“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Friday, May 26, 2017

Trump Needs to Drain His Own Swamp First and Then Defeat Activist Judges



Federal Judges Invite Muslims To Veto Americans’ Elections Over Campaign Statements

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Ten progressive judges in Virginia have decided that Muslims can ask judges to change the nation’s national security and immigration policies whenever prior campaign statements in democratic political elections can be described as unfair to Muslims living in America.

“To the extent that our review chills campaign promises to condemn and exclude entire religious groups, we think that a welcome restraint,” boasted the majority opinion, which was approved by 10 judges on the Richmond-based Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and announced May 25. President Donald Trump’s Executive Order on Islamic migration “speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination” from the 2016 election campaign, the judges insisted. 
However, a dissent approved by three judges highlighted the political ambitions and risks hiding behind the court’s declaration of support for the Islamic plaintiffs. “The danger of the majority’s new rule is that it will enable any court to justify its decision to strike down any executive action with which it disagrees,” says three three-judge dissent, which concluded:
Unless corrected by the Supreme Court, the majority’s new approach, which is unsupported by any Supreme Court case, will become a sword for plaintiffs to challenge facially neutral government actions, particularly those affecting regions dominated by a single religion. Government officials will avoid speaking about religion, even privately, lest a court discover statements that could be used to ascribe a religious motivation to their future actions. And, in the more immediate future, our courts will be faced with the unworkable task of determining when this President’s supposed religious motive [in the 2016 election] has sufficiently dissipated so as to allow executive action toward these or other majority Muslim countries.
The lawsuit by was brought by Muslim plaintiffs, backed up by a huge array of establishment progressive corporate lawyers, against President Trump’s Executive Order, which merely temporarily blocked or curbed Muslim immigration from six of 50-Muslim-majority countries around the world. 
The temporary block is intended to help officials institute new safeguards against Islamic-inspired attacks by the growing inflow of Muslim immigrants, refugees, and their future American-born children, into an increasingly diverse, chaotic and divided nation. 

The judges’ deference to the Muslim plaintiffs comes after 16 years of deadly, repeated and destructive attacks on Americans motivated by the Islamic religion, starting on 9/11, 2001. Since then, U.S. forces have gone to war in several majority-Muslim countries to curb terrorism, and more than 101 people named after Islam’s primary warrior/prophet have been arrested and convicted by domestic courts for various jihad and terror-related offenses.

Muhammed

That bloody and violent record was important to voters in the 2016 election, where the subsequently elected president, Donald Trump, gained support by promising to reduce immigration of Muslims and to step up vetting of would-be Muslim immigrants.  Trump’s position was bolstered in June 2016 when the son of Muslim immigrants murdered 49 Americans at the Pulse nightclub in Florida. 

AP Photo
However, progressive Democrats, establishment Republicans, and business leaders strongly favor a continued inflow of cheap workers, extra consumers and likely future Democratic voters, regardless of the economic and security impact on Americans. 

In the dissent authored by Circuit Judge Paul Niemeyer, the three moderate judges scoffed at the 10 judges for ignoring prior Supreme Court guidance. The logic of the 10 judges’ decision, says the dissent, is that any future court:
 need only find one [campaign] statement that contradicts the stated reasons for a subsequent executive action and thereby pronounce that reasons for the executive action are a pretext …
Moreover, the unbounded nature of the majority’s new rule will leave the President and his Administration in a clearly untenable position for future action. It is undeniable that President Trump will need to engage in foreign policy regarding majority-Muslim nations, including those designated by the Order. And yet the majority now suggests that at least some of those future actions might also be subject to the same challenges upheld today. Presumably, the majority does not intend entirely to stop the President from creating policies that address these nations, but it gives the President no guidelines for “cleansing” himself of the “taint” they have purportedly identified… 
Finally, the new rule would by itself chill political speech directed at voters seeking to make their election decision. It is hard to imagine a greater or more direct chill on campaign speech than the knowledge that any statement made may be used later to support the inference of some nefarious intent when official actions are inevitably subjected to legal challenges. Indeed, the majority does not even deny that it employs an approach that will limit communication to voters. Instead, it simply opines remarkable that such chilling is “a welcome restraint.” 
The Supreme Court surely will shudder at the majority’s adoption of this new rule that has no limits or bounds — one that transforms the [10-judge] majority’s criticisms of a candidate’s various campaign statements into a constitutional violation…
It engages in its own review of the national security justifications supporting the Order and concludes that protecting national security could not be the President’s “primary purpose.” As evidence, the majority points to the President’s level of consultation with national security agencies before issuing the Order; the content of internal Department of Homeland Security reports; the comments of former national security officials made in an amicus brief; and its own assessment of the national security threats described in the Order … The majority’s intense factual inquiry is particularly inappropriate where the government’s secular purpose is related to national security — a subject, as the majority recognizes, on which we owe the executive significant deference…
Unless corrected by the Supreme Court, the majority’s new approach, which is unsupported by any Supreme Court case, will become a sword for plaintiffs to challenge facially neutral government actions, particularly those affecting regions dominated by a single religion. Government officials will avoid speaking about religion, even privately, lest a court discover statements that could be used to ascribe a religious motivation to their future actions. And, in the more immediate future, our courts will be faced with the unworkable task of determining when this President’s supposed religious motive has sufficiently dissipated so as to allow executive action toward these or other majority Muslim countries. The Establishment Clause demands none of these unfortunate and unprecedented results.
Read the court decision here

93 comments:

  1. Chaos reigns and it is not all coming from Trump. IMO, Washington is not fixable by Washington. Trump will not change anything with the crew he has assembled. That should be obvious. As weakened as Trump is now, it will only get worse unless he rethinks his government and acts promptly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Google just demolished everything I JUST WROTE. Try again:

      19 members of Al Qaeda and AQ's supporting group, spent roughly half a million dollars to destroy the World Trade Center and cripple the Pentagon. What has been the cost to the United States? In a survey of estimates by The New York Times, the answer is $3.3 trillion, or about $7 million for every dollar Al Qaeda spent planning and executing the attacks. While not all of the costs have been borne by the government — and some are still to come — this total equals one-fifth of the current national debt. All figures are in 2011 dollars.

      Delete
    2. We should never take that risk again. Washington will not fix it. Trump will not fix it. The US media will not and neither of the political parties will.

      There is one last hope for a peaceful fix and that is an An Article V Convention of The States that redefines who we are and who we will be.

      Delete
  2. The generally accepted nonsense that the wealthiest country on the planet with 320 million people needs unfettered immigration from third world alien cultures is patent nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is intellectually lazy to cite immigration statistics comparing foreign criminals with domestic criminals, yet it is done repeatedly to justify wide open borders. 911 was not a criminal act and neither was the killing of Manchester school girls a criminal act.

    All these attacks are a political attempt to destroy, overthrow and replace western culture and values. No further risks should be taken and existing risks should be reduced.

    Enough is enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hear ! Hear !

      It is intellectually lazy to cite immigration statistics comparing foreign criminals with domestic criminals, yet it is done repeatedly to justify wide open borders.

      This is a tactic often used by Quirk.

      Delete
    2. a transparent ploy often used by Quirk.

      I'm not going back to look it up but you pulled your ploy out of your arse just the other day.

      Delete
    3. .

      I wasn't referring to your comment, Bob. That every comment you post here is witless is a given.

      I was commenting on the term 'intellectually lazy' and the context it was used in. Using it as it was is almost like you or Doug screaming about 'fake news', dripping with irony almost to the point of being oxymoronic.

      .

      Delete
    4. So you admit you did just recently pull your transparent ploy out of your arse.

      At least you are honest about it.

      Delete
    5. .

      Once more the English major proves he can't read and understand English.


      .

      Delete
  4. Replies
    1. .


      That's one I'll bet on. Not going to happen.


      .

      Delete
    2. You might be right, alas.

      Too many lazy asses out there who love to whine to high heaven and call everyone else sheeple and dicks

      This sheeple is at least doing his part in pushing the effort.

      You out to join up too !

      Get out of your sheepcote !

      Delete
  5. This is how NUTZ much of our country has become -

    May 26, 2017
    Muslim 'sentiments' defeated Trump's temporary travel ban
    By Madeline Brooks

    You may have heard that in Muslim fundamentalist countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan, people have been machete-chopped to pieces for saying things that hurt the "sentiments" of Muslims.

    It is a peculiar expression, not one we commonly use here in the U.S. We might say, instead, that someone's feelings were hurt. But never before, to my knowledge, have we had a judicial ruling based on hurt feelings, or sentiments.



    Until now. On May 25, 2017, the Fourth Circuit Appeals Court denied Donald Trump's temporary ban on immigration from six dangerous majority-Muslim countries. Underneath legal commentary about whether Trump's executive order was legal on its face or not, protecting Muslim sentiments appears to be what brought about the decision.

    A look inside the judges' ruling reveals why your right to be protected against the risk of being blown to Manchester smithereens has been overridden.

    On pages 25 and 26, we read about some of the plaintiffs who objected to Trump's travel ban. The plaintiffs cited below are all Muslim. Whether or not they are even citizens is not stated in the court's document.

    Beyond claiming injury to their family relationships, several of the individual Plaintiffs allege that the anti-Muslim message animating EO-2 has caused them feelings of disparagement and exclusion. Doe #1, a scientist who obtained permanent resident status through the National Interest Waiver program for people with extraordinary abilities, references these "anti-Muslim views,"...J.A. 304, 306. Plaintiff Meteab relays that the "anti-Muslim sentiment" motivating EO-2 had led him to feel "isolated and disparaged in [his] community." [Emphasis added.]

    Additionally, the Middle East Studies Association, an organization with known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, will lose $18,000 and suffer a conference attendance reduction. Somehow, that prevails over our collective safety!

    The final Plaintiff, the Middle East Studies Association, an umbrella organization dedicated to fostering awareness of the Middle East, asserts that EO-2 will, among other injuries, reduce attendance at its annual conference and cause the organization to lose $18,000 in registration fees.

    Muslim sentiments. Muslim money. Just as if we were in Bangladesh or Pakistan. Feelings can infiltrate subtly. Can it be that the appeals courts have been that undermined, that quickly?

    Trump's temporary travel ban, as an executive order, will undoubtedly appear before the Supreme Court. If the Supremes cannot come up with a more rational approach to the travel ban, we are in serious trouble.


    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/05/muslim_sentiments_defeated_trumps_temporary_travel_ban.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May God Bless and Always Remember Donald Trump for erasing Hillary from our political scene.

      She would have appointed a Judge that would have voted on the Supreme Court the way the Fourth Circuit Appeals Court has done.

      Say what you will about The Donald, but he allowed us to dodge that bullet.

      Delete
    2. Only the Supreme Court Can Save Trump's Travel Ban Now

      A federal appeals court said Thursday the president’s controversial executive order “drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”

      Immigration activists protest President Trump's travel ban outside of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection headquarters in March.(Eric Thayer / Reuters)
      MATT FORD MAY 25, 2017

      https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/fourth-circuit-travel-ban/528222/

      Obviously hoping here that the Supreme Court crushes all these Federal Appeals Courts to smithereens on this issue.

      Delete
  6. OF COURSE IT SINGLES OUT MUSLIMS - HINDUS FOR INSTANCE ARE NOT KNOWN FOR BLOWING THINGS UP AND SHOOTING AND BEHEADING PEOPLE

    Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s temporary immigration ban

    MAY 25, 2017 2:20 PM BY ROBERT SPENCER

    “Trump has insisted that the measure is necessary to prevent possible terrorist attacks. But courts in previous rulings blocking its enforcement have cited past statements from Trump and his advisors signaling that it may single out Muslims.”

    ((((Meanwhile, Muslims continue singling out non-Muslims for jihad terror attacks.)))) If the UK had had Trump’s ban in place years ago, the father of the Manchester jihad mass murderer, who himself has links to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State would not have been admitted into the country from Libya, and the Manchester jihad massacre would not have happened.

    But to think this way is “Islamophobic.” We must allow our people to be murdered in jihad attacks, and take no steps to prevent these attacks. Any such steps would “single out Muslims”!

    The appeals court decision claims that the Executive Order “in text speaks in vague terms of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination.”

    In context? Is Manchester any relevant context? Or any of the other recent jihad terror attacks?



    “Federal appeals court upholds block on Trump’s travel ban: NBC News,” CNBC, May 25, 2017:

    A federal appeals court has upheld the nationwide block of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting travel from several predominantly Muslim countries, NBC News reported.

    The ruling came from the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals.

    It upholds the suspension of a revised version of the executive order that the Trump administration crafted to better hold up to legal scrutiny than an earlier version.

    Trump has insisted that the measure is necessary to prevent possible terrorist attacks. But courts in previous rulings blocking its enforcement have cited past statements from Trump and his advisors signaling that it may single out Muslims.

    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/05/federal-appeals-court-upholds-block-on-trumps-temporary-immigration-ban

    ReplyDelete
  7. WARNING: RAMADAN STARTS NOW !

    IF YOU HAVE THE PERMIT PACK YOUR CONCEALED WEAPON !

    ReplyDelete
  8. 24 Coptic Christians murdered by a gunman in Egypt today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Warming up for 'the holy month of Ramadan'.

      Delete
  9. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Not only the NSA but the FBI as well were spying on us, even passing the info along to private parties, so the news is telling us today.

    Believe it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Deuce ☂Fri May 26, 07:06:00 AM EDT
    It is intellectually lazy to cite immigration statistics comparing foreign criminals with domestic criminals, yet it is done repeatedly to justify wide open borders. 911 was not a criminal act and neither was the killing of Manchester school girls a criminal act.

    All these attacks are a political attempt to destroy, overthrow and replace western culture and values. No further risks should be taken and existing risks should be reduced.

    Enough is enough.



    Well said

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deuce wrote:

      "All these attacks are a political attempt to destroy, overthrow and replace western culture and values"

      The obvious question is - attacks by who?

      Name the enemy and how one will be able to identify them.

      Delete
    2. Ash, your family.

      Supporters of Hamas. Jihadists.

      Delete
  12. Deuce's man Trump in action

    http://in.reuters.com/video/2017/05/25/trump-shoves-fellow-nato-leader-aside-on?videoId=371753409

    ReplyDelete

  13. AshFri May 26, 11:37:00 AM EDT
    Deuce wrote:

    "All these attacks are a political attempt to destroy, overthrow and replace western culture and values"

    The obvious question is - attacks by who?

    Name the enemy and how one will be able to identify them.


    Goddamn Ash, come on, don't always act so incredibly idiotic.

    The rest of the people here, even if they tried really hard, couldn't say something so stupid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe it's electroshock therapy the fellow needs, hell if I know.

      Delete
    2. DHS chief: You'd 'never leave house' with my terror info....DRUDGE

      Just stay in your home or condo, Ash, and don't come out again. And throw your computer away.

      Delete
    3. I am going to cease referencing Ash and Quirk together.

      It is too much of a libel on Quirk.

      Delete
    4. Here Ash -

      RAYMOND IBRAHIM VIDEO: THE HISTORY OF ISLAMIC JIHAD
      Understanding the West’s 1,400-year-old Islamic problem.
      May 26, 2017 Frontpagemag.com

      https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266815/raymond-ibrahim-video-history-islamic-jihad-frontpagemagcom

      Get this video, Ash. Keep it at home, and watch it again and again and again.

      Delete
  14. FBI illegally shared surveillance data on Americans with unauthorized third parties and federal contractors
    POSTED AT 11:21 AM ON MAY 26, 2017 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

    As a legal matter, this seems straightforward. The FBI’s gotten too loose with sharing Americans’ data in violation of its own “minimization” rules and you’d better believe Jim Comey will be asked about it the next time he testifies before Congress. If he testifies before Congress....

    http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/26/fbi-illegally-shared-surveillance-data-americans-unauthorized-third-parties-federal-contractors/

    ReplyDelete
  15. .

    One Trump Promise Kept

    During the campaign Trump promised to target the families of terrorists...

    New US-led Syria strike said to kill 80 relatives of IS fighters


    Families were sheltering in municipal building; at least 33 children among the dead, monitor group says

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. tit for tat? You kill 22 kids we'll kill 33...

      Delete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The power of emotions to influence judgment, including political attitudes, has been recognized since classical antiquity. Aristotle, in his treatise Rhetoric, described emotional arousal as critical to persuasion: "The orator persuades by means of his hearers, when they are roused to emotion by his speech; for the judgments we deliver are not the same when we are influenced by joy or sorrow, love or hate."[6][7] Aristotle accordingly warned that emotions may give rise to beliefs where none existed, or change existing beliefs, and may enhance or decrease the strength with which a belief is held.[8] Seneca similarly warned that "Reason herself, to whom the reins of power have been entrusted, remains mistress only so long as she is kept apart from the passions."[9]
    Centuries later, French scientist and philosopher, Blaise Pascal wrote that "People [...] arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof, but on the basis of what they find attractive."[10] Baruch Spinoza characterized emotions as having the power to "make the mind inclined to think one thing rather than another." Disagreeing with Seneca the Younger that emotion was a corrupter of reason, the 18th century English philosopher George Campbell argued, instead, that emotions were allies of reason, and that they aid in the assimilation of knowledge. At the same time, Campbell warned of the malleability of emotion and the consequent risk in terms of suggestibility:
    [Emotions] are not supplanters of reason, or even rivals in her sway; they are her handmaids, by whose ministry she is enabled to usher truth into the heart, and procure it to favorable reception. As handmaids, they are liable to be seduced by sophistry in the garb of reason, and sometimes are made ignorantly to lend their aid in the introduction of falsehood.[11]

    Drawing on the social psychology of his day, propaganda theorist Edward Bernays confidently asserted that "in certain cases we can effect some change in public opinion with a fair degree of accuracy by operating a certain mechanism, just as a motorist can regulate the speed of his car by manipulating the flow of gasoline." [12] Bernays advised that to change the attitudes of the masses, a propagandist should target its "impulses, habits and emotions" [13] and by making "emotional currents" work for him.[14]


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. .

      The MSM is Fair and Balanced.

      .

      Delete
    2. .

      Typical Doug.

      For him, the first thing the article above brings to mind is the MSM. There is rich irony in that. The thought that it might more apply to Trump and his Trumpkins never occurs to him. Point out the fact that the call to emotions is the mother's milk of the populist, and he shrugs. Tell him how easy the populist can turn into a demagogue, and he turns defensive.

      The Trump and the Trumpkins are codependents. He feeds and stirs up their fears and bigotry and they in turn give him their unquestioning support even to the point they support him when it's pointed out he has lied to them. Why think when you can emote? Trump appeals to their darker selves and their fears and they are willing to forgive most everything else.

      .

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. .

      MSM

      Now, I know ol Doug couldn't be talking about the US MSM (you know, the usual suspects) in referencing the story I posted about the US raid killing all those kids.

      That story came from the Times of Israel referencing a French press agency similar to Reuters quoting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

      But his main argument (if it can be called that) or, more accurately, his go to response is typically MSM. Perhaps, its another example of his automatic response mechanism, a defensive device used whenever one of his core beliefs is attacked and he lacks a rational response, kind of like his binky, an adult comfort device, his security blanket. Much easier than admitting uncomfortable truth when you are an emotionally fragile person, like Doug.

      .

      Delete
  18. The real blame lies with O'bozo.

    It wasn't until after he took the troops out of Iraq that ISIS got a grip in Iraq and Syria.

    Quirk knows this but he is blinded by his jealous hatred of The Donald and can't resist using emotion appeal against him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ....by his jealous sexual hatred....

      Delete
    2. ....festering jealous sexual hatred....

      Delete
    3. ....uncontrollable festering jealous sexual hatred....

      Delete
    4. ....overpowering volcanic festering jealous sexual hatred....

      Delete
    5. .

      Ah, if I only had an overpowering volcanic festering jealous sexual anything.

      I find mine have become less volcanic with each passing year.

      .

      Delete
    6. Alas, you and me both, brother.

      And you haven't gone through radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

      Delete
  19. Is there anything more stupid than a"Terrorist Watch List"?

    Evidently, the UK has three thousand of these charmers on their Watch List, costing the UK taxpayer ten of millions and still one of them killed all those young people.

    Here is a thought: Change the name to a "Flight List" and you have five days to leave, with a police escort till their sorry gone asses are locked down in the plane.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...better yet a "Hasta Luego Mutha Fucka" List.

      Delete
    2. We knew everything about everyone the day after 9-11.

      Things haven't changed since.

      Delete
    3. All is peachy keen unless you end up on a federal government list. Deuce, this blog of tours will most likely have you on a list somewhere.

      Delete
    4. .

      We knew everything about everyone the day after 9-11.

      ================

      19 members of Al Qaeda and AQ's supporting group, spent roughly half a million dollars to destroy the World Trade Center and cripple the Pentagon. What has been the cost to the United States? In a survey of estimates by The New York Times, the answer is $3.3 trillion, or about $7 million for every dollar Al Qaeda spent planning and executing the attacks. While not all of the costs have been borne by the government — and some are still to come — this total equals one-fifth of the current national debt. All figures are in 2011 dollars.

      The 9/11 attack killed 3,000 people. It destroyed property valued at $3 - $4 billion.

      IMO, the $ trillions lost that is mentioned above is the result of…

      - Government actions that included the WOT and subsequent wars of choice in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria (and now operations in others, Yemen, Somalia, and others throughout the ME/Africa).

      - It includes the disruption in the markets, especially in the stock market, a stock market that is now pretty much driven by computer algorithms that shift the DOW 1000 points in a single day based on things such rumors or Fed actions.

      - It includes the hundreds of $ billions spent on the expansion of the intelligence agencies, the same intelligence now being investigated for the widespread and illegal monitoring of American citizens, the same intelligence agencies that have done jack shit in stopping domestic terror caused by domestic lone wolves.

      - The money spent on increased security, TSA, etc. that follows the pattern of an increasing government intrusion and control of American citizens.

      - Worldwide reactions following the lead set by the US.

      In other words, most of the $ trillions lost were self-inflicted by an intrusive government and a compliant population that was willing to give up rights for an unfulfilled government promise to protect them.

      It brings to mind two sayings. The first WRT the government...

      Never let a good crisis go to waste.

      and one WRT the sheeple...

      Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      .

      Delete
    5. And all they really needed to do to counter another 911 was to reinforce and lock cockpit doors.

      Delete
    6. I think Quirk's point is more inclusive.

      No doubt he will share, if so.

      ...Quirk's points are...

      Delete
    7. .

      Sorry Doug, I forgot we were dealing with some oldsters here who read English as a second language.

      The 'point' I was trying to make was associated with the results of the 9/11 attack and my view that much of costs to this country resulting from 9/11 were self-inflicted and unnecessary.

      Ash, on the other hand was talking about the attack itself and precautions that might have prevented it.

      Two different things.

      .

      Delete
    8. Yeah, I got your point, he missed it.

      Then...

      Delete
    9. Deuce's Point, my point, your point...

      ...and Ash's point.

      Delete
    10. The subtly of the door was no doubt beyond a man of my age.

      Delete
  20. And watch the snow flakes here lose their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Replies
    1. The snow flakes just want to kick the can down the road.

      Delete
  22. Rural America Is the New ‘Inner City’

    A Wall Street Journal analysis shows that since the 1990s, sparsely populated counties have replaced large cities as America’s most troubled areas by key measures of socioeconomic well-being—a decline that’s accelerating.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/rural-america-is-the-new-inner-city-1495817008

    ReplyDelete
  23. I'll take Zuck's new social contract:

    1/320,000,000 of his Net Worth.

    ReplyDelete
  24. .

    Bush holds hands.

    Obama bows.

    Trump dances.

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2017/05/22/video-trump-welcomed-saudi-arabia-traditional-sword-dance/

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Billionaire's Daughter Missed the Groove.

      Delete
  25. GOP strategist admits he colluded with Russian hackers to hurt Hillary Clinton, Democrats

    Or not.

    http://www.salon.com/2017/05/25/gop-strategist-admits-he-colluded-with-russian-hackers-to-hurt-hillary-clinton-democrats/#.WSd2oZ-lJMc.facebook

    ReplyDelete
  26. Has Trump ordered the Secret Service to leave their coats unbuttoned ?

    In Solidarity

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Trump-at-the-G7-1.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  27. JOIN MARCH AGAINST SHARIA


    May 26, 2017
    Unadulterated Evil: Remembering Manchester
    By Eileen F. Toplansky

    In The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky, radical evil is described in the following fashion:
    By the way, a Bulgarian . . . told me about the crimes committed by Turks and Circassians in all parts of Bulgaria[.]  They burn villages, murder, outrage women and children, they nail their prisoners by the ears to the fences, leave them so till morning, and in the morning they hang them all – all sorts of things you can't imagine.  People talk sometimes of bestial cruelty, but that's a great injustice and insult to the beasts; a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so artistically cruel.

    These Turks took a pleasure in torturing children too; cutting the unborn child from the mother's womb, and tossing babies up in the air and catching them on the points of their bayonets before their mother's eyes.  Doing it before the mother's eyes was what gave zest to the amusement. 

    Imagine a trembling mother with her baby in her arms, a circle of invading Turks around her.  They've planned a diversion; they pet the baby, laugh to make it laugh.  They succeed, the baby laughs.  At that moment a Turk, points a pistol four inches from the baby's face.  The baby laughs with glee, holds out its little hands to the pistol, and he pulls the trigger in the baby's face and blows out its brains.

    The above passage was used in a 1980 essay by Kenneth R. Seeskin titled "The Reality of Radical Evil," wherein he describes the actions of the Nazis against the Jews during the Holocaust.

    Seeskin maintains that such evil describes  "the actions of someone who understands only too well what human dignity is and takes pleasure in mocking it."  In fact, "he has chosen to profane the tenderest and most sacred of living creatures and to do so in a manner destined to show the victim and everyone else that he is fully aware of the horror in what he is doing."

    Seeskin makes a distinction between those murderers with a conscience and those who do not possess one.  He maintains that this describes the "essence of radical evil.  It both denies God and puts something awful in His place.  In theological terms, it is really a form of idolatry – only not the kind which is satisfied with pagan gods or graven images.  The person who attempts to exterminate a whole people does not just succumb to evil, he worships it."

    As with the Holocaust, Islamic jihadist evil is a "nihilistic, demonic celebration of death."  Consider the word celebration.  In the Muslim world, when the infidel is slaughtered, "they hand out sweets in jubilation" as the murderers are praised, and the families of the evildoers are paid for the evil perpetuated. 

    Unfortunately, despite philosophers' and religious leaders' attempts to explain the evil, "morality has nothing to say to those who appear to choose evil purely for its own sake, nor reason to those who insist on knowing why such choices are made." 

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But there certainly is a common thread that describes such evil.  It "unites cruelty, desecration, humiliation, and every other form of depravity.  Where God creates what has dignity or lasting significance, [evil doers] seek to reduce it to nothing.  Human beings, sacred articles, transcendent ideals – all are turned to waste."  Consider the destruction by ISIS of artifacts dating back thousands of years.

      Furthermore, "[a]s Joseph Contrad once said: '[t]he belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary, [as] men alone are quite capable of every wickedness.'" 

      As many so-called pundits and politicians attempt to mitigate the evil by equivocation and mouthing absurdities, it is important to recall "that when evil is so foul that its full horror defies description, the categories of more or less and of better or worse no longer apply."

      Hence, "radical evil, unlike any normal transgression, cannot be forgiven – even by God."  For after all, "if there are sins whose evil lies beyond the bounds of fallibility – sins which involved not just the doing of evil but the adoration of it – can God forgive them as well?"
       
      So, the eternal question: why evil?

      Seeskin asserts that "evil allows God to test the faith of the righteous.  Evil occurs so that God can discipline the righteous.  Evil is a means of making the wicked alter their ways.  The suffering of the innocent and the flourishing of the wicked will be corrected at some unspecified point in the future."

      Yet, he admits that surely, "this line of thinking pushes our moral sensibilities to the breaking point or beyond."

      Ultimately, "we must distinguish between permitting man to make his own choices and rescuing innocent victims when those choices [incline] towards catastrophe." 

      On speaking of the Holocaust, Eliezer Berkovits maintains that "God hid his face."  For Seeskin, "to the atheist, suffering presents no problem because the universe lacks a transcendent power capable of redeeming it.  Likewise, suffering is not a problem for the orthodox theist because he believes that eventually all evil will be punished and all good will be rewarded."  Yet "intellectual honesty prevents us from being content with pat answers or simplistic theodicies."
       

      Delete
    2. The 20th century was the prelude to the terrible reality of Islamic jihadist evil that now permeates the 21st century.  Europe is currently in a war for its very soul, but its leaders dabble in a Faustian game.  Likewise, in Canada, a Senate bill has been passed that "removes the right to revoke citizenship from dual nationals who are convicted terrorists."

      One cannot make deals with evil.  Its very strength lies in its intractability and forbearance. 

      Jennifer Roskies at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs explains that in "Israeli eyes, the trend to bend over backwards in order to avoid being labeled Islamophobic is a politically-correct nicety the West can ill afford."  Consequently, "Israelis look at European reluctance to label the nature of the threat they face by its true name – radical Islam – with the belief that they do so at their own peril."

      We must rise up and fight this jihadist scourge with every ounce of strength we have. ((( On Saturday, June 10, 2017, ACT for America is having the first ever March Against Sharia in cities across the nation.)))  The site explains that "[t]his is a march against Sharia law and for human rights. Our nation is built on the freedom of religion – a pillar of our democracy – which we must always respect, protect, and honor. However many aspects of Sharia law run contrary to basic human rights and are completely incompatible with our laws and our democratic values. Therefore, as American citizens, we must become familiar with what Sharia is all about and we must speak out loudly about its tenets that are unacceptable – both to Americans and to humankind."

      Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

      http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/unadulterated_evil_remembering_manchester.html

      Delete
  28. ((( On Saturday, June 10, 2017, ACT for America is having the first ever March Against Sharia in cities across the nation.)))

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Don't miss it. You'll never forgive yourself.

      .

      Delete
    2. .

      What a chance to hand out with your peeps.

      .

      Delete
    3. .


      And hang out with them too.

      .

      Delete
    4. .

      Dig out that old 'Kill a Muslim for Christ' sign you used to have.

      .

      Delete
    5. .

      I can imagine the various groups that bill be there.

      And the solidarity.

      You go girl.

      .

      Delete
    6. .

      I can also imagine the various groups that will be there.

      .

      Delete
  29. Replies
    1. Judging by his comments directly above, he is turning into a smug smirking ashole.

      There's always more to Quirk, though, which is his saving grace, so the final verdict is as yet uncertain.

      And of course is up to The Lord.

      We should all hope for his best and pray for the old boy.

      That is all we can do, other than offer some helpful advice once in a while, and try to keep him in a good humor.

      He certainly does have it in for Trump, whatever the root cause may be.

      Delete
  30. March Against Sharia -- March for Human Rights

    http://www.actforamerica.org/rally

    Locations of marches. I'd have to go to either Portland, Oregon, or Seattle, Washington, which I might well do.

    Quirk can hit the march in Lansing, Michigan.

    That is, if he is either against sharia, or for human rights.

    Doug, who is against sharia, and for human rights, is out of luck in Hawaii, unless he quickly organizes one of his own.

    Deuce can hit the Harrisburg, Pennsylvanian march.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tulsi Gabbard is taking me out to dinner in order to explain that she is not the Devil despite being a Hindu from Samoa.

      http://hawaiisholywar2016.blogspot.com/2016/07/

      Delete
    2. By now, Gabbard has left any ambiguity about her religious beliefs behind. She identifies as a member of the Gaudiya Vaishnavism Sect of the Hindu faith.

      It’s a faith she shares with India’s leader, Narendra Modi. But they share more than that— they share a hard-right political philosophy that is at odds with Gabbard’s perceived role as a liberal touchstone in the Democratic Party.

      https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/11/tulsi-gabbard-is-not-who-you-think-she-is.html

      Delete
    3. Not really familiar with this Gabbard broad but she sounds like she's got something on the ball to me.

      Delete

  31. El relato perverso de la violencia en Venezuela

    http://www.alainet.org/articulo/185506

    ReplyDelete
  32. Deuce, this blog of tours will most likely have you on a list somewhere.

    Oh, I'm sure I twitched a diode or two along the way, and with the delete button saved a few assholes from twitching other diodes.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete