Very interesting piece from The American Thinker regarding ongoing – and atrocious – teacher sex abuse scandals in the state of Missouri, especially the Kansas City area. While the vast majority of the populations of Kansas and Missouri are extremely conservative (in fact, Kansas is a hotbed of sede vacantism), the elites in the large cities are overwhelmingly leftist, as are the media.
Bishop Finn was not only conservative but also suspected of embracing Tradition (as his very close association with the Benedictines of Mary Queen of the Apostles revealed). For that, he had to be destroyed. He remains the only US bishop ever to face criminal prosecution for ostensible malfeasance in a priest sex abuse case, even though the priest in question committed crimes that pale in comparison to those enabled by left-leaning bishops in the US and elsewhere. Bishop Finn followed legal protocol and advice in his treatment of defrocked Fr. Shawn Ratigan, and removed him from service after he was found to have taken upskirt photos of underage girls. But Fr. Ratigan repeated his (comparitively minor) crime, and the KC media had all the material they needed to mount a relentless campaign of destruction.
For instance, did you know that the local newspaper, the Kansas City Star, published NINETY articles attacking Bishop Finn during this campaign? But Cardinal Mahoney, who had personal knowledge of actual boy-rape perpetrated repeatedly by certain priests, kept those priests in public apostolates, and he remained a cardinal in good standing throughout his tenure, and is still revered and feted around the country and world.
I hate leftism:
On April 15, Jackson County, Missouri, prosecutors charged James R. Green Jr., 52, with six counts of second-degree statutory sodomy. Green was a teacher and coach at a middle school in the suburban North Kansas City School District. Green’s victim was a sixteen-year-old boy. It appears likely that Green was abusing other boys over a period of at least twelve years in at least two different school districts, and Green’s crime is not the half of it…….
…….Without digging too hard, I discovered that Green was the sixth employee, all male, busted on sex charges with underage students in the last thirteen months in this one suburban school district. At least five of those employees were arrested. The reporting on the sixth was too sketchy to determine. Four of the interactions were heterosexual, two homosexual. In the same week Green was arrested, a campus supervisor at a high school in the North Kansas City District was charged with sending messages of a sexual nature to two female students, one fourteen and one fifteen. His was one of three cases at that same suburban school. In January 2017, the principal was arrested for having sex with students twenty years prior, and in August 2016 the band director was dismissed for sending sexual texts to students………
…….As troubling as these crimes were, what I found truly scandalous was that our local paper of record, the Kansas City Star, has not reported on this larger story. Typically, the paper has done brief one-offs on each crime and then moved on to something meatier, like, say, the latest imagined outrage by Gov. Brownback.
The reason for the silence is not hard to understand. The media and the teachers unions share an allegiance to the Democratic Party. The Star goes out of its way to protect the unions, and the unions have gone out of their way to protect the teachers, including the sexual predators………
………..[While steadfastly ignoring the far larger teacher-student rape scandal]the Star was dedicating its energies to Shawn Ratigan, a Catholic priest with the perverse habit of taking lurid photos of little girls unaware they were being photographed.
For the Star, the Ratigan scandal was tailor made. Unlike most accused priests, his pathology was heterosexual. Better still, the priest’s ultimate supervisor, Bishop Robert Finn, was described in media reports as a “theological conservative” with a record of challenging the Star’s agenda on life issues. [Yes. Don’t think that didn’t play a substantial role, especially when Finn several times publicly embarrassed the rag by refuting some of their pro-abort coverage]
The Star assigned its ace project reporter, Judy Thomas, to the Ratigan story. Locally, she had a reputation for seeking dirt on pro-life institutions, Catholic and evangelical. At the first whiff of the Ratigan scandal, the Star started to run above-the-fold headlines and soon called for the bishop’s resignation. “It’s painful to believe the most vulnerable in his flock weren’t protected,” thundered a Star editorialist. [Meanwhile, almost all the Star’s coverage of teacher sex abuse, which in some cases is even more systematic than it ever was in the Church, is buried deep in the paper if it is published at all]
After the photos were discovered, Ratigan attempted suicide. Bishop Finn consulted with his attorneys, and they assured him that what Ratigan had done may have been perverse, but it was not criminal. When Ratigan recovered, Finn assigned him to a home for aged nuns and imposed numerous restrictions. They did not work. Ratigan was caught taking photos at a family reunion.
The Star ran at least ninety articles on the Ratigan case, creating enough hysteria to get Ratigan a fifty-year prison sentence and get Finn, a saintly man, prosecuted for failure to report Ratigan to the police immediately. [And giving a hostile pope all the ammunition he needed to replace this good bishop years before the normal retirement age.]
Over the years, Catholic dioceses have dramatically altered their policies for identifying, reporting and removing alleged clerical predators, but, with cover from the media, public school districts have been largely insulated from any efforts to reform union practices.
Star editors went so far as to call Bishop Finn “repulsive,” but they have yet to mention the name of the man who runs the North Kansas City School District. As I have discovered, it is not just the national media that need to be watched. No, the local media are just as bad, maybe worse. [Which is why I dropped my subscription to the Dallas Morning News about 8 years ago.]
It was a hatchet job from beginning to end, deliberately construed to whip up enough public frenzy to get Finn not just charged, but convicted and then ultimately removed.
But Ace makes a great point. The media – all media, entertainment, infotainment, “news,” etc. – only has the influence on us we choose to allow it to have. If you are an expert in a certain field, or have a decent depth of knowledge, haven’t you noticed how often the media butchers related topics, and makes error after error? Sure we discount the media’s political bias, but what about their cultural bias or even their plain knowledge of the world? Why would you believe they would be any more right in any other field?
Thus, the alternative media. I am surprised, however, at the extent even people who should – who do! – know better still allow themselves to be moved on numerous issues by media opinion. I just had the case of a (not terribly close) family member opining that “gay marriage” was just fine by them, because “they are in love and that’s who they are and how can we ‘deny them happiness'”? Parroting almost word for word what the mass media says. Yet these same individuals see through the media lies regarding Trump. Discouraging.
Then again, they’re episcopalian, so go figure.
Austria was, even after World War II, one of the most visibly Catholic countries in the world. But after decades of being steeped in (America-imposed) secular materialism, Austrians recently elected a man president who now argues that if opposition to islam continues to grow, the result will be that ALL women will have to wear “headscarves,” by which he means the hijab.
I can’t quite follow the logic, either, but he seems to be declaring that opposition to islamification only emboldens muslims and, if that occurs, all women will eventually wind up in the hijab. Of course, if opposition to islam does not increase, Austria will wind up in the same place, with total submission of the state and individuals to islam. Suleiman the Magnificent must be whooping for joy in hell, if such were possible.
About the video, this is Sargon again, and Sargon’s an atheist, and prone to blasphemy, as well. I would advise playing the video without sound until the 3:50 mark, knowing that the subtitles are quotes from muslim men in Austria regarding their feelings towards atheists:
Yes. Absolutely. These people do want to be conquered. They are like the late Greek and Roman elites who had totally, entirely given up on their own birthright, and so they got the barbarians.
We need to seriously start thinking about a strategic reserve where Christendom can be preserved. It won’t be Europe.
Just a quick reminder of what these young, aggressive, cocksure muslim men are willing to kill over (content warning, Mohammad, like almost all the enemies of Christ, was wholly given over to his prurient lusts):
Normal for muslim men, perhaps.
David Wood has still more – all muslims gain from the activities of their radical brethren, which is why virtually no muslims oppose the activities of the jihadis, just as essentially no muslims opposed the armies of the Grand Turk, nor the Berber hordes that repeatedly invaded Christian Spain, nor any of the other non-stop wars of aggression islam has waged against Christendom:
We have our own dhimmis in the Catholic Church. Many of these are priests, mostly of a certain age, but not always. I have been called a racist and islamophobe for pointing out – much more mildly than here – the deplorable beliefs that muslims hold. To these dhimmis – including a couple of local pastors I am thinking of – ANY criticism of islam or any other religion they hold in esteem (which is every one but their own) is absolutely forbidden and is met with accusations of racism or some other -ism. They’d fit in very, very well at an antifa riot, for the rhetoric is the same.
I know most of this post is old news for regular readers. Islam is a satanic counterfeit of Christianity, the veritable antithesis of all the goodness and light Christ brought to the world. The quote from the horrid president of Austria is notable, however. He was barely elected over a rival who was pilloried in the media as being a “far right” neo-nazi. All over the world, the elites are using the same tactics, the same words to gain their ends. Which ends, apparently, include complete and total surrender to islam, and probable eventual conversion.
Enjoy paying the jizya.
Great column by Sandro Magister noting the rapid erosion of the formerly non-negotiable principles regarding the sanctity of life in the only Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself. I’ve no time to add much commentary myself excerpt to say, yep, this is exactly right, this is exactly what one would expect to happen given a pontiff like Francis – the Church abandoning her most sacred beliefs in a pathetically false hope of earning the love and acceptance of an implacably hostile world:
And also to note the sad fact that the philosophy professor at the formerly Catholic, now Satanic University of Louvain I covered two weeks ago was indeed sacked for daring to say that abortion is murder:
There has been an uproar over events at the Catholic University of Louvain, which has suspended and finally dismissed one of its philosophy professors, Stéphane Mercier, for having written in a note for his students that “abortion is the murder of an innocent person.”
The matter is not surprising, seeing the track record of this university which is nonetheless endowed with the title of “Catholic,” the hospital of which has for some time been openly practicing euthanasia procedures, “from 12 to 15 per year,” according to the rector of the twin Flemish university of Leuven, the canonist Rik Torfs.
But what is more striking is the substantial approval that the bishops of Belgium have given to the removal of Professor Mercier.
Also startling is the reticence of the newspaper of the Italian episcopal conference, “Avvenire,” which in giving a concise account of the affair – the more complete documentation of which has appeared on the blog Rossoporpora – avoided taking a position, limiting itself to this: “It remains to be understood what is the meaning of what has been stated by the spokesman of the Belgian episcopal conference.” [Wherein the spokesman completely contradicted Catholic Doctrine by calling abortion a “fundamental right.” You can’t get much clearer than that, but the disciples of Francis are apparently hopelessly confused by such a statement]
Not to mention the silence of Pope Francis, who however has not failed on other occasions to call abortion a “horrendous crime.”
There is in effect a significant discrepancy between how the papacy and much of the Catholic hierarchy speak out on abortion and euthanasia today and how they used to speak out.
What during the previous pontificates were “non-negotiable principles” have now become realities to be “discerned” and “mediated” both in politics and in pastoral practice.
The Italian episcopal conference and its newspaper “Avvenire” are perfect examples of this mutation.
In February of 2009, when Italy was rocked by the case of Eluana Englaro, the young woman in a vegetative state whose life was taken when her nutrition and hydration were cut off, the current editor of “Avvenire,” Marco Tarquinio, wrote a fiery editorial, calling that act a “killing”.
While today the climate is different. It should be enough to look at the courteous detachment with which “Avvenire” refers to and comments on the law currently under discussion in Italy on advance healthcare directives, abbreviated DAT, the indications to be given to physicians beforehand on what lifesaving measures to take or not take in case of loss of consciousness.
Go to the link and read how differently the Italian bishop’s conference newspaper “Avvenire” covered euthanasia in 2009, and how it covers it today. Same writer, but much, much more “nuance” now, because the writer obviously understands that Francis believes God lives in the “shades of grey,” which historically had been regarded as the domain of the devil.
But who am I to judge? One man’s God is another man’s devil, I suppose, especially if that man is consumed with leftist ideology.
US Bishops Oppose Appeal of Johnson Amendment – Why? March 7, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, Endless Corruption, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
I saw the following excerpt of a lengthy interview Archbishop Lori gave to the Catholic Register recently on the subject of the new presidency and the prospects it brings to the Church, and in addition to being generally disappointed with the bishop’s general view of much of the Trump agenda he was queried about, I was very surprised by this particular excerpt:
What is your assessment of the president’s proposal to eliminate the Johnson Amendment?
That’s, of course, a very complex question. We would certainly want to see, more specifically, what the president might have in mind. As a general rule, it is not a good idea for churches to engage in partisan politics. I believe that, generally, that proves to be a great distraction from our central task and mission, which is to preach the Gospel. Furthermore, I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations.
I would recognize that the Johnson Amendment is lived out fairly unevenly, across religious lines, but in general, I think we would eye the adjustment of this amendment warily. I think that’s the best adverb I can give you. We are looking at this carefully and warily.
The Johnson Amendment, for those who don’t know, was something created by the corrupt, racist Lyndon Johnson in 1954 and tacked onto a defense appropriations bill to punish the churches who had opposed his 1952 candidacy to the US Senate from Texas. Johnson only won by literally manufacturing votes in magical ballot boxes, but he had faced criticism from various churches for some of his stands and he did not want to have to deal with that again. So, he created an amendment that churches that endorse or oppose specific candidates would lose their precious tax-exempt status. The amendment was shockingly non-controversial at the time, but it has had enormous ramifications.
Now why would the bishops not favor being freed from this restriction on their ability to speak freely and endorse the most moral, most worthy candidates, and oppose those who are unworthy? There are two reasons, really – money, and ideology.
Regarding the money, the USCCB – and Lori was speaking in at least a semi-official capacity for the USCCB in this interview – is wholly dependent on federal funding for almost all of their activities, activities which have come to be thoroughly politicized by this very same funding. Something like 90% of Catholic Charities and 92% of Catholic Relief Services funding comes directly from US taxpayers. One could imagine that, if freed of the Johnson Amendment the bishops would be placed in a very difficult position, not wanting to anger either party by openly opposing some or many (or all) of their candidates. Such politicking could place their precious, precious billions at risk. Can’t have that.
In addition, one can easily forecast how divided and lukewarm the bishops would be in determining which candidates to endorse or oppose.
Think how many very difficult, uncomfortable stands out milquetoast bishops would have to take should the Johnson Amendment be repealed. The house divided they worry about is their own conference’s alienation from faithful souls. Either way they went, they’d be angering a large proportion of their sharply divided flock, but in most of these cases, there is a clear, Catholic moral imperative to support one candidate and oppose another. Right now, they have the perfect excuse not to speak out much more forcefully against pro-abort, pro-contraception, pro-perversion, etc., candidates. They simply can’t speak out for fear of losing that “holy” tax exempt status. It’s great cover.
But it’s also a huge shirking of duty and conduct unworthy of a shepherd of souls. In fact, much of the division among those in this country who apply the name Catholic to themselves stems precisely from the bishop’s unwillingness to take clear stands on moral issues, and, more importantly, impose ecclesiastical penalties against politicians and others of notoriety who advocate for positions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith. How many pro-abort politicians have been denied Communion, for instance? How many have been condemned by name? How many morally worthless, mealy-mouthed “voting guides” have been trotted out over the years, always containing just enough morally ambiguous language to give a shade of cover for those who want to vote for politicians who advance morally reprehensible positions?
Overall, this commentary reveals the moral corruption at the heart of the USCCB and most national episcopal conferences. Not only do they try to enforce a rigid conformity, blocking individual ordinary’s ability to speak out by imposing penalties against those who do, they also reveal a bureaucratic contractor more concerned with getting paid than saving souls. Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the Church and the protestant sects and others to have a stronger impact on the electoral landscape than they’ve had in decades, and thus materially improve the moral condition of this nation. In point of fact, one can trace the steady decline in morals in this country almost in a direct line back to 1954 – that is to say, the silencing of the churches played a significant role in the subsequent moral collapse of this nation.
But perhaps many of our shepherds today consider that much more of a feature, than a bug. Whatever keeps the gravy train rolling……is that their primary concern? And how many of them favor the Church to be a mute, subservient, loyal and dutiful NGO-type contractor to the government, rather than the radically countercultural Body of Christ and vehicle of salvation she is intended by our Lord to be?
The Elites Got Their Scalp – Milo Yiannopoulos Resigns Brietbart February 22, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, Endless Corruption, error, horror, persecution, priests, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
While it may seem like a tempest in a teacup, or perhaps the well-earned and inevitable downfall of someone who created a name for himself by flaunting social (or elite) convention constantly and brazenly, I do have grave concerns over the rapid and seemingly near-total destruction of Milo Yiannopolous over the past two days. He just announced his “resignation” from Brietbart a little while ago, but from what I have heard and read the resignation was forced and eagerly desired by some Brietbart staffers who had grown annoyed at Milo’s popularity and antics. His lucrative book deal has been cancelled. He claims he has many new projects in the works, but his name has probably been permanently sullied by this “high tech lynching,” to quote Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
For those unaware of what I am discussing, videos were published, first on sites very closely linked to several high-power establishment Repubniks, containing highly edited statements from Milo Yiannopolous – videos recorded many months to a year+ ago – that gave the appearance that he either supported, apologized for, or had some sympathy for pedophilia. When it was shown that his words were being completely twisted, slightly less edited versions were released that made it appear that Milo was at least of questionable judgment on this matter. Milo maintains he was speaking of personal experience and that he is a bitter opponent of pedophiles.
I have had many thoughts and been rather conflicted about all this. First of all, this is obviously a carefully engineered takedown of someone who was a rising threat to the dominant uniparty elites. The offending comments were made long ago and were the “juiciest” things that hundreds of thousands of dollars of oppo research could find. And they were definitely not good. I think it’s confirmed now that Milo’s perversion is not an act and that it seriously affects aspects of his judgments, and not in a good way.
Amazingly, as all this has developed, it seems the Novus Ordo church played a significant role in Milo’s downfall, and I don’t mean just this week’s developments. Assuming he is being truthful, Milo was first exposed to the sodomite lifestyle by an English Catholic priest. That was his first “experience,” when he was 13. What a tragedy. What a scandal. Even more incredibly, very few people have even batted an eye at this revelation. “Oh yes another priest raped and morally ruined a young boy, yawn……” I mean, that’s’ been the overall reaction. That the Church has been involved in the moral corruption of a young boy yet again, something which not only ruined him but likely his entire family……..it makes me want to throw up. And yes I know this went on before VII, but VII did not materialize from a vacuum. The very fact there were perverts of this type corrupting the priesthood was a significant factor in the phenomenon we call Vatican II even coming into being.
But this revelation brings two very important points to the fore: one, those who suffer childhood sex abuse are never quite right again. Their ability to judge certain moral matters, especially those related to their own sexuality, are almost always forever compromised by the violent taking of their innocence. Secondly, a great many sodomites are sodomites because they were abused by men at a very young age. Thus, this entire sequence of sorry events is not entirely surprising.
That is to say, I agree quite a bit with Sargon’s analysis below, which, while generally apologizing for Milo, admits that he probably had to turn his abuse into a “good thing” to mentally and emotionally deal with such unimaginably deep and hurtful wounds (LANGUAGE WARNING):
I’ll add a few more thoughts, sort of randomly. First of all, the various ages of consent in differing nations are more or less arbitrary. It’s 16 in England, 14 in Germany, generally 17 or 18 in the US, etc. Of course there is no such thing in muslim countries, where young boys are systematically abused with societal and religious approval and girls as young as 8 or 9 are sold as “brides.”
Is the US with relatively high ages of consent more moral? But wasn’t Saint Elizabeth of Hungary married at age 14? In fact, throughout the Age of Faith, the great and high Middle Ages, marriage at such ages was routine. Of course, people generally died much younger, too, but I don’t think 13th century Spain or 11th century Italy was less Christian or less moral than these United States, or anywhere in the world today. Not that I think such is appropriate today, nor would I want that for my 6 daughters. I am merely stating that all these things are really just conventions and are almost wholly arbitrary.
The other things is, Milo is right, those who are carrying out this attempted destruction are not doing so out of moral outrage. They are doing it to take out a target they don’t like. The real target is not Yiannopolous. It’s Steve Bannon, and more importantly, Donald Trump. Milo was, whatever one may think of him, energizing an entirely new generation towards conservative/libertarian/populist beliefs, and there was a very strong cross-over between the thousands of kids who braved insult and injury to hear Milo speak on college campuses and support for Trump. He was also, like Trump, extremely effective at bulldozing into oblivion the cultural marxist structures in the academia, media, heck, in the very language, which are such powerful tools of the Left. He had been almost immune to criticism, with his “high on the victim pyramid” lifestyle and devil may care nature. Until now.
My concern is that if the elite media complex/entrenched political powers can do this to a Milo Yiannopolous or a Mike Flynn, they can do it to any of us. There has been a recent spate of what seem like vengeful attacks from the old media on the new, with targeted takedowns of rising new media personalities. For some analysis of how and why this is happening, I think this is spot on (again, language warning). And, of course, we have seen the media-government complex deign to destroy average Joes and Janes for exceedingly trivial sins against the sexular pagan orthodoxy on a number of occasions, from cake bakers in Oregon to photographers in New Mexico to bed and breakfast owners in Vermont to florists in Washington. This is about power, and maintaining a narrow, undeserving oligarchy in the power and riches which it has arrogated to itself. To me, it’s all part of a broader reaction against the little people who got a little too uppity and actually exercised their rights in a way the elites find annoying.
Having said all that, Milo largely did this to himself. I’d hate to have every off-hand or “boozy” (his words) comment I’ve ever made microscopically analyzed and held up for all the world to see, but that’s also what goes with the territory. The old media and entrenched political powers are not nice people and have no scruples in destroying anyone they perceive as being in their way, or simply annoying. Heck, it’s practically a sport to these people. Milo should have known, having already experienced several attempted “lynchings” for his blasphemies against the state religion of sexular pagan cultural marxism. I’m sure he’ll be back in some fashion, but he’s been permanently damaged by this, which takes away another important defender and ally from Trump.
I expect this to become far more cruel and ugly as we go along. They want to destroy all those who publicly support Trump and ultimately go after him.
Soros-Funded, Paid “Protesters” Attempting to Subvert Election November 11, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, Endless Corruption, error, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
The evidence is overwhelming. Protesters riding chartered buses to a rally in Austin:
Media searching social media for staged interviews of aggrieved leftists:
Yeah. That’s some unbiased media for you.
These staged riots are being directed by MoveOn.org, which has received extensive funding from Soros’ “Open Society” group for years. There is extensive evidence of Soros’ funding of left-wing demonstrations in the US going back over a decade. I don’t disagree with Lew Rockwell that Soros might even want to push the US into a civil war. This is the self-loathing Jewish former Nazi that described rounding up Jews as the highlight of his life, and who has retained such a hatred of the US and Britain for their role in the destruction of Nazism (though not, curiously, the Soviet Union for its even larger role) that he deliberately broke the Bank of England in the 80s and has long sought to wreck the United States through cultural marxist, Frankfurt-school tactics.
But what concrete object do they hope to achieve in the present spate of demonstrations, all taking place in demonrat-controlled cities? Nothing less than the overturning of the will of the people as expressed in the most recent election, if not formally, then at least effectively:
Across the country, exclusively in cities controlled by Democrats, there have been “spontaneous” protests by the usual suspects “concerned” that the winner of Tuesday’s election doesn’t “represent” them as president.
And though the numbers at these protests don’t appear to be overly large, the intensity of them appears to make up some of the difference. In Seattle, violence was in the air both in the rhetoric of the speakers practicing street theater and in the literal sense, as four people were shot. In Chicago, a man was beaten and his car stolen for having manifested himself as a Donald Trump supporter. In New York, street theater turned threatening as hundreds surrounded Trump’s home at Trump Tower — more than a dozen arrested. Some 40 fires were started and three police officers were injured from Molotov Cocktail-hurling thugs in Oakland. Los Angeles police arrested 28 people attempting to block an interstate highway. Even the Hard-Left local government of Portland, Oregon termed the protests a riot after the orgy of property destruction unleashed there.
And in New Orleans, several dozen children from local colleges staged a tantrum in which bank windows were broken and businesses and landmarks defaced with profane graffiti. In the presence of local police. None were arrested……….
…….That’s a pattern that has repeated itself across the country — in deep blue cities, the local pols demand Trump “reconcile” with the people he offended amid the campaign, and shortly after the Social Justice mob appears to bring chaos to the streets and Astroturf their way onto the local and national news to create the appearance of civil disorder. The pattern even includes perpetrating hoaxes to slander Trump supporters as violent racists.
And that disorder is clearly aimed at cowing Trump into “reconciliation” — as defined by those he is to reconcile with.
We know it’s Astroturf, not just because these protests and near-riots always are. The protesters in Austin came off buses, as they did in other cities.
It’s all the Left has in their arsenal. The election is over and the voters repudiated them nearly everywhere they could. It wasn’t just Hillary Clinton’s loss — the Democrats couldn’t take the House or Senate, they now control only 16 governorships and 12 state legislatures. Their party is at a low point of political power such as they’ve not seen since 1928, the finale of the Calvin Coolidge administration.
Democrats no longer have the power to win real arguments in America, because they’ve allowed a cadre of totalitarians and crybullies to seize control of their intellectual centers. All they have left is intimidation, and thus we now have a brand-new manifestation of the Occupy gang angry at Trump’s election and transported to TV-friendly locales for street theater. On the Occupy Wall Street Facebook page, they’re threatening a general strike during the Trump inauguration; this would be a considerably more frightening prospect if any of them had jobs.
A quite, ah, energetic response to these tactics from Paul Joseph Watson below. While I may not condone the language he uses (you are warned), I can certainly understand it. May God, and my readers, forgive me for this one excess:
Well, that didn’t take long: McConnell already signaling cave to Dems on Supreme Court November 11, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, Endless Corruption, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, secularism, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
The nuclear option, which Harry Reid stated he would implement immediately if the demonrats gained control of the Senate, is already out the window. That took barely 36 hours. Already obstructionism from Repubniks in the Senate is in full force. Is there ANY vehicle to get rid of this guy?
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hinted Wednesday that he may not support the controversial idea of changing Senate rules to kill Democratic filibusters, and instead warned that Republicans need to be wary of “overreaching” now that they have kept control of Congress.
When Democrats ran the Senate, they changed the rules to allow for simple majority votes for judicial nominees, but not Supreme Courtnominees, which can still be filibustered. But despite speculation that Republicans will take this next step, McConnell declined to talk about that option when pressed on Wednesday.
“Well, I won’t purport to know what might happen in the context of the Supreme Court,” McConnell told reporters. “What we do know is the new president will fill the vacancy …”
He said he “would not expect” Democrats to reveal their strategy for how Democrats might try to defeat the nominee, or how Republicans might respond to that strategy.
And when asked more broadly about how how Republicans and Democrats might cooperate, or not, in the Senate, he struck a conciliatory tone, and warned about “overreaching.” [Yeah, heaven forbid they actually implement the will of the people for a change. This is exactly why Trump won the Republican nomination, the electorate simply does not trust any but a handful of Repubniks in Washington, and with good reason. They’re the French Army of American politics, always ready to surrender.]
McConnell said “overreaching after an election, generally speaking, is a mistake.” When pressed on McConnell’s approach to working with Democrats in the new Senate, McConnell said the way the chamber is structured requires “some Democratic participation and cooperation.”
Reading through the lines, it seems McConnell expects to cooperate with dems to keep the Supreme Court stuck in a 4-4 split for many months if not years. Either that, or try to force a nominee acceptable to demonrats, which would make that same nominee totally unacceptable to the core of the electorate that voted in Trump. Another Souter or Kennedy. Looks like one of the first activities we the people will have to undertake to stop this kind of obstruction is putting heavy pressure on McConnell to honor the results of the election.
You can contact the uniparty majority leader here.