Like Zimmerman and Most KnockOut Victims the La Roux Family is too Lightly Complected to Matter....

polifrog--



Perhaps if she were beaten a bit more she would be dark enough for the left to care.  As it it is she is simply the pride of Mandela.

The Le Roux couple were awakened at 03h00am by armed gunmen and brutally beaten. Their sons Kasllie 16 and Pedro 9 also were assaulted - fortunately little Chris, 4, was asleep. "We were beaten awake, thrown on our stomachs on the floormat, and tied up. We were blinded by their shining flashlights in our eyes and with the blood running into our eyes and could not identify them,'...

In South Africa being white makes one a minority.  And being white is cause for abuse by a tyrannous majority of blacks.  Not only does the left does not care, but it deifies the Marxist responsible.

The La Roux family:

H/T - The Mad Jewess




NitWitCharmer

Ship of AGW fools ice-bound in bay once free of ice in 1912..declare AGW responsible for melting. #AGW http://goo.gl/EXcJD2

polifrog---



1912:



2013:

Via NBC:

Snow showers and high winds made it impossible for the Aurora Australis to approach the MV Akademic Shokalskiy, which has been stuck in multi-layered slabs of ice more than 10-feet deep since Christmas Eve, according to the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA).

You be the judge ... science or fools in search of bias confirmation.


-- NitWitCharmer

Chris Hedges Rejecting the Enlightenment...

polifrog--


What was the enlightenment?  Wiki has this to say:

The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th- and 18th-century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.

Reason and individualism...

Below is Chris Hedges who argues that individualism is a danger, that in the face of the big government failures that ghost liberalism, socialism is the answer.

Consider that... according to Chris Hedges the solution to big government failure is big government (a rejection of reason), not the individual (a rejection of individualism).

How much can one person reject the enlightenment?  And if one rejects the enlightenment do they not embrace that which preceded it .... darkness?





NitWitCharmer

Phil Robertson, Free Speech, American Virtue and unAmerican Democrats...

polifrog---


Has Phil Robertson's free speech been transgressed? Yes and no.  While the government did not infringe Robertson's speech, the left has violated the spirit of that American virtue known as free speech.

And if one does not embrace American virtue, one is unAmerican.

It is that unAmericanism that Americans stand against when they stand with Phil Robertson and American virtue.



NitWitCharmer

A Liberal Asks Liberals for Rational Argument Against the Rucho's Charge that the ACA is Facist ... Gets Nothing..

polifrog


The Discussion concerned Sen. Bob Rucho who tweeted,

Justice Robert’s pen & Obamacare has done more damage to the USA then the swords of the Nazis, Soviets & terrorists combined.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/12/16/3465037/nc-gop-asks-sen-bob-rucho-to-apologize.html#storylink=cpy

The liberal reaction was simple ... express outrage in the absence of  rational argument.

It seems one liberal, Dan Montgomery, wanted more than outrage but left with disappointment:

1. 

   Dan Montgomery 
   December 18, 2013 at 10:24 am

   Help!

   In following this debate there seems to be a great deal of outrage directed toward Rucho for essentially sounding an alarm in regard to the direction of our nation (as he sees it).

   What is the answer to his point?

   Some argue that If Socialist Nazis and Communists each dabbled in there own forms of the ACA, then how can Rucho’s comparison be unfair?

   How do I argue with this point?

1. 
   
2. 

   GOP Rules 
   December 18, 2013 at 10:33 am

   Dennis,
   The exact same thing applies here to the Pulse. I hesitate to use something from Alan/ML, but your comment is the exact same “word salad” but in a mirror. When a democrat (or some other chosen member of the “good ole’ boy network”) in NC uses the word nazi, there are crickets chirping all around here…but when it just so happens to be a person with an R beside them….then as Foghorn Leghorn would say— OUTRAGE I say, Outrage! He must apoligize! Have him drawn, quartered, and burned at the stake!

1. 

   GOP Rules 
   December 18, 2013 at 10:35 am

   And I should say….I am not outraged by either a democrat or republican saying stupid things….do you not expect stupid things to come from politicians anyway? What is the true outrage is some people do not expect something stupid from them regardless of party.

1. 

   ML 
2. December 18, 2013 at 11:25 am

   And Dan. That point can be made without bringing up some of the worst authorities in human history, maybe try something like the worst thing since Voodoo Economics or Vohlstead Act…

1. 
   
2. 

   Dan Montgomery 
   December 18, 2013 at 12:44 pm

   Wordsalad?

   My problem is that in a discussion thread one guy said that the pre-war Germany had there own version of the ACA. (he used the term Nazi…)

   So, I thought I’d look it up and squash him.

   As it turns out Germany did have their own version of the ACA. As a result I couldn’t counter this idiot who was comparing Nazis to Democrats.

   I do not want to just “shout” at the guy as valid as it might be. I want to prove him wrong. I want to prove to him and anyone reading that Democrats and pre-war Germany stand apart from each other in every way including healthcare.

   I am looking for a rational, thoughtful argument and this seemed like a good place to go.

1. 

   Steve Harrison 
   December 18, 2013 at 3:07 pm

   Dan, Germany’s socialized healthcare predated the Nazi movement by several decades, and it didn’t even remotely resemble the Affordable Care Act of today. In fact, the NC DHHS’s move towards managed care comes a lot closer to the sometimes harsh institutional nature of Germany’s program(s) than Obamacare does/will, but you won’t hear a peep out of Rucho mentioning that.

1. 

   wncgirl 
   December 18, 2013 at 3:31 pm

   So before the Nazi Democrats came up with the ACA the Nazi Republicans at the Heritage Foundation came up with it… for it before against it after… what you say? What I say is which party is the more hateful towards women, people of a darker hue, the poor, those with alternative lifestyles? I think we all know the answer to that one…

1. 

   GOP Rules 
   December 18, 2013 at 4:08 pm

   ML…..such is the state of all politicians. If you are placing faith in them, they are going to disappoint you more times than not. I too am sad that people in that profession are only concerned with power, oppression of freedom, and the continual expansion of government. This should be expected though, government is an invention of humans, and humans who are attracted to controlling other people are usually the one’s who will be the first to become corrupt in some way.

1. 

   Dan Montgomery 
   December 18, 2013 at 4:24 pm

   It is good to hear that Germany’s socialized medicine was not a Nazi construct, Steve.

   But I don’t feel comfortable arguing that socialized medicine was just a precursor to Nazi control. Surly you can see where that would leave me open to counter argument. Did the Nazi party do away with socialized medicine in Germany? I would ave thought they would have with wartime expenses and all but I don’t want to make assumptions..

   While I feel in my heart that the ACA is just and right, I am still having a difficult time arguing against the healthcare parallels these idiots are drawing with prewar Germany or Germany or Nazi Germany.

   I want to defend the ACA but I don’t want to sound shrill.
   The best argument is the rational one.

1. 
   
2. 

   Dan Montgomery 
   December 19, 2013 at 8:06 am

   My apologies if I came to the wrong place.

1. 

   LayintheSmakDown 
   December 19, 2013 at 8:26 am

   What is drow dalas?

   Dan,
   You came to the wrong place if you expected to not be called names if you state an opinion that may be outside of the realm of liberal political correctness. You may also expect to be accused of being on the payroll of Civitas or Art Pope…or maybe Satan (although these guys consider them all to be the same) if you express a view that may be contrary to the popular liberal belief or lean the slightest bit conservative. That way they take the argument away from the facts and with the resources they have you can then be essentially shouted down.

1. 

   Alan 
   December 19, 2013 at 10:12 am

   Word salad in a mirror….”but your comment is the exact same “word salad” but in a mirror”

   The “slightest” bit conservative? Only if you regard Atilla The Hun as a fire breathing liburel….

1. 

   LayintheSmakDown 
   December 19, 2013 at 6:14 pm

   Liburel….is that french?

Higher Minimum Wages Equal Fewer Jobs and/or Higher Prices, What if it Hit Your Pocket??

polifrog


These folks don't like it, but they know the PC answer ...






NitWitCharmer

Piers Morgan Goes Full unAmerican... Rejects 2nd and 1st....

polifrog



Breitbart:

At 9:30 a.m. on December 19th, CNN's Piers Morgan tweeted that the First Amendment "shouldn't protect vile bigots" like Phil Robertson.

And while making this claim, Morgan also reiterated his position that the Second Amendment "shouldn't protect assault rifle devotees."

Like Democrats Morgan is unAmerican....


NitWitCharmer

Just as We Jail Those Who Disrespect the Rights of Others, We Should Institutionalize Those Who can not Understand the Rights of Others...

polifrog --




Arming the Insane With a Full Complement of Rights Threatens the Liberties of the Sane...

Coulter:

If someone was brought back from the 1950s to today, he’d tell us: “I couldn’t help but notice that all the people who committed mass shootings were batsh*t crazy. Why were they not locked up or forced to take medication?”

We’d have to say, “Because some people — we call them ‘liberals’ — get a warm feeling of self-righteousness by defending the right of the deranged to crap in a shoebox, carefully label it and put it in a closet.”

NitWitCharmer

The Evil of the Diversity of Wealth at the Expense of Poverty...

polifrog



It is a shame that all diversity is not embraced by unAmerican Democrats.  It it were all Americans would benefit, not just those who vote Democrat.





NitWitCharmer

unAmerican Democrats in Oregon Lock Horns With Free Speech

polifrog


Among Americans free speech is considered an American virtue, but that is unfortunately not the case among unAmerican Democrats....

That increasingly gossamer thing called free speech...

In order  to do any sort of business with Cover Oregon, they must sign a far-reaching non-disparagement agreement that forbids the signee from saying anything remotely negative or disparaging about the Obamacare exchange. If state officials decide that someone has spoken unfavorably about the Obamacare exchange, that business or organization can have their grant money revoked.

NitWitCharmer

You Might be an unAmerican Democrat ....

polifrog




=== If you believe that the Koch brothers and Art Pope should be silenced you might be an unAmerican Democrat. (Free Speech is an American virtue)

=== If you believe that Americans assembling into groups as corporations so as to better affect change in the government that governs them via speech is wrong then you might be an unAmerican Democrat. (see freedom of assembly, speech and redress, all American virtues)

=== If you believe that government employees are not allowed to express their religious beliefs then you might be an unAmerican Democrat. (see freedom of religion an American virtue)

=== If you believe religion should be excluded from government to the point that the de facto establishment of Atheism ensues then you might be an unAmerican Democrat (see freedom of religion, an American virtue, and the Supreme court's defining of Atheism as a religion)

=== If you believe citizen journalism stands apart from professional journalism and therefore does not enjoy the same liberties as professional journalism then you might be an unAmerican Democrat. (see freedom of speech and press, both American virtues)

And that's just the first amendment.

It is not me that defines Democrats as unAmerican, but Democrats themselves.

Please consider the warmth of the enlightenment, of individual liberty, of the Tea Party and deny the cold hard dark reality that is the unAmerican Democrat Party.

NitWitCharmer

The short incestuous story of Democrats, Slavery, Eugenics, and Abortion...

polifrog ---

Slave owners were one with Democrats and together they begot not only Jim Crow, their first child, but also Eugenics, their daughter, who with her father's incestuous desire gave birth to one of her own, Abortion.


 NitWitCharmer

Why do Liberals Shoot up Our Schools? Are Gun Free Zones Massacre Magnets??

polifrog


It seems that Massacre Magnets regularly  attract anti 2nd unAmerican Democrats...




 NitWitCharmer

Bob Rucho is Right, The ACA is More Damaging than to the US than the Swords of Nazis and Soviets...

polifrog


Bob Rucho via twitter:

Justice Robert's pen & Obamacare has done more damage to the USA then the swords of the Nazis,Soviets & terrorists combined.

Agreed.  The US kicked Nazi ass, the US kicked Soviet ass, but ObamaCare is kicking the ass of all Americans...

Who's up for kicking some more unAmerican ass?  This  time it's already on American soil and it's called the ACA...

NitWitCharmer

Trey Gowdy Brings Benghazi to Uninterested Press...

polifrog









 




NitWitCharmer

Hmm... a Comedian Who Refuses to Apologize to the Liberal Church Ladies of Racial Aggrievement....

polifrog








NitWitCharmer

Liberty is Hard....

polifrog----



 



NitWitCharmer

Equal numbers of conservatives and liberals in the pursuit of unbiased journalism???

polifrog



The equal numbers I am referring to are the FOX journalists who pursue the stories for the hard news coverage, not opinion, but hard news like that presented at 6 in the evening, behind the faces seen on the screen.

Those invisible journalists whose charge is story selection are themselves selected based on their political bias. FOX prefers an equal number of liberals and conservatives in these positions. The reason for this is that if story selection is done by a group that is predominantly conservative or predominately liberal potential stories go missed ... a byproduct of this process is FOX's boring but lucrative balance in news coverage.

This story via Forbes from the 2008 election comports with FOX's balance...

ABC, CBS, NBC coverage as a group
==Obama 68% positive, 32% negative / McCain 36% positive, 64% negative

However for FOX,
==Obama 36% positive, 64% negative / McCain 40% positive, 60% negative

Within the numbers one can see reflected the liberal argument that FOX was hard on Obama ... arguably biased.

But also within the numbers is reflected FOX's argument that Fox itself was hard on both Obama and McCain.  And is that not the proper role of a watch dog press? To be hard on both all of governance? Recall that FOX manages this via a   balanced sort of  digging for dirt behind the scenes.

The fact is that FOX only appears bias when contrasted against the true bias of the big three networks, while being nearly unbiased in regard to the pursuit of news coverage. 

NitWitCharmer

Professor David Coates, an unAmerican not Only Defining Liberty Down but Negatively... Negative Freedom

polifrog



David Coates via the News Record:

We enjoy negative freedom when we are free from rules blocking our ability to act. We enjoy positive freedom when we possess enough resources to act as we wish. Keeping that distinction in mind makes clear that...

What does this mean?

It means that individual liberty is a negative from the perspective of government influence over your individual desires, needs and wants. It means that individual liberty is a "negative" because you are enjoy liberty while government is limited in its power over you.

When one defends your individual liberty to speak, to be a journalist, to practice your religion, right to a speedy trial, right to self defense, in short, your individual rights as listed throughout the Bill of Rights, does that come across to you as a "negative"? Me neither.

But according to the author, "critics of the Obama administration invariably define freedom narrowly and negatively. "

Negatively. Consider that. Defending your choice to individually choose the plan you want, according to the author, is "negative". Defending one's individual liberty to a speedy trial, according to Coates, is "negative". Defending the individual liberty of the religious to practice their religion free from the ACA's diktat is, according to the author, "negative". Defending one's individual liberty to self defense via arms is "negative".

In short, David Coates claims that arguing in favor of individual liberty is "negative".

One should understand that what Coates calls "negative freedom" is more commonly called "negative liberty".

Coates could just as well have written, "We enjoy negative -liberty- when we are free from rules blocking our ability to act." In fact, he would have been more honest had he done so.

Thus, whereas Americans believe, "We enjoy -liberty- when we are free from rules blocking our ability to act," Coates could have more honestly written: "We enjoy negative -liberty- when we are free from rules blocking our ability to act."

The reality is that the American embrace of individual liberty is  positive while unAmerican Democrats like David Coates who harbor disdain for American virtue based on individual liberty, otherwise known as those restraints that American virtue imposes on the few to decide for the many, view individual liberty as a negative.

Let us be free to choose happiness, let us be free to choose sadness, let us be free from those like the misseducated David Coates who claim to "enjoy positive freedom when we possess enough resources to act as we wish". 

The choice is yours be American or stand with David Coates.

Via Stanford:

While negative liberty is usually attributed to individual agents, positive liberty is sometimes attributed to collectivities, or to individuals considered primarily as members of given collectivities.

and

... negative and positive liberty are not merely two distinct kinds of liberty; they can be seen as rival, incompatible interpretations of a single political ideal. Since few people claim to be against liberty, the way this term is interpreted and defined can have important political implications.

It's the last bit, "... liberty, the way this term is interpreted and defined can have important political implications", moderates  find illuminating in a disheartening sense. While we all know individual liberty is a positive virtue, what becomes of liberty if academia manages to define individual liberty as a negative? Diminished liberty... which is what Coates' particular brand of unAmericanism is all about.

unAmericanism is real, and it is found here within Coates' words. And if unAmerican dolts like Coates are willing to engage in redefining individual liberty not only down, but indeed, as a negative, then I sure as hell will note his unAmerican intent ... and yes, his dark unenlightened unAmerican heart. If the years of 1900 to 2000 taught us anything, it is that what Coates so eloquently preaches inevitably devolves into hate and genocide.

Coates is not a friend of America.

It is sad to see Wake forest befriend David Coates, for as Wake Forest befriends David Coates it befriends the worst of the 20th century. 

---NitWitCharmer---

Mandela, Journalistic Fawning for One of Their Own...

poilifrog

 


out