The Liability of Liberalism: Contradicting themselves.

Our resident “I Hate Conservativiots” Progressive offers us the following:

No more racist star spangled banner as national anthem.

There are historians (notably Robin Blackburn, author of The Overthrow of Colonial Slavery, 1776-1848, and Alan Taylor, author of “American Blacks in the War of 1812”), who have indeed read the stanza as glorying in the Americans’ defeat of the Corps of Colonial Marines, one of two units of black slaves recruited between 1808 and 1816 to fight for the British

Yes who wouldn’t have “read the stanza” (if they did read the stanza in this way) as glorifying in the defeat of individuals recruited to fight for the British?

Isn’t that what the American revolution was about, i.e., defeating the British tyranny?

These are Liberals. This is the contradiction of Liberalism.

Got this from a Progressive today regarding last nights mass shooting in Las Vegas:

So that means we get to blame trump for this one in Las Vegas, right conservativiots?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/13/trump-blames-obama-for-orlando-shooting-blasts-clinton-on-immigration/?utm_term=.352e99dd7435

Since it is unwise to ever believe a Progressive Liberal about anything before you check it out, I did.

And what do you know, to no one’s surprise here’s just another example of the Desperately Despicable, Deceiving Democrat Liberals, and the Liars they are.

Go ahead Putrid Progressives…please do blame Trump…shout it from the rooftops so the entire world can continue to hear who you really are.

Here’s the headline from the WaPo article:

Trump blames Obama for Orlando shooting, blasts Clinton on immigration

I went through the article itself. Below are the entirety of quotes attributed in the article to Trump.

Does he blame Obama for Orlando here?

said Monday during a speech here that “political correctness” and lax immigration laws have stifled efforts to combat radical jihadism.

Hmm. No.

Here?

“Truly, our president doesn’t know what he’s doing. He’s failed us, and he’s failed us badly. And under his leadership, this situation will not get any better, it will only get worse, and I’ve been saying that for a long time,”

No.

What about here?

“They’re pouring in, and we don’t know what we’re doing,” he added later.

No.

Here?

Trump said that he would suspend immigration “from areas of the world where there’s a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe and our allies.”

Here?

Later in the speech, he specifically focused on immigration from the Middle East and “many more from Muslim countries outside of the Middle East.”

Here?

“The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why she believes that immigration from these dangerous countries should be increased without any effective system … to screen,” Trump said.

Here?

“Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don’t want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!” he tweeted Sunday

Here?

“We express our deepest sympathies to the victims, the wounded and their families. We mourn as one people for our nation’s loss, and pledge our support to any and all who need it,” Trump said.

“It’s a strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation. It’s an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want, and express their identity,” Trump added.

“Well, there are a lot of people that think maybe he doesn’t want to get it,” Trump said Monday on NBC. “A lot of people think maybe he doesn’t want to know about it. I happen to think that he just doesn’t know what he’s doing, but there are many people that think maybe he doesn’t want to get it.”

“She has no clue, in my opinion, what radical Islam is, and she won’t speak honestly about it if she does in fact know. She’s in total denial.”

“If you had some guns in that club the night that this took place … you wouldn’t have had the tragedy that you had,” Trump said on CNN Monday morning.

Now, including skin color, that which is racist is anything Dr. Seuss!

Hooray for Liberals! Hooray for Liberalism!

“Another fact that many people are unaware of is that Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are steeped in racist propaganda, caricatures, and harmful stereotypes,” Soeiro wrote, giving examples of “If I Ran a Zoo” and “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street” as clear “racist mockery” in Seuss’ art.”

Melania Trump fires back at librarian who rejected gift of Dr. Seuss books as ‘racist’

First lady Melania Trump fired back Friday at a Massachusetts elementary school librarian who rejected her donation of Dr. Seuss books, claiming their illustrations are examples of “racist propaganda.”

Stephanie Grisham, director of communications for the first lady’s office, said in a statement to Fox News that the response was “unfortunate,” and Mrs. Trump wanted to use her platform “to help as many children as she can.”

“She has demonstrated this in both actions and words since her husband took office, and sending books to children across the country is but one example,” she said. “To turn the gesture of sending young students some books into something divisive is unfortunate, but the First Lady remains committed to her efforts on behalf of children everywhere.”

To celebrate “National Read a Book Day,” the first lady had sent out a collection of 10 Dr. Seuss books to one school in each state across the nation. The titles included: “The Cat in the Hat”; “One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish”; “Wacky Wednesday”; “Green Eggs and Ham”; and “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!”

She followed in the footsteps of her predecessor, Michelle Obama, who often read Dr. Seuss books to children. Former first ladies Hillary Clinton and Barbara Bush also read to children at Dr. Seuss-themed educational events.

“I wanted to send you a special gift. Dr. Seuss’s Oh, the Places You’ll Go! is a book my son and I have read over and over again, and one that we want to share with all of you,” the first lady wrote in her letter to students. “Please also remember that you are the future of America and that you can accomplish anything you set your mind to.”

But despite the gesture, Liz Phipps Soeiro, a librarian at a public school in Cambridge, wrote a letter to the first lady, which was then published on The Horn Book blog, notifying Mrs. Trump that her school would “not be keeping the titles” for their collection, explaining that her school didn’t have a “NEED” for the books, due to her school and library’s “award-winning” status.

“I work in a district that has plenty of resources, which contributes directly to ‘excellence,’” Soeiro wrote. “My students have access to a school library with over nine thousand volumes and a librarian with a graduate degree in library science.”

Soeiro went on to slam the White House and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos for not gifting the books to “underfunded and underprivileged communities,” which she suggested “continue to be marginalized” by DeVos’ policies.

But Soeiro seemed to be the most offended by the books themselves.

First Lady Melania Trump with children at the American International School of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in May 2017.  (Reuters)

“Another fact that many people are unaware of is that Dr. Seuss’s illustrations are steeped in racist propaganda, caricatures, and harmful stereotypes,” Soeiro wrote, giving  examples of “If I Ran a Zoo” and “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street” as clear “racist mockery” in Seuss’ art. 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/29/melania-trump-fires-back-at-librarian-who-rejected-gift-dr-seuss-books-as-racist.html

Two Liberals are out “raising awareness” of the Russian hack of our 2016 Presidential election:

“aRussia-Russia-Russia-Russia, hack-hack-hack-hack, voting-HACK, voting-HACK…voting…wait…”
“What?!”
“Voting hack?”
“Yeah dude do the mantra dude what’s wrong with you?”
“But…”
“Yes? ’But’ what?”
“But we’ve already said voter fraud is a myth…”
“LOL – so what moron?!?! Who cares? If we repeat the lie long enough someone will believe us!”
“Okay…but I feel kinda weird.”
“No worries. Lying is like heroin, at the first couple of shots you get sick, but the next one makes you feel gooooood…”
“Ready?”
“Okay!”
“Alrighty then!”

Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet?

Last Friday, most major media outlets touted a major story about Russian attempts to hack into U.S. voting systems, based exclusively on claims made by the Department of Homeland Security. “Russians attempted to hack elections systems in 21 states in the run-up to last year’s presidential election, officials said Friday,” began the USA Today story, similar to how most other outlets presented this extraordinary claim.

This official story was explosive for obvious reasons, and predictably triggered instant decrees – that of course went viral – declaring that the legitimacy of the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election is now in doubt.

Virginia’s Democratic Congressman Don Beyer, referring to the 21 targeted states, announced that this shows “Russia tried to hack their election”:

MSNBC’s Paul Revere for all matters relating to the Kremlin take-over, Rachel Maddow, was indignant that this wasn’t told to us earlier and that we still aren’t getting all the details. “What we have now figured out,” Maddow gravely intoned as she showed the multi-colored maps she made, is that “Homeland Security knew at least by June that 21 states had been targeted by Russian hackers during the election. . .targeting their election infrastructure.”

They were one small step away from demanding that the election results be nullified, indulging the sentiment expressed by #Resistance icon Carl Reiner the other day: “Is there anything more exciting that [sic] the possibility of Trump’s election being invalidated & Hillary rightfully installed as our President?”

So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false. The story began to fall apart yesterday when Associated Press reported that Wisconsin – one of the states included in the original report that, for obvious reasons, caused the most excitement – did not, in fact, have its election systems targeted by Russian hackers:

Read the full story: https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

This is Socialism:

In Venezuela, they were teachers and doctors. To buy food, they became prostitutes.

By Jim Wyss
jwyss@miamiherald.com
September 22, 2017 12:08 PM
ARAUCA, Colombia

At a squat, concrete brothel on the muddy banks of the Arauca River, Gabriel Sánchez rattled off the previous jobs of the women who now sell their bodies at his establishment for $25 an hour.

“We’ve got lots of teachers, some doctors, many professional women and one petroleum engineer,” he yelled over the din of vallenato music. “All of them showed up with their degrees in hand.”

And all of them came from Venezuela.

As Venezuela’s economy continues to collapse amid food shortages, hyperinflation and U.S. sanctions, waves of economic refugees have fled the country. Those with the means have gone to places like Miami, Santiago and Panama.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/venezuela/article174808061.html#storylink=cpy

Our good friend, “I Hate Conservativiots” sent me this today (bold mine):

“But only last year the lying troll said the ice in Antarctica was growing.”

“The fact that the calving events have gotten a little more frequent is not a good sign,” Shuman said. He adds there is no sign the trend is reversing.

Check out this article from USA TODAY: Iceberg 3 times the size of Manhattan breaks off Antarctica https://usat.ly/2yrgYgz

Yep, it is growing (as of this date, anyway).

It grew between 2013 and 2015, dropped some in 2016 and we don’t yet know for 2017.

Not much change at all, however, since 1979. Since 2003 the trend is generally up.

Donald Trump once again tweaks the Left with his particular brand of honesty and patriotism.

You just have to love the guy even if you don’t like him.

Look at hypocrite Thug Liberals, threatening violence unless you censor art they don’t like:

“Ban the art!” “Protest their business!” “Burn the books!”

The hypocrisy is deliciously stupid.

The Guggenheim just yanked three animal-related artworks after receiving threats

New York’s Guggenheim Museum said it will not include three works in an upcoming exhibition after they sparked the ire of animal rights groups. The exhibition, “Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World,” included three works that critics said promoted cruelty to animals–including one called “Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other,” which reportedly included footage of pit bulls on treadmills.

The museum initially defended showing the works, saying it valued freedom of expression, but it said in a statement yesterday that threats of violence have forced it to reconsider out of concern for the safety of its visitors. It added that it is “dismayed” over having to basically self-censor its exhibition:

 “Out of concern for the safety of its staff, visitors, and participating artists, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum has decided against showing the art works Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other (2003), Theater of the World (1993), and A Case Study of Transference (1994) in its upcoming exhibition Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World. Although these works have been exhibited in museums in Asia, Europe, and the United States, the Guggenheim regrets that explicit and repeated threats of violence have made our decision necessary. As an arts institution committed to presenting a multiplicity of voices, we are dismayed that we must withhold works of art. Freedom of expression has always been and will remain a paramount value of the Guggenheim.”

https://www.fastcompany.com/40473159/the-guggenheim-just-yanked-three-animal-related-artworks-after-receiving-threats

Got this the other day from our “I Hate Conservativiots” friend:

Ban football. 

Check out this article from USA TODAY: 

Ex-Patriots star Aaron Hernandez had severe CTE, examiners conclude 

https://usat.ly/2xldUDb 

No worries Liberals. Liberalism is already well on its way to destroying American football. 

http://nypost.com/2017/09/20/the-nfl-is-praying-for-a-ratings-turnaround/ 

http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/49ers-Rams-tickets-cheapest-levis-stadium-history-12215863.php 

https://sports.yahoo.com/memo-nfl-players-ask-roger-goodell-support-racial-equality-campaign-031110505.html

http://fortune.com/2017/09/20/nfl-monday-night-football-tv-ratings-decline/

I got this from our resident Liberal, “I Hate Conservativiots”. Look at how this typical Liberal utilizes fallacious logic in order to attempt to smear both Roman Catholicism as well as the name of Steve Bannon:

10,000 reasons never to trust a priest.

Steve bannon is a good catholic, too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/09/15/vatican-diplomat-in-united-states-recalled-due-to-child-porn-investigation/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_vatican-845am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.7457f5bdeba4 

Most modern Liberals must rely on faulty logic in order to convince the unsuspecting target. They have no other choice, given the propositions within their belief system cannot be sustained through Reason.

One of the most common logical fallacies utilized is this one:

Ad Hominem (Guilt by Association)

argumentum ad hominem

(also known as:  association fallacy, bad company fallacy, company that you keep fallacy, they’re not like us fallacy, transfer fallacy)

Description: When the source is viewed negatively because of its association with another person or group who is already viewed negatively.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/10/Ad-Hominem-Guilt-by-Association

So here we have the following argument:

A Roman Catholic priest is accused of child pornography. 

Child pornography makes one untrustworthy. 

Therefore, all Roman Catholic priests must be untrustworthy.

But the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise because of the logical fallacy. Concluding that all Roman Catholic priests are untrustworthy because of the actions of other priests is fallacious reasoning.

And then when the fallacy is applied forward, the irrational Liberal double-applies the fallacy toward Roman Catholicism in general:

All Roman Catholic priests must be untrustworthy. 

Steve Bannon is a Roman Catholic. 

Therefore, Steve Bannon must also be untrustworthy.

How the above is obviously fallacious I leave as an exercise to the reader.

These are Irrational Liberals…disciples of Irrational Liberalism