uses the word to define the word and that’s something that annoys me, under such a definition, the Left is THE OPPOSITE OF TOLERANT!
When you think of Leftist tolerance, what comes to mind? Aside from the fact that it’s as real as a leprechaun, a unicorn or a successful socialist country, one thinks of tolerance for gay people, tolerance for transgender people, tolerance for Muslims, etc. When a Leftist says he’s tolerant, this is what he means.
However, for the most part, all of those things are part of what the Left ALREADY AGREES WITH!
Now, before some people get mad at me, I’m not saying all gay people are Leftists. Matter of fact, I know a good deal of gay people who are Trump supporters and are conservatives in every other aspect of their lives. However, one cannot be faulted for believing most gay people tend to be liberals.
After all, it was the Left that sought to legalize gay marriage. It’s the Left that seeks to normalize gender dysphoria. It’s typically been the Left that has “helped” gay people in their agenda.
According to Google, that’s not tolerance. Tolerance is tolerating what you disagree with. The Left, for the most part, does not disagree with the LGBT agenda and community. The Left LOVES whatever is against God and Christianity. Since homosexuality is a sin, it makes sense for most gay people to be against God and be Leftists.
Gay marriage disrupts the idea of the sanctity of marriage and disrupts the nuclear family. Transgenderism disrupts the idea that God created someone perfectly and the way He wanted them (and disrupts a basic scientific principle).
The Left ADORES whatever can cause chaos and disruption, particularly against Christianity and God. And it’s that adoration for such chaos and disruption that perfectly exposes how intolerant they are.
They only “tolerate” what they agree with and who they agree with. The ironic thing is that if a gay person claims he or she is conservative, the Left becomes livid and trashes them, further exposing their intolerance. So it’s not that they are tolerant of gay people. They are just tolerant of the ones that agree with them. And as Google tells us, that’s not tolerance at all.
In regards to the Republicans at the baseball game, Rand Paul, Donald Trump, DC McAllister and every other conservative person who has either been threatened for their beliefs or has actually been attacked for their beliefs, you can see right there the intolerance of the Left. You can see perfectly the death of civil discourse.
Having a civil argument with someone regarding politics is increasingly difficult. Not only because people will sometimes have such nuclear responses, but because there is another way to destroy civil discourse.
What I talked about mostly was the worst kind of destruction of civil discourse: flat out threats and violence. But another way people destroy civil discourse is every single time someone uses the race card or the gender card or the gay card or something that victimizes the user and accuses the other person of some form of bigotry.
“You disagree with my position? RACIST!” “You are punishing me for cheating during a tennis game? Racist and sexist!” “You are arresting a colored person because they broke the law? CLASSIC RACIST PIG!”
It is altogether impossible to have civil discourse with such people because it quickly devolves into a screaming match about who is and isn’t a bigot for the sole reason of holding a differing point of view. It’s asinine, but it’s ever present in today’s world.
This sort of disruption of civil discourse can be traced to the Left’s attempts at victimizing everyone. Every time a cop shoots a colored person, they immediately believe racism is the cause. Not that maybe the colored person was a threat to someone (granted, there are cases when the colored person was not a legitimate threat to anyone and was still gunned down), but that the cops simply wanted to kill a black person or a Hispanic.
Obama even had an entire PROGRAM designed to overlook the crimes committed by minorities (misdemeanors, mostly).
So it’s the Left, with their vivid intolerance towards those they disagree with and their tendency to victimize a group of people, who have a hand in the deterioration and ultimate death of civil discourse.
“Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. It’s a 100% free newsletter that won’t feature barbarism and lunatic Leftism. Quite the opposite, it features a compilation of the week’s articles, as well as easy access to our online store.
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Over Mother’s Day weekend, a black man wearing a MAGA hat and eating with his girlfriend’s family was verbally attacked and threatened by Cheesecake Factory employees in a restaurant in Miami, Florida.
According to multiple witnesses and Eugenior Joseph, the Trump supporter, a female employee walked up to him and “started pointing at his hat, signaling for the other employees to come over,” according to the Daily Wire, who had an exclusive on this story.
One witness told the Daily Wire: “Her finger was literally on top of his head, we were all looking at her like ‘what is happening?’… She was pointing at him, calling her other coworkers, telling them to look at this guy wearing a Make America Great Again hat.”
The Daily Wire then reports that, after that, about a dozen employees “approached the table and began making comments about the hat, with some saying they wanted to punch Joseph in the face. Witnesses also allege that some of the employees also referred to him as a ‘n**ger’ in their conversations among each other.”
Another witness recounts: “So then all the employees started standing there, saying things out loud, like, ‘I’m going to knock his head in so hard his hat’s going to come off.’”
One of the employees also gave Joseph “intimidating looks, clenching his fists and making hand gestures that appeared to indicate that he was ready to engage in a fistfight.”
Joseph himself told the Daily Wire: “He got behind me and another coworker came by and they were staring at each other and he fist bumped him and then he started looking at me, balling his fists, smacking his fists, trying to scare me.”
Another witness also told the Daily Wire that the group of employees looked like a lynch mob and that they couldn’t stand seeing a black man wearing a hat that shows support for the President.
Joseph then says: “I got up and went to the restroom, my girlfriend followed me, and as we were walking back, a group of [the employees] came out from the back and they just started clapping and yelling, and just screaming things at me.”
Another witness also said that employees in the kitchen were booing Joseph loudly as he walked by.
This incident also affected other patrons in the restaurant, with one elderly woman having to take some medication to calm herself down and a young girl crying, afraid of the suddenly hostile environment she was in.
As the family exited the restaurant, multiple witnesses saw the manager of the restaurant follow them out and told them that some of the employees admitted to their actions and that one of the employees had been sent home.
Shortly after the family left the restaurant, they ran into police that had been called to the scene who documented the incident in a police report. According to the Daily Wire, no charges were filed.
Joseph also says that he has not been contacted by anyone from the Cheesecake Factory, even after the restaurant made a formal response claiming the restaurant apologized to the family. According to Joseph, no such apology was ever issued.
Now, this is absolutely horrific. I can’t imagine being hounded and attacked like that for simply wearing a MAGA hat. If I still lived in Miami, I would absolutely go to that Cheesecake Factory and raise some hell over that. This story has me fired up.
All that day was meant to be for Joseph was a nice dinner with his girlfriend’s family. It was supposed to be a celebration of his girlfriend’s mom's motherhood, this being Mother’s Day, and it was supposed to be a nice, enjoyable evening. But because the Left is full of unhinged, lunatic psychos who cannot get over Hillary’s election loss, they felt it necessary to berate someone for just supporting the President.
Not only that, if one of the witnesses’ accounts of the employees calling him the n-word, at least with each other, is truthful, then this makes it a race problem as well.
The Left has a sordid history of disliking a free black man. They fought for their “right” to keep them enslaved, they fought for their “right” to keep them segregated from white people (Republicans were more largely supportive of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than Democrats) and today, they insult and berate a black man for expressing a different opinion from them.
Just like with Kanye West, whom the Left decided he was deranged and a lunatic, people on the Left have decided to attack another black Trump supporter.
If this was the 19th, or even the early 20th century, that lynch mob would’ve literally turned into a lynch mob. Joseph would’ve been lynched, as many black people were after the Emancipation Proclamation, for liking a Republican President.
I find it ironic that the Left so ardently wants to point out racism in this country, since it’s only THEM who are the racist ones. The Left simply can’t stand seeing a freed black man. And since today they can’t actually lynch someone, they choose the best alternative: berate and verbally attack/threaten them, hoping to draw fear from them that they might reconsider their support of Trump.
Make no mistake, this was terrorism in its truest sense. The point of terrorism isn’t to kill people, but to terrorize people into changing what they are into what the terrorists want them to be.
And, by the way, you cannot believe just how angry I am that the police did not file any charges. I get that they might not have had the evidence, but the Daily Wire reports having reviewed multiple video clips and photos validating the claims made by the witnesses. Surely, the police could review the videos, and even videos from the restaurant’s security cameras to see the terrorist employees threatening and berating the guy.
As you know, it’s illegal to make threats towards someone. With the amount of witnesses there, as well as the video evidence, Joseph can take this matter to court and easily win.
Now, if it had just been berating, I would only focus on that. People have the right to free speech, but nothing like this should ever happen to anyone regardless of their politics. If this had been an incident at, say, Chick-fil-A and the victim of berating had been a Hillary supporter or a Bernie supporter, the Mainstream Media would be livid and the whole country would be angry. The employees would be fired, likely to find difficulty in getting another job and the company would have to issue public apology after apology and order their employees to take a day off for “race-relations training”.
I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this. Starbucks had been called racist for having two black men arrested for loitering. The manager who had called the cops had been fired and Starbucks’s CEO had to make a public apology. Well, a black man was berated and given threats by Cheesecake Factory employees and not much has seemingly happened. Those employees will likely not face very severe punishments. Actually, the Cheesecake Factory announced that “the individuals involved in the incident have been suspended pending the results of our investigation.”
Let’s look at some differences, shall we? The Starbucks manager who called the police on the black men who were loitering in the store (which a manager of any store has the right to call the police for) was fired some time after the incident. The employees who verbally attacked and threatened a black Trump supporter have been suspended, not fired, and we will see what happens after the investigation. In other words, they will likely take their sweet time to wrap up their investigation and wait until things cool down a little before announcing the employees will only be slightly punished for their terrorist behavior.
Now, I could be wrong about that, but that’s what I would expect out of a company that employs such beasts.
Still, this is yet another perfect example of the racism that exists solely on the Left. Of the hatred that exists solely on the Left. They can’t stand seeing a black person throw his or her support for Trump or any Republican. In their minds, black people will always be their slaves. The sight of a black Trump supporter is enraging to the point of threats.
This is the unhinged nature of the Left. This is the hateful nature of the Left. They are no different today than they were in the days of Dred Scott.
1 John 2:9
“Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...