Archive for the ‘Patriotism’ Category

On Saturday, Universal Pictures announced that they were cancelling the release of ‘The Hunt’. The announcement is being treated as a huge victory for conservatives. It isn’t. It’s little more than a temporary appeasement.

In their announcement, the Universal spokesperson said “the studio has decided to cancel our plans to release the film … we understand that now is not the right time to release this film.” That’s the most wishy-washy statement I’ve ever heard. It’s downright disgusting, to be honest.

There isn’t a good time to make that film. It’s everything that’s wrong with the anarchist left. I see this as nothing more than treating a symptom. The underlying disease is kept intact. Hollywood still thinks of Trump supporters as Deplorables. Democrats criticize President Trump for his incendiary rhetoric. How isn’t this 100 times worse?

Democrats, especially the Antifa Wing of their party, hate deplorables. It’s been impossible for elitists to hide their contempt for conservatives. What is Hollywood doing to fix their underlying contempt for conservatism? What is Hollywood doing to fix our chaotic southern border? Hollywood hasn’t shown any interest in stopping the sex trafficking that’s running rampant these days.

These are things that Trump’s supporters care deeply about. While President Trump calls for unity, Democrats have praised division and hatred. To be American, we need shared priorities, shared interest in being virtuous and a belief that, while working together, there’s nothing that Americans can’t do.

People from other parts of the world are welcome here as long as they come by our rules. Bum-rushing an overwhelmed border, then applying for asylum, isn’t how we create a society that helps each other, pulls for each other and builds great things together.

The Hunt has been cancelled but fixing Hollywood is still part of America’s to-do list. Hollywood’s ‘Hate America First’ mentality must stop ASAP. Tolerating the left’s hate-filled attacks is unacceptable.

Krystal Ball used to be a host on MSNBC. She isn’t anymore. To say that she’s critical of MSNBC is accurate but it’s incomplete. Ball is now a host for Hill.TV, where she has a more reputable platform from which to voice her opinions. In this article, Ball didn’t hold back:

“I dare to say some talent did drink more deeply of the Russia conspiracy waters than others, Rachel Maddow, you have some explaining to do,” said Ball, who now who hosts Hill.TV’s “Rising.”

“This is not journalism, it is Infowars conspiracy theory,” she added, referencing the show hosted by right wing provocateur Alex Jones. “CNN and many other outlets are clearly not blameless in this hype machine and the Democratic Party was plenty happy to engage in this speculation as well,” she continued. “Individual members clearly loved that sweet cable news spotlight but I single out my former employer, in particular, in part because they were certainly the worst mainstream offenders.”

This is actually frightening in the worst way. Yes, Mueller was a sad, almost-pathetic, figure but that isn’t what’s frightening. William Jacobsen’s article does that subject justice far better than I can do:

Whether Robert Mueller was a mere figurehead or in control, he was a participant. So while he was a sorry figure in the congressional hearings, and his appearance did substantial damage to Democrat and media plans, the gravity of what happened should not be lessened. It almost worked.

The media, of course, was a full participant in what happened. Just when you thought the major organizations who control almost all of popular and social media couldn’t get any worse, they do. This all takes place while high tech companies put the thumb on the scale by penalizing non-liberal content.

I used to think that Big Government and Big Corporations was the worst combination. Big Tech and the Deep State make Big Government and Big Corporations look like child’s play.

It’s important to factor in the Big Government people and the Deep State. Nancy Pelosi is part of the Big Government nasties that care only about attaining, then maintaining power. As I wrote about in this post, Pelosi is among the nastiest, most disgusting, people in DC. Yesterday, without a hint of proof, Pelosi accused President Trump of committing treason. That’s what a venomous snake looks like. She didn’t have a tidbit of proof. She knew that she couldn’t prove that accusation if her life depended on it. It didn’t bother her that she’d made the most serious charge imaginable. To Pelosi, this was just about appeasing her base. It was all about partisan advantage. This didn’t have anything to do with patriotism.

Krystal Ball did the right thing getting out of MSNBC. That’s a pit of vipers unequaled except in the House Democrat caucus.

If anyone ever thought that Nancy Pelosi’s first goal was to make the United States the best nation it could possibly be, that notion died last night. That’s because Pelosi “told a ‘Tucker’ producer” that “I wonder what Putin has politically, financially, or personally.”

Accusing the President of the United States of treason without a scintilla of proof is partisanship at its worst. Next fall, voters need to know that a vote for House Democrats is a vote for this despicable person. In 2018, Democrats ran away from Pelosi to look moderate. Then half of these Democrats voted for Pelosi to be Speaker. More importantly, most of these Democrats have hung tight with Pelosi on every major vote that’s been taken.

Moderate? Give me a break. But I digress.

Let’s get into the heart of this accusation. What proof does Speaker Pelosi have that suggests that President Trump is compromised? This is pretty high-stakes stuff. When the person who is third in line to the Oval Office accuses the current occupant of the White House of having committed treason, that person better have gold-plated proof that supports her accusation.

Democrats don’t have that type of proof. If they did, they would’ve started impeachment hearings the minute they got their gavels. The next question that needs to be asked is this: If Democrats don’t have proof to support such a flippant, irresponsible accusation, what’s the basis for that accusation? I think Tucker nailed it in this paragraph:

Carlson said that she is once again intimating that the president is a traitor committing treason, but she doesn’t mean it. He said her comments are annoying and ominous. “Everything is political. … It’s just about power,” he said.

This reminds me of Harry Reid’s comments on the Senate floor where he accused Mitt Romney of not paying taxes for 10 years. When asked about making those accusations, Reid replied “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Harry Reid didn’t care about doing what’s right for America. What’s frightening is that Pelosi is more cold-blooded than Reid. With her, it’s all about gaining, then maintaining, political power to check items off the Democrats’ ideological checklist. This is what evil looks and sounds like:

“It’s about what matters. It’s not politics, not partisanship. It’s patriotism.”

Pelosi doesn’t give a damn about patriotism. She wants to maintain the Democrats’ majority in the House no matter what. She isn’t leading Democrats by focusing them to do the right thing in terms of the economy, the border or impeachment. Democrats are chasing impeachment. Do they have any proof of high crimes and misdemeanors? Of course they don’t.

Here’s the key question for voters: Do you want a House majority that puts its priorities first? Or would you prefer a majority that puts your priorities first? A vote for a Democrat is a vote for putting the Democrats’ priorities first. That translates into a chaotic situation at the border. That translates into a stagnating economy. That’s a vote to ignore small-town America. That’s a vote against energy dominance, too.

Worst of all, it’s a vote to hand the Speaker’s Gavel to Evil Nancy Pelosi. No thanks.

Last night, the Democrat politicians in St. Louis Park voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings. In so doing, the Council officially recognized that reciting the Pledge was patriotic and inclusive.

Actually, that isn’t what they said. “At-Large Council Member Thom Miller, who introduced the amendment, said…the harassment from nonresidents was too much. “To be perfectly clear, I fully support the change we made in June to eliminate the Pledge of Allegiance from our standard meeting agenda.” Nonetheless, he voted to restore the reciting of the Pledge. Did he just say that he’s just another spineless politician? I think so.

What needs to be remembered is how this got started. This started with a terribly flawed process. No notice was given that this rule change was going to be voted on. In fact, citizens weren’t allowed to testify on the issue. That being said, the process was intentional. The City Council intended for citizens to not be able to testify. The last thing they wanted was for a bunch of uppity peasants to raise a ruckus. Like Rep. Omar, the St. Louis Park City Council thinks that they’re the citizens’ betters.

They aren’t the citizens’ betters. They’re just a bunch of arrogant politicians. Rep. Ryan Winkler, the House Majority Leader, is a total lightweight and a charlatan. He’s from Golden Valley. In the summer of 2017, Rep. Winkler criticized the Supreme Court for its opinion on the Voting Rights Act, saying “VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.” When he was called on his usage of a nasty racist term, Winkler insisted that he didn’t know that Uncle Thomas was a racist term. At the time, I did a little digging into Winkler’s educational background. It turns out that Winkler graduated with a degree in History from Harvard. But I digress. Back to St. Louis Park.

The mayor, Jake Spano, missed the vote but issued a statement on the vote. He said that he wouldn’t have supported the rule change. That’s easy after the fact. Others were less diplomatic:

Ward 1 Council Member Margaret Rog echoed Miller’s sentiments, stating the feedback she’d gotten from residents had been “thoughtful and respectful” but that the same could not be said for those not from the city. “We don’t need to be at the epicenter of a manufactured standoff of what it means to be a good American,” she said, directing her message to St. Louis Park residents. “This circus needs to end.”

Stop making major decisions without asking for the citizens’ input next time. Had the City Council invited testimony before they voted, it’s likely they wouldn’t have made this mistake. Anne Mavity spoke out, too:

Anne Mavity, the councilwoman who proposed the original measure, remained defiant — even as she reversed her vote — and addressed the council’s critics. “I’m not sure that if you say the pledge three times a month instead of this two, you’re more patriotic,” Mavity said. “Or if you say it one time a month you’re less patriotic. That makes no sense.”

Defiant is exactly the right word. Mavity doesn’t care about the uppity peasants. That’s why she doesn’t understand them.

This is a fight over retaining one of the richest institutions of the United States. What other pledge states as a national goal “liberty and justice for all“? In Somalia, Ilhan Omar’s nation of origin, I’m betting that they’d be satisfied with liberty and justice once in awhile. By stating that each person is committed to liberty and justice for all, people are stating emphatically that our national goal soars high above our nation.

That’s why people want to come here. Yes, they enjoy the economic mobility, too, but most people fleeing their nations are fleeing nations where the laws are determined by dictators on a minute-by-minute basis.

That’s why it’s beyond odd that people want to eliminate the Pledge.

By now, the entire industrialized world knows that the St. Louis Park City Council voted unanimously to discontinue to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before their meetings. That isn’t news so I won’t beat that horse. It’s already dead. What hasn’t been discussed is whether there’s a bigger story that hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves. In my opinion, there’s another story that needs covering that’s just as important.

Mayor Jake Spano got it right when he said “It feels to me like we may have missed a step there and if we had that conversation, we might have been able to hear from our community about how they felt about this action.” First, let’s dispense with the “may have.” The City Council intentionally skipped that step. This was an ambush, pure and simple.

This isn’t a new tactic. The DFL ‘nonpartisans’ in other cities have used the “inclusive and welcoming” argument before to push through unpopular resolutions and rule changes. When St. Cloud wanted to ambush Councilman Jeff Johnson with a resolution on refugee resettlement, the put the resolution on the agenda at the last minute, then arranged for special interests, including CAIR-MN, to speak when the microphones opened up. They made sure average citizens didn’t have the chance for input.

When St. Louis Park voted to drop the Pledge, the public didn’t have the opportunity to testify. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? When I led the Vote No campaign to sink the bonding referendum, I tirelessly told LFR readers that the ISD 742 School Board was trying to keep the referendum as low profile as possible. Stealth was its chief tactic. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Are you sensing a pattern yet?

The DFL locally and Democrats nationally don’t win arguments anymore. They don’t bother trying, in fact. They call people who oppose them bigots or racists, instead. Once upon a time, Democrats consistently insisted on openness and fairness. Now, they insist on those things only when it helps them. There’s nothing consistent about it anymore.

During this past Monday night’s study session, the St. Louis Park City Council hoped to not to take public testimony:

According to WCCO news, the session was meant to re-address the council’s unanimous decision to drop the Pledge of Allegiance from council meetings. The session was not meant to include public input, but that did not stop community members from interrupting.

People were already pissed with the Council’s decision. They held this study session to plot a path forward. Their intention was to restrict or eliminate input from their constituents. What part of that sounds like a plan to resolve this outcry?

Passing this rules change without public input is what got the Council in trouble. Did they think that plotting political strategy without public input would help fix this problem? Only people who are totally out of touch would think that would fix things.

This looks like white gas getting poured on a raging fire:

The pattern that’s emerged is for Democrats to restrict public testimony and/or to accuse people who oppose them of being racists. Fortunately, the DFL hasn’t called these patriots racists — yet.

This article highlights just how hair-brained the city of St. Louis Park, MN is. By now, the entire nation knows that St. Louis Park’s soon-to-be-replaced City Council voted unanimously to stop reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of their meetings. The confusion and uproar started when “Council member Anne Mavity, who sponsored the rules change, told KARE 11 that she didn’t feel saying the pledge was necessary, especially for non-citizens.”

Amidst the uproar, KARE11 reported that the citizens attending Monday’s study session erupted in reciting the Pledge and chants of USA, USA!” Jon Lauritsen said the meeting “wasn’t intended to accept public input.” (Are you getting the impression that the City Council might be a bit out of touch? Don’t fight that impression. The St. Louis Park City Council is attempting to bend over backwards in its attempt to be seen as a “welcoming community.” These Democrats have started spinning as fact that the Pledge of Allegiance is polarizing. Read the Pledge for yourself, then determine whether it’s divisive or whether the City Council is divisive:

That’s the definition of divisiveness? Liberty and justice for all is divisive? Why would anyone think that the American flag is divisive? The Democrats on St. Louis Park’s City Council are simply spinning things. No right-minded person thinks that anything about the Pledge is divisive. That doesn’t mean that Ilhan Omar doesn’t think it’s divisive and probably racist, too. (St. Louis Park is part of Rep. Omar’s district.)

Lawrence Jones and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, (R-TX), asked some great questions tonight:

To the people of St. Louis Park, you have the opportunity to start cleaning out the sewer this November:

Contact
mayorjakespano@gmail.com
952.928.1448
Term ends: January 2020

Based on what we’ve seen thus far, this mayor and this city council is really out of touch with their constituents. When that happens, it’s time to fire them. PERIOD.

Something that I missed in this post was something that Anne Mavity said in explaining why she submitted a rules change that would stop the St. Louis Park City Council from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings.

The article said “Council member Anne Mavity, who sponsored the rules change, told KARE 11 that she didn’t feel saying the pledge was necessary, especially for non-citizens.” That’s bassackwards thinking. Do we want refugees to assimilate or do we want them clinging to their society’s norms? Newt Gingrich had it right when he stated that we aren’t a multi-cultural nation, that we’re instead a multi-ethnic nation.

It’s apparent that Mavity is utterly clueless. According to this article, Mavity said “As a proud American, I’m appalled that our little suburban community’s meeting protocols have sparked this polarizing conversation.” Would a “proud American” think that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is “polarizing”? Those things don’t mesh together whatsoever.

If you’re a proud American, affirming your loyalty to the greatest nation in the history of mankind is a privilege. It isn’t polarizing. Further, if parts of the population find American ideals distasteful or polarizing, perhaps it’s those people that need to re-examine their loyalties. This video is disturbing:

KARE11’s Jon Lauritsen reported that “Public input was not supposed to be part of Monday night’s study session.” It’s worth noting that the main topic for Monday night’s study session was the rule change eliminating the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance at City Council meetings. People were furious because the rules change was passed unanimously without public input.

Conservatives push for local control of issues. That being said, they also push for accountability and listening to constituents. The whole idea behind local control is so We The People have maximum input.

Finally, Mavity’s depravity is frightening because, according to her public statements, she doesn’t understand why a simple little rule change should be controversial. What a dipstick. This isn’t about making a simple rule change. It’s about why the St. Louis Park City Council thinks that pledging allegiance to this great nation is controversial. What a dipstick!

More and more, the American people are getting the impression that anti-American forces are trying to take apart part of the United States’ identity simply by complaining. In St. Louis Park, it might not have taken even that much for the City Council to vote to eliminate reciting the Pledge of Allegiance before City Council meetings.

According to the article, “council members voted for removal because some argued the Pledge of Allegiance could discourage non-citizens from the political process.” So the St Louis Park City Council voted unanimously to stop reciting the Pledge because it might offend someone? How is that different than a heckler’s veto against conservative speakers?

Thankfully, our pro-American president isn’t sitting on the sidelines while the Hate America First Democrats strip away one tradition after another. This isn’t just one isolated incident after another. These are related. There’s no question that there’s a plan in place. Here’s President Trump’s tweet:


Apparently, these politicians don’t understand who they’re dealing with as constituents. This is the age of Brexit, populism and President Trump. Check this out:

(Anne Mavity, the council member who sponsored the original changes to the meeting protocol, previously told KARE 11 that non-citizens shouldn’t have to say a pledge to do business with the city). However, the decision led to some backlash and even national media attention, including the president’s tweet. Mavity said she supports a detailed research process that incorporates feedback from constituents. “We clearly fumbled by not anticipating the desire of our St. Louis Park residents to be in conversation about this,” Mavity said. “So, I want to make sure we get it right at this time.”

First, if non-citizens have a problem with meetings that start with the Pledge of Allegiance, that’s their problem. Period. Next, it’s important for the United States to maintain its identity. Someone should send this recital of the Pledge to the Council:

I’ve watched the Pledge getting recited dozens of times. Each time, I gain new appreciation for the Pledge. Whenever this Pledge is recited, though, something special happens. I can’t explain it but I know it when I feel it.

That’s why winning this fight isn’t just important. It’s essential.

The mayor supports reinstating the pledge but was out of town when the vote occurred in June. On Monday night, he said council members “skipped a step” and should have taken more time to consider the community’s feedback. “Let’s have a focused discussion (about the pledge),” Spano said in interview. “Whether or not that is in fact welcoming or unwelcoming and what does that mean? And how do we move forward as a group?”

It’s difficult to believe that the Council accidentally skipped a step. I think it was intentional because I’m betting that the Council wanted a specific outcome and because they didn’t want to have to explain their decision to the uppity peasants.

It’s pretty apparent that Democrats don’t give a damn about border security. Any political party that unanimously approves of decriminalizing illegal aliens entering the United States officially is the Open Borders Party. The week before Independence Day, NBC and the DNC (Pardon the repetition) hosted a pair of Democrat presidential debates.

During those debates, each of the Democrat presidential candidates raised their hands in support of decriminalizing illegal aliens entering the US. They didn’t stop there, though, unfortunately. All 20 of these Democrat presidential candidates raised their hands affirming that their national health care laws would provide taxpayer-funded health care to illegal aliens.

Jeh Johnson, President Obama’s final Secretary of Homeland Security, passionately opposes the Democrats’ open border policies:

That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders. That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that.

I don’t disagree often with Newt Gingrich but I must this time:

When word spreads that sick people can sneak into America and get free medical treatment from American doctors and nurses, the flood of sick immigrants will double and triple from the current numbers.

It isn’t that I disagree with Newt’s opinion. It’s his choice of words. Right now, illegal aliens don’t have to “sneak” across the border. They can waltz across the border, then apply for asylum. Thanks to Nancy ‘Spark of Divinity’ and Alexandria ‘Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire’ Ocasio-Cortez, illegal aliens are treated better than are our homeless veterans.

Anyone who thinks that this is patriotic is stupid beyond belief. Yes, I’m talking to you, Jessica Tarlov, Tom Perez and Ed Rendell. Predictably, Newt nailed it with this tweet:


Democrats are patriots in some weird, demented way but not in the traditional sense. It’s time to re-establish Reaganite patriotism. It’s been too long since we had that type of patriotism.

AOC’s patriotism is faux patriotism. She wouldn’t recognize Founding Fathers-style patriotism if it bit her backside. The men who signed the Declaration, the men who fought the Revolutionary War and the men who wrote this nation’s Constitution were selfless men. The men who signed the Declaration of Independence knew that they were dead men walking if George Washington’s army didn’t defeat King George’s military.

Can anyone picture AOC doing any of the things that those slaveholders did? Yes, I ‘admitted’ that many were slaveholders. I can’t picture AOC doing anything even close to what those patriots did.

Democrats have been intentionally mangling the meaning of important words. Democrats deny advocating for open borders while providing incentives that would shout to the Northern Triangle nations to flood across the US-Mexico border. Democrats insist that detention facilities are concentration camps and that women are forced to drink from toilets.

It’s impossible to believe that CBP is tormenting women and little girls in the ways that AOC is insisting. It isn’t like AOC has a lengthy history of veracity. Rather, AOC has a history of frequently getting caught lying.

If Republicans want to get things done, they’ll need to toss the gloves and put on brass knuckles. Resistance Democrats fight like Antifa. If we want to lose honorably, (think John McCain) then Republicans will lose often. No more! Tell AOC, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff that their reign of stupidity and lies is coming to a close in a few months.

Finally, Republicans should adopt President Reagan’s policy towards the USSR. When asked what his policy towards the Soviets was, President Reagan, replied “Simple. We win, they lose.” It’s time to sink the Democrats’ battleship.

Prior to President Trump’s “Salute to America” event on the National Mall, Democrats insisted that President Trump was using the event for partisan gain. In looking past the speech, Democrats looked petty. This Washington Post article did its best to sound whiny but it grudgingly finally admitted that the speech was simply a patriotic speech.

What can’t be denied is the fact that all incumbent presidents have a huge advantage going into their re-election campaigns. It’s often called the power of incumbents and it’s there whether the person running for re-election is running for City Council, the State Legislature, Congress or the White House. Whining about the inherent structural benefits of being the incumbent is nothing more than sour grapes.

The best part of the speech was that President Trump’s speechwriter wove in a history lesson of what makes America great without drawing on a single partisan issue. It truly was pitch-perfect. There’s little doubt that President Trump’s critics want to criticize him. It’s just that they don’t have anything to criticize him about. The Media Wing of the Democratic Party wanted to criticize President Trump but couldn’t:

The Fourth of July extravaganza was created at Trump’s request and designed to suit his whims, but the president largely refrained from using it to praise himself — abandoning his typical self-promotional style to applaud the military and ordinary Americans who have contributed to the nation’s advancement.

“As we gather this evening in the joy of freedom, we remember that all share a truly extraordinary heritage,” Trump said in a 47-minute speech that was dampened and delayed by a downpour on the Mall. “Together, we are part of one of the greatest stories ever told, the story of America. It is the epic tale of a great nation whose people have risked everything for what they know is right and what they know is true.”

Democrats wanted badly to find something to criticize President Trump about — but couldn’t. This is an example of how much the MSM wanted to accuse President Trump of politicizing the event, then stopped short:

OMIGOD! The crowd started chanting USA — USA — at an Independence Day event no less. What type of partisans would do such a thing? Wow! What’s the big deal?

This is the Mueller Report, Part II. Prior to the Mueller Report getting published, Democrats thought for certain that this would be the time that they got President Trump by the short hairs. When the report was published, they couldn’t admit that they didn’t get the results they wanted. That was difficult because Democrats were so certain they had President Trump in their crosshairs and that he wouldn’t escape this time. They were positively crestfallen when the Mueller Report disappointed Democrats.

Prior to Thursday night on the National Mall, Democrats kept raising a stink about President Trump politicizing the event. Democrats were certain that they’d finally trapped President Trump. Instead of watching President Trump politicize the Salute to the Nation, Democrats watched something horrific. Democrats watched President Trump deliver a history lesson on American exceptionalism and patriotism.

President Trump talked about American ingenuity, American innovation and American sacrifice to liberate America’s allies. President Trump didn’t need to draw political comparisons with Democrats with red meat. He just had to talk about the US at its aspirational best vs. the Democrats’ pessimism. The American people are smart enough to notice the difference.

Here’s hoping that your Independence Day was exceptional. Here’s hoping that the United States’ best days are still to come. God bless America.