The shots had barely stopped ringing in Santa Fe, Texas, when some people were already trying to exploit the deaths of students to promote a political agenda that would have done nothing to prevent such shootings and might even make them worse.
On Sunday’s Billboard Music Awards, the pop stars couldn’t just express prayers or condolences, they had to demand “action.” They didn’t say what action that might be, but most viewers must have assumed it was, conveniently, the same gun control agenda that the left has been pushing for years and which would, again, have had no effect on the tragedy in Santa Fe (Raising the age to buy guns? The shooter was already below that age, and he didn’t buy them. Banning “assault rifles”? He didn’t use them. Confiscating all guns? He also reportedly built pipe and pressure cooker bombs.)
And yet, if you question policies that would disarm the law-abiding while doing nothing to protect children, you’re accused of not caring if children die. Americans quite rightly saw through that, just as they spotted the hypocrisy of music stars, many of whom promote amoral violence through their song lyrics, lecturing the rest of us. The show’s ratings hit a record low.
Perhaps the…what’s the nicest term I can use for this?...stupidest response to school shootings came from President Obama’s former Assistant Secretary of Education, Peter Cunningham, who tweeted that “maybe it’s time for America’s 50 million school parents to simply pull their kids out of school until we have better gun laws.” It isn’t often that you see a former federal education official urging people not to send their kids to school. Although if he’s suggesting that all parents start home-schooling instead of entrusting their education to people like him, he might actually have something there.
These kinds of hysterical comments are not designed to solve the problem but to sow even more fear and panic so that the left can impose a failed agenda that nobody would support if they were thinking rationally. It’s bad enough that they try to panic adults, but pushing that kind of fear onto kids is unconscionable. Instead of frightening all children into thinking they’re going to die if they go to school, how about reassuring them they’ll be safe by increasing school security, and telling them that as horrific as these shootings are, and as much attention as they get in the media (which I can’t help feeling makes such acts more attractive to sick minds), a person is more likely to die from an insect sting than in a mass shooting.
The irrational fear that every classroom is about to erupt in gunfire is an offshoot of a long-standing phenomenon caused by the rise of electronic media. Two hundred years ago, someone could be murdered 50 miles away, and you could live your entire life without ever hearing about it. Today, if someone is murdered 1,000 miles away, you hear about it within seconds. Because of the “If it bleeds, it leads” mentality, we now hear about every bad thing that happens everywhere. No wonder Gallup surveys routinely show Americans believe violent crime is getting worse every year, even though FBI stats show that it fell by 48% from 1993 to 2016.
But if the left is going to continually blame conservatives and law-abiding gun owners for school shootings and push their preexisting nostrums that would plainly not solve the problem, then let’s turn that around on them. Not to point fingers, but just as an intellectual exercise, I can make a better case that these shooters’ twisted minds are the result of “progressive” left policies than they can that it’s the NRA’s fault.
First of all, let’s put aside the irrational argument that the problem is the availability of the hardware. Americans have always had guns, but we’ve only recently had students remorselessly slaughtering their classmates as if it were a video game. As we’ve seen with recent attacks, both school shooters and homegrown terrorists, if they don’t have semi-automatic rifles, will use pistols, knives, vehicles, pressure cookers or whatever comes to hand. Sadly, Europeans are learning this the hard way as their impulse to ban every conceivable weapons lags two steps behind evil people’s creativity.
Trying to stop school attacks by banning guns would be like reacting to a mugger who threatened you with a baseball bat by shutting down the Louisville Slugger company. The problem isn’t the hardware but the minds of the people who prey on others without conscience.
It should go without saying that one of the biggest mistakes made by conservatives and parents over the past half-century was allowing the left to take over the education system. You can see the results on our college campuses, which the satirist Iowahawk defines as “oases of totalitarianism in a sea of freedom.” But the rot starts much earlier. The left has turned indoctrinating kids right from the cradle into a key element of their long-term mission, and they are succeeding to a shocking degree, as we see by the number of miseducated teenagers who think America is evil and socialism is wonderful.
In order to turn our kids into good little tools of the progressive agenda, they have to be robbed of their childhood innocence early on and forced to see the world the way leftist adults do: as a terrible, unfair place where warring factions are out to exploit and oppress others. Children as young as kindergarten are now being told that if they aren’t white, they’re victims of racism; and if they are white, they’re oppressors who should be ashamed of their very existence – and if they think they aren’t racist, that’s because they’re blind to their white privilege and microagressions. Girls are taught that they are victims of the patriarchy, and if they dream of going to college one day, there’s a good chance they’ll be raped on campus (isn’t that what controlling parents used to say to scare girls out of going to college?) Boys are told that they’re so bad, they should be put on drugs just to keep them from acting too much like boys. If a preschool boy kisses a girl he likes on the cheek, he can find himself branded as a sexual predator and suspended from school.
If they do go to school, they get to hear lessons in how American history is an endless panorama of cruelty, racism and oppression. They’re given lessons on all sorts of trendy sexual and gender issues before they even know what sex is. They’re told that due to climate change, the world is going to fry to a cinder, and everything they do is responsible for that, from eating a hamburger to wanting to live in a house larger than a refrigerator crate. They’re taught that they’re not allowed to question the inalienable right of women to kill their own babies in the womb for convenience (arguing for the sanctity of life is another patriarchal aggression). And they’re told that while they must be tolerant of kids of the opposite sex who demand to use the locker room with them, they can’t talk about their family’s religion because that isn’t tolerated in school.
When the school day is over, they are bombarded by a liberal popular culture that again insists on treating young children as if they were adults: profane, violent and sexually graphic song lyrics and videos; movies and video games filled with gratuitous shooting and gore; fashions and fashion magazines that sexualize pre-pubescent girls; an Internet filled with cruelty, bullying, profanity, pornography and aggressive mockery of anyone who holds religious faith (“imaginary man in the sky,” “flying spaghetti monster” and all the other contemptuous clichés that modern-day atheists parrot in lieu of intellectual arguments).
All of these things are invented, promoted and/or defended by the “progressive” left. They result in countless kids being robbed of their childhood innocence; allowed to see threats, promiscuity and violence as harmless entertainment; and taught from the cradle that everyone is out to oppress them, people are a virus infecting the Earth, life isn’t sacred, there is no higher moral authority watching them, and the world is doomed anyway so they have no future. To use a computer term, this is GIGO: “Garbage in, garbage out.”
Then when some kids see no downside to slaughtering their classmates, the left feigns shock and blames the gun. And of course, conservatives, who’ve spent the past 50 years in a futile battle against everything I just listed above.
Hillary Clinton’s defenders like to claim that she didn’t win the presidency because Americans were too sexist to vote for a woman (that’s just one of the 57 or so excuses Hillary herself has floated, but it’s in there.) And if those who didn’t support her protest that they would gladly vote for a woman President, just not her, the Democratic response is that that’s just a phony excuse and they really wouldn’t vote for any woman.
Frankly, I think that’s absolutely ridiculous. Carly Fiorina made a good run for the GOP nomination and was even high in the early polls before falling to Trump, as did all the other male candidates (me included, unfortunately.) I know of many Republicans who would love to vote for Condoleezza Rice for President. And when John McCain recently expressed regrets for picking Sarah Palin as a running mate, conservative websites were flooded with posts from Republicans saying that she was the main reason they voted for him.
Hillary Clinton’s problem wasn’t that she was a woman; it’s that she was “that woman” voters had been observing up close for over 20 years: Hillary Clinton. Most voters don’t accept that they’re under an obligation to support a candidate they don’t like or agree with, just because she’s a woman, and that includes most women voters.
As if to prove what a bogus premise that is, Hillary herself just endorsed the reelection of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo over his female challenger, former “Sex & The City” star, Cynthia Nixon. Now, I don’t know if Ms. Nixon is qualified to be governor of New York (I'd question that about Cuomo, too), and I certainly don’t agree with her political positions (she thinks Cuomo isn’t far enough to the left.) But there’s no question that she is a woman, and she’s appealing for women’s support.
If Hillary is going to accuse Americans of being sexist for not supporting the woman when she ran, then she endorses a man over a woman just because his views on the issues align more with hers, then how about according the rest of us the same privilege?
Rep. Steve King introduced a bill to put “sanctuary city” majors in prison for up to five years for tipping off illegal immigrants to impending ICE raids. Here’s the surprising part: that’s not already illegal. Yet if you act as lookout to warn any other lawbreakers when the cops are coming, you’re charged as an accomplice.
In a 5-4 partisan split, a sharply-divided Supreme Court on Monday gave a victory to businesses in Epic Systems v. Lewis, ruling that employees who have entered into arbitration agreements with their employers and are not satisfied with the ruling must challenge it individually and can’t file class action lawsuits.
Writing for the liberals on the Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg blasted the majority as “egregiously wrong” for undermining the workers’ strength in numbers. But in the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that while the policy may be debatable, as a matter of law, the Federal Arbitration Act as written by Congress clearly instructs “federal courts to enforce arbitration agreements according to their terms — including terms providing for individualized proceedings.”
This may seem like an arcane legal matter, but it provides a perfect example of the battle raging across the land over the proper role of courts. The liberal Justices would have ruled based on what they believe to be most fair, not the law Congress passed. The conservative Justices admit that it might not seem fair to some, but that’s the way Congress wrote the law. If you think it's wrong, then you lobby the branch of government with lawmaking power – Congress – to change the law; you don’t ask a judge to usurp legislative power and rewrite laws from the bench. This is why so many liberal hot button issues get imposed on America by unelected judges: because they’d never be able to get Congress or the voters to agree to them.
Whether you like the SCOTUS ruling or hate it, the fact that even at the highest level of our court system, deference to the Constitutional separation of powers hinged on just one vote shows how important it is for those who want to preserve the Constitution to maintain control of nominating and vetting judges.
Continuing the theme of traumatizing school children to exploit them for political advantage, Lifezette’s Brendan Kirby dug into CDC statistics to put the real danger of school shootings into perspective. From 2000-2016, the most recent year for which there are complete numbers, 80 school age kids died in shootings at school (that includes 11 suicides.) Those are undeniably terrible tragedies, and it doesn’t take into account the victims since. Even so, more children (155) drowned themselves on purpose than died in school shootings. Nearly 11 times as many died from being struck in fistfights. About 28 times as many died on bicycles. Nearly 29 times as many died from cuttings and piercings. When you get up to accidental drownings, drug overdoses and traffic accidents, the death risk was 100 times greater or more.
None of this is intended to downplay the tragedy of losing even one child to any preventable cause. But it shows that just leaving the house can be a risk. Adults should be capable of debating how to prevent school shootings without terrifying kids into thinking their lives will be over if they go to class.
When Donald Trump was running for President, he promised to reduce government red tape that was stifling growth and job creation by cutting two government regulations for every new regulation. Well, CNN and MSNBC can now accuse him of breaking that promise. According to a new study by the American Action Forum, he’s actually cut 3.75 regulations for every new one. They estimate that this represents a net savings to the economy of $686.6 million.
It’s been amusing to hear so many Democrats and media figures (but I repeat myself) trying to give credit for the recent robust economic growth to Obama. They insist that it was his policies that pulled us out of the recession (at the slowest rate in post-war history) and started growth and job creation again (anemic growth that we were assured we couldn’t exceed because slow growth was the “new normal” and it was foolish to think manufacturing jobs were ever coming back to America.)
What actually happened is that many businesses were sitting on capital but were afraid to use it for fear it would be taxed away if they brought it back from foreign markets or that they’d need it in the future to survive whatever new anti-business regulatory curveball would be hurled at them next. With Trump’s election and his keeping his promise to cut taxes and regulations, the businesses that drive the economy finally felt free to shift out of Park.
I’ve actually heard some people recently trying to make the same argument for Jimmy Carter: that he really set up the foundation for the ‘80s boom and Reagan merely inherited it and got credit for it. Which is absurd to anyone who lived through those times and remembers the disaster Reagan inherited and the complete economic overhaul that he put into place, to much fury and ridicule from the left.
Still, you have to feel sorry for these poor Democratic Presidents. No matter how long they’re in office or how many brilliant new government programs to goose the economy they create, it never seems to show any life until after they leave and then the Republican who replaces them gets the credit. It’s so unfair! For some reason, economic growth just never kicks in until after the liberals who really deserve the credit for it are kicked out.
LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE. I READ THEM!