The Democrat Party Continues to Feel the Pull From the Left

Ever since he came down the escalator inside Trump Tower to announced his presidential campaign in the summer of 2015, Donald Trump has drawn consistent media attention. Now as President, that vacuum he helped create continues to suck out the air of other political news. That is especially true when it comes to media attention considering the political vitally from across the aisle.

Coverage of President Trump and Republicans fighting and the future of the conservative movement are the shiny objects that draw media scrutiny as much as moths to a flame. When this happens, what is missed is an even bigger story on how much those across the aisle are in a pugnacious battle between conservative Blue-Dog Democrats and those on the fringe far left.

“The growing tension between the party’s ascendant militant wing and Democrats competing in conservative-leaning terrain, was on vivid, split-screen display over the weekend,” according to an article in Monday’s New York Times. “In Chicago, Senator Bernie Sanders led a revival-style meeting of his progressive devotees, while in Atlanta, Democrats made a final push to seize a traditionally Republican congressional district.”

For years now, the Democrat party has drifted to the left. With the emerge of Bernie’s success in 2016 and Labour Party left-wing leader Jeremy Corbyn, in last week’s British elections, this trend has only intensified.

However, many party insiders also see that with a populist President who is in the process remaking the Republican party, the opportunity should look at the model Democrats campaigned on in 2006, when the party won control of Congress by competing for conservative corners of the country.

A prime example of this is the current Congressional race in Georgia’s Sixth District where Jon Ossoff has publicly stated that he would not support raising income taxes, even for the wealthy, and opposed “any move” toward a single-payer health care system.

Compare this to what happened over the weekend in Chicago. “Mr. Sanders rallied his youthful, often-raucous coalition Saturday night at a gathering named the “People’s Summit,” where supporters hailed him in worshipful language.”

With ever increasing echo chambers that re-enforce talking points that activists seek, the far left is energized. The reality is that under their last liberal leader, President Obama, the Democratic Party suffered huge losses (net loss of 1,042 state and federal posts). Democrats have always been the party of emotion instead of logic. Only time will tell which direction they will move.

For us on the right, we must always stand for substance, truth, ideals, and principles. We also should be wise to never underestimate any political outcome. After all, with the GOP house divided and Democrats in disarray last election, Trump went from a joke to the Oval Office.


The Left Hates You

…even though they REALLY don’t know you

On Wednesday, April 5, Alex Pareene saddled up his high horse, Lefty, and excreted the steaming pile that is “The Long, Lucrative Right-wing Grift Is Blowing Up in the World’s Face”. That stercoraceous metaphor is particularly apt given Pareene’s penchant for peppering his monologue with scatological references in a desperate quest to be oh-so-edgy; that he comes off as a ten-year-old among adults is unfortunate for him, since that likely isn’t the look he wanted.

Pareene’s instrument for venting his spleen is Fusion, part of the new-media conglomeration that includes deceptively innocuous sites like lifehacker and Gizmodo, along with brazenly-leftist sites such as Jezebel and Deadspin, at the last of which may be found the scholarly “Look At This F**king A**hole” (NSFW, if you couldn’t tell), totally not a piece of ridiculous clickbait. Deadspin is also the site that got pwned not so long ago by Senator Ted Cruz in a Twitter dustup.

Ted Cruz shows sense of humor, owns Deadspin in Twitter war

The central theme of Pareene’s piece — if a theme can be detected in such a rambling tirade — is probably that the American Right has lied to and incited its base (all those stupid, angry old white guys) for so long that a clueless, reactionary president was the unavoidable eventual result. Pareene’s obvious implication is that it’s only the Right that riles up its base; no member of the virtuous Left would even contemplate such irresponsible behavior.

The irony in Pareene’s utter lack of self-awareness is mind-blowing. His own piece, the one decrying rightist sensationalism and outrage is, itself, an exercise in pure incitement. It contains no persuasion; he isn’t trying to win hearts or minds. It has no supporting arguments (much less facts); he isn’t attempting to prevail in a debate. No, his intended audience is the already-converted, readers who will unquestioningly accept a goes-without-saying narrative that wastes no time with trying to be convincing. And how is his piece meant to affect such devoted leftists? Shock! Outrage! #Resist! Fire in a crowded theater! Gratuitously signal your virtue!

Such a dearth of mirror-looking is only to be expected when your political values spring from equal parts smug condescension and intellectual laziness; the mote in the evil other side’s collective eye is ever so much more interesting and troubling than the beams in your own side’s peeper. If Pareene ever actually takes a step back from his self-deluded sanctimony, his world will come crashing down.

Chief among the mistakes in Pareene’s piece is the way he attempts to lump everyone and everything on the right into a single, strongly-bound entity. There’s more to this than Pareene’s provincialist “Them dang furiners all look alike!” xenophobia. The American Right prizes and encourages individuality; this is often a major disadvantage when it comes to marshaling political will in order to accomplish real-world results. In contrast, the Left enforces strict homogeneity, firing quick warning shots across the bow whenever anyone strays slightly from leftist orthodoxy, and publicly burning apostates at the stake as gory examples of what you’d better not even think about doing. Remain true to the cause, don’t make enemies of the wrong people, and you’ll be defended — often beatified — long after you’re dead. Anything less might harm the cause itself.

The Right is nowhere near so cohesive. There are exceptions, but no amount of loyalty to party or cause is likely to save you if you have real issues with your character, ethics, or honesty (with an obvious waiver for the breaking of campaign promises; folks on the right are suckers for a good campaign promise, the unlikelier the better).

It’s uncertain whether Pareene’s misconception stems from an inadvertent disregard of the admonition to “know thine enemy,” or from willful ignorance for the purpose of painting the Right the way his readership already sees it, a mirror complement of the Left’s pieties of groupthink and realpolitik. Understanding is time-consuming and difficult; projection is quick and easy.


“The rubes listened to talk radio, read right-wing blogs, watched Fox News. They were fed apocalyptic paranoia about threats to their liberty, racial hysteria about the generalized menace posed by various groups of brown people, and hysterical lies about the criminal misdeeds of various Democratic politicians.”

How difficult is it to write this kind of thing about any given group of people? Turns out it’s easy:

“The rubes listened to NPR, read Fusion, Jezebel, Deadspin, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Mother Jones, etc. ad nauseam, watched MSNBC. They were fed apocalyptic paranoia about threats to their government entitlements, racial hysteria about the intrinsic majesty of diversity and multiculturalism, and hysterical lies about the criminal misdeeds of various Republican politicians.”

Easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy. No sweat was broken, and enough leftist silliness was held in reserve that we could go on for a good, long while without any fear of repetition.

Pareene again:

“They put their faith in a fairly traditional conservative orthodoxy: That you can use the levers of power to quietly enrich your friends and their firms, while pleasing the masses with some combination of tax cuts, loud proclamations of religiosity, and a modest, popular war or two.”

Has this guy seriously never heard of Barack “Mr. Cronyism” Obama? Is empowering and enriching unions and union bosses somehow more virtuous than enriching private-sector friends? More than that, cronyism has no place in true “conservative orthodoxy,” since a free market of voluntary, private transactions is the conservative ideal. Before we get close to the neighborhood of actual cronyism, conservatism abhors the concept of government picking winners and losers, even when it’s only the equivalent of the lightest of fingers on the scale.

The last part of the quote immediately above can, once again, be easily rewritten to illustrate the asininity of Pareene’s mischaracterization of the Right: “…while pleasing the masses with some combination of raising taxes on the rich, loud proclamations of support for a woman’s right to choose abortion, and a modest, popular class or race war or two.”

From the number of times Pareene used some form of the word “conservatism,” it’s obvious he thinks he knows what it means, but it’s equally obvious he is wrong. Words have meaning, and he doesn’t get to redefine terms at will to suit his personal worldview. Pareene should stick to his strong suit, cross-species anal-retentiveness.

Feeling Blue: Vox’s Inauguration Emotion Tracker

No, this isn’t some form of self-parody: Vox has actually set up an “emotion tracker” for their readers during Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Visitors to the site are encouraged to, “submit up to five emotions, and we’ll tell you the most common emotion other readers are feeling, as well as how many other people are feeling the way you do.” The tracker also maps out a graph of all the emotions submitted so far (image via screenshot):

As expected, “sad” is the most common emotion so far. Personally, I feel like the “crybaby” tag is applied to the Left a little too often, but this is ridiculous, and stunts like this justify the ridicule liberals receive. Is it okay to be disappointed by an election result? Of course, but it doesn’t mean you put your life on hold and have a group therapy session. It’s a shame that the Left can’t see how foolish their behavior looks to the rest of the country.

First They Shut You Up, Then You Will Be Made to Care

I have to quibble, slightly, with the Washington Free Beacon’s Sonny Bunch. In a piece last week Sonny wrote that he did not think I was quite right with my phrase “you will be made to care.” Instead, he thought it should be “you will be made to shut up.”

I would suggest that he stops too soon. Yes, along the way to making people care, many of us must be shut up first.

In fact, we see that is the initial play with the left. A young man last week pointed out that transgenderism is largely a mental health issue and started receiving threats on twitter and general harassment. The Fire Chief in Atlanta referred to homosexuality as a sin and lost his job. Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty quoted scripture and the left tried to drive him from the airwaves. The Benham Brothers are evangelical Christians and had their TV deal cancelled for offending the gay mafia.

Christians will be made to shut up. Those who question political correctness will be made to shut up. Now there is a new troubling story out. A tenured professor at Marquette University lost his tenure and was fired for a blog post in which he took issue with a graduate student who told a class only bigots and homophobes could question gay marriage. The one student who did question it was failed. Again, a tenured professor lost his job for raising questions about the appropriateness of a graduate student’s class instruction on gay marriage.

Yes, they’ll try to shut us up. But that is only the halfway point.

As I have written before, particularly on the issue of gay marriage, gay rights activists want the entire veneer of normal. They want the whole package. That involves the Christian florist being forced to provide flowers for a gay wedding. That involves driving from the airwaves anyone who calls homosexuality a sin. That will, eventually, involve forcing pastors to marry gay couples. After all, normally weddings happen in a church. For those of you who say this will never happen, we’re already about to move on to polyamory, which was also, like gay marriage, never going to happen. Just wait.

I’ve had more than one employee of major Fortune 500 companies tell me they are “strongly encouraged” to participate in gay pride events. I have had corporate employees tell me they have had to fill out surveys, with their name on them so that there is no anonymity, that ask frank questions about their views of gay rights.

Eventually, you will be made to care. Once the gay mafia has established that everyone agrees with them because all other voices have been made silent, those of you still thinking you do not have to pick a side or can compromise and nuance your position will have to take a side. You will be made to care about gay marriage one way or the other and if you care the wrong way, good luck finding or keeping a job.

I encounter, on a near weekly basis, more and more Christians who say gay rights is increasingly becoming a modern mark of the beast — either celebrate gay rights or be forced to the sidelines of society. I don’t hold to that theological view, but I completely understand where they are coming from. And it is only going to get worse, requiring a braver, more vocal church.

Sonny Buch is right that you will be made to shut up. But then you will be made to care. And that is precisely why people of faith cannot shut up.

The post First They Shut You Up, Then You Will Be Made to Care appeared first on RedState.

Behind the Scenes in Mordor

I do not know who Fredrik deBoer is, but this piece is fascinating. He expands upon Jon Chait’s lament over political correctness. I do have to say the funniest piece in response to Chait was some idiot at Vox who denied political correctness even exists.

The whole thing is a snapshot into Mordor. Take this for example:

I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 19 year old white woman — smart, well-meaning, passionate — literally run crying from a classroom because she was so ruthlessly brow-beaten for using the word “disabled.” Not repeatedly. Not with malice. Not because of privilege. She used the word once and was excoriated for it. She never came back. I watched that happen.

I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 20 year old black man, a track athlete who tried to fit organizing meetings around classes and his ridiculous practice schedule (for which he received a scholarship worth a quarter of tuition), be told not to return to those meetings because he said he thought there were such a thing as innate gender differences. He wasn’t a homophobe, or transphobic, or a misogynist. It turns out that 20 year olds from rural South Carolina aren’t born with an innate understanding of the intersectionality playbook. But those were the terms deployed against him, those and worse. So that was it; he was gone.

I have seen, with my own two eyes, a 33 year old Hispanic man, an Iraq war veteran who had served three tours and had become an outspoken critic of our presence there, be lectured about patriarchy by an affluent 22 year old white liberal arts college student, because he had said that other vets have to “man up” and speak out about the war. Because apparently we have to pretend that we don’t know how metaphorical language works or else we’re bad people. I watched his eyes glaze over as this woman with $300 shoes berated him. I saw that. Myself.

These things aren’t hypothetical. This isn’t some thought experiment. This is where I live, where I have lived. These and many, many more depressing stories of good people pushed out and marginalized in left-wing circles because they didn’t use the proper set of social and class signals to satisfy the world of intersectional politics. So you’ll forgive me when I roll my eyes at the army of media liberals, stuffed into their narrow enclaves, responding to Chait by insisting that there is no problem here and that anyone who says there is should be considered the enemy.

If you’ve ever read Lord of the Rings or even just seen the movies, Tolkien captured something so accurate about the nature of those without God. The cast and crew of Mordor are as nasty to each other as they are to everyone else. The orcs fight and kill and rip apart themselves.

Those who have an innate goodness in them that reflects God will stumble and fall and fight, but rarely are they constantly malicious with themselves and with others. They have a self-awareness burning in their conscience that makes it pretty hard to keep up on that front.

Those without that innate goodness reflecting God have no self-awareness on that front. They’ve filled that spot in their heart with something else. It becomes their idol and stone cold idols and idols in the head and heart do not have Christ’s grace, so it cannot be extended to others.

That’s the theological point behind it. It is also the reality, but is like burning coals in their ears and on their heads to point it out. Even writing this I know what the reaction from the left will be. But it is true. Those without Jesus are not of God. The things of the world are hostile to the things of God. And the things hostile to God are hostile to each other.

They only co-exist at peace and on a united front when fighting the things of God. We see this every day in culture. In Lord of the Rings, Eru Ilúvatar’s creations had true will and Melkor’s creation had pretended will. It had the appearance of being freely acted will, but really it was the maliciousness of Melkor controlling every action even between each other. Mordor of Middle Earth reflects well the Mordor of this earth.

The post Behind the Scenes in Mordor appeared first on RedState.