AR-15 Behavior Communists control deaths Dystopian elitists Fear freedom government is slavery gun control Headline News Humanity immorality Intelwars left vs. right paradigm lie liberty mao zedong mobs political power power ruling class SLAVERY Socialism Threats totalitarian Violence wake up

The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15

This article was originally published by Brandon Smith at 

This past week a US District judge in California struck down the state’s 30-year ban on high capacity semi-automatic rifles which leftists label “assault weapons”. The judge called the ban unconstitutional (which it is). In response, the progressive media has lost their collective minds, screeching in horror at the idea of AR-15 rifles being legal within the borders of their carefully manicured socialist Utopia state. Their most commonly expressed reaction seems to be fear.

Fear is rarely a rational thing. When someone operates based on fear, they tend to make terrible decisions and support oppressive causes and laws. Fear leads to an obsession with control. Fearful people also tend to look for large mobs of other terrified people so they can feel safe and secure and anonymous. They want to be able to act impulsively on their fears without having to face consequences for it later.

Leftists are driven primarily by two factors: Narcissism, and yes, fear. I’ve discussed their narcissism at great length in past articles; now I think we should delve into their fear.

The most common leftist retort to the question “Why are you so afraid of the AR-15?” will usually be a snort of indignant disbelief followed by the words: “Because it’s a military weapon designed to kill a lot of people quickly…idiot!”

But this is not an argument, it is an expression of irrational fear. Why are they, as individuals, afraid of the AR-15? What are the chances that they will EVER be faced with a person intent on killing them with an AR-15? And, why do they believe that disarming innocent law-abiding Americans will somehow save them from their paranoia?

Let’s examine the first issue of statistical probability; how many people are actually killed by AR-15s each year? Not many according to the FBI, which does not track the stats on specific rifles, but does track the stats on all rifles together. And, as it turns out, only around 6% of all gun deaths involve rifles in the US each year.

How much of that 6% involves the use of military-grade rifles like the AR-15? It’s impossible to say, but even if it was half, or 3% of all gun-related crimes, that would still mean you have FAR more of a chance of being murdered by a knife or blunt object than an AR. By extension, Rifles overall are dwarfed by handgun murders, so, again, why are leftists so afraid of the AR-15?

What about mass shootings? It seems like the AR-15 is a favorite among mass shooters because of its “efficiency”, so is this reason enough to be fearful? According to the New York Times’ own analysis, the AR-15 was used to kill 173 people in mass shootings in the US from 2007 to 2017. Meaning around 17 homicides per year over a decade can be attributed to the rifle. Again, the AR is dwarfed by almost all other weapons in homicide including knives, even when accounting for mass shootings.

With the sheer number of military-grade weapons in the hands of civilians in the US, there should be mass homicides everywhere you look if you take the common position of the typical progressive gun grabber. But, this is not the case. In fact, if you want to increase your chances of being killed by a gun, move to a major Democrat-run city like Chicago, New York, or Philadelphia. In Chicago, there were 4033 shootings and 784 homicides, predominantly in black neighborhoods and primarily with handguns.

So, statistically, access to AR-15s does not increase gun homicides. But what about living in a black neighborhood in leftist-run Chicago under some of the strictest gun laws in the country? Yes, your chances of being shot are MUCH higher (just not by an AR-15).

Since the math does not add up in favor of the leftists, perhaps we should examine other factors that might be driving them to focus on the AR in particular. Let’s talk about “precedence”…

Look at it this way – States like California are a petri dish, a testing ground for the future that leftists want for the entire country. There is an old saying that “As goes California, so goes the US”, and this is because California is often where most experimental legislation is pushed; legislation that violates the boundaries of what the constitution allows. Sometimes it’s New York or New Jersey or some other blue state, but most of the time CA is where unconstitutional precedents are set. Its massive population and a large number of electoral votes make it a perfect target for conditioning the wider public to further restrictions on their freedoms.

This explains some of the fear the media is showing regarding the latest federal court decision on military-grade weapons like the AR. Political elites see California as their own little kingdom with their own special laws, and they plan to eventually spread those laws across America using California as the model. But, if such laws are overturned as unconstitutional, then the precedent actually works in reverse. Now, the leftists are concerned that an overturned gun ban in CA means more blue states will follow and their entire gun-grabbing scheme will go out the window.

The leftist mind thinks in terms of unchecked and unhinged “democracy”. Meaning, they believe that the majority is paramount; the majority is law. If a majority in a society wants to take away your freedoms, then they have the right to because they have the mob on their side. 51% rules over the lives of the other 49%. But this is not how things work in a Constitutional Republic.

Under the Bill of Rights, your freedoms are codified and sacrosanct. They are inherent and gifted by God (or whatever you happen to believe in); government has no domain over these rights. The right to firearms and self-defense is one of these inherent qualities. It does not matter what the State of California thinks, or even what the “majority” of people in California think. If an American in California wants to own an AR-15, then he/she has the right to own an AR-15.

We also cannot ignore the fact that leftists have an insatiable appetite for collectivism, usually in the name of the “greater good”. Collectivism is basically totalitarianism disguised as humanitarianism. They know what’s best for you, and they are going to make sure you follow THEIR plan for your life.

The AR-15 is indeed a military-grade weapon, and maybe this is what frightens leftists the most. Not because they are personally more likely to be shot by one (we’ve already proven that notion false), but because leftists desire control over all else, and with military-grade weapons in the hands of the public control becomes much more difficult. ALL totalitarian governments seek to first disarm the people they intend to enslave or destroy. This is a fact.

When a group of people in power are working hard to remove defensive or even offensive weapons from your hands, it’s best to assume that their intentions are malevolent. They are not trying to help you, they are trying to help themselves.

They will deny this motive to the grave, but look at how the political left has been acting lately: They are the only people that have supported mass censorship of opposing viewpoints. They are the only people that are supported by international conglomerates and Big Tech companies. They are the only people that supported the pandemic lockdowns, which were completely useless in stopping the spread of covid, but they were very useful in killing hundreds of thousands of small businesses across the US. They are also the only people in favor of vaccine passports which would destroy the very fabric of our society and erase what is left of our freedoms.

It’s not really surprising that they want to disarm us as well.

Of course, they will claim that this argument is “silly”. After all, what can an AR-15 do against an Apache helicopter or an Abrams battle tank? Well, these rifles in the right hands can do a hell of a lot to stop a technologically advanced military, as we have seen for the past two decades in Afghanistan. Let us not play games; there is a reason why leftists and elites are obsessed with our disarmament. If military-grade rifles were not a threat to them, then they would not be going after them so aggressively.

Finally, the mainstream media has rolled out all the typical propaganda tools when it comes to spinning the federal decision in CA, including attacking the judge and his character. Almost every single article on this issue focuses on the fact that the judge compared the AR-15 to a “Swiss Army knife”.

The left will continue to use this narrative as a means to distract from the real problem at hand because false conflations and straw man arguments have worked for them in the past. Clearly, the judge was not trying to say that an AR-15 and a Swiss Army knife are exactly the same, or that they are equally capable of killing people. The logical interpretation is that the AR-15 is a tool like any other tool, and it has multiple uses. It is a utilitarian object, not an inherently demonic death machine as leftists would have us believe.

Gun grabbers love to make the argument that firearms are only designed for one purpose: “Killing”. This is a lie. They are also tools for self-defense. They are a means to defuse a violent situation before it even happens. There are thousands of videos on the web showing people with criminal intent running away from a Good Samaritan with a gun. There is no way of telling how many potential victims have been saved by the mere presence of a firearm, but the accounts are documented and numerous.

This is on top of all the other uses for guns, including hunting and sporting uses. So, yes, the judge is absolutely correct; an AR-15 is a multipurpose tool, just like a Swiss Army knife.

In my view, the gun control lobby in America is in the midst of a considerable decline, and maybe it is even about to die. The political left has long operated on the mantra that “the squeaky wheel gets the oil”. In other words, they think if they whine long enough and loud enough about an issue someone will come along and give them what they want just to shut them up, even if what they want is illogical or morally bankrupt.

This strategy has worked out for them for many decades so it’s not surprising that they keep using it, but times are changing. Now, the squeaky wheel gets no oil, at least not from gun owners. The squeaky wheel gets nothing.

Gun control is the big line in the sand for most law-abiding conservatives and moderates, and we have grown tired of the debate because it’s no longer a debate, it’s an imposition of ideology and cultism. All the facts are on the side of gun owners. All the legal protections are on the side of gun owners. All the moral dynamics are on the side of gun owners. As long as we stand our ground, there is nothing that leftists can do about it.

They can continue to lie, they can continue to threaten and they can continue exploiting emotional arguments, but they’ll NEVER get the guns. And, as we have seen recently, we might even start returning some of those gun rights and rifles to states like California, where fear was used to cloud the public mind and people were conned into compliance

What are California leftists and their comrades in other blue states really afraid of? They are afraid that their strategies are failing, that the public is getting wise to their games, that their incrementalism only works for so long, that their true intentions have become transparent, that their narcissism has blinded them to their own frailties, that the law is not their plaything and that every piece of constitutional ground they have stolen over the decades could be taken back from them in the blink of an eye; as fast as a speeding bullet

Leftists and totalitarians fear the AR-15, but what they fear more is what it represents. And with each carefully placed practice shot at every gun range across America, they hear the crushing sound of inevitability.

The post The Real Reasons Why California Leftists Are Terrified Of The AR-15 first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You.

columbia university Fox News Intelwars North Korea Socialism Woke culture Yeonmi park

North Korean defector who escaped sex slavery has powerful indictment for woke culture, liberals embracing socialism

A North Korean defector spoke out Monday about the encroaching dangers of progressivism on American college campuses, explaining woke culture is eroding what makes America a beacon for the world, especially for those people who are not free.

What is the background?

Yeonmi Park fled North Korea with her mother when she was just 13 years old. Park fled sex slavery and traveled across the vast and dangerous Gobi desert in search of freedom.

Park eventually settled in South Korea, as many defectors from the North do, but came to the United States in 2016 when she transferred to Columbia University in New York City.

What did she say?

Speaking with Fox News, Park said her experience studying at an elite American university had many similarities to her life in North Korea.

In fact, she said the problems began during orientation, when she was scolded for admitting that she enjoys reading classic English literature, such as works by Jane Austen.

“I said ‘I love those books.’ I thought it was a good thing. Then she said, ‘Did you know those writers had a colonial mindset? They were racists and bigots and are subconsciously brainwashing you,'” Park recalled.

Park explained that her education was designed to make students “resent” Western democracy and included blaming white men for civilization’s problems. She also chided students for “playing with fire” — citing their love for socialism and communism — and mocked safe spaces and wanting to be identified by pronouns distinct from one’s biological sex.

“It felt like the regression of civilization,” Park said of her time at Columbia. “Even North Korea is not this nuts. … North Korea was pretty crazy, but not this crazy.”

“People choose to be brainwashed, and they deny it,” she added of Americans. “Education almost makes you not able to think critically, even though in the name of critical thinking.”

Park went on to lambaste Americans who think they are oppressed, especially those who pay half a million dollars to attend an Ivy League institution like Columbia University. “They are so bitter. They have zero, zero appreciation for what this country did, what the Constitution says to protect individual liberty. They have zero, zero appreciation. They are dying to give all their liberty away.”

Park predicted that, if progressives get their way, America will head down the same path as North Korea.

“There’s no rule of law, no morality, nothing is good or bad anymore, it’s complete chaos,” she said. “I guess that’s what they want, to destroy every single thing and rebuild into a communist paradise.”

Anything else?

Park later spoke with Fox News host Sean Hannity, where she explained why her experience is “heartbreaking” — and what it means for freedom.

“It’s just heartbreaking. I literally sold as a sexual slave and I literally crossed the Gobi Desert to be free,” Park said. “And now I thought I landed in a country where I can say what I believe and have my, you know, freedom to think. However, now I live in a country I have to constantly censor my speech because now in the name of safe place — Columbia told us what we cannot talk about.”

“I am so concerned like, if America is not free, I think there’s no place else is left that is free,” she added. “And I think that’s why it’s really alarming to me.”

North Korean defector compares Ivy League campuses to living under Kim regime

George Soros house democrats Intelwars Poor peoples campaign Socialism Third reconstruction

Group backed by George Soros, House Democrats, pushes for radical socialist ‘Third Reconstruction’

A group funded by infamous left-wing megadonor George Soros and backed by dozens of progressive House Democratic lawmakers kicked off a yearlong campaign to advocate for radical socialist policy reforms this week.

The group, known as the Poor People’s Campaign, announced earlier this year its intentions, starting in June, to organize mass assemblies promoting progressive laundry list items such as automatic voter registration, minimum wage hikes, free health care, free college, reparations, welfare for illegal immigrants, and the abolishment of ICE.

As a way to kick off the campaign, the group announced plans for a “Moral March” protest against Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (W. Va.) over his recent decision to oppose H.R.1, a sweeping federal election reform bill.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, the group was buoyed following the death of George Floyd by a sizable grant from Soros’ Open Society Foundations through the organization’s $220 million “anti-racist” initiative. It is supported by 30 House Democrats, including outspoken Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).

The outlet noted that in a news release announcing the grant, Open Society Foundations touted groups like the Poor People’s Campaign, which are “fighting for an end to policing as we know it.”

Alex Soros, the foundation’s deputy chair, added, “This is the time for urgent and bold action to address racial injustice in America.”

In the “Third Reconstruction” resolution on its website, PPC states: “[We] recognize that these times require moral policies aimed at fully addressing the interlocking injustices of systemic racism, poverty, the denial of health care and ecological devastation, militarism, and the distorted moral narrative of religious nationalism, as a third Reconstruction to build an equitable, thriving, and resilient economy from the bottom up.”

To accomplish that goal, the group advocates for the implementation of federal living wage laws, a guaranteed annual income, guaranteed housing, “relief from student debt, housing debt, utilities debt, medical debt, and other household and personal debt,” the “demilitarizing” of the southern border, and much more.

One senior GOP Senate aide described the resolution as the “next Green New Deal,” the Free Beacon reported.

The outlet added that “in 2018, the group organized ’40 Days of Action,’ which resulted in thousands of arrests” as “protesters in dozens of states held sit-ins at government offices and blocked roads while demanding local legislators pass hikes to the minimum wage and expand welfare benefits.”

Here’s more about the campaign:

The Demands of the Poor People’s Campaign (abridged)

Antifa Antifa trump Change my mind COMEDY communism communist Crowder Crowder bits Crowder bits playlist1776 Crowder clips Crowder confronts Crowderbits CURRENT EVENTS D-day D-day invasion Donald Trump fake news Funny conservative History How to debate How to debunk Intelwars liberal libertarian Louder with crowder Lwc Mug club news Normandy Normandy beach Normandy landings Politics protest Socialism Stephen Crowder Steven Crowder Video What is antifa World War II WWII

Crowder obliterates Lincoln Project video that compares ANTIFA to WWII soldiers

In this clip, Steven Crowder discussed a video — produced by The Lincoln Project — created to mark the memory of D-Day when brave Allied troops stormed the beaches of Normandy, France, during World War II. But, things turned comical when the video compared those brave men to Antifa.

“Are they talking about the same Antifa?” Crowder asked sarcastically.

Crowder broke down all the ways that the Antifa we see today is nothing like the heroes that fought in WWII. Crowder and his crew reminded viewers of the fascism imposed on the American public in current times. “Silencing political opinions is what fascists do,” the guys agreed.

Crowder produced a video of his own to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the day Antifa “stormed the City of Seattle and changed the name to CHAZ.”

Watch the video below. Can’t watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Steven Crowder?

To enjoy more of Steven’s uncensored late-night comedy that’s actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.

Intelwars Roger daltrey Socialism The who Woke culture Woke generation

Legendary rocker Roger Daltrey blasts woke culture: ‘Miserable world they’re going to create’

Legendary rock music singer Roger Daltrey, frontman for The Who, slammed the “woke generation” recently, blasting woke culture and its impact on society.

What are the details?

Speaking in an interview with DJ Zane Lowe on Apple Music in late April, Daltrey expressed gratitude for having lived through the “golden era,” rebuking the relativity of truth and slamming those who advocate socialism and communism.

“It’s just getting harder to disseminate the truth,” Daltrey said. “It’s almost like, now we should turn the whole thing off. Go back to newsprint, go back to word of mouth, and start to read books again.”

“It’s becoming so absurd now with AI, all the tricks it can do, and the woke generation,” he continued. “It’s terrifying, the miserable world they’re going to create for themselves. I mean, anyone who’s lived a life and you see what they’re doing, you just know that it’s a route to nowhere. Especially when you’ve lived through the periods of a life that we’ve had the privilege to.”

“We’ve had the golden era. There’s no doubt about that,” Daltrey explained. “We came out of a war, we came out of a leveled society, completely flattened bomb sites and everything. And we’ve been through socialist governments. We’ve seen the communist system fail in the Soviet Union. I’ve been in those communist countries while they were communist. I’ve seen how ‘wonderful’ — really? — it was.”

Pete Townshend & Roger Daltrey: ‘The Who Sell Out’ Released in 1967 and their Legacy | Apple Music

Anything else?

The interview was not the first time Daltrey has spoken out against the progressive agenda.

In 2013, Daltrey slammed the British Labour Party for its liberal immigration policy.

“I will never, ever forgive the Labour Party for allowing this mass immigration with no demands put on what people should be paid when they come to this country. I will never forgive them for destroying the jobs of my mates, because they allowed their jobs to be undercut with stupid thinking on Europe, letting them all in, so they can live 10 to a room, working for Polish wages,” Daltrey said.

Daltrey even weighed in on the 2016 U.S. presidential election, saying “a dead dog” would have won against Hillary Clinton.

In 2018, Daltrey spoke out against the #MeToo movement, saying, “I find this whole thing so obnoxious. It’s always allegations and it’s just salacious crap.”

Black Lives Matter BLM communism Glenn Beck Intelwars mao zedong Marxism Patrisse cullors Socialism

Black Lives Matter founder overjoyed her book is compared to Mao’s ‘Little Red Book’ in unearthed video

Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors once was ecstatic that a book she was promoting was compared to the “Little Red Book” by Chinese Communist Party leader Mao Zedong, one of the most notorious mass murderers in history.

The unearthed video reportedly shows Cullors delivering a speech in Detroit during a United States Social Forum panel in 2010. Cullors, who would have been about 26 years old at the time, was one of five speakers who were “launching a movement-building conversation” and “building anti-racist, anti-imperialist politics in working-class communities of color.”

In the video resurfaced by the National Pulse, Cullors promotes the book titled, “The 7 Components of Transformative Organizing Theory.” Cullors, who has described herself as a “trained Marxist,” said the radical left-wing organizing book was comparable to the “Little Red Book,” a collection of 427 quotes from Mao released during China’s Cultural Revolution to spread propaganda about communism, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, and class struggle.

“I was speaking to this young person from Arizona who’s trying to fight SB 1070, and he grabbed a book and he said, ‘It’s like Mao’s Red Book.’ And I was like, ‘Man, that’s what I was thinking,’ and it was just really cool to hear him make that connection,” Cullors said in the video. “And I was like how about you buy 10 to 15 of these books and you all have like a youth organizing group where you talk about it and you really try to engage this. We need to build off of this.”

Historian Frank Dikötter estimates that Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people between 1958 to 1962, far more deaths than Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin.

Also during the 2010 workshop, Cullors said racism was the cause of her father’s death.

“My father passed away in December, what I say of racism. He was only 53 years old and he passed of racism,” Cullors claimed. “Because this country killed him.”

The speaker after Cullors then promoted a workshop titled, “Socialism for the 21st Century,” which she billed as “Glenn Beck’s nightmare.”

Pt 4 Transformative Organizing Theory (USSF 2010 Workshop)

At the time of the video, Cullors was a community organizer with the Labor Community Strategy Center, a self-described “think tank/act tank” that is “building a matching to take on the system.” The Los Angeles-based organization launches campaigns for “working class communities of color, and addresses the totality of urban life with a particular focus on civil rights, environmental justice, public health, global warming, and the criminal legal system.”

Cullors said that she joined the Labor Community Strategy Center at the age of 17 when she was “really angry.” She said, “I didn’t have a direction, I just was spewing anger.”

In 2018, Cullors told Democracy Now that the Labor Community Strategy Center was her “first political home,” and said that the organization’s founder and director Eric Mann is her “mentor.”

In the 1960s, Mann was an active member of the Weathermen, the group that later became Weather Underground, a radical left-wing militant organization. In November 1969, Mann and 22 members of the Weathermen were arrested in connection to a shooting of the police station in Cambridge, Massachusetts, according to the Harvard Crimson.

“Three men — Eric Mann, James Reeves, and James Kilpatrick — were charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to attempt murder,” the paper reported. “The rest of the 23 are being held on the conspiracy charge.”

“Mann was eventually charged with assault and battery, disturbing the peace, damaging property, defacing a building and disturbing a public assembly, for which he spent 18 months behind bars,” the New York Post reported.

During the workshop, the speakers were trying to sell copies of Mann’s book “The 7 Components of Transformative Organizing Theory,” a 58-page paperback published in 2010. Mann defines “transformative organizing” as “left-wing organizing as characterized by militant opposition to racism, war, and the abuses of Empire, strategized by people who self-identify as revolutionary, radical, liberal, and progressive.”

According to Mann, “Transformative organizing seeks radical social change through the strategy of building an international united front to challenge the U.S. Empire.” He proclaimed that the United States is a “structurally racist, imperialist power. Driven by the need to relentlessly expand — a characteristic of advanced capitalism — it operates to control the economies, governments, and peoples of every nation, especially in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.”

Mann said the United States was “built on genocide, slavery, stolen lands, and stolen peoples.”

Mann claimed, “Transformative organizing requires the leadership of society’s most exploited, oppressed, and strategically placed classes and races” and must “put forth radical demands, and wage long-term battles.”

In 2010 Mann wrote:

With the “Tea Party” rising in popularity and the Obama/Clinton administration busy pursuing the Empire’s objectives abroad, there is an urgent need for the Left to organize and generate a new movement rooted in a creative, anti-racist, anti-imperialist politics among working class communities of color. The most effective framework for doing this is transformative organizing because: it is in revolutionary opposition to the power structures of colonialism, patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism in its current form, which is imperialism; it actually transforms the consciousness of people who participate in the process; and it empowers organizers to stand up to the Right, reach out to people, and take on the system.

Cullors was recently embroiled in controversy when it was revealed that the Marxist-loving BLM founder reportedly purchased four homes for $3.2 million over a short period of time. Cullors defended the property purchases by claiming that she is investing in her “family members.”

Democratic socialists Intelwars Judith whitmer Nevada democratic party Socialism

Nevada Democratic Party’s entire staff resigns after socialists win leadership roles in party

As moderate Democrats and far-left progressives continue to fight over the identity of their party, Democrats in Nevada recently took a stand after so-called democratic socialists won party leadership roles.

What are the details?

The entire staff of the Nevada Democratic Party resigned over the weekend after far-left progressives won leadership roles in the party.

In elections that took place on Saturday, far-left progressives won every leadership spot, five in all. The candidates were backed by the Democratic Socialists of America, and all but one of the winning candidates is a dues-paying member of the DSA.

The existing leadership responded by resigning, The Intercept reported. In fact, the entire staff, including consultants, abruptly resigned.

From The Intercept:

Not long after Judith Whitmer won her election on Saturday to become chair of the Nevada Democratic Party, she got an email from the party’s executive director, Alana Mounce. The message from Mounce began with a note of congratulations, before getting to her main point.

She was quitting. So was every other employee. And so were all the consultants. And the staff would be taking severance checks with them, thank you very much.

One staffer anonymously told The Intercept, “I knew I couldn’t work with her and watch her destroy the years of hard work so many operatives put into making our state party the best state party in the country.”

Victory for democratic socialists was made possible by groundwork laid by activists who worked on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign in 2016, according to The Intercept. They continued building momentum where it mattered over the last several years, making Saturday’s victory possible.

What is the background?

While progressives appear to be making inroads in some states, there remains a sharp divide within the power structures of the Democratic Party about which direction the party should go.

While Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) hopes to steer her party further left, moderate Democrats wholeheartedly believe that would be disastrous for Democrats.

In fact, many Democrats, like Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), believe far-left policies like “defund the police” and “open borders” are responsible for Democrats losing numerous House seats in the 2020 election.

“We need to be pretty clear,” Spanberger reportedly said after the election. “It was a failure. It was not a success. We lost incredible members of Congress.

“We have to commit to not saying the words ‘defund the police’ ever again,” she said. “We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again.”

“If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022,” Spanberger predicted.

common cold communism COVID-19 government is slavery Headline News Hoax immoral to support government Intelwars liars Lie Medical Tyranny Morality no authority no choice no enforcers no free will no masters no rulers no slaves plandemic political parasites ruling class scamdemic seize private property seizure is theft Socialism socialized healthcare statism is a mental disorder stealing taxation is theft Theft wake up

Canadian Politician Proposes Seizing Private Hospitals to Fight COVID-19

This article was originally published by Pierre-Guy Veer at The Foundation for Economic Education.

*EDITOR’S NOTE: The seizure of and the banning of ownership of private property is one of the tenants of the Great Reset. “You will own nothing and you will be happy.” This is just the beginning. The ruling class will own everything, including you.

In the Canadian province of Quebec, no party sitting in the provincial parliament dares to question the mammoth size of government. But strangely enough, only one party openly embraces socialism: Québec solidaire (QS). Their motto could be boiled down to “There is no salvation without the State.”

This conclusion is quite obvious when reading a recent Facebook post written by a leader of the left-wing party.

Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, a co-spokesman for the party who was elected to the provincial legislative assembly in 2017, expressed outrage that it was possible to get an appointment for a “Brazilian butt lift within a few days” while “intensive care units are overwhelmed” because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nadeau-Dubois’ team called a few private clinics, and they told him that “there’s no reason to cancel or delay surgeries unless the government tells us otherwise.”

Perhaps inspired by that last point, he proposed seizing private ORs because “an exceptional situation requires exceptional measures… Lives are on the line.”

For a moment, let’s forget the fact that “nothing is more permanent than a temporary government measure,” and that QS is only dreaming about having an all-mighty public sector in nearly every aspect of everyone’s lives.

One has to wonder whether Nadeau has even skimmed through Quebec’s administration of the healthcare system since it was nationalized some 50 years ago. Since the deep cuts of the mid-1990s under Lucien Bouchard, the nominal budget for healthcare has multiplied by a factor of 3.7, increasing five percent per year.

And yet, waiting lists hardly budge.

As of July 2018, the waiting time to see a family doctor was 371 days. These specialists are so overwhelmed that they have already denied service to 75,000 people and counting. As for elective surgeries, over 100,000 people have been on a waiting list for more than six months. Many more patients will have to wait too since “non-urgent” procedures have been delayed because of the pandemic.

What’s more, the province-wide ER occupancy rate is currently 95 percent of available gurneys, with some being well overcapacity. So nothing much has changed over four years ago.

Seizing private ORs, or even taxing corporations that “profited from” the pandemic, is very unlikely to shorten waiting lines, however.

As Montreal’s Economic Institute reminds us, Medicare-for-all (Canada has its own version of Medicare) sees people as spending, and therefore they need to be rationed in order not to go over budget.

But in a private hospital, patients are seen as a source of revenue; there is, therefore, an incentive to give great care so that, for future needs, the patient will come back.

And when there is waiting time in private hospitals, it’s rather short compared to their public peers. So much so that public organizations like CSST (Quebec’s OSHA) send workplace injuries to private establishments in order to save time. Indeed, a shorter waiting time means quicker rehab, less spending on worker compensation, etc.

So as long as the government funds and administers healthcare, refunding patients using private hospitals could mean saving on precious public funds.

It’s already happening for certain long-term care facilities (CHSLD) that receive public funding but are privately administered. In other words, they work like charter schools, and just like them, they have a sword of Damocles hanging over their heads.

In short: They need to work exceptionally well in order to remain open. Otherwise, the state can easily revoke its license. It’s a strong motivator—especially since public establishments hardly, if at all, suffer the same fate—but it pushes charter school administrators like Alex Quigley in North Carolina to find ways to improve their performance. Through trials and tribulations, Quigley was able to improve his school’s grade from F to D; and he hopes to make it to a C soon.

“Charter” CHSLDs operate in a similar fashion. Since they are publicly financed, they can’t charge users more than the fixed price, which was around $2,000 for a room with one bed in 2020. They even pay income and sales taxes, unlike their 100 percent public counterparts.

And yet, their quality is much better: None of them were evaluated as offering a “preoccupied” level of service compared to 12 percent of their wholly public peers. As for a “very satisfying” level of service, it was respectively 64 percent compared to 18 percent, according to a survey of users.

The improved level of care also probably explains why the only CHSLDs that weren’t contaminated by COVID when it started last year were either charter or entirely private. One head administrator, Marie-Hélène Girard, even went to buy PPE in mid-March 2020 on her own initiative despite severe shortages.

“It wasn’t recommended, but we did it anyway. Better to have those handy than nothing at all,” she said in an interview.

Girard was able to act promptly thanks to a lighter administrative burden. According to economist Pierre Fortin, administrative cost for “charter” CHSLD is 26 percent lower than their 100 percent public counterparts. The overall cost is about 12 percent lower.

So rather than envying the private sector’s efficiency, QS should look at it and take notes. While having no direct out-of-pocket spending can be nice, a median waiting time of 16.3 weeks for medically necessary procedures can lead to a heavy human toll.

Rationing is the result of regulating supply and ignoring prices, profits, and good incentives. “Non-essential” procedures like Lasik or butt lifts either saw price decreases or much slower price increases than regular medical because practitioners saw an opportunity for profit.  This drew more providers into the marketplace, which increased supply, driving prices down.

Canadian lawmakers would be wise to emulate the private sector, not co-opt it. By utilizing markets, the private sector has shown it can lower both wait times and costs—something Canada’s “Medicare-for-all” system has failed to deliver.

The post Canadian Politician Proposes Seizing Private Hospitals to Fight COVID-19 first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You.

Campaign 2022 Defund the police democratic party Intelwars open borders Scott peters Socialism

House Democrat issues stark warning to own party about 2022: Can’t ‘get caught with our pants down again’

Despite having control of the White House and Congress, some Democrats do not feel comfortable about their position heading into the 2022 midterm elections.

In fact, one House Democrat is already warning that defeat lays ahead for the Democratic Party if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders allow the party’s progressive members to steer the party further to the left beyond what most Americans find palatable.

In a thoughtful interview with liberal think tank NDN, Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) said this week that Democrats cannot “get caught with our pants down again” in 2022.

Rep. Scott Peters. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

Despite winning the White House, Peters suggested that Democrats must examine why they lost many seats in the House, explaining that Republicans successfully campaigned against Democrats by pointing out the party’s growing affinity for socialism, defunding the police, and progressive immigration policy.

“We were defined by Republicans in ways that were pretty effective around a couple of issues,” Peters said.

“One was that we were open borders … I think really Democrats are for fixing the immigration laws and then enforcing them,” Peters continued. “You heard that we were for defunding the police. I think part of that was that we never came up with a deal to show what we were for.”

“We also want to concentrate on this attack that we’re socialists, and I think it’s on us to show how markets and capitalism can be put to work for everybody,” Peters explained.

Peters is a vice chairman for the New Democrats Coalition, a congressional caucus of moderate Democrats.

Anything else?

While some Democrats continue to push their party further to the left, other Democrats know exactly why 2020 was not necessarily a longterm win for Democrats, despite now having control of the White House and Congress.

In a Democratic Party conference call after the 2020 election, Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), a moderate Democrat, blasted far-left policies, attributing Democrats’ failure to deliver on the promised “blue wave” to some Democrats supporting deeply unpopular policies like “defund the police.”

“We need to be pretty clear,” Spanberger reportedly said on the call, “It was a failure. It was not a success. We lost incredible members of Congress.”

“We have to commit to not saying the words ‘defund the police’ ever again,” she said. “We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again.”

“If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022,” Spanberger predicted.

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), the No. 3 House Democrat, agrees with Spanberger’s analysis.

Clyburn has said that if Democrats “are going to run on Medicare for All, defund the police, socialized medicine, we’re not going to win” future elections.

abolish government abolish slavery centralized banking democray is mob rule Donald Trump economy spiraling out of control. Brian Deese Federal Reserve government is slavery Headline News Intelwars Joe Biden Landlords liars in suits money no masters no rulers political parasites ruling class Socialism stimulus package tyranny United States

Even The Director Of Biden’s National Economic Council Has Been Forced To Admit The Economy Is “Spiraling Downward”

This article was contributed by Michael Snyder at The Economic Collapse Blog. 

If your economy is “spiraling downward”, is that a good sign or a bad sign?  To me, that doesn’t sound good at all, but if I am mistaken please tell me.  I just want to make sure that I am not “misinterpreting” anything.

Brian Deese, the man who will shortly be serving as the head of the National Economic Council, has publicly stated that our economy is “spiraling downward” at this moment.  When I hear that, I picture a passenger airplane that completely loses control just before it crashes.  But according to Deese, there is a solution.  All we need to do is to pass the 1.9 trillion dollar stimulus package that Joe Biden is proposing

A top economic adviser to President-elect Joe Biden warned the US economy is “spiraling downward” and called for swift action to address vulnerabilities that the global pandemic has drawn into focus.

Brian Deese, who will serve as director of Biden’s National Economic Council, said Sunday that the incoming administration’s $1.9 trillion spending plan would generate “the kind of robust recovery we need.”

That sounds so good.

All we have to do is press a button and we will be on our way to a “robust recovery”.

But what about all of the trillions of dollars that we already spent on all of the previous “stimulus packages”.

If they didn’t fix the economy, why will this one do it?

Perhaps they weren’t big enough, and so why don’t we make this next one 19 trillion dollars instead of just 1.9 trillion dollars?

If printing, borrowing, and spending 1.9 trillion dollars is good, surely 19 trillion dollars would be so much better.

Of course, I am being facetious.

The truth is that over the past year we have literally been committing national financial suicide.

Just look at what our leaders have done to our money supply

We used to talk about “hyperinflation” in the United States in theoretical terms, but this is not a theoretical exercise any longer.

I cannot even begin to express how horrifying this is, and now our politicians in Washington plan to add another 1.9 trillion dollars to the fire.

As a part of his “stimulus package”, Joe Biden also wants the federal minimum wage to be raised to 15 dollars an hour

It also calls for a $15 federal minimum wage, from $7.25, higher taxes and more regulations. Those initiatives have already alienated some Republicans and drawn criticism that the proposals are far removed from an emergency effort to shake off the coronavirus-related slowdown.

But at the rate we are inflating our currency, that certainly won’t be a “livable wage” for long.

So I have an idea.

Let’s make the minimum wage 150 dollars an hour.

Surely that is a proposal that our socialist friends can really get behind.

And when I use the term “socialist”, I am referring to most of the politicians in Washington.

If we force all of the “greedy” small businesses in America to pay their employees $150 an hour, then all of those workers will finally be able to live the lifestyles that they have always dreamed of living.

But of course, many of them also wouldn’t have their jobs for much longer, because most of their employers would shortly go out of business.

Unfortunately, the socialists in Washington don’t understand how businesses actually operate.  In fact, the vast majority of our politicians have never actually run a successful business.

What they are good at is spending other people’s money, and members of “the Squad” are publicly calling for even larger “survival checks” that Biden is proposing…

AOC: “$2,000 means $2,000. $2,000 does not mean $1,400”

Ayanna Pressley: “The people deserve, demand, and require $2,000 recurring monthly survival checks.”

Ilhan Omar: “The American people are struggling to make ends meet and need relief. We must immediately pass $2,000 survival checks.”

Rashida Tlaib: “$1400 < $2000  Math teachers know this. That $600 is already in the clutches of landlords and bill collectors. Stop compromising the working class, and our most vulnerable neighbors.”

As I discussed yesterday, the cost of issuing $2,000 “survival checks” a single time would be approximately 600 billion dollars.

If we do it on a continual basis, the cost per year will be more than 7 trillion dollars.

So where does Ayanna Pressley suggest that we get an extra 7 trillion dollars?

Should we just print it into existence and make our transition to a “banana republic” complete?

Sadly, now that we have opened Pandora’s Box the American people are going to be demanding more government checks on a regular basis from now on.

As I detail in my new book, Shane Warren once warned that we would get to a point where people would be in the streets demanding their “entitlements” and if you doubt that we have arrived at that time just look at what radical leftists did to Nancy Pelosi’s house.

When people try to convince me that the United States is in danger of becoming a socialist country “someday”, I just smile.

The truth is that we already are a socialist country, and we have been for a long time.

Even the stock market has become a rigged socialist game.  Every time it starts to slip, the Federal Reserve steps in to bail out investors.

According to one recent survey, the vast majority of millionaires believe that we are either in a “stock market bubble” or that we are heading into one…

  • 16% think we’re “fully in a bubble”
  • 46% in “somewhat of a bubble”
  • 29% think the market is approaching one

But most of them continue to pour more money into the market because they know that the game has been rigged in their favor.

However, what happens if things get so crazy that the Federal Reserve eventually loses all control?

Many are convinced that this can never happen, and we shall see if they are correct.

Meanwhile, the real economy continues to get even worse, our politicians continue to spend even more money, and social unrest continues to grow.

America has entered a long national nightmare, and what most people don’t realize is that this nightmare is still only in the very early stages.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream, and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial, or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter, and Parler, and anyway that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.


The post Even The Director Of Biden’s National Economic Council Has Been Forced To Admit The Economy Is “Spiraling Downward” first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You.

corporate taxes Corporations Democrat taxation Intelwars Socialism

Horowitz: It’s time to let Democrats tax the pants off big business

Why do we lie down on the tracks to bail out those corporations that are abusing us from looming tax increases threatened by the same party that uses them to destroy our freedom and our lives? If Democrats want to raise taxes on big corporations, let’s exempt small businesses and agree to drop the filibuster against any proposal that raises the corporate tax rate on the rest of them. In fact, why not outbid the Democrats and propose a doubling of the corporate tax rate on America’s largest corporations?

What’s worse than pure socialism? Low-tax socialism.

The free market is a full-package deal. It requires government to not only keep taxes at a minimum, but to keep spending low, stop the Federal Reserve from tampering with the economy through monetary morphine, and, most importantly, refrain from regulating businesses into oblivion. Instead, Republicans have joined with Democrats for years to promote every facet of socialism and anti-market government intervention under the sun. The one thing they fought for was low taxes.

This dichotomy created the worst outcome of all. Large corporations that had the economies of scale to deal with regulations and the cash flow to benefit from the ridiculous monetary policies were able to thrive while small businesses were run out of business. Throw into the equation the corrupt government relations and trade with China, and you had a perfect storm for a venture socialist economy that robbed from small businesses to give to large businesses.

Corporate America has become the number one enforcer — even more effective than the media and academia — promoting open borders, endless Middle East migration, weak-on-crime laws, anti-religious liberty policies, mindless multiculturalism, and the transgender agenda. Even on fiscal issues, the big corporations support the welfare state, Obamacare, and all the regulations that help them shut out competition. And remember, government-run health care is the single biggest driver of our debt, and that is being fueled by big business, particularly the health care industry.

Now, these masters of the universe have become the single most potent tool in crushing the liberties of the very political opposition that has helped them all these years escape the one Democrat policy they disagree with — high taxes. The one component of the Democrat platform missing from corporate America’s ideological portfolio is the tax issue. If the corporations empowered Democrats on that issue too, they couldn’t survive. Thus, they feast off the Republican lifeline against Democrat tax increases so that they can promote the rest of the progressive agenda and silence patriots.

Now is the perfect opportunity to turn that paradigm on its head. Amid all the civilization-crushing battles we are confronted with — from suspension of civil liberties and open borders to mass release of criminals and criminalization of patriotism — why should we expend our capital fighting the Democrat attempt to raise the corporate tax rate? In fact, why not agree to double that rate, so long as it only applies to businesses with over 5,000 employees?

Joe Biden’s plan would raise the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%. Conservatives should demand that Republicans block the plan until the rate goes much higher, but only on large corporations. Government has used COVID to shut down small businesses and make Walmart and Amazon filthy rich. That is the ultimate form of socialism. It’s time to even up the score by demanding a 50% tax on certain large corporations and zero taxes for five years on businesses under 500 employees as a form of Fifth Amendment Takings Clause reparations for shutting them down.

Americans are sick of one-way constitutionalism and one-directional free markets, whereby corporations get in bed with government for years to violate the Constitution and permanently distort private enterprise and social behavior, while capitalizing on principled conservatism to maintain the new status quo.

At the 1984 Democrat National Convention, presidential nominee Walter Mondale reportedly turned to Congressman Dan Rostenkowski and said of those in the audience, “Look at ’em. We’re going to tax their ass off.” Well, in this year of COVID-1984 — a year when big business is working to lock us down and censor us so they can crush small business and American patriots — perhaps it’s time we finally let Democrats punish our enemies for us.

Georgia election Intelwars Kelly loeffler Marco Rubio Marxism Raphael warnock Runoff election Socialism

Marco Rubio warns that Raphael Warnock is ‘unabashed Marxist sympathizer who would destroy the American Dream’

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) delivered a warning to Georgians about Democratic candidate Raphael Warnock ahead of the upcoming runoff elections on Jan. 5. Rubio urged people to vote for Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler because Warnock’s “policies do not represent Georgia values.”

“Democrat Raphael Warnock is the most radically liberal candidate anywhere in the country,” Rubio wrote in a Fox News opinion piece. “He would vote in lock-step with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to eliminate the Senate filibuster, pack the U.S. Supreme Court, raise taxes on families and small businesses by trillions of dollars, decimate families and farmers with the Green New Deal, socialize your health care, shut down the economy, and weaponize technology companies to silence dissent.”

Rubio labeled Warnock as “an unabashed Marxist sympathizer who would destroy the American Dream.”

“He has repeatedly praised Marxism and socialism, and slammed capitalism, writing that ‘the Marxist critique has much to teach the black church’ and that the Black middle-class should pay more attention to the ‘hard questions about the distribution of wealth,'” the senator wrote.

Earlier this month, Loeffler’s campaign released a compilation of Warnock’s writings and associations that appear to flirt with Marxism and socialism.

Like Rubio, Loeffler has made comments about Warnock’s coziness with Marxism, and in November, she said that her Democratic challenger has “a Marxist ideology.”

During an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity” on Wednesday night, Loeffler said she and fellow Georgia Republican Sen. David Perdue “are the firewall to socialism in this country.”

“If we don’t vote, we could see the election of America’s first Marxist senator in this country, right here in Georgia. And that’s why we’re the firewall,” Loeffler said of Warnock if he is elected.

“My opponent, radical liberal Raphael Warnock, is a socialist,” Loeffler said during the debate between the candidates earlier this month. Loeffler challenged Warnock to “renounce socialism and Marxism.”

Warnock refused to condemn socialism and Marxism, and defended his politics by replying, “I believe in the free enterprise system.”

Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott called Warnock a “radical’s radical,” and questioned the Democratic candidate’s comments about Cuba’s former Marxist-Leninist dictator Fidel Castro. When Castro died in 2016, Warnock said, “We remember Fidel Castro, whose legacy is complex. Don’t let anybody tell you a simple story.”

Scott slammed Warnock’s defense of Castro, “Murder isn’t complex. Exporting terrorism across Latin America isn’t complex. Denying his people basic human rights isn’t complex. This shouldn’t be hard.”

In his article, Rubio concluded that the country does not need “someone like Raphael Warnock who espouses Marxism and has spent his life siding with brutal dictators.”

Loeffler and Warnock will face off in a runoff election, as will incumbent Perdue and Democratic challenger Jon Ossoff. The Georgia races will determine which party controls the Senate next year. The Republicans hold a 50-48 advantage, but the chamber would be split if Warnock and Ossoff win, allowing the vice president to break any ties.

2020 Election Alexandria ocasio-cortez Allie Allie beth stuckey Allie blazetv Allie stuckey America AOC Biden Biden vs. Trump black Black Lives Matter blaze Blaze podcasts Blaze radio autonomous zone Blaze tv Blazetv Capitol hill autonomous zone Capitol hill occupied protest Change my mind Chaz Chop COMEDY Commentary conservative Conservative commentary Conservative commentator Coronavirus COVID-19 Crowder Crowder confronts CURRENT EVENTS Democrat ad Democrat Party democratic party discussion election Election 2020 fake news Fox Business Fox News Funny conservative George floyd protests Glenn Beck Honest democrat ad Intelwars Joe Biden Learn history liberal libertarian Louder with crowder Lwc Make America Great Again millennial Mug club news parody Pat Pat gray Pat gray podcast Pat gray radio Pat gray unleashed Pat gray videos Pat grey Politicad ad Political comedy political news Political parody Political vlog Political vlogger Politics President Trump Protests Radio Relatable with allie beth stuckey Relatable with allie stuckey reopen america republican republican party Riots Sara gonzales Sara gonzales unfiltered Seattle Socialism Stephen Crowder Steven Crowder TALK RADIO The Blaze TheBlaze trump Trump 2020 Trump vs biden values Video Vlog Vlogger Welcome to braz

VOTE NOW: Which is your favorite BlazeTV Parody video of 2020?

BlazeTV staff members combed through social media pages and channels for the most popular content produced throughout the year. Over the next 12 days, you decide 2020’s standout videos.

Our first category: Best Parody!

Kung Flu Fighting (Parody of ‘Kung Fu Fighting’)

AOC Tells People: Don’t Go Back To Work…Um, WHAT?

An Honest Ad From Your Democratic Party Spokesperson

OBEY: The Woke Party Demands Your Compliance (‘1984’ Parody)

Vote for your favorite parody now!

Want more BlazeTV?

To enjoy more straight talk from BlazeTV’s all-star lineup, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC Fox News Intelwars Socialism Tucker Carlson

Tucker Carlson warns how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ‘absolutely could’ become president in four years

Fox News host Tucker Carlson explained on his show Friday how far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) could ascend to the White House in the near future.

According to Carlson, if Democrats retake control of the Senate by way of winning both Georgia runoff elections — creating a 50-50 tie in the Senate, making the vice president the tie-breaking vote — their economic recovery plan for America would be disastrous for the American middle-class by further diving Americans.

Tucker: Experts have been exposed as frauds

Outlining his reasons, Carlson said Democrats would print more money, creating more inflation, and give tax breaks to the wealthy.

Inflation may crush you, but it will make the people making the decisions richer. Everyone else — regular wage earners, people living on fixed income, every middle-class retiree in the country, anyone who bothered to live like a responsible person and save money — will be in serious trouble when inflation arrives. That’s not speculation. It’s coming, and anyone who’s paying attention knows it’s coming.

If Democrats retake the Senate in January, they’ve committed to passing something called the HEROES Act. Just who are these heroes they plan to help? Not the thousands of small business owners whose lives they destroyed. No, this legislation will help rich people in the Northeast who were hurt by the Trump administration’s last tax cuts. The HEROES Act would restore the full state and local tax deduction, reversing the 2017 law that capped it at $10,000. According to the Brookings Institution, 96% of the benefits from this would go to the top quintile of earners, 57% would benefit the top 1%, and 25% would benefit the top 0.1%. In other words, it would benefit Democratic voters.

But it doesn’t stop there.

Democrats are also pushing to forgive massive amounts of student loan debt if they have control of the House, Senate, and White House, which, according to Carlson, “would disproportionately help the most privileged in America, i.e., Democratic voters.”

The Democratic Party’s economic vision is problematic, Carlson said, because it enriches the wealthy on the backs of the middle-class that “discredits” capitalism and emboldens socialists.

“They are giving capitalism a bad name because what they’re participating in is not a free, open market economy. It’s a closed game, run for their benefit and their benefit alone. Long-term, this is a disaster for all of us and not even so far in the future,” Carlson said.

Such a “volatile society” paves the way for lawmakers like Ocasio-Cortez — whom Carlson referred to as “Sandy Cortez” — to seize power.”

“In four years. for example, Sandy Cortez will be eligible to run for president. Now, you may laugh at Sandy Cortez, and you should. She’s a vacuous idiot, another rich-girl narcissist with an overheated Twitter account,” Carlson said.

“But that doesn’t mean she couldn’t win. If we keep up with this economic craziness, she absolutely could,” he added.

Is there a solution?

Aside from stopping Democrats from controlling the White House and Capitol Hill, Carlson floated the possibility of enacting a “one-time COVID fee” against corporations that have financially benefited during the coronavirus pandemic.

“Here’s another idea: Why not make the people who benefited the most from the lockdown pay for the effects of those lockdowns?” Carlson suggested, citing Amazon, Apple, Goldman Sachs, Google, Netflix, Walmart, and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.

“While we’re at it, why not make Harvard and Yale and Stanford and Princeton use their endowments to pay off some of the student debt they caused?” Carlson went on to say. “There’s no reason ordinary taxpayers should be on the hook for their spending.”

1984 Censorship Collateral crimethink Damage deliberate freedom is slavery Government Headline News ignorance is strength Intelwars Milton Friedman net-zero newspeak Orwellian Prediction Socialism war is peace Warning

“Newspeak” Is the Future

This article was originally published by Peter Foster at The Mises Institute. 

George Orwell pointed out that one of the first casualties of socialism is language. The damage is not collateral, it is deliberate—designed to numb minds and render critical thought difficult or impossible.

The instrument of this dumbing down in Nineteen Eighty-Four was Newspeak, the official language of the English Socialist Party (Ingsoc). Newspeak was a sort of totalitarian Esperanto that sought gradually to diminish the range of what was thinkable by eliminating, contracting, and manufacturing words. New words had a “political implication” and “were intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using them.” The meaning of words was often reversed, as was most starkly emphasized in the key slogans of Ingsoc:




Nineteen Eighty-Four was written in 1949. Its nightmarish fictional world is now thirty-six years in the past, so one might reasonably conclude that Orwell was far too pessimistic, but his great book was less a prediction than a warning and above all an analysis of the totalitarian mentality. Meanwhile, there is another significant date in Nineteen Eighty-Four. The book’s appendix on the principles of Newspeak stressed that the corruption of language was a multigenerational project whose fruition would not come until well into the present century. Ingsoc’s objective was to render independent thought impossible by “about 2050.”

Intriguingly, that is the same year that the world allegedly has to become “carbon neutral,” or “net-zero,” to avoid climate Armaggedon.

Twenty fifty has become a key date for the UN’s “global governance” agenda, which seeks nothing less than to oversee and regulate every aspect of life on the basis of a suite of alarmist projections. The main existential threat is claimed to be catastrophic manmade climate change. “Climate governance” has thus emerged as the “fourth pillar,” of the UN’s mandate, joining peace and security, development, and human rights. So far—as with the other three pillars—the UN’s climate efforts have been spectacularly unsuccessful. It has held enormous “Conferences of the Parties,” or COPs, which have promoted a morass of uncoordinated national policies that have had zero impact on the climate. COP 21 in Paris in 2015, for instance, was meant to hatch a successor to the failed Kyoto Agreement. But all it produced was a raft of hypocritical, voluntary, fingers-crossed “Nationally Determined Contributions.” The failure of Paris, and of temperatures to rise in line with flawed models, led to a doubling down of “ambitions.” One new commitment that seeped out of Paris was for the countries of the world to hold temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above levels before the Industrial Revolution (the Original Climate Sin). Staying below that level, UN policy wonks rapidly calculated, would require the world to become carbon neutral, or net zero, by 2050.

In fact, there is no climate “crisis” or “emergency.” However, as Orwell noted, the language of fear and panic is one of the main instruments of political control.

Today, just as in Nineteen Eighty-Four, the classical liberal concepts of liberty and equality (of opportunity) are under relentless attack, as are the values of reason and objectivity. Liberty and equality were classified in Newspeak as “Crimethink.” Objectivity and rationalism were “Oldthink.” A doomed Newspeak lexicographer named Syme tells the book’s equally doomed hero, Winston Smith, that even the party slogans will eventually become incomprehensible: “How could you have a slogan like ‘freedom is slavery’ when the concept of freedom has been abolished?”

Orwell was hardly the first observer to point to the political dangers of linguistic manipulation, which go back to discussions of sophistry in Plato. The great economist and philosopher Friedrich Hayek pointed in particular to the Left’s use of “social.” He dubbed it a “weasel word” that not merely sucked meaning from words to which it was attached but often reversed meaning. Thus, by classical liberal standards, social democracy is undemocratic, social justice is unjust, and a social market economy is antimarket. We have a prime current example in the phrase “social license to operate,” which in fact means a potential veto on corporate activities by radical non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the stormtroopers of the global governance agenda. Private corporations were once socialism’s enemies; now they have been co-opted as its partners, agents of “global salvationism.” Nobel economist Milton Freidman pointed to the subversive, open-ended nature of “corporate social responsibility,” where “responsibility” represents another weasel word. CSR’s purpose is to force corporate executives to abandon their responsibility to their shareholders in favor of an endless list of “stakeholder” demands.

Perhaps the most significant new weasel word to have emerged from the UN’s equivalent of the Ministry of Truth is “sustainable.” Commitment to sustainability is now mouthed by every politician, bureaucrat, marketing executive, and media hack on earth. It sounds so benign, so reasonable, but what it actually means is “bureaucratically controlled and NGO-enforced within a UN-based socialist agenda.”

Like “social,” “sustainable” tends to vitiate or reverse the meaning of words to which it is attached. Thus sustainable development is development retarded by top-down control and whose effectiveness is further compromised by the insertion of a long list of cart-before-the-horse social policy objectives, from gender equity to “responsible consumption.”

Recently, “sustainable finance” has also bubbled up from the UN verbal swamp. What it means, not surprisingly, is stopping the financing of fossil fuels by browbeating banks and investors and rigging the regulatory process.

There are no dictionaries of sustainable Newspeak. Its mavens rely less on new words than on perverting or reversing the meaning of old ones. One recent clarion call heard echoing around the corridors of power is that recovery from the covid crisis must be “resilient.” Insofar as that means forcing the use of more expensive, less reliable, and less flexible energy sources such as wind and solar, it will inevitably make economies less resilient. Thus it promotes the first energy “transition” in history that involves moving backward. Typically, such backward movement is a key part of a “progressive” agenda.

The indoctrination of young people was a key strategy of Ingsoc. Likewise, Agenda 21, the doorstop socialist wish list that emerged from the UN’s Earth Summit at Rio in 1992, declared: “Students should be taught about the environment and sustainable development throughout their schooling.” They should learn that “The world is confronted with worsening poverty, hunger, ill-health, illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of ecosystems on which we depend for our wellbeing.” In other words, a catalog of alarmism that has—or should have been—utterly discredited by the evidence of the intervening decades. However, we tend to see what we have been taught to believe. Walls may have ears but more important is that ears have walls. Building such walls was the specific purpose of Ingsoc’s Crimestop, or “protective stupidity.” The capture of academic institutions has virtually installed Crimestop as a compulsory course.

Meanwhile, not only did Agenda 21 demand that children be indoctrinated, it demanded that the most indoctrinated among them be allowed into political fora to lecture their elders. This program came to stunning fruition last fall at the UN, when Greta Thunberg, a bright, anxious, and thoroughly indoctrinated Swedish teenager, was elevated to the podium to paraphrase Agenda 21: “People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are at the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!”

One is reminded of the Newspeak appendix: “A Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgment should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets.”

Meanwhile, the political establishment’s current watchwords of inclusivity, diversity, and equity are all aimed at perverting truth and concealing real meanings. Inclusivity and diversity involve excluding white men and conservatives of either sex (although it is a “thoughtcrime” to suggest that there are fundamentally two sexes, as J.K. Rowling discovered). Equity falsely equates the inevitable inequality of outcomes in a free society with moral inequity.

Through all of this, the concept of doublethink, that is, effortlessly holding incompatible beliefs, spreads apace. Orwell wrote that “Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty.”

Keep that in mind the next time a public figure cites the climate emergency, intones the existential necessity of sustainable development and sustainable finance, and trumpets the job-creating benefits of a resilient recovery and a transformative green transition to a net-zero future.


The post “Newspeak” Is the Future first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC Aoc shirts Capitalism Democratic socialism Eat the rich Intelwars Socialism Twitter reactions

Democratic socialist AOC gets destroyed for selling $58 ‘Tax The Rich’ shirts

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is a self-declared democratic socialist who has been a vocal critic of capitalism. In the past, she has instructed her nearly 11 million Twitter followers to “Resist disaster capitalism.” Last year, AOC called declared capitalism to be “irredeemable.”

Ocasio-Cortez railed against Amazon constructing a second headquarters in New York City, which was estimated to bring “at least 25,000 to 40,000 good paying jobs and nearly $30 billion dollars in new revenue” into the state. according to New York. Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

This week, the democratic socialist fully embraced capitalism by peddling $58 shirts that say, “Tax The Rich” on them. The $58 does not include shipping and handling. AOC’s merchandise website indicated that it would cost an additional $9.22 to ship the product to my house, bringing the grand total for the shirt to $67.22. The shop stated that the shirt would ship via the U.S. Postal Service, and “ship in 1-2 weeks + 2 business days in transit.”

Pre-orders were being taken this week for the “gender neutral fit” shirts.

It turns out that AOC has an entire merchandise shop, where she sells a hoodie promoting the Green New Deal, made from 20% polyester, for a whopping $65.

If you can’t afford the expensive long-sleeved shirts, you can purchase a strangely worded T-shirt that says “AOC + ME” for $27. Instead of paying off your student loan you can spend $27 on a cancel student debt T-shirt. There is even a perplexing “Drink Water & Don’t Be Racist” T-shirt for $27.

The AOC shop also hawks other swag, such as $24 posters and $25 onesies promoting the Green New Deal, a $28 “Abolish ICE” hat, a $27 tote bag, and a $27 mug that promote Ocasio-Cortez.

Many people considered the Democratic socialist selling products at premium prices to be “hypocritical,” and bashed the Democratic congresswoman for selling such high-priced goods on Twitter.

One person, who seemed to be an AOC supporter and retweeted the congresswoman numerous times in the past, simply wrote, “Wish I could afford this.”

Intelwars John Mackey Socialism Whole Foods

Whole Foods CEO blasts socialism, explains how universities corrupt young people: ‘Trickle-up poverty’

Whole Foods CEO John Mackey blasted socialism during a recent interview, explaining such economic policies cause increased poverty.

During a discussion hosted by the American Enterprise Institute on Tuesday, Mackey did not mince words — he said socialism is the “path of poverty.”

“They talk about ‘trickle-down wealth,’ but socialism is trickle-up poverty,” Mackey explained. “It just impoverishes everything.”

Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Mackey explained that capitalism, on the other hand, is the “greatest thing humanity has ever created,” and blamed intellectuals in universities for corrupting young people into thinking that capitalism is bad.

“Capitalism is the greatest thing humanity’s ever done. We’ve told a bad narrative, and we’ve let the enemies of business and the enemies of capitalism put out a narrative about us that’s wrong, it’s inaccurate — and it’s doing tremendous damage to the minds of young people,” Mackey said.

“The Marxists and socialists, the academic community is generally hostile to business. It always has been. This is not new,” he explained.

Socialism is favored by far-left progressive politicians like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Mackey went on to explain that not all progressivism is bad, but that socialism must be abandoned.

“We have to recognize that some of the progressive insights are important and they shouldn’t go away, but we can’t throw out capitalism and replace it with socialism, that will be a disaster,” Mackey said, Just The News reported.

“Socialism has been tried 42 times in the last 100 years, and 42 failures, it doesn’t work, it’s the wrong way. We have to keep capitalism, I would argue, we need conscious capitalism,” he continued.

According to Mackey, capitalism and business innovation overall is responsible for increased living conditions worldwide, has increased global literacy rates, and is even responsible for increasing life expectancy.

Business, therefore, should be evaluated “in terms of its value-creation,” Mackey said.

“For its customers, and all the jobs that it creates for its employees and the residual or tangential effects that happen when it trades with suppliers, who also trade for voluntary reasons — they’re benefitting and they’re prospering as a result,” the businessman explained.

Whole Foods, which was bought by Amazon in 2017, employs about 100,000 people, Mackey said.

John Mackey, Whole Foods Market CEO on Conscious leadership | LIVE STREAM

Alexandria ocasio-cortez David Perdue Intelwars Jon Ossoff Socialism socialist

GOP Sen. Perdue says he would fly AOC to Georgia to campaign for his Democratic opponent

Socialism doesn’t play well politically in the South — something Georgia Republican Sen. David Perdue is banking on in his Senate runoff campaign against Democrat Jon Ossoff.

In fact, Perdue is so sure of it that he said he would fly democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to the state to campaign for Ossoff, NBC News reported.

Socialism kills (Democratic campaigns)

Democrats expected to increase their lead in the U.S. House and believed they could flip control of the U.S. Senate in the 2020 election, and they had their eyes set on taking over multiple state legislatures.

But they failed — bigly. And Democrats’ ties to socialism were seen by party leaders and insiders to be a major reason.

Intra-party postmortem discussions about what happened in the 2020 congressional elections became a source of tension among party members, with accusations for Democrats’ ballot-box failures being leveled at anti-police socialists like Ocasio-Cortez and “The Squad.” One Democratic lawmaker warned, “We have to commit to not saying the words ‘defund the police’ ever again. We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again,” and, “If we run this race again, we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022.”

Ocasio-Cortez naturally took exception to those claims and instead blamed the party’s losses on GOP smears connecting Democrats to socialism and “defund the police” movements and on moderate Democrats’ poor campaigning efforts that allowed Republican charges to stick.

Invitation to AOC

Sen. Perdue understands that socialism was a campaign killer for Democrats in 2020 — from congressional races to former Vice President Joe Biden’s failure in Florida — and he’s doing everything he can to tie Ossoff to the ideology.

In an interview with Mike Huckabee last week, Perdue said the “main difference” between him and Ossoff was “simple” to understand: Ossoff is a “socialist.”

And now Perdue has stepped up the game by working to connect Ossoff to Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow travelers.

According to NBC News reporter Alex Seitz-Wald, Perdue said during a campaign stop Monday that he is hoping Ocasio-Cortez will come to Georgia. In fact, he’s willing to foot the bill for a plane ticket to get the democratic socialist to the Peach State and on Ossoff’s trail forthwith.

“She’s going go be down here. I’m going to buy her a ticket!” Perdue said, the Daily Caller reported. “I want her to come down to Georgia. We’ll have that debate.”

2020 Election Black Lives Matter dnc Intelwars Socialism

Democrats reportedly lambaste party’s embrace of far-left policies, socialism: ‘It’s killing us’

Democrats believed that a “blue wave” was coming in the 2020 election, but Republicans mounted an overall impressive effort, defying dire pre-election predictions. According to a new report, there is some infighting between Democrats, some blaming the party’s poor election performance on pushing far-left policies.

Last week, Democrats held a conference call to discuss what went wrong in the 2020 election. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) questioned the DNC’s Latino outreach program, while others lambasted the party’s endorsement of far-left ideologies.

“Defund police, open borders, socialism — it’s killing us,” Rep. Vincente Gonzalez (D-Texas) said, according to The New York Times. “I had to fight to explain all that.”

Gonzalez contended that the Democrats’ embrace of socialism cost the party support with Hispanic and Asian migrant populations. He argued that while the “average white person” may think of Nordic countries when it comes to socialism, the Latino and Asian communities recall authoritarian “left-wing regimes” in Cuba and South East Asia.

Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.) concurred with Gonzalez, pointing out how he wasn’t as successful with Vietnamese-American and centrist voters because of the party’s seemingly close ties with socialism.

“This narrative that the Democratic Party is borderline socialist, we need to fight back harder on that because it’s simply not true,” Rouda declared. “We needed to be more forceful in defending the moderate position of the Democratic Party as a whole.”

Democratic consultant Chuck Rocha stated that white members of the Democratic Party needed to stop seeing “black and brown people as the same.”

In another DNC conference call earlier this month, Democrats broke into different factions, as some blamed the party for going too far left.

If the Democrats “are going to run on Medicare for All, defund the police, socialized medicine, we’re not going to win,” House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) reportedly said on the call.

Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) said “defund the police” messaging and allying with the Black Lives Matter movement was damaging to her election.

“We need to be pretty clear. It was a failure. It was not a success,” Spanberger said. “We lost incredible members of Congress.”

“We have to commit to not saying the words ‘defund the police’ ever again,” she declared. “We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again. It does matter, and we have lost good members because of that.”

“If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022,” the Virginia congresswoman stated.

Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC election Election 2020 electoral college Intelwars Joe Biden Michael Moore Socialism

Michael Moore calls for Joe Biden to embrace socialism, eliminate the Electoral College, reject bipartisanship

Michael Moore wrote an open letter to Joe Biden, where he outlined actions he wants to see the former Democratic vice president execute if he enters the White House, including embracing socialism and eliminating the Electoral College.

In a lengthy post on Facebook, Moore expressed his delight in the current election results.

“You stopped the madness. A grateful nation — and myself — are in a state of joy, hope and relief,” the progressive filmmaker wrote. “Thank you for that! We are all eager to join with you to repair the damage done to our country — and to eliminate that about our society and our politics which gave us Donald Trump in the first place.

“Health Care is a human right and every American must be covered,” Moore spouted. “Everyone must be paid a living wage.”

Regarding the coronavirus pandemic, Moore claimed, “Had Trump won, I’m guessing up to a million people in the next year or so would have died from him ignoring this virus.”

Moore then called for Biden to embrace socialism.

“They think because Trump got 70 million votes the Democrats should reject Black Lives Matter, AOC, and anything that vaguely sounds like socialism — at a time when the majority of our citizens under the age of 35, according to most polls, prefer the idea of democratic socialism over the greed of modern-day capitalism,” he states. “Why risk losing them? We need to listen to and understand why they feel this way. They’ve been saddled with crushing student debt and we’ve handed them a planet In the middle of its 6th extinction event as their future.”

Moore urges Biden to reject bipartisanship, which he alleges was a “mistake” that former President Barack Obama made when he was first elected. Moore advises Biden not to compromise like his former boss did.

“The Republicans had already decided they were going to block EVERYTHING Obama proposed and that’s exactly what they did for eight long years with a discipline and a ruthlessness we should probably envy,” he instructed the former vice president. “Don’t let this happen to you. Charge in on January 20th like FDR on steroids. You have no choice. People are dying! You need to sign executive orders and cajole, demand and shame Congress into action.”

Moore tells Biden to “GO BIG,” and “Eliminate the Electoral College through the National Popular Vote Act!”

Regarding the two critical U.S. Senate seats currently held by Republicans in Georgia that will be voted on during the Jan. 5 runoff elections, Moore said, “All hands on deck between now and January 5th.”

He vaguely suggests, “We will all do whatever is needed” to win the runoff elections.

Last month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) also promised to push Biden to become more progressive if he is elected president.

“My role is consistent, in making sure that we push the Democratic Party to have a larger vision for our future,” AOC said. “And, so, is my job to push the Democratic Party? Absolutely. And that has been my job since and that has been a part of my role since I have been elected.

“I believe that it’s critically important that the Biden administration appoint progressive leaders,” she added. “This is about making sure that we’re not just going back to how things were and rewinding the tape before the Trump administration.”

Intelwars Nancy Pelosi Nancy pelosi reelection Press Conference Socialism speaker of the House

Nancy Pelosi refuses to denounce socialism during press conference

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) refused to denounce socialism during a recent press conference, according to Fox News.

The apparent refusal comes amid Pelosi’s bid for another term as speaker of the House.

What are the details?

The outlet reported that during a Friday press conference, the network requested comment from Pelosi “several times,” including “multiple phone calls to Pelosi’s office,” regarding inquiries as to whether the long-serving Democrat opposes socialism and whether she would permit any self-identifying socialists elected in the Democratic caucus to hold leadership positions in the House.

“During a press conference on Friday, Pelosi acknowledged that there was a ‘difference of opinion’ among members of her caucus as a rift between moderates and progressives appears to have expanded following the 2020 election,” the outlet wrote, pointing out that in 2019, Pelosi had no problem insisting that socialism was “not the view” of the Democratic Party.

In her remarks, Pelosi said, “Our caucus has its differences. I would not want to lead in a caucus that was a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp, lockstep caucus. That’s called Republicans. We are the Democratic Party, and we have several exuberances in our midst, and that is representative of the districts that people come to Congress to serve, and we respect that.”

Fox pointed out that self-identified “democratic socialists” have been growing in the mainstream, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y).

“The subject of socialism is apparently becoming a growing concern among Democrats behind closed doors,” the outlet added. “A leaked recording from a Democratic caucus call showed Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., suggesting that socialism, in addition to ‘defund the police’ rhetoric, were to blame for several congressional defeats as their GOP opponents used the ideology as a bludgeon.”

In the recording in question, Spanberger can be heard saying, “We want to talk about funding social services, and ensuring good engagement in community policing, let’s talk about what we are for. And we need to not ever use the words ‘socialist’ or ‘socialism’ ever again. Because while people think it doesn’t matter, it does matter. And we lost good members because of it.”

Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday shared the Fox News story and wrote, “How hard is it to renounce socialism if you really don’t believe in it? The reason she can’t renounce it is because the mainstream of her party — deep in their soul — backs socialism.”

In related news …

Ocasio-Cortez is reported to have insisted that Democrats and former Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign dropped the ball in attempting to sway Latino voters in Florida.

President Donald Trump’s use of the term “socialist” when describing former Vice President Joe Biden’s agenda is also what could have cost the Democratic candidate significant Latino votes in Florida after Trump was successfully able to paint the Democratic candidate as a socialist.

2020 Election Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC Conor lamb Defund the police Intelwars Moderate democrats Socialism The squad

Moderate Democratic lawmaker dares to ‘talk back’ to AOC and the Squad: Your ideas are ‘unworkable and extremely unpopular’

Democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) really does not appreciate that many members of her party — from moderates to liberals who still think straight-up socialism is a losing issue — are blasting the agenda she and her “Squad” have pushed for Democrats’ overall poor showing in the 2020 elections.

The congresswoman has tried to lay the blame at the feet of moderates and their campaign failures.

One moderate Democrat is daring to call her out and saying she’s not a team player and that her ideas are “unworkable and extremely unpopular.”

What happened?

Beyond the fight for the White House, Democrats were projected to expand their majority in the U.S. House, quite possibly flip the majority of the U.S. Senate, and flip multiple state legislative chambers.

They failed on all counts.

Following last week’s election results, Democrats blamed anti-police and pro-socialism messaging from far-left members for their failures.

Ocasio-Cortez took exception to those claims and instead blamed the party’s losses on GOP smears connecting Democrats to socialism and “defund the police” movements and on moderate Democrats’ poor campaigning efforts that allowed Republican charges to stick.

In an interview with the New York Times during which she said she feels like her party thinks she’s the “enemy,” the congresswoman specifically called out moderate Democratic Rep. Conor Lamb (Pa.) for “criminal” political “malpractice.” She blasted Lamb for spending only $2,000 on Facebook the week before the election as an example of how moderate Democrats’ poor campaigning was what cost her party in 2020 and not radicals like her and her fellow liberal progressives.

Some of this is criminal. It’s malpractice. Conor Lamb spent $2,000 on Facebook the week before the election. I don’t think anybody who is not on the internet in a real way in the Year of our Lord 2020 and loses an election can blame anyone else when you’re not even really on the internet.

But there’s one problem in Ocasio-Cortez’s logic: Lamb won re-election.

And now the congressman is speaking out and, as HotAir’s John Sexton noted, daring to do what other members of his party have refused to do: “talk back to AOC.”

How did Lamb respond?

The Times interviewed Lamb after his victory and noted that he is “one of those moderates who believes the left is costing Democrats in key areas” and that he believes a Biden administration will “govern as it had campaigned: with progressives at arm’s length.”

Lamb told the Times that what went wrong for House Democrats was the message being pushed by progressives (and self-avowed socialists). Their “unrealistic” calls for a far-left agenda alienated a lot of voters, Lamb said.

“I’m giving you an honest account of what I’m hearing from my own constituents, which is that they are extremely frustrated by the message of defunding the police and banning fracking,” he told the Times. “And I, as a Democrat, am just as frustrated. Because those things aren’t just unpopular, they’re completely unrealistic, and they aren’t going to happen.”

The green agenda pushed by people like Ocasio-Cortez “isn’t something to joke around about,” Lamb added.

According to Lamb, the progressive policies and rhetoric have “gone way too far.” Instead, he said, the Democrats’ messaging “needs to be dialed back” and “rooted in common sense, in reality.”

He urged that the party needs to have a “united” message when it comes to law enforcement and avoid the rabid calls to “defund the police.” According to Lamb, when he and fellow House Democrats were working on a police reform bill, its wasn’t the Squad that was doing the work.

“The people that I was on the phone with, when we were passing [the police reform bill] at the time, were not the freshmen members who are criticizing us today,” he told the Times.

Lamb warned that the policies Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow radicals have been pushing “are unworkable and extremely unpopular.”

He added that “people are not clamoring for” single-payer health insurance or the Green New Deal, noting that those issues separate a winner from a loser in a moderate district like his.

Asked about Ocasio-Cortez’s specific comments about him and his campaign, Lamb responded, “She doesn’t have any idea how we ran our campaign, or what we spent.”

He went on to blast her for not being a “team player” and for pushing a damaging agenda.

But I got to say, as you’ve talked a lot about Representative Ocasio-Cortez, she can put her name behind stuff and that’s I guess courageous, but when it’s a damaging idea or bad policy, like her tweeting out that fracking is bad in the middle of a presidential debate when we’re trying to win western Pennsylvania — that’s not being anything like a team player. And it’s honestly giving a false and ineffective promise to people that makes it very difficult to win the areas where President Trump is most popular in campaigns.

And he really didn’t like that the socialist congresswoman was going after moderates.

I have to be honest and say that I was surprised about the whole interview on the day when Vice President and now President-Elect Biden was having the election called for him. I just don’t think it was a day for people to be sniping at other members, especially in districts that are so different from their own.

I respect her and how hard she works. And what she did in an extremely low-turnout Democratic primary. But the fact is that in general elections in these districts — particularly in the ones where President Trump himself campaigns over and over and over again, and attacks members within their own Republican-leaning districts, like me and Representative Slotkin and Representative Spanberger — it’s the message that matters. It’s not a question of door knocking, or Facebook. It matters what policies you stand for, and which ones you don’t. And that is all that we are trying to say.

He also offered a little reminder to the Squad types: “The American people just showed us in massive numbers, generally, which side of these issues that they are on. They sent us a Republican Senate and a Democratic president.”

2020 Election Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC Defund the police Intelwars Socialism

Avowed socialist AOC and other left-wingers repeatedly called for defunding police. Now she blames the GOP for linking Dems to socialism and anti-police movements.

Following Tuesday’s election in which the Democratic Party underperformed expectations in U.S. Senate, U.S. House, and state legislative races, Democrats blamed anti-police and pro-socialism messaging for their failures.

But avowed socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who loudly cried for defunding the police, told CNN over the weekend that Democrats did not campaign on socialism or anti-police sentiment.

Instead, AOC claimed, the whole thing was just some GOP smear against her party.

What’s happening?

Last week, Democrats gathered on a conference call to discuss the fallout from the 2020 congressional elections.

During the call, House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) said that if the Democrats “are going to run on Medicare for All, defund the police, socialized medicine, we’re not going to win,” Politico reported.

He was backed up by moderate Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger (Va.) who reportedly “scolded” the party for campaigning on extreme messages that nearly cost her her re-election.

“We need to be pretty clear,” she said. “It was a failure. It was not a success. We lost incredible members of Congress.”

“We have to commit to not saying the words ‘defund the police’ ever again,” Spanberger continued. “We need to not ever use the words socialist or socialism ever again.

“If we run this race again we will get f***ing torn apart again in 2022,” she added, according to the Washington Post.

Ocasio-Cortez did not take kindly to the accusations. In fact, she said she might even have to get out of politics, while complaining to the New York Times:

So I need my colleagues to understand that we are not the enemy. And that their base is not the enemy. That the Movement for Black Lives is not the enemy, that Medicare for all is not the enemy. This isn’t even just about winning an argument. It’s that if they keep going after the wrong thing, I mean, they’re just setting up their own obsolescence.

During an interview Sunday with Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union,” the congresswoman tried to claim that the reason Democrats got dinged by voters for supporting socialism and defunding the police was due to Republican “rhetorical attacks.”

Responding to Spanberger’s statements, Ocasio-Cortez said that “Republicans levied very effective rhetorical attacks against our party” and that her party needs to figure out how to defend themselves against such attacks.

The socialist lawmaker claimed that it was GOP smears and not Democratic candidates that linked the party to groups advocating for socialism and anti-police efforts.

“If you look at some of the arguments that are being advanced, that ‘defund the police’ hurt or that arguments about socialism hurt, not a single member of Congress that I’m aware of campaigned on socialism or defunding the police in this general election,” she said. “These were largely slogans or they were demands from activist groups.”

Ocasio-Cortez Says Democrats Cant Blame Progressives For Losses in House Races

Despite her complaints of GOP rhetoric, Ocasio-Cortez, who has consistently identified as a democratic socialist, famously demanded that New York defund its police just last summer, declaring “defunding police means defunding police.”

In June, while criticizing New York City leadership, including fellow traveler Mayor Bill de Blasio, for alleged budget tricks and “funny math” during debates over funds for the NYPD, the lawmaker said:

Defunding police means defunding police. It does not mean tricks or funny math. It does not mean moving school police officers from the NYPD budget to the Department of Education’s budget so that the exact same police remain in schools. It does not mean counting overtime cuts as cuts, even as NYPD ignores every attempt by City Council to curb overtime spending and overspends on overtime anyways. It does not mean hiring more police officers while cutting more than $800M from NYC schools. If these reports are accurate, then these proposed ‘cuts’ to NYPD’s budget are a disingenuous illusion. This is not a victory. The fight to defund policing continues.

Ocasio-Cortez’s comments came as de Blasio’s plan called for about $1 billion in cuts to the NYPD.

Alexandria ocasio-cortez AOC Campaign 2020 democratic party Intelwars Progressive Socialism

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lashes out at Democratic Party, hints at quitting politics

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), the progressive firebrand who cruised to re-election last week, suggested in a new interview that she might be on her way out of politics.

What did Ocasio-Cortez say?

Speaking with the New York Times, Ocasio-Cortez said she might depart from politics as it becomes even more clear that her far-left progressive agenda is not welcome in the Democratic Party.

When asked if she is considering a Senate run in the next couple of years, Ocasio-Cortez said, “I genuinely don’t know.”

“I don’t even know if I want to be in politics. You know, for real, in the first six months of my term, I didn’t even know if I was going to run for re-election this year,” she added. “It’s the incoming. It’s the stress. It’s the violence. It’s the lack of support from your own party. It’s your own party thinking you’re the enemy.”

She continued, “But I’m serious when I tell people the odds of me running for higher office and the odds of me just going off trying to start a homestead somewhere — they’re probably the same.”

Ocasio-Cortez spent much of the interview lashing out at the Democratic Party for not accepting her brand of ultra-left politics, claiming that progressive policies are winning elections — not losing them.

She said:

I’ve been begging the party to let me help them for two years. That’s also the damn thing of it. I’ve been trying to help. Before the election, I offered to help every single swing district Democrat with their operation. And every single one of them, but five, refused my help. And all five of the vulnerable or swing district people that I helped secured victory or are on a path to secure victory. And every single one that rejected my help is losing. And now they’re blaming us for their loss.

So I need my colleagues to understand that we are not the enemy. And that their base is not the enemy. That the Movement for Black Lives is not the enemy, that Medicare for all is not the enemy. This isn’t even just about winning an argument. It’s that if they keep going after the wrong thing, I mean, they’re just setting up their own obsolescence.

Speaking specifically about how the Democratic Party establishment has reacted to her progressive politics, Ocasio-Cortez said, “The last two years have been pretty hostile. Externally, we’ve been winning. Externally, there’s been a ton of support, but internally, it’s been extremely hostile to anything that even smells progressive.”

What are Democrats and media saying?

Moderate Democrats, however, do not share Ocasio-Cortez’s sentiment. House Democrats participated in a conference call last week, where they lamented on losing many seats on Election Day and blamed progressive politics for those losses, the New York Times reported.

Meanwhile, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough said Friday that the election was an “absolute repudiation” of the Democratic Party’s vision for America.

“There is no way to put this other than to say … Joe Biden winning looks like a one-off. This election for the most part was an absolute repudiation of the Democratic Party as a brand. Their brand doesn’t work across most of America. It just doesn’t,” he said.

Former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang also sounded the alarm that if the Democratic Party doesn’t change course now, they’re going to continue losing elections.