Day: March 26, 2018

Stop Diminishing the Men



Feminists who constantly denounce manhood won't like what they're cooking up.  Neither will the rest of us.



Source link

America doesn't have a gun violence epidemic. Democrat cities do.


Guns and gun crime are the new climate change: those who know nothing about the subject are suddenly “experts.” 

I call this faux expertise Albert Gore-itis, and I discuss it at length in my upcoming first book, 10 Warning Signs Your Child is Becoming a Democrat.

College pottery majors and donkey cheese-eating, Che Guevera T-shirt-wearing trust fund babies fancy themselves firearms gurus (FYI, donkey cheese is the world’s most expensive).  That doesn’t really bother me as much as the lying-by-withholding that the DMIC (Democrat Media Industrial Complex) and Redcoat gun-grabbing organizations (funded by millionaires and billionaires, such as former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg) engage in when discussing guns and gun crime.

Democrat policies kill

America does not have a gun crime epidemic.  There are, however, epidemics in many locales and cities.  Who do you think runs the vast majority of those cities?

NRA-funded Republicans?

No.

Lobbyists for firearm manufacturers?

No.

The vast majority of those cities have been run by Democrats for decades upon decades.

Here are the top 20 cities with the highest gun murder rates in the U.S. per capita.  Of these, every city except the last one, Tulsa, has a Democrat majority in the mayoralty and City Council or Board of Aldermen.

Here are the non-fatal shootings top 20 per capita.  Notice the overlap of several cities; the cities on the non-fatal list absent on the murder list are also Democrat-run cities, except for the last one, Jacksonville.

Here’s a sampling of five longtime Democrat empires (all days are consecutive and uninterrupted).  All appear in the top 20 lists:

1. St. Louis: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 15,000 days.

2. Baltimore: only Democrat mayors and only Democrat City Council; 18,000 days.

3. Philadelphia: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 20,000 days.

4. Detroit: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 22,000 days.

5. Chicago: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 30,000 days.

The Democrats have ruled Chicago for longer than Stalin ruled the USSR, the Castros in Cuba, and the Kims in North Korea, and for longer than slavery was legal in the U.S.

Exhausted yet?  There’s more.

These are America’s top 10 most violent cities, according to FBI data.  Violent crimes include homicides, gun violence, gangs, pedophilia, and robberies.

Every city is majority Democrat-controlled.  Several of the cities on the FBI’s list also appear on the aforementioned murder and non-fatal shootings lists.  Because the FBI’s ranking is per capita, several cities such as Chicago and Newark (only Democrat mayors; 90% City Council; 23,000 days) are absent.

Still with me?  St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, and New Orleans crack the top 50 for most dangerous cities on the planet.  New Orleans has elected only Democrat mayors for the last 55,000 consecutive days; the United States as a nation has existed for 88,000 days.  New Orleans’s city council is, in theory, nonpartisan; I’ll let you conclude how nonpartisan it is.

As a side note on Chicago: A report last year estimated that 60% of guns recovered in Chicago came from out of state, with 20% traced back to Indiana and others from Wisconsin.  Though difficult to determine from where exactly, in each state, the guns originated, I believe it’s reasonable to speculate that they came not from rural areas, but from the big cities, such as Indianapolis and Milwaukee (run, of course, by…drum roll…Democrats).  What, you thought Wisconsin and Indiana were red states?  Red states are dead; only blue and pur-blue exist.

Stats don’t lie; Democrats do

Democrats sell local gun crime epidemics as national gun crime epidemics. And listen: their sales pitch is effective.  I rarely hear Republicans, conservatives, or even the NRA effectively combat this pitch.  Data is mixed, depending on the study, but since the ’90s, gun violence and homicides nationally have declined.  But not in Democrat-controlled cities.

Also, Democrats always pad the stat sheet by mixing in gun-related deaths from suicide and suspects shot and killed by police officers.

The old saying “stats don’t lie; statisticians do” can be used in any ideological context.  But when it comes to the DMIC, Democrats and Redcoat gun-grabbers, one of two things is at work:

  1. They’re unaware that the epidemics are largely isolated in Democrat city monopolies, thereby making them dangerously ignorant.
  2. They are aware, thereby making them…well, just dangerous, just like the cities they rule over. 

When it comes to the crème de la crème of cities with gun crime, Democrats control 95% – yes, 95% – of the top 20.  As one moves into the top 50 and 100 cities, the percentage dips, but not by much.

Our rights are under fire

Helping the Democrats’ cause is the fact that they are now overtly and in-your-face exploiting our youths as Redcoat gun control propaganda props.  The Democrats have pitted us against children and created creepy kid activists.  How do we win a battle challenging kids?  Answer: We don’t, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about it all the time.  The Democrats are always on offense.  It’s not enough for us to match their intensity; we must exceed it.  Republicans and conservatives usually underestimate the Democrats and fail to understand their tactics.

The way Republicans and conservatives win this narrative war is by talking about the entire story, and one is not telling the entire story without hammering home over and over again the indisputable failures of Democrat gun and crime policies. While statements such as “we’re not Sweden” and “those countries don’t have a Second Amendment” are correct, they render the message incomplete.  Winning this narrative war will not be easy, but it can be done.

Chances are that those of you reading this don’t live in a city with mass gun crime.  Remove the data from municipal Democrat quasi-monarchies, and our gun crime rate is lower than Heaven’s.

If we could just convince Democrats and Tessio Republicans to self-deport, I suspect that our crime rates would significantly decrease in an evening or two.  One can only dream.

Rich Logis is host of The Rich Logis Show, at TheRichLogisShow.com, and author of the upcoming book 10 Warning Signs Your Child is Becoming a Democrat.  He can be found on Twitter at @RichLogis.

Guns and gun crime are the new climate change: those who know nothing about the subject are suddenly “experts.” 

I call this faux expertise Albert Gore-itis, and I discuss it at length in my upcoming first book, 10 Warning Signs Your Child is Becoming a Democrat.

College pottery majors and donkey cheese-eating, Che Guevera T-shirt-wearing trust fund babies fancy themselves firearms gurus (FYI, donkey cheese is the world’s most expensive).  That doesn’t really bother me as much as the lying-by-withholding that the DMIC (Democrat Media Industrial Complex) and Redcoat gun-grabbing organizations (funded by millionaires and billionaires, such as former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg) engage in when discussing guns and gun crime.

Democrat policies kill

America does not have a gun crime epidemic.  There are, however, epidemics in many locales and cities.  Who do you think runs the vast majority of those cities?

NRA-funded Republicans?

No.

Lobbyists for firearm manufacturers?

No.

The vast majority of those cities have been run by Democrats for decades upon decades.

Here are the top 20 cities with the highest gun murder rates in the U.S. per capita.  Of these, every city except the last one, Tulsa, has a Democrat majority in the mayoralty and City Council or Board of Aldermen.

Here are the non-fatal shootings top 20 per capita.  Notice the overlap of several cities; the cities on the non-fatal list absent on the murder list are also Democrat-run cities, except for the last one, Jacksonville.

Here’s a sampling of five longtime Democrat empires (all days are consecutive and uninterrupted).  All appear in the top 20 lists:

1. St. Louis: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 15,000 days.

2. Baltimore: only Democrat mayors and only Democrat City Council; 18,000 days.

3. Philadelphia: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 20,000 days.

4. Detroit: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 22,000 days.

5. Chicago: only Democrat mayors; 90% Democrat City Council; 30,000 days.

The Democrats have ruled Chicago for longer than Stalin ruled the USSR, the Castros in Cuba, and the Kims in North Korea, and for longer than slavery was legal in the U.S.

Exhausted yet?  There’s more.

These are America’s top 10 most violent cities, according to FBI data.  Violent crimes include homicides, gun violence, gangs, pedophilia, and robberies.

Every city is majority Democrat-controlled.  Several of the cities on the FBI’s list also appear on the aforementioned murder and non-fatal shootings lists.  Because the FBI’s ranking is per capita, several cities such as Chicago and Newark (only Democrat mayors; 90% City Council; 23,000 days) are absent.

Still with me?  St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, and New Orleans crack the top 50 for most dangerous cities on the planet.  New Orleans has elected only Democrat mayors for the last 55,000 consecutive days; the United States as a nation has existed for 88,000 days.  New Orleans’s city council is, in theory, nonpartisan; I’ll let you conclude how nonpartisan it is.

As a side note on Chicago: A report last year estimated that 60% of guns recovered in Chicago came from out of state, with 20% traced back to Indiana and others from Wisconsin.  Though difficult to determine from where exactly, in each state, the guns originated, I believe it’s reasonable to speculate that they came not from rural areas, but from the big cities, such as Indianapolis and Milwaukee (run, of course, by…drum roll…Democrats).  What, you thought Wisconsin and Indiana were red states?  Red states are dead; only blue and pur-blue exist.

Stats don’t lie; Democrats do

Democrats sell local gun crime epidemics as national gun crime epidemics. And listen: their sales pitch is effective.  I rarely hear Republicans, conservatives, or even the NRA effectively combat this pitch.  Data is mixed, depending on the study, but since the ’90s, gun violence and homicides nationally have declined.  But not in Democrat-controlled cities.

Also, Democrats always pad the stat sheet by mixing in gun-related deaths from suicide and suspects shot and killed by police officers.

The old saying “stats don’t lie; statisticians do” can be used in any ideological context.  But when it comes to the DMIC, Democrats and Redcoat gun-grabbers, one of two things is at work:

  1. They’re unaware that the epidemics are largely isolated in Democrat city monopolies, thereby making them dangerously ignorant.
  2. They are aware, thereby making them…well, just dangerous, just like the cities they rule over. 

When it comes to the crème de la crème of cities with gun crime, Democrats control 95% – yes, 95% – of the top 20.  As one moves into the top 50 and 100 cities, the percentage dips, but not by much.

Our rights are under fire

Helping the Democrats’ cause is the fact that they are now overtly and in-your-face exploiting our youths as Redcoat gun control propaganda props.  The Democrats have pitted us against children and created creepy kid activists.  How do we win a battle challenging kids?  Answer: We don’t, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about it all the time.  The Democrats are always on offense.  It’s not enough for us to match their intensity; we must exceed it.  Republicans and conservatives usually underestimate the Democrats and fail to understand their tactics.

The way Republicans and conservatives win this narrative war is by talking about the entire story, and one is not telling the entire story without hammering home over and over again the indisputable failures of Democrat gun and crime policies. While statements such as “we’re not Sweden” and “those countries don’t have a Second Amendment” are correct, they render the message incomplete.  Winning this narrative war will not be easy, but it can be done.

Chances are that those of you reading this don’t live in a city with mass gun crime.  Remove the data from municipal Democrat quasi-monarchies, and our gun crime rate is lower than Heaven’s.

If we could just convince Democrats and Tessio Republicans to self-deport, I suspect that our crime rates would significantly decrease in an evening or two.  One can only dream.

Rich Logis is host of The Rich Logis Show, at TheRichLogisShow.com, and author of the upcoming book 10 Warning Signs Your Child is Becoming a Democrat.  He can be found on Twitter at @RichLogis.



Source link

Big Budget Bills and the Death of Small Government


Speaking of the new $1.3 trillion, 2,232-page omnibus spending bill that Congress hastily crafted, no elected official had read, and that Donald Trump grudgingly signed into law, Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld said on The Five, with surprising nonchalance, “I don’t understand why people are angry over this.  I mean, how could you not see this coming?  Donald Trump is not a libertarian.  He’s not small government.”  With a somber smirk, he proclaims, “small government is dead.  Sadly, as a conservative, it is dead.”

 

To a certain degree, he’s correct.  We should have seen this moment coming.

Donald Trump notwithstanding, neither Republicans nor Democrats have even feigned fiscal conservatism in the last few years.  In recent memory, though, Republicans did tout fiscal conservatism as a fundamental principle in shaping policy, but that charade ended in 2014 when they lost the ability to claim that bloated government spending was solely the fault of the Democrats in Congress and the White House.

Since 2009, excessive federal spending has been the battle cry of conservatives everywhere, amplified early-on by the upstart Tea Party.  Barack Obama and the then-Democrat Congress had issued the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act, which carried tentative taxpayer price tags of $787 billion and ~$900 billion, respectively.  Disaffected taxpayers who, and whose children and grandchildren, were destined to foot the bill were assured by Republican candidates that majorities in both chambers of Congress would restore fiscal sanity in Washington.  Bills would then be carefully crafted, and actually perused before passage. 

All of that was reasonable enough for Americans to demand.  In fact, it’s disheartening to consider that this is how little we actually ask of the stewards of our wealth in Washington. Imagine handing ~25% of your annual income to a financial advisor to be invested, only for you to not only be unaware of how it’s being spent, but for that advisor to take on massive amounts of new debt in your name without telling you how, precisely, that money will be spent. 

In the real world, that advisor would be arrested and subject to prosecution.  In Washington, it’s often argued, particularly by the left, that anything short of that arrangement is greed and bitterness on the part of the taxpaying “investor.”

But immediately after conservative voters delivered a majority in both the House and the Senate in 2014, John Boehner and Congressional Republicans crafted and quickly passed a $1.1 trillion spending package in a lame duck session, which Barack Obama happily signed.  “We’ve done this in a bipartisan fashion,” Boehner assured disaffected Republicans, “and, frankly, it’s a good bill.”

Democrats had no qualms with such excessive spending they’d been driving for years, so they simply went about their business, proceeding headlong into more peculiar identity politics and inventing new social grievances for their base to be enraged about, like men who think they’re women being able to use ladies’ toilets.  Republicans, on the other hand, simply dropped the notion of fiscal conservatism as a prominent line item in the platform, continuing to harp about Obamacare and immigration, which were still winning issues with constituents.

So, perhaps if you’ve been paying attention, you shouldn’t be surprised by this new spending bill.  But that doesn’t change the fact that you should you be outraged at a 2,223-page, $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill that even Trump, to his credit, had the honesty to admit that no one had read before voting upon. 

And if you are not outraged by that, but you spent 2010 barking about the fiscal irresponsibility of Obamacare that was similarly passed, then you can be nothing short of a hypocrite.

But then there’s the bigger question.  Is small government really dead?  If the answer to that question is yes, then Gutfeld’s blasé disappointment doesn’t capture the deep despair to be felt in the realization.  Because if small government is dead, then the very idea of America is truly dead.  What exists after its death is something else entirely.

In perhaps my favorite single paragraph of Mark Steyn’s essential After America: Get Ready for Armageddon, he writes*:

Conservatives often talk about “small government,” which, in a sense, is framing the argument in leftist terms.  They’re for “Big Government” – and, when you’re arguing for the small alternative, its easy to sound pinched and mean and grudging.  But small government gives you big freedoms – and Big Government leaves you with very little freedom.  The opposite of Big Government is not small government, but Big Liberty.  The bailout and the stimulus and the budget and the trillion-dollar deficits are not merely massive transfers from the most dynamic and productive sector to the least dynamic and productive.  When governments annex a huge chunk of the economy, they also annex a huge chuck of individual liberty. 

At its core, that is what massive government spending does.  It turns a nation of individual savers and spenders into a nation of serfs, beholden to a government which holds a collective debt that must be paid in order to continue a collective existence. 

Government is simply not a good steward of our wealth, as has been proven time and time again, if our $20+ trillion debt doesn’t signify that enough.  And our wealth, along with the opportunities to freely attain, preserve, or lose it, is among the most fundamental cruxes of liberty. 

This is not a new notion, by any stretch of the imagination.  Our wealth is our property, and to it, we have a God-given right.  That right should is to be protected by a just government, not infringed and usurped to finance the desired whims of others, be they government bureaucrats or envious grumblers demanding free housing, college, or education.

Small government principles aid in preserving this individual right to property.  Big government, which seems to be the preferred panacea for both Republicans and Democrats these days, aids in destroying that right.  And if that right continues to be thus degraded, all that the American idea once was is surely dying.

There should be no surprise in Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi cheering the new spending bill as a victory for big government Democrats.  And again, there should be no surprise in this bill being presented and passed with Republican majorities, despite their having run wholeheartedly against such things not so long ago. 

The biggest surprise, for me, is Donald Trump.  He gave verbal opposition to it before signing it, and even open criticism after signing it.  He seemed honest in doing both of those things, even if the only reason for that is his belief that it wasn’t a “good deal.”

Right now, despite my occasional differences with him, Donald Trump may indeed be a small government conservative’s best spokesman in Washington.  But given that, as Greg Gutfeld says, Donald Trump is “not small government” and never has been, that provides little substance to the thin gruel that we small government conservatives are being offered by Washington right now.

*Steyn, Mark.  After America: Get Ready for Armageddon.  Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2011. pp. 346

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

Speaking of the new $1.3 trillion, 2,232-page omnibus spending bill that Congress hastily crafted, no elected official had read, and that Donald Trump grudgingly signed into law, Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld said on The Five, with surprising nonchalance, “I don’t understand why people are angry over this.  I mean, how could you not see this coming?  Donald Trump is not a libertarian.  He’s not small government.”  With a somber smirk, he proclaims, “small government is dead.  Sadly, as a conservative, it is dead.”

 

To a certain degree, he’s correct.  We should have seen this moment coming.

Donald Trump notwithstanding, neither Republicans nor Democrats have even feigned fiscal conservatism in the last few years.  In recent memory, though, Republicans did tout fiscal conservatism as a fundamental principle in shaping policy, but that charade ended in 2014 when they lost the ability to claim that bloated government spending was solely the fault of the Democrats in Congress and the White House.

Since 2009, excessive federal spending has been the battle cry of conservatives everywhere, amplified early-on by the upstart Tea Party.  Barack Obama and the then-Democrat Congress had issued the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act, which carried tentative taxpayer price tags of $787 billion and ~$900 billion, respectively.  Disaffected taxpayers who, and whose children and grandchildren, were destined to foot the bill were assured by Republican candidates that majorities in both chambers of Congress would restore fiscal sanity in Washington.  Bills would then be carefully crafted, and actually perused before passage. 

All of that was reasonable enough for Americans to demand.  In fact, it’s disheartening to consider that this is how little we actually ask of the stewards of our wealth in Washington. Imagine handing ~25% of your annual income to a financial advisor to be invested, only for you to not only be unaware of how it’s being spent, but for that advisor to take on massive amounts of new debt in your name without telling you how, precisely, that money will be spent. 

In the real world, that advisor would be arrested and subject to prosecution.  In Washington, it’s often argued, particularly by the left, that anything short of that arrangement is greed and bitterness on the part of the taxpaying “investor.”

But immediately after conservative voters delivered a majority in both the House and the Senate in 2014, John Boehner and Congressional Republicans crafted and quickly passed a $1.1 trillion spending package in a lame duck session, which Barack Obama happily signed.  “We’ve done this in a bipartisan fashion,” Boehner assured disaffected Republicans, “and, frankly, it’s a good bill.”

Democrats had no qualms with such excessive spending they’d been driving for years, so they simply went about their business, proceeding headlong into more peculiar identity politics and inventing new social grievances for their base to be enraged about, like men who think they’re women being able to use ladies’ toilets.  Republicans, on the other hand, simply dropped the notion of fiscal conservatism as a prominent line item in the platform, continuing to harp about Obamacare and immigration, which were still winning issues with constituents.

So, perhaps if you’ve been paying attention, you shouldn’t be surprised by this new spending bill.  But that doesn’t change the fact that you should you be outraged at a 2,223-page, $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill that even Trump, to his credit, had the honesty to admit that no one had read before voting upon. 

And if you are not outraged by that, but you spent 2010 barking about the fiscal irresponsibility of Obamacare that was similarly passed, then you can be nothing short of a hypocrite.

But then there’s the bigger question.  Is small government really dead?  If the answer to that question is yes, then Gutfeld’s blasé disappointment doesn’t capture the deep despair to be felt in the realization.  Because if small government is dead, then the very idea of America is truly dead.  What exists after its death is something else entirely.

In perhaps my favorite single paragraph of Mark Steyn’s essential After America: Get Ready for Armageddon, he writes*:

Conservatives often talk about “small government,” which, in a sense, is framing the argument in leftist terms.  They’re for “Big Government” – and, when you’re arguing for the small alternative, its easy to sound pinched and mean and grudging.  But small government gives you big freedoms – and Big Government leaves you with very little freedom.  The opposite of Big Government is not small government, but Big Liberty.  The bailout and the stimulus and the budget and the trillion-dollar deficits are not merely massive transfers from the most dynamic and productive sector to the least dynamic and productive.  When governments annex a huge chunk of the economy, they also annex a huge chuck of individual liberty. 

At its core, that is what massive government spending does.  It turns a nation of individual savers and spenders into a nation of serfs, beholden to a government which holds a collective debt that must be paid in order to continue a collective existence. 

Government is simply not a good steward of our wealth, as has been proven time and time again, if our $20+ trillion debt doesn’t signify that enough.  And our wealth, along with the opportunities to freely attain, preserve, or lose it, is among the most fundamental cruxes of liberty. 

This is not a new notion, by any stretch of the imagination.  Our wealth is our property, and to it, we have a God-given right.  That right should is to be protected by a just government, not infringed and usurped to finance the desired whims of others, be they government bureaucrats or envious grumblers demanding free housing, college, or education.

Small government principles aid in preserving this individual right to property.  Big government, which seems to be the preferred panacea for both Republicans and Democrats these days, aids in destroying that right.  And if that right continues to be thus degraded, all that the American idea once was is surely dying.

There should be no surprise in Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi cheering the new spending bill as a victory for big government Democrats.  And again, there should be no surprise in this bill being presented and passed with Republican majorities, despite their having run wholeheartedly against such things not so long ago. 

The biggest surprise, for me, is Donald Trump.  He gave verbal opposition to it before signing it, and even open criticism after signing it.  He seemed honest in doing both of those things, even if the only reason for that is his belief that it wasn’t a “good deal.”

Right now, despite my occasional differences with him, Donald Trump may indeed be a small government conservative’s best spokesman in Washington.  But given that, as Greg Gutfeld says, Donald Trump is “not small government” and never has been, that provides little substance to the thin gruel that we small government conservatives are being offered by Washington right now.

*Steyn, Mark.  After America: Get Ready for Armageddon.  Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2011. pp. 346

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.



Source link

On Iran, the USA Is in Big Trouble



Here's sincerely hoping it doesn't come to total war.



Source link