Left bots get their news from comedians which is why they are so ignorant

Is Comey a bad guy – he stopped Hillary from becoming president – or is he a good guy – investigating Trump’s Russian connection? Expect not honesty, consistency or common sense from the left who get their lead from comedians. Politics on the left is just a fashion statement. This is a paradigm example of how the left instantly falls into line with whatever is supposed to be the politically correct response to any event. This is from Twitchy: BACKFIRE alert! Audience reaction to Comey firing NOT what Stephen Colbert wanted.

On the Late Show, Stephen Colbert broke the news to his audience that Donald Trump had fired FBI Director James Comey, and their reaction was not what he hoped for.

Dems have gone back and forth on Comey so much even Colbert’s fans are unsure how they’re supposed to react on any given day.

Almost exactly the same from the Puffington Host even, also picked up by Twitchy: BACKFIRE alert! Audience reaction to Comey firing NOT what Stephen Colbert wanted.

Stephen Colbert opened his Tuesday night “Late Show” with the news that President Donald Trump had abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey.

The audience immediately started to clap and cheer at the news, leading Colbert to quip that there were “huge Donald Trump fans here tonight.”

Colbert’s guest on the show, Jon Stewart, later discussed the audience’s bizarre reaction to the Comey news.

Within minutes the entire left knew its lines and how to act in unison by following their national socialist leaders. This example from history shows how it was done then as it still is.

And the words – via the voice-over translator – are uncanny in their opposition to democracy, liberty and free speech.

A COUPLE OF ADDITIONS: The left remains a mystery in their self-destructive ways. Two examples worth your time. The first from Ann Coulter: TO SAY, ‘STOP RAPING ME!’ IN ENGLISH, PRESS ‘1’ NOW. The second from QoL: Mark Steyn, Cole Porter and Free Speech. This is an historic first, where a civilisation has disintegrated because its inhabitants hated its own values. I hope these cretins like what comes next better than what they are helping to see off, but my guess is they won’t. But their offspring will not know any better so in a hundred years no one will understand how pleasant our way of life was since no one will be able to believe we had what we had and gave it all away.

Politically ravaged marriages it’s worse than ever

From Fights over Trump drive couples, especially millennials, to split up.

Couples are fighting over President Trump more than ever, and many are turning to divorce court to get out of their politically ravaged marriages.

New data from Wakefield Research found that one in 10 couples, married and not, have ended their relationships in a battle over political differences. For younger millennials, it’s 22 percent.

And nearly one in three Americans said that political clashes over Trump have “had a negative impact on their relationship,” said the report provided to Secrets.

Not sure I could have lasted eight years with an Obama person, or would mind living my own life free from one of Hillary’s cretinous minions.

Les Miz after reality finally bites

An absolutely stunning photo. The people behind the barricades are, of course, the people who put Chavez and now Maduro into power. I wonder what they now know that they didn’t know then. If you look to the government to give you things you didn’t earn for yourself, this is the very plausible place you will end up. That is why when I have gone to see Les Miz, I always cheer for Inspector Javert.

Picked up at Instapundit.

UPDATE: Here is perhaps an article that may have the explanation: What Caused Venezuela’s Collapse Is No Mystery — Except To Economically Illiterate Journalists. So let us see what answer they come up with. This is where they start:

The cause is simple. Socialism. End it and you will end the misery.

I suppose that’s right, but what is this thing referred to as “socialism”. What are its characteristics and what can be done to avoid it? This, I’m afraid, we don’t entirely find out. The rest of the article describes how mainstream journalists evade the issue, with examples from The New York Times, The LA Times and USA Today. They attribute the collapse to falling oil prices, corrupt business leaders and even the weather which brought on a drought. And, of course, these weren’t the causes of the drastic failure of the Venezuelan economy, but after all is said and done, we end where the story began.

It is their unwillingness to admit that socialism can’t work that drives so many mainstream journalists to look for something, anything, else to blame when socialist economies invariable fail.

Socialism is merely a word that describes lots of economic systems, many of which have been very successful. What’s missing is any discussion of what in particular they have been doing wrong. It is this that seems to leave out that specifics of what needs to be avoided and what ought to be done in its place.

It wasn’t Comey it was Obama who did Hillary in

Listening to Hillary maunder on about Comey does make me think she actually knows the truth but knows she cannot say it herself. I have never been in any doubt that it was Comey who made PDT possible, but it was Obama via Loretta Lynch who was behind it all. I wrote about it a week before the election in a post I titled, Raisin’ Kaine to the highest office in the land which is, of course, reprinted in my The Art of the Impossible: A Blog History of the Election of Donald J.Trump as President. The same scenario was also discussed in another post on November 4. These are the ingredients for what is a very simple sequence that fits every fact not to mention the personal motivations of each of the persons involved. It also explains what Hillary cannot say but more likely than not knows herself.

1) Obama hates Hillary.

2) Tim Kaine is not just from the Obama side of the Democratic Party but was one of the first of the Democrats to defect to Obama in 2007. Hillary would never ever under ordinary circumstances have chosen Kaine for her Vice President, even assuming he would be a great campaign asset which he most assuredly was not.

3) However, she can only run for president if she is not under indictment for the undoubtedly illegal use of an insecure server. Hillary was therefore compelled to choose someone who she would never have chosen as her Vice Presidential candidate.

4) Obama’s aim was to be succeeded by someone with his own agenda to carry on where he had left off.

5) Hillary wanted to be president, but not necessarily serve as president. She is a sick woman which can hardly be denied. She might not have lasted a year before her illnesses would have forced her to resign.

6) But in any case, just in case she was reluctant to give up the presidency once she had it, the evidence of illegal activity could be used to impeach her if she chose to battle on, or at the very least, force her to stand aside and allow the Vice President to take over.

7) Comey had begun the original investigation, which was extraordinary enough. But since it is necessary for Hillary to win if Kaine was to become president, Comey – under instruction – says on his own bat that she has no case to answer.

8) Hillary then moves to the front and looks set to win the election. But now there is no means to force her from office if she doesn’t want to go. So suddenly 650,000 classified emails are found on Weiner’s laptop leading Comey – under instruction from Obama – to open the investigation again.

9) But then, to everyone’s astonishment on the Democrat side of politics, Trump begins to move ahead in the last week of the election, throwing the result into doubt. The investigation against Hillary therefore needs to be shut down immediately. Comey therefore declares that they FBI has gone through the 650,000 emails and states there is nothing there to prosecute.

10) But by then it is too late and Trump gathers just enough momentum due to the various scandals that have surrounded Hillary to win the election.

Hence this: Clinton blames Comey, WikiLeaks for election loss. I think this is exactly right:

Clinton said she was on track to winning the election until Oct. 28, when news broke that Comey had sent a letter to Congress announcing that he had reopened the investigation into her emails. . . .

“I was on the way to winning until the combination of Jim Comey’s letter on October 28 and Russian WikiLeaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me, but got scared off,” Clinton said.

Saying that the WikiLeaks came from Russia is just part of the fake news dross, but the WikiLeaks no doubt did matter but was hardly decisive. It was the investigation by the FBI that made her electoral poison. I even agree with her when she says she would have won had the election been held the week before. I wrote exactly this on the first of November, where I discussed A Week is a Long Time in Politics – another post reprinted in my book. There I wrote: “In my view, had the election been held today, Hillary would have won.” We’ll never know since the election was held a week later and bless my soul, by then, thanks to Obama with the assistance of James Comey, DJT was elected instead.

Cleaning up after Obama

Donald Trump has followed the worst president in American history. Here is Daniel Greenfield discussing the foreign policy mess that must now be dealt with, but also how it arose in the first place. As he writes, it was hard for Obama to follow any kind of consistency since his number one aim was to support America’s enemies, but sometimes the really bad guys were on opposite sides in different theatres of war which made it hard for him to choose. Here is a sample from the article but read the lot about the guy the left incredibly wishes were still president.

Obama’s foreign policy was a wildly inconsistent mess. The Nobel Peace Prize winner couldn’t quite decide if he was a humanitarian interventionist or a pacifist non-interventionist. He couldn’t make up his mind if he wanted to take the side of the Sunnis or the Shiites in their Islamic unholy war. He didn’t know if he wanted to appease Russia or sanction it, to pivot to Asia or run the other way, to play another round of golf or replace his defense secretary for the fifth time. . . .

The Islamist democracy proponents got Obama to kick off the Arab Spring. When Gaddafi shot the Islamists in the streets, the interventionists got him to sign on to regime change in Libya. But then Syria boiled down to Sunni and Shiite Islamists shooting each other and interventionism hit a roadblock.

Obama stopped at his own Red Line and couldn’t figure out what to do next. His foreign policy had somehow boiled down to helping Shiites kill Sunnis in Iraq and helping Sunnis kill Shiites in Syria.

The left has no foreign policy since they side with every form of anti-American group across the world. Cuba, Iran, Islamists, or whoever is around at the time. It is now Trump’s role to straighten out the crooked road left behind, but must do it without the support of 90% of those who make a living by writing or reading from scripts (such as actors, journalist, newsreaders, public “servants” and academics).

Know thine enemy

There is something so pathetically inane among the supposed right side of the political spectrum that I am at a loss to understand how to get others to see what is right before their eyes. The left knows its own. They can tell from the phrases they all use, their uniformity of perspective on every issue, their inability to reason and make sense of a contrary argument, that they are part of that side of the political world. The comments on my post on John Brennan dealing with Guess who was “a supporter of the American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War” has led me to put up this post as a response.

The first of these comments is just empty rhetoric from some Democrat/Hillary troll (however he might deny it) and is hardly worth a moment’s thought. But given that I had been on the left in my youth, one of the many things I have learned is that the most perfect dye-marker of someone who no longer has those views is that they never leave anyone in doubt about the ways their political beliefs have changed by their unrelenting criticisms of the left. Brennan has never said a word to indicate he has changed his political beliefs and was appointed by Obama! If you think he was ideologically a different man in 2013 than he was in 1976, when he could not even bring himself to vote for Carter for heaven’s sake, you really ought to rethink these things again.

This comment is purely incoherent:

You can’t have it both ways Kates. On one hand you are complaining that a pinko ran the CIA. On the other you defend Trump’s assertions that Putin’s Russia is no worse than the USA! Make up your mind (if that’s at all possible).

These others, however, make a valid point, I suppose, but seem to be merely a preference to do nothing even as a three-alarm fire is raging right before them. Those asking that we investigate further whether the beliefs that John Brennan hold have changed in a more benign direction are, I’m afraid, forms of rhetorical junk. What genuine point do they make unless they have some reason to think that if we spent time and effort looking more closely at Brennan’s current views that there is something else we might find?

Christopher Hitchens was a Trotskyist around the same time.

Steve do you agree with what you thought in 1976?

The traffic from left to right is very thin. With no exception I can think of, all of the people I associated with in my student days have not changed their politics in any way other than to follow whatever the modern fashion might be. To remain friends, we just have to stay off certain topics, which is all right since I see them only every year or so at the most. I have a friend from my university days who went on to become Vice-President of a major Canadian insurance company, but when he retired he immediately went back to overtly expressing the political beliefs of his (and my) youth, beginning his instant return to the far left by reading every Chomsky book he could find. No doubt almost every corporate boardroom has imbeciles just like him. There is no country that would not be turned into Venezuela if these people had their way. They are as unable to understand the workings of a free market as they are to understand how hydrogen and oxygen turn into water.

If after eight years you still want to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, and John Brennan along with him, I cannot think what can be done to make you see how you are playing into the hands of the left assuming you are not actually part of the left already. And to be quite honest, I am anyway unable to distinguish you from these leftist loons, although I am willing to hear in what way I may be wrong.

Making Marxism cool again

There are so many different directions from which cultural Marxism comes that it is impossible to keep up. If you do not understand and wish to sustain a society of free individuals whose aim is to live in freedom and direct their own lives in their own way, and by the way to also live in prosperity, then there is almost no defence against the centralising force that are found at every turn. There was a comment on my post on Communism for Kids that has added yet another dimension to this web. I am going to quote what “Robin” has written but will slightly reconstruct the order in which he brought out his points in a way I find easier to understand. This is what he wrote in the second of his comments:

I actually dropped in from the US to alert Australians to this push from March to force a shift to Human Capability Theory [HCT] in the name of supposed preparation for work.

Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum seem to have created HCT to implement the Marxist Humanist view of education globally without that being appreciated. The Capability Approach and Human Development is what the global change agents call this theory and they get together now quite a lot to plan how to implement it out of our collective sight for the most part.

Communism for Kids is published by MIT Press. I’m no longer surprised to see a university engaged in such kinds of work, but it’s not because they are a publisher and publish what they think will sell along the lines of selling the rope that will be used to hang them. They do it because HCT is part of a project MIT is involved with. The background to the book was outlined in the first of his comments.

This is translated into English from German I believe and relates to what I refer to as little ‘c’ communism. It is also what Gorbachev and others call Marxist Humanism. Its ties to what Marx called the Human development Society and education are covered here.

Marxist Humanism and little c communism are what the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN and its Dignity for All by 2030 campaign are all about once we become familiar with the theory. MIT’s involvement makes far more sense once we know they are partners with the UN in its Earth Systems Science Partnership that is about the behavioral and social sciences, including education.

Also the necessary premise for the Human Development Society where “from each according to abilities and to each according to needs” would be the operating principle was that capitalism would have produced a necessary level of technological innovation. ICT [Information and Communication Technology] is regarded as that magic technology worldwide and MIT is essentially homebase. China and Russia installed Communism on an agricultural base. Therefore, unfortunately, the theorists insist that their history does not invalidate what communism might entail if the theory can be implemented on the right technological base.

This remains a dangerous theory if not correctly understood. Letting it come in as ‘systems science’ for example is just as dangerous and much harder to see.

One superficially negative review of the book however ends with this.

There were a couple of positive reviews of the book, though none of them verifier buyers. “I loved this book so much!” wrote Sophia Nachalo. “It’s not really a kid’s book, but rather a book for everyone written in a fun and easy way that uses stories, fables, and funny characters to explain everyday life. It makes marxism cool again!”

Fredrick Jameson, a Duke University Professor, endorsed the book, claiming “this delightful little book may be helpful in showing youngsters there are other forms of life and living than the one we currently ‘enjoy,’ and even some adults might learn from it as well.”

And in another negative review there was nevertheless this at the end which totally reversed whatever mild criticisms there were:

CNN’s Chris Cuomo said communism is “uplifting” as he talked fondly of Cuba. This is the state of affairs in the United States today.

“The concern was the freedom of the people,” he continued. “What is the point of this communist regime if it is not to truly make everyone equal — not at the lowest level; not by demoralizing everyone; but lifting everyone up?”

I had a friend from the far left who was overjoyed by the fall of the Soviet Union now almost three decades ago. With no negative example before us, he was sure Marxism would come back stronger than ever. It may be the only political judgement he has ever been right about, but it is one that should worry you all.

Communism for Kids v Economics for Infants

Just like the article says, this is MIT’s new publication ‘COMMUNISM FOR KIDS’. You can pick it up at Amazon where you can find the following blurb:

Once upon a time, people yearned to be free of the misery of capitalism. How could their dreams come true? This little book proposes a different kind of communism, one that is true to its ideals and free from authoritarianism. Offering relief for many who have been numbed by Marxist exegesis and given headaches by the earnest pompousness of socialist politics, it presents political theory in the simple terms of a children’s story, accompanied by illustrations of lovable little revolutionaries experiencing their political awakening.

It all unfolds like a story, with jealous princesses, fancy swords, displaced peasants, mean bosses, and tired workers–not to mention a Ouija board, a talking chair, and a big pot called “the state.” Before they know it, readers are learning about the economic history of feudalism, class struggles in capitalism, different ideas of communism, and more. Finally, competition between two factories leads to a crisis that the workers attempt to solve in six different ways (most of them borrowed from historic models of communist or socialist change). Each attempt fails, since true communism is not so easy after all. But it’s also not that hard. At last, the people take everything into their own hands and decide for themselves how to continue. Happy ending? Only the future will tell. With an epilogue that goes deeper into the theoretical issues behind the story, this book is perfect for all ages and all who desire a better world.

You would hope that it’s all intended to be ironic but given the way of the world, every word is meant just as it is written. “Happy ending?” they ask. Complete idiots which often comes with high IQ grade stupidity.

So I will just mention that I have written my own little book which is titled Economics for Infants, the first children’s book ever premised on the classical economics of Say’s Law and John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty.

More details to come.

[The story on The Children’s Guide to the Gulag comes via Instapundit]

We’re crazy and we vote

If you are interested in Australia’s energy future you can see it here in my home province of old: Ontario manufacturers eye greener pastures stateside as hydro rates go through the roof.

“The government treats us like bourgeois sweatshop operators who have to be stopped,” said Bamford, who has organized dozens of medium-sized companies into the Coalition of Concerned Manufacturers of Ontario. “All the businesses are terrified of the government. My husband said, ‘Well, do you just want to pick up and go?’ And I said, ‘Well, I guess I gotta just stay and fight.’ I feel like I’m the Norma Rae of manufacturing.”

Automatic Coating’s electricity bill has more than doubled in the past decade. Its bill for last November was $49,209.68. The first line is for electricity: $6,577.93. The second line is much harder to explain: it is the euphemistic Global Adjustment charge: 217,165 kWh at 11.6 cents each for a total of $25,223.73.

The Global Adjustment contains many different costs, including Ontario’s payments to solar and wind energy makers at far more than the market rate, the cost to sell excess power to U.S. states at a loss, and even the cost of replacing light bulbs with LED bulbs.

They’re nutters every one – the ones in government and the ones who put them there – but they come in very large numbers. We’re crazy and we vote is not the line they use but it is the reality. They are now as disconnected from reality as we will all soon be from a secure source of affordable power.

[Via Small Dead Animals]

Multiple sources tell Fox News it’s Susan Rice

The probability that she knew but he didn’t is zero: Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say.

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.

The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.

As for whether you can believe a word she says about anything:

Rice is no stranger to controversy. As the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, she appeared on several Sunday news shows to defend the adminstration’s later debunked claim that the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in Libya was triggered by an Internet video.

Rice also told ABC News in 2014 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction” and that he “wasn’t simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield.”

Bergdahl is currently facing court-martial on charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for allegedly walking off his post in Afghanistan.

Disgusting and depraved. Treasonous to their very core. Worst president in history but still supported by the media, most of whom are utterly incapable of telling the truth about anything that harms the interests of the left. Not only lacking in integrity, but morally stupid. So the defence begins with The Atlantic now running Did Susan Rice Do Anything Wrong By Asking to ‘Unmask’ Trump Officials? Do you even have to read it to know what their answer is? Final para:

The political winds may be shifting on this story, or at least blowing in a slightly more favorable direction for the White House. But unless firm evidence of any actual wrongdoing emerges, these partial revelations, some favorable to the president and some unfavorable, are probably mostly a distraction, or at least a way to while away time, until the real news emerges from the congressional or FBI investigations.

Contemptible scum. Most corrupt administration in history.

UPDATE: This is the text that comes with the above video