Archive for the ‘Ted Cruz’ category

Gingrich: When will our leaders realize we are at war?

March 24, 2016

Gingrich: When will our leaders realize we are at war? Fox News via You Tube, March 23, 2016

 

Cruz Hits Trump on NATO ‘Surrender’ in Wake of Brussels Attacks

March 22, 2016

Cruz Hits Trump on NATO ‘Surrender’ in Wake of Brussels Attacks, Newsmax, Sandy Fitzgerald, March 22, 2016

(At least he didn’t blame the Trump rallies for the violence in Brussels. — DM)

Cruz vs Trump(AP)

GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz said Tuesday that Donald Trump was engaging in a “pre-emptive surrender” to Islamic terror by calling for a “withdrawal” from NATO on the eve of the Brussels terror attacks.

On Monday, Trump told CNN that the U.S. should greatly reduce its support of NATO.

“It’s too much and frankly it’s a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea,” Trump said of the US-European security alliance.

Cruz said he found it “striking” that the terror attacks occurred on the day after his rival candidate Donald Trump called for reducing the U.S. role NATO.

“We see Brussels where NATO is headquartered as the subject of a radical Islamic terrorist attack,” Cruz said in a press conference from Washington D.C.

“Donald Trump is wrong that America should withdraw from the world and abandon our allies. Donald Trump is wrong that America should retreat from Europe, retreat from NATO, hand Vladimir Putin a major victory, and while’s he’s at it, hand ISIS a major victory.”

Instead, said the Texas senator, NATO would be crucial in any United States effort in “utterly destroying ISIS.”

“And I would note that NATO  is ready to act in a way our president is not,” said Cruz.

“Donald Trump’s proposal to withdraw from the world, to withdraw from NATO and Europe is sadly consistent with his statement that he intends to be neutral between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Cruz also said Trump’s approach was similar to Obama’s.

“We have seen for 7 years a president that cannot distinguish between our friends and enemies. A president that cannot distinguish between the nation of Israel and Islamic terrorists who seek to murder us, and it would be a mistake to elect another president who buys into the same left-wing moral relativism that equates the terrorist blowing himself you have and murdering innocent civilians to the brave soldiers and law enforcement officers risking everything to keep us safe.”

Cruz was not alone for criticizing Trump on his stand on NATO.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, appearing on Fox News Tuesday morning, said Trump’s plan for downsizing the U.S. role in NATO was dangerous as we confront the grave threat of Islamic terrorism.

The Case for Trump + Cruz

March 20, 2016

The Case for Trump + Cruz, American ThinkerJames Lewis, March 20, 2016

There is an atmosphere of doom and despair hanging over the capital of the United States today.  The cause is by far the most competitive and genuinely democratic Republican primary season in many years, with by far the best team of Republican candidates, drawing more viewers to more substantive television debates than ever before.  In history.

Every single Republican candidate has been head and shoulders above any of the rickety Democrats.  Hillary and Bernie look so bad, and their ideas are so out of date that Hail Mary candidate Martin O’Malley, had to start his campaign with a soft-porn photo op showing his bare muscles.  Maybe it was supposed to appeal to the gay lobby, or maybe Obama has set yet another dreadful precedent for the future, but O’Malley flopped like a dead herring.  And he made the Hillary-Bernie show look even more pathetic.

You would think Republicans would take pride in an outstanding field of candidates competing with each other, and actually reaching far outside the usual voter base.  But no, even self-proclaimed conservatives in D.C. sense “a feeling of menace in the air.”

My hero Charles Krauthammer is down-hearted at the sight of Donald Trump leading the pack.  Dr. Krauthammer rightly blames the highly trained, Soros-paid and organized MoveOn.org ruckus-makers who invaded Donald Trump’s meeting in Chicago.  Krauthammer notes, “This was an act of deliberate sabotage created by a totalitarian left that specializes in the intimidation and silencing of political opponents.”

This is exactly correct.

But you know where his column is going.  It’s Trump who is the real menace in the minds of D.C., across the spectrum – which is too Marie Antoinette for words.  Conservatives have been calling for a popular revolt against the neo-Stalinist left for years, and when it shows up in the shape of Donald Trump, the Orange Demon, they join the P.C.  Organs of Propaganda in whipping up hysteria.  Even when Trump issues policy papers taken straight from our leading pundits, it’s not good enough.

This makes me think that Trump’s real sin is his unparalleled vulgarity, as practiced in the outer boroughs of New York.  Yes, our deep thinkers believe in democracy, but they feel an “air of menace” at the real thing, as if the vulgar mob is about to storm the Bastille.

Now, consider that America has barely survived almost eight years of the most radical left, America-sabotaging, and politically inverted administration in history.  Yet D.C. conservatives have come to terms with a racialist-Marxist-Islamophile administration, straight from the Chicago Machine.  Apparently our folks have come to terms with it, because they are shocked (shocked!) at a successful New York businessman actually leading the pack.  There is absolutely zero evidence that The Don has ever stirred up a riot, while the Soros-funded ruckus-makers have trained for years to do exactly what they did in Chicago.

George Soros started in Nazi-occupied Hungary by selling the household goods of Hungarian Jews who were arrested by the brutal S.S. and sent to the death camps, and yet Soros later wrote that it was “the best time in my life.”  Soros is a self-diagnosed narcissist, who funds numerous lefto-fascist groups, who actually do riot and disrupt conservative speakers on campus, as well as enemy politicians in the United States.  Those facts make me feel an “air of menace,” all right, and not just around the heavily fortified city of Washington, D.C.  General Petraeus was physically stormed by leftomaniacs at NYU six months ago, and he had to run for it.  The media barely reported it.  That kind of thing creates an air of menace, all right.  It is supposed to do that.  (See Karl Marx on revolutionary terror.)

Apparently our conservative elites have lost their perspective on things, which is what happens when you sleep with the enemy for too long.

If D.C. conservatives want to do something constructive, they might start making peace between Trump and Cruz, a dream team for real conservatives.  Trump and Cruz have had productive talks with each other, and there is not much disagreement on the fundamentals.  Trump is more of a pragmatist, as you might expect in a business guy.  He will do deals with the Devil if he feels it’s necessary – which is good preparation for dealing with Vladimir Putin.  Cruz has a very skilled legal mind, has shown real political courage in standing up to the GOP mafia in Congress.  Cruz has a passionate belief in constitutionalism.

Put those two powerhouses together, and we might get a break from the relentless assaults of the left.  At least we will be able to answer back, which is very important.  Young people today have never heard a president speak about constitutional government.  They will never hear it from Hillary or Bernie, but Trump and Cruz could penetrate some heavily indoctrinated skulls.

So let’s leave the hysteria to the socialist Democrats, who know how to run around tearing their hair off anyway.  The sooner GOP frontrunners unite, the better.  They are far more effective than Bob Dole and Lindsey Graham, with all due respect.  Trump brings in the Reagan Democrats, while Cruz can talk to the constitutionalists.

There isn’t a better team in politics to clean up D.C. after two terms of Marxist-Islamist-racialist abuses of power.  Remember the stakes in this election.  After a power-hungry Obama and a sex-obsessed Bill Clinton, consider a Trump+Cruz team compared to the alternative.  Americans are optimistic by instinct.  This is no time for conservatives, of all people, to scare the horses.  The left will do that all by itself, and we don’t have to help them spread delusional panic.

 

Should Trump and Cruz unite with we the people against the establishment uni-party?

March 16, 2016

Should Trump and Cruz unite with we the people against the establishment uni-party? Free Republic, Jim Robinson, March 16, 2016

(I would prefer Trump as president, but a Trump – Cruz ticket would be great. I hope it happens. — DM)

The biggest plus is a Trump/Cruz ticket would immediately secure the nomination for us (the majority of the right-leaning grassroots voters), end any possibility of a GOPe betrayal at the convention, and would ensure the Republican party is finally with we the grassroots people (tea party, conservatives, religious people, economic conservatives, business people, middle class, blue collar, national security patriots, etc, ie, a rebirth of the Reagan Coalition) and against the globalist GOP big government establishment. It’d be a yuuuge middle finger to the elite ruling classes of both parties.

And it would have coattails guaranteeing a pro-America landslide against the America-hating Marxists and a strengthening of the Republican majority in the congress and in local and state governments. And finally begin a return to constitutional, pro-America, pro-free-market government and a reversal of the slide into godless socialism and globalism.

A mandate from we the people to secure the borders, enforce the law, deport the illegals, end sanctuary cities, end the war on Christianity, cut the taxes, cut the government, cut the regulations, end the war on American industry, end the war on coal gas & oil, bring back a growing economy, bring back manufacturing and jobs, and rebuild the military.

Unlike the GOPe, this is what real Americans want and what both candidates propose doing.

So let’s quit bickering, join forces, and make it happen.

Arrest the Thugs

March 15, 2016

Arrest the Thugs, Front Page Magazine, The Editors, March 15, 2016

(Please see also, How Not to Fight Our Enemies. — DM)

gh

First the Left unleashed anti-war rallies against President Bush in support of Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. Then it brought out Occupy Wall Street to push the radical Marxist agenda that Bernie Sanders is now riding like a red wave through the Democratic Party. Finally, it unleashed the racist hate mobs that looted and burned neighborhoods and cities, singled out white people for harassment over the color of their skin, terrorized campuses and incited the murder of police officers.

The common agenda of all these hateful campaigns was to radicalize, intimidate and terrorize Americans into submitting to the totalitarians of the Left. From the inner city neighborhood to the Ivy League campus, from a couple having brunch in the morning to a police officer on patrol being shot in the head, from a political rally to the Thanksgiving Day parade, these thugs of the Left are out to enforce their tyrannical Party Line through political terror.

While the media call these so-called protesters “non-violent,” they completely ignore the fact that suppressing someone else’s free speech is an act of intimidation. To prevent someone else from speaking is not a debate. It’s the refusal to have a debate. Protesters have the right to be heard, but silencing views you disagree with is not a protest. It is the exercise of totalitarian power. And the Left’s organized efforts to prevent opposing points of view from being heard have now migrated from the campus to the city. The media call these crybullies the victims. But they are not victims. They are thugs who are using brute force to suppress the free speech and political freedoms of others.

Donald Trump has as much right to hold a rally as Bernie Sanders. His supporters have as much right to come out to hear him speak. The Left’s refusal to accept this is a definitive rejection of freedom of speech and democracy.

For all his faults, Donald Trump is to be commended for standing up against all this, and for his cool under fire. When a leftist fascist attempted to attack him recently at a rally in Dayton, Ohio, and succeeded in grabbing his foot before he was subdued by Secret Service agents, Trump quipped: “I was ready for him but it’s much easier if the cops do it, don’t we agree?”

Trump’s opponents, both Republican and Democrat, and the Obama administration should realize what’s at stake – if, that is, they have any interest in preserving the American tradition of non-violent political disagreement. The unseemly haste of Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich to blame Trump’s rhetoric for the violent shutdown of his Chicago rally is extraordinarily disappointing: they should realize that the same violence can and will be turned against them if they stray too far from the thugs’ idea of what constitutes acceptable political discourse.

There is only one answer to a movement that is determined to thuggishly shut down the speech of others. And that is prison. We can either have speech democracy or speech tyranny in which the biggest thugs and the nastiest bullies decide who gets to speak and who has to shut up. The leftist fascists who shut down Trump’s Chicago rally should be arrested and energetically prosecuted. Barack Obama, so quick to issue statements about black and Muslim victimhood, should (if he cared at all about the principles that allow for a republic) immediately issue a statement stressing the importance of civility and respect for political dissent, and decry the shutdown of the Trump rally.

Obama won’t issue any such statement, of course, and that’s a large part of the problem. Much, much more is at stake in the shutdown of Trump’s rally than most Americans realize. As it becomes increasingly perilous to dissent from the leftist line in America, we can only hope that a sufficient number of Americans will awaken to what is happening in time to hold today’s political and media elites to account for the damage they have done and are doing to the American public square.

The political thugs of the Left cannot be allowed to hijack freedom of speech for an entire nation. Either we arrest the thugs or we will all exist confined in a prison where a handful of thugs can tell us what to we may say and what we may think.

 

Rush, Andrew, Donald, and the Republican Reconquista

March 15, 2016

Rush, Andrew, Donald, and the Republican Reconquista, American ThinkerJack Cashill, March 15, 2016

“Most of my friends were graduating that year,” writes Barack Obama in Dreams from My Father. “Hasan off to work with his family in London, Regina on her way to Andalusia to study Spanish Gypsies.”

Ah yes, “Andalusia!” That, of course, is left-speak for “Spain.” For anti-colonialists like Obama, Andalusia is more than an historical place. It is a metaphor for a progressive golden age, one in which wisdom ruled and peace reigned. “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance,” affirmed Obama at Cairo in 2009. “We see it in the history of Andalusia.”

True, after the invading Moors brutally ripped the Iberian Peninsula from its indigenous Latinos, peace of a sort did reign. It came at a price, specifically the jizya, a tax non-Muslims had to pay to secure their dhimmi status, the Islamic equivalent of Jim Crow.

The Moors arrived in the year 711. The Christians started reconquering their homeland in 721. It would take them seven centuries to finish the job. In all of Obama’s musings about Andalusia, he has spared scarcely a word for the “Reconquista,” a Republican variation of which has hatched on his watch.

A few days ago, casually searching YouTube, I came across a short video I had not seen in five years called “The Media Reaction to Jack Cashill’s Deconstructing Obama.” In seven compact minutes producer Chris Kusnell sheds some unexpected light on the Republican Reconquista in embryo.

 

 

What makes the video particularly relevant is that it features on-screen appearances by some of the leading figures in this movement — Rush Limbaugh, the late Andrew Breitbart, and, most intriguingly, Donald Trump.

Kusnell’s piece begins with a video of candidate Barack Obama boasting to a crowd of Virginia schoolteachers in July 2008, “I’ve written two books. I actually wrote them myself.”

Obama was comfortable making this claim for one reason: the left dominates America’s culture as thoroughly as the Andalusian Muslims did the culture of Iberia. From experience, Obama knew that the nation’s cultural imams were willing to enable his fraud if it advanced a cause close to their hearts.

And a fraud it most certainly was. By September 2008, I was 100 percent certain Obama did not write Dreams from My Father or Audacity of Hope by himself, and I was 90 percent certain that terrorist emeritus Bill Ayers co-authored Dreams.

Knowing Obama’s media allies would have zero interest in my evidence, I tried to find an influential forum on the right. Yet when I knocked on insider doors to advance my thesis, they remained firmly shut. Human Events punted on my research. The National Review did too. The FOX producers downstairs showed interest, but the suits upstairs did not.

The managing editor of the Weekly Standard referred me to the magazine’s literary editor, whose response was myopic to a fault: “An interesting piece, but I’m rather oversubscribed at the moment, the length is considerable, and cutting would not do it justice.”

A Weekly Standard cover that read “Who Wrote Dreams from My Father?” might have changed the outcome of the election, but the editor, alas, was “oversubscribed.” Like the other high profile dhimmis, he had made his “peace” with the progressive establishment. Whether Obama won or lost, he still had his job and the grudging tolerance of his overlords. He was not about to risk either to advance an idea someone might call “racist.”

On October 9, 2008, the American Thinker gave me the space I needed to make my case. Rush Limbaugh amplified the American Thinker piece that same day. As the Kusnell video shows, he gave it a good airing.

To keep Limbaugh’s influence in check, the cultural imams fought back with the most potent weapon in their arsenal — shame. “This may not have been Limbaugh’s most racist insinuation of the campaign,” said New Yorker editor David Remnick, citing others he liked less. He concluded, though, that our collective “libel about Obama’s memoir — the denial of literacy, the denial of authorship — had a particularly ugly pedigree.”

During the next four weeks, despite Limbaugh’s overture and my best efforts, not a single “respectable” conservative, either in the media or in the McCain campaign, dared explore this issue. On the up side, no one called our respectable friends “racist.” On the down side, Obama was elected president.

When McCain lost, the dhimmis blamed “Internet zanies” like me for his defeat. The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto singled me out by name as among those who “engaged in irresponsible rumor-mongering and conspiracy-theorizing.” The National Review’s Jonah Goldberg sniffed, “I think trying to claim some sort of literary conspiracy is a bridge too far.”

In the fall of 2009, without ever talking to me, bestselling celebrity biographer Christopher Andersen confirmed my thesis in his book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage. Although the apolitical Andersen spent six pages on Ayers’s involvement with Dreams, the mainstream media simply pretended he didn’t. And once again, the conservative media enabled the pretense.

In 2011, Simon & Schuster published my book, Deconstructing Obama. In it, I make a case for Ayers’s role as Obama’s muse so compelling that only a liberal or a dhimmi would deny it. As the Kusnell video shows, Andrew Breitbart was neither.

“Let’s get on to the racism of today,” Bill Maher asked Breitbart on his HBO show. “You do not believe Obama wrote his own book?” Breitbart was not surprised by this line of attack. Martin Bashir had already tried to shame him for defending me on his MSNBC show.

Breitbart, however, did not offer the expected apologies. A true culture warrior, he was taking conservatism one step beyond Limbaugh, out of the Dhimmi ghetto and right into the pinkest of parlors, fully impervious to their ritual defamation. His unexpected death in March 2012 stalled the Reconquista and his left his heirs fighting over his legacy.

The Kusnell video held one more surprise for me. In 2011, as the video shows, the only other major figure to support my thesis publicly was Donald Trump. Said Trump about Obama to a gathered crowd, “His whole aura was caused by the genius of the first book which was written by Bill Ayers.”

At the time, the media, Democrat and dhimmi, gleefully took Trump to task for questioning Obama’s birth certificate, but they dared not question him on the authorship issue. By 2011, even if the major media refused to admit it, most of them sensed Obama was a fraud. True to form, our dhimmi friends refused to raise the authorship issue in 2012 and once again helped elect Obama president.

What Limbaugh, Breitbart and Trump have in common is less a shared belief system than a refusal to accept their dhimmi status. They want to take the culture back. If Trump has attacked the dhimmi establishment from outside, Ted Cruz has attacked it from within. Calling the Senate majority leader a liar on the Senate floor is a sure way to get its attention.

Ordinary Americans are “mad as hell about political correctness and the havoc it has wreaked for 40 years — havoc made worse by the flat refusal of most serious Republicans to confront it,” writes David Gelertner in the Weekly Standard, a dhimmi publication hostile to Cruz and apoplectic about Trump. Yet Gelernter nails the issue.

In a June 10, 2015, column, I wrote, “The Republican nominee for president will be that candidate who best learns that there is no future in apologizing.” This was a week before Trump declared. I did not even know he was running.

Nine months later, Republican voters have rejected all the apologizers, all the collaborators, all the dhimmi candidates. Ready or not, they will be asked to join the first full scale battle in the Republican Reconquista behind either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz, and the dhimmis are atwitter.

Shame has not stopped either candidate. Violence won’t work either. The one force that will stop the Reconquista is division. There was much of that in Christian Iberia, so much of it, in fact, that it took seven centuries for the Christians to win their country back. Here is hoping the Republicans can do a little better.

 

 

How Not to Fight Our Enemies

March 13, 2016

How Not to Fight Our Enemies, Front Page MagazineDavid Horowitz, March 13, 2016

(An excellent article by David Horowitz. — DM)

cdtobckueaez4sp

The mob that came to disrupt the Trump rally in Chicago was neither spontaneous nor innocent, nor new. It was a mob that has been forming ever since the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization in 1999, whose target was global capitalism. The Seattle rioters repeated their outrages for the next two years and then transformed itself into the so-called “anti-war” movement to save the Saddam dictatorship in Iraq. Same leaders, funders and troops. The enemy was always America and its Republican defenders. When Obama invaded countries and blew up families in Muslim countries, there was no anti-war movement because Obama was one of them, and they didn’t want to divide their support. In 2012 the so-called “anti-war” movement reformed as “Occupy Wall Street.” They went on a rampage creating cross-country riots to protesting the One Percent and provided a whipping boy for Obama’s re-election campaign. Same leaders, same funders and troops. In 2015 the same leftwing forces created and funded Black Lives Matter and lynch mobs in Ferguson and Baltimore who targeted “white supremacists” and police.

Behind all the mobs was the organized left – MoveOn.org, the public sector unions runby Sixties leftovers,  and the cabal of anti-American billionaires led by George Soros. The mobs themselves were composed of the hate-filled foot soldiers of the political left. Now these forces have gathered in the campaign to elect the Vermont communist and are focusing their venom on Donald Trump. The obvious plan is to make Republicans toxic while driving a wedge through the Republican Party. The plan is defeat Republicans in November so that the destructive forces they have set in motion in the Democratic Party can finish the wrecking job that Obama started.

One of the professionally produced signs at the Chicago mob scene proclaimed, “This is what democracy looks like.” Actually it is exactly what fascism looks like. As every student of the Thirties knows, the break up of democratic forums by Nazi and Communist thugs paved the way for Hitler’s election. Just like the mobs of the Thirties, today’s left is driven by racial and class hate, and is utterly contemptuous of the democratic process – hence the effort to hang the Ferguson cop before the trial and to prevent Trump from expounding his views in Chicago.

And what has been the reaction of the presidential candidates, particularly those who propose to save the country? It is to blame Trump as though he and not the left had instigated the riot. If you play with matches like Trump did, opined Hillary Clinton, you’re likely to start a fire. This is the same Hillary Clinton who has compared Republicans to terrorists and called them racists, and who once accused a “vast right-wing conspiracy” of inventing her husband’s paramour. The Democratic Party has officially endorsed the Black Lives Matter racists and rioters. But it is not only the left who is attempting to blame Trump for the Chicago debacle.

According to the proudly positive John Kasich, it was Trump who created the “toxic environment” that led to the riot – not the fascist movement that has been metastasizing in our universities and streets for more than a decade. In other words, when you finally go on the attack, attack a Republican rather than a Democrat. That way you get a pass.

Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz and their spokespeople piled on Trump as well. “Ted Cruz Claims Trump Is To Blame For Violence At His Rallies,” ran a headline in the leftwing New York Times. His Republican attackers attempted to shame Trump for speaking to the anger of his conservative supporters instead of bringing everyone together – those who claim we live in a white supremacist society and the whites they are attacking, those who claim that Republicans are terrorists and racists and the victims of this abuse. As though you can create unity with people who hate you because you are white or rich, or believe that America is a nation worth saving. The fact is that Trump’s anger is pretty controlled, considering the hate-filled environment of Islamic terrorists, illegal immigrants, event disrupters and rival candidates openly smearing him.

He is often guilty of over-reach – “punch him in the nose” directed at one disrupter, but this is hardly the sin his detractors suggest in comparing him to Mussolini. That is a much great violence to the man who is its target. Aside from Trump’s compulsive over-reach what is wrong with anger in the current political context? Is it wrong to be angry at what Obama and the Democrats and the progressive mobs are doing to our country? How is this dissociation from Trump mob attack not the same surrender to political correctness that conservatives like Rubio and Cruz claim to reject? Aren’t Cruz and Rubio angry at what is being done to our country? Why are they willing to validate the hypocritical slanders of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, two architects of our disasters?

This is the reality we must never forget: There is an anti-American radical in the White House who – with the support of his party – has delivered nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and a hundred billion dollars to our mortal enemies in Teheran who have declared their intentions to kill us. This suicidal deal was not an oversight, as Rubio has correctly observed, but the result of decades of thinking that America and Israel are adversaries, and our enemies are their victims. The extremists of #Never Trump exemplify the malaise Republicans have been prisoners of for years, which is what the primary revolt is about. Why was there no #Never Obama movement in 2012? For Republicans such a movement would be unthinkable. It would be too angry. It would be called racist. On the other hand, no one will call us racist for attacking a fellow Republican. So let’s join the left in smearing one of our own and hope that we can scrub off the stigmas that Democrats have tarred us with in the process. We’re not racists. Let’s not fight Obama, which will prove that we are. Let’s have respectful words for the lynch mob left.  If we capitulate the disaster unfolding before us, maybe it will go away. That is what the Trump crowd is angry about and mainstream Republicans should be too.

At the outset of the presidential debates all the Republican candidates pledged to support the party’s choice in November. Extra pressure was put on Trump to do so and he did. But now that millions of Republicans have cast their ballots for Trump, Rubio and Kasich are threatening to renege on their pledge, and destroy both the party and the country in the process. And Cruz, while sniping at Trump’s alleged role in inciting the leftists is notably non-committal about whether he will support a Trump primary victory. None of them explain how you can fight fascist leftists without actually fighting them and opening yourself to the charge of anger.

Perhaps it is money from the #Never Trump crowd – the extremists who want to thwart the popular vote and fatally split the party – that is behind this perfidy. But as someone who until very recently held high opinions of Rubio and Cruz, I am hoping that it is not too late for somebody to wake them up. I am hoping that somebody says: Cut it out. Come to your senses. Your scorched earth warfare is threatening the very existence of the right. Trump isn’t the enemy. Like you he is opposed to the Iran deal, supports a secure border, recognizes the Islamist threat, wants to reduce taxes and make the country solvent, and is greatly expanding the Republican base. Attempt to beat him at the polls if you think he shouldn’t be president but let the voters decide the result, and respect their decision. The alternative is a fratricidal war that could drive large numbers of conservatives away from the polls, and whose beneficiaries will only be America’s enemies at home and abroad.

Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement – Attack On 1st Amendment and Trump Rally

March 13, 2016

Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement – Attack On 1st Amendment & Trump Rally, Fox News via You Tube, March 12, 2016

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0LD_4MAQug

Trump Storm Troopers Mob Sanders Rally: Force Cancellation

March 13, 2016

Trump Storm Troopers Mob Sanders Rally: Force Cancellation, American Thinker, Clarice Feldman, March 13, 2016

Of course, this didn’t happen. The opposite is true, but you can be sure that would be the headline had conservative opponents of Sanders prevented his rally in suburban Chicago from taking place because of mob threats of violence. This makes Ted Cruz ‘s spineless rejoinder to the violent demonstrations in Chicago so galling to me.

Some years ago I wrote here of my contempt for conservatives who flee the forum for fear of getting their spotlessly white togas spattered with mud and blood when their colleagues are being savaged by liars and thugs. This week my White Toga award goes to Ted Cruz. As thousands of rent a mobs from Soros funded Move On, the White House approved Black Lives Matters fabulist race baiters, and Bernie Sanders fans mobbed and threatened the thousands of people who’d waited in lines for hours to attend a rally in Chicago for Donald Trump. Even Obama pal and admitted terrorist Bill Ayers, doubtless reliving his “glory days” as a Weatherman was there cheering the mayhem on:

We shut Trump down! Beautiful gathering of anti racist youth. pic.twitter.com/uYOFXMvKhX

Bill Ayers (@WilliamAyers) March 12, 2016

The People’s Cube, which has perfected its satire of left speak described the event from the thugs’ point of view:

CHICAGO, IL – Tonight one thousand peaceful communists, socialists, anarchists, Black Lives Matter activists, devout Muslims, immigration advocates with Mexican flags, and local students of Marxism, disrupted a meeting of some twenty five thousand angry and violent Trump supporters.

The Trump crowd had it coming because they had conspired to shut down everyone else’s right to free speech by buying tickets to the event, which was closed to those who didn’t have tickets. That was a grotesque violation of the protesters’ right to get inside, jump on the podium, rip Trump signs, and scream “F** Trump” into a TV camera.

As the news of the event’s cancellation was announced, the protesters peacefully celebrated their victory by throwing punches at Trump supporters and police officers, shouting over their objections, flipping the middle finger and kicking their cars, and walking into the road to block traffic composed of gas-guzzling, global-warming-causing vehicles.

Did Ted Cruz criticize this effort to deny thousands of people their right to free speech and assembly or the violent nature of the demonstration? No, he feebly offered up this on Fox New’s The Kelly File: “A campaign bears responsibility for creating an environment when the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence.”

Did he seriously believe that the effort to shut down the rally was occasioned by anything but Trump’s political positions? Where was he in 1968 when the far left pulled the same kind of thug action in the same city? Did he not notice Soros’ funding of Move On and Black Lives Matter or his funding of opposition to Trump and mobilization of Latinos opposed to Trump’s immigration stance in this election?

The organizers’ own words belie that claim that Trump bears responsibility for this mayhem: They were well organized and were there to shut down Trump  whose political views they oppose.

Here’s People for Bernie:

People For Bernie

‏‪@People4Bernie

Remember the ‪#TrumpRally wasn’t just luck. It took organizers from dozens of organizations and thousands of people to pull off. Great work.

Newsbusters picked up from an AP story the role of a Black Lives Matters

When’s the last time if even, that a group of right-wing protesters in the U.S. specifically set out to completely shut down a left-wing speaker’s address? There’s no doubt that the attempt to protest Trump was organized, and that its primary intent was to prevent him from speaking:

[snip]

“Trump represents everything America is not and everything Chicago is not,” said Kamran Siddiqui, 20, a student at the school who was among those celebrating. “We came in here and we wanted to shut this down. Because this is a great city and we don’t want to let that person in here.”

[snip]

“Our country is not going to make it being divided by the views of Donald Trump,” said Jermaine Hodge, a 37-year-old lifelong Chicago resident who owns a trucking company. “Our country is divided enough. Donald Trump, he’s preaching hate. He’s preaching division.”

[snip]

Chicago community activist Quo Vadis said hundreds of protesters had positioned themselves in groups around the arena, and they intended to demonstrate right after Trump took the stage.

Their goal, he said, was “for Donald to take the stage and to completely interrupt him. The plan is to shut Donald Trump all the way down.”

A directory assistance lookup indicates that there is no listed “Quo Vadis” (which means “Where are you going?” in Latin) in Illinois.

It seems quite likely that the person who was quoted is really Quovadis Green, a Chicago activist who was involved in Black Lives Matter protests in Chicago’s Michigan Avenue shopping district during last year’s Black Friday Christmas shopping weekend.

Bernie Sanders, whose people, as I have noted, took pride in shutting down the Trump rally, held a rally of his own in suburban Chicago. There he bragged that he was bringing people together, not dividing them like Trump. One can only imagine what he’d have said in the unlikely chance that rabid Trump supporters had shut down his rally. I say unlikely chance because these tactics are those of the left side of the spectrum. For sure, the press wouldn’t have called such action a “protest”. We’d have been treated to Nazi comparisons and the rally wreckers called Trump’s storm troopers.

The president, who has stirred up so much racial division by, among other things, supporting the Black Lives Matter supporters and megaphoning their lies about Trayvon Martin and Ferguson, Missouri, was equally mendacious.

“What’s happening in this primary is just a distillation of what’s been happening in their party for more than a decade,” Obama said, according to a report filed by the Texas Tribune.

Given the forces of the left arrayed against his party, Cruz’ take was more than spineless, it was self-defeating. If they succeed in shutting down Trump’s rallies, he’ll be next in their crosshairs. It’s the way they work. In any event, this show of rent-a-mob force may well encourage more voters, sick of this behavior, into the Trump camp.

Cruz’ offering up a justification for this behavior also played into the press game of targeting Republicans while spackling the records of their opponents. Of particular amusement is this piece in the Washington Post (whose editors must be on permanent leave):

Trump is known for his massive, raucous rallies — part campaign events, part media spectacles, part populist exaltations for his most loyal supporters. But the events have also become suffused with the kind of hostility and even violence that are unknown to modern presidential campaigns. The candidate himself often seems to wink at, or even encourage, rough treatment of protesters.

What is conveniently ignored is that these demonstrations are set up by Trump’s opponents specifically to provoke tensions and fights which the press then propagandizes. By this means they hope to set him up as what he is not — a racist — to scare off supporters and drive Blacks and Hispanics to the polls to vote for his Democratic opponent.

It’s of a piece with the rapidly disintegrating claim of a Breitbart reporter, Michelle Fields, days before that she was roughed up by Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s brilliant campaign manager.

The Daily Beast picked up her claim and further suggested (on the basis of a dubious third-hand account) that Lewandowski had admitted manhandling Fields, but as pictures and videos emerged which made her claim virtually impossible to sustain. It shows Trump and Lewandowski emerging from the presser with a Secret Service agent between Lewandowski and Fields. The Daily Beast walked that back step by step:

Update 2:15 p.m. ET: The Trump campaign has evidently leaked an email from Breitbart News Washington political editor Matthew Boyle. In the email Boyle rejects as “false” Daily Beast editor-at-large Lloyd Grove’s claim that Lewandowski “acknowledged to Breitbart’s Washington political editor, Matthew Boyle, that he did manhandle Fields.”

Breitbart, itself over the day, seemed to be backpeddling its reporter’s claim and noted

A Vine video has emerged, purporting to show a new angle of the incident. The footage appears inconclusive, but visible in the background is Ken Kurson, editor-in-chief of the New York Observer, who appears to have had a close-up view of the action.

Breitbart News reached out to Kurson, who responded via e-mail:

I was five feet away from the alleged incident and didn’t see anything. I was literally looking right at Corey when it supposedly happened. Someone sent me a Vine of it (I look bald as hell, goddammit — and what’s with that backpack?!?!!?) and if this happened, I think I would have seen it. I have a lot of experience as both a journalist and operative in these kind of press scrums and I didn’t see anything at all out of the norm.

Still, you can be sure this week’s lefty trope that Trump and his people are violent and encourage more violence will be played out, And if Cruz were the front runner drawing tens of thousands to his rallies he, too, would be tarred just the same.

Stay alert. This is going to be the dirtiest election in a long time.

Brownshirts invade Trump rally

March 12, 2016

Brownshirts invade Trump rally, American ThinkerShelby Williams, March 12, 2016

(Ted Cruz, with his normal sense of fair play and justice, has argued that Trump is responsible for the Chicago mess:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmxBp4IFe_I

Judging by comments posted at Free Republic, many Cruz supporters have switched to Trump due to Cruz’s comments.– DM)

 

The invective against Donald Trump has recently reached new heights, as his detractors have dusted off the old “Hitler” comparisons and brought them to the fore. Even Bill Mahar jokingly compared the Donald to Hitler in a segment on his show. Needless to say, such misguided attempts at castigating Trump sickeningly diminish the real atrocities committed by the real Hitler. These people show how little they know, but in addition, last night they showed their hypocrisy.

In advance of a Trump rally on the University of Illinois-Chicago campus on Friday night, protestors flooded the arena with the express goal of shutting down the event. Physical altercations are reported to have taken place between the protestors and Trump supporters. With the safety of his supporters in mind, Trump rightly cancelled the event. When this was announced, the protestors erupted in applause, their mission accomplished—to stifle opposing points of view.

Many of the protestors were heard to have chanted “Bernie! Bernie!” after the cancellation was announced. I doubt Bernie Sanders would openly condone what took place at the arena, but he has condoned – even praised – the totalitarian tactics of the Castro brothers. Would he call on his supporters to refrain from such actions hostile to the First Amendment? Scanning social media this evening, I’ve seen some Bernie supporters laudably condemn what occurred, but I’ve seen just as many, if not more, claiming these are Trump’s just deserts.

I have no doubt that the perpetrators of last night’s lawlessness applaudingly condoned the likening of Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler, all the while engaging in real actions straight out of the playbook of the Sturmabteilung—the infamous “Brownshirts.” Mechanically enforcing the will of the Nazi party, the Brownshirts disrupted meetings of opposing parties, employing force and violence to make their mark and discourage dissent. This is precisely what these thugs did last night, abandoning the law and civil discourse to perversely embrace the tactics of a man and a party they witlessly accuse Trump and the Republican party of embodying.

This, though, is a hallmark of Statists — they accuse their opponents of doing what they themselves do. They make the comparison to Hitler without a sense of irony, carelessly analogizing Trump’s proposal to temporary ban the entry of Muslims to the United States to Hitler’s Final Solution. They call Trump a fascist and shamelessly employ fascist tactics against him and his supporters.

Regardless of what one thinks about Donald Trump, he has a right to speak, and his supporters have a right to peaceably assemble. Those rights are enshrined in the First Amendment to our Constitution. Our nation cherishes that right and has historically celebrated the ability of opponents on an issue to speak their minds and debate. However, it’s a right which Statists on college campuses embrace when it’s their message they want to shout from the rooftops, but which they condemn when faced with differing viewpoints. The selective application of freedom of speech is no freedom at all.

The left paints themselves as eminently tolerant of others, but that façade crumbles when put to the test. Just look at the excoriation of Caitlyn Jenner by the left when the transgendered reality star made supportive statements about Ted Cruz. Last night was no different. Trump comes to Chicago, where he has many supporters, but his leftist detractors rule the day through intimidation, violence, and anarchy. The mob ruled last night, giving the civil political process our nation has long enjoyed a miss.

The Chicago Police did an admirable job of keeping a bad situation from going worse, but I fear this lot of students cum Brownshirts will only embolden others. Given the circumstances, I believe Trump did the right thing to cancel the rally, but he has sent a message: you can silence me by adopting such tactics. For Statists, this could serve as an open invitation to storm rallies across the country, inciting violence and usurping the rule of law.

Just as Trump and his supporters have the right to assemble and speak, his opponents likewise have the right to peaceably protest. They do not have the right to overrun Trump’s rallies, nor to silence opposition. This is an important point. The rights we enjoy in this nation are not enjoyed the world over. We have the opportunity to speak and debate and engage in the free flow of ideas. This is the very foundation of the civil society. The first step toward tyranny is to remove that ability.

This ideology says, “If I don’t like what you have to say, it’s perfectly justifiable to shut you down.” Of what else is such an ideology capable? History gives us the answer, and it’s deeply troubling. To be sure, it’s a long road from point A to point Z, but for those to whom the end justifies the means, it’s a smooth, straight road.