Leftists: dissension must be ELIMINATED

Leftists DON'T ALLOW DISSENSIONFirst on the agenda: the Drudge Report (though it’s nothing more than an aggregator) and Fox News.  Then the entire internet.

EXAMPLE ONE:

First, from the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Fox targeted by FEC Dems in first-ever vote to punish debate sponsorship

by Paul Bedard

Finally making good on long-harbored anger at conservative media, Democrats on the Federal Election Commission voted in secret to punish Fox News’ sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate, using an obscure law to charge the network with helping those on stage.

STOP.  Read that first sentence again: “Finally making good on LONG-HARBORED ANGER at CONSERVATIVE media, DEMOCRATS on the Federal Election Commission voted in SECRET to PUNISH Fox News’ sponsorship of a Republican presidential debate, USING AN OBSCURE LAW to charge the network with helping those on stage.”

Would that not be unlike Lois Lerner and the IRS who complained bitterly that no such thing was done until finally the IRS admitted that precisely that thing was done?

It is the first time in history that members of the FEC voted to punish a media outlet’s debate sponsorship, and it follows several years of Democratic threats against conservative media and websites like the Drudge Report.

The punishment, however, was blocked by all three Republicans on the commission, resulting in a 3-3 tie vote and no action. The vote was posted Thursday and is here.

Imagine the results had Demorats simply owned that board, as Demorats own the state of California on most every level?

It seems that CNN sponsored quite a number of Democrat debates.  CNN sponsored four Democrat debates, of the ten documented — that’s almost half.  The GOP had twelve debates, six of which were sponsored by Fox.  That also is half.  Any issue with the FEC?

Here’s the obvious kicker:

CNN did the same thing, but there is no indication that they faced a complaint.

Do not think that the Demorats and Leftists are content to stop there.  They absolutely, incontrovertibly, wish to control the entire internet and all its content — particularly if that content is right-leaning in nature.

EXAMPLE TWO:

Also from the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Federal regulation of Internet coming, warn FCC, FEC commissioners

by Paul Bedard

Democrats targeting content and control of the Internet, especially from conservative sources, are pushing hard to layer on new regulations and even censorship under the guise of promoting diversity while policing bullying, warn commissioners from the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission.

“Protecting freedom on the Internet is just one vote away,” said Lee E. Goodman, a commissioner on the FEC which is divided three Democrats to three Republicans. “There is a cloud over your free speech.”

What is diversity?  In the eyes of Leftists, it is a One World Barbeque — that is, all persons saying, writing and thinking the same: a Leftist fashion.  Dissension cannot be tolerated.  What the FEC and Leftists and Demorats want is the same freedom of speech one now customarily finds on college campuses in America today; that is, little to none.

BZ License To BlogIn this vein I wrote, many years ago in 2010, that I could foresee the time where I as a blogger would require a literal license to blog.  To express my opinions and feelings.

Freedom of speech on the Internet, added Ajit Pai, commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, “is increasingly under threat.”

Pai and Goodman cited political correctness campaigns by Democrats as a threat. Both also said their agencies are becoming politicized and the liberals are using their power to push regulations that impact business and conservative outlets and voices.

Of course it’s under threat.  Leftists and Demorat want absolute control of speech as well as most every other aspect of your life.  With a SCOTUS that leans far left as would occur under the lying and brazenly-corrupt Hillary Clinton, you can quite certainly wave good-bye to your Bill of Rights, with the Second and First Amendments primarily in their PC sights.

“One of the things that is critical for this country is to reassert the value of the First Amendment, the fact that robust discourse, that is sometimes cacophonous, is nonetheless a value, in fact it creates value,” said Pai.

But wait; perhaps you thought I was kidding with the whole “my blog will be involved as will yours” thingie?  Read on.

At a CATO Institute discussion on online speech Wednesday night, both said that regulators are eager to issue new rules that could put limits on what people could say on blogs, online news and even YouTube. Washington Examiner reporter Rudy Takala and Cato’s digital manager Kat Murti were also on the panel.

There it is in black and white.  Do not for a moment believe that, somehow, miraculously, you will remain unaffected — particularly if you are a Conservative.  Or a Libertarian for that matter — John Stossel, I’m looking at you, sir.

Pai, addressing Goodman, added, “The common thread of our experiences I think is this impulse of control, whether it’s the FCC and the impulse of the government to want to control how these networks operate, and the FEC to control the content of the traffic that traverses over those networks, and I think that certainly highlights the importance of the First Amendment.”

Goodman concluded, “We need to be ever mindful and vigilant not to let governmental agencies through 3-2 votes, or 4-2 votes at the FEC take that away from us.”

Let there be no mistake.  Leftists and Demorats want control of our lives, complete and utter control of what we do, what we eat, where we live, how we live our lives and ultimately what we write, say and even think.

Leftists and Demorats would truly be pleased with a 1984 environment.

1984 - Big BrotherI can see an upheaval coming, ladies and gentlemen, if Demorats and Leftists keep removing our rights and our freedoms.

BZ

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

LEFTISTS determining to LIMIT free speech

Freedom of Speech StoppedAnd not a shock considering the history of Leftists insisting upon control — death-grip control — of speech across the globe.

Europe first.

From Bloomberg.com::

Tech Giants Vow to Tackle Online Hate Speech Within 24 Hours

by Stephanie Bodoni

U.S. Internet giants Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Google and Microsoft Corp. pledged to tackle online hate speech in less than 24 hours as part of a joint commitment with the European Union to combat the use of social media by terrorists.

Beyond national laws that criminalize hate speech, there is a need to ensure such activity by Internet users is “expeditiously reviewed by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame,” the companies and the European Commission said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

But what is “hate speech”?  And who makes that determination?

As an American, I understand that Europe has no real First Amendment as do we.  There is no history, in Europe, of valuing true free speech.  As is commonly said in America, however, the First Amendment exists not for everyday or pablum-oriented speech, but challenging speech.

The code of conduct arrives as Europe comes to terms with the bloody attacks in Paris and Brussels by Islamic State, which has used the Web and social media to spread its message of hate against its enemies. The companies said it remains a “challenge” to strike the right balance between freedom of expression and hate speech in the self-generated content on online platforms.

“We remain committed to letting the Tweets flow,” said Twitter’s head of public policy for Europe, Karen White, in the statement. “However, there is a clear distinction between freedom of expression and conduct that incites violence and hate.”

But it looks like, when you get down to it, the objection by these large techies isn’t necessarily terrorism as in the standard definition of the word — specifically as with regard to the Brussels attacks.  Perhaps that was the original intent a month or so ago.

Read this, from the AP.org on the same topic:

“The internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech,” said Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality. She added that the code of conduct, which will be regularly reviewed in terms of its scope and its impact, will ensure that public incitement to violence to hatred has “no place online.”

The firms themselves say there’s no conflict between their mission statements to promote the freedom of expression and clamping down on hate speech.

But again, WHO determines the definition of “hate speech”?  We already know that Facebook has been caught short-shrifting and minimizing stories involving conservative issues of import.  We already know that the IRS targeted conservative groups.  We already know that every newsroom in the US is 85% + Leftist.  We already know that Google, Facebook and Twitter are run by Leftists, and that Google, Facebook and Twitter have suspended the accounts of conservative persons for no stated specific reason whatsoever whilst simultaneously allowing the same behavior to occur on behalf of Leftists for Leftist causes.  Facts in evidence.

Obama Billionaire Corporate DemoratsWe already know that Obama and DC don’t hate all capitalists.  They love Leftist tech capitalists.  Just look above.

Now?  It would seem to me that the definition of “hate speech” is expanding.

What is “hate speech”?  Is it, “Allahu akhbar, slay all the infidels and behead the nonbelievers, run their parts through a wood chipper and set that liquid on fire”?

Is it “kill all the Jews, may their corrupt Zionist bodies be blown to bits and their children slaughtered in their beds with the sharpest of machetes”?

Or is it when BZ writes that “black lives don’t matter”?

Is it when BZ takes umbrage with the word marriage meaning one man and one man, one woman and one woman — even though BZ couldn’t care less that two gays or lesbians enjoy a “civil union” and should be afforded precisely the same benefits as one man and one woman?  That he just despises the meanings of words being hijacked?

Is it when BZ writes the word “trannies”?

Is it when BZ says that Leftists are every bit as hypocritical as everyone else and frequently more so, or that most Leftists have no concept of reality, or that Obama is one of the most dangerous persons to the United States ever installed in the White House?  Or that the electorate is increasingly brain dead for Free Cheese?

Is it when BZ writes emphatically that illegal Mexicans should not be allowed into the United States?

Is it when BZ writes that “Islam is as Islam does”?

I’m certain by now you see where I’m going with this.

LEFTIST WORD POLICEThe Dream Police are here.  So sayeth Cheap Trick.  The Word Police are setting up shop and already have a logo.  The Thought Police are deciding what color uniform to purchase.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Thought Police.  You realize, of course, that technology is already being developed in order to truly read your thoughts?  For shame, if you think I’m writing out my ass.  Click the links here and here.

So I ask again:

Just what is “hate speech”?

Who gets to decide?

“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.” 

Eric Arthur Blair is shaking his head and saying “I told you so.”

BZ

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Leftists riot in Burlingame over Trump

At the California GOP Convention in Burlingame.

Mexico Wants US AgainWhat Mexican Leftists want, paraded in front of Mexican flag in Burlingame.

And all of it FUNDED by GEORGE SOROS.

None of this was spontaneous.  It was well funded and well planned.

The American people have grown fat, lazy and stupid.  They don’t care about freedom any more, they don’t care about privacy, they don’t care about responsibility or accountability.  All they care about is Free Cheese and what the government can do for them.   People today cannot handle real, actual, freedom.  And they don’t want to be responsible.  Americans aren’t smart enough to realize this because they have been brainwashed by “educators” and the American Media Maggots.  Patriotism is now “jingoism.”  Independence is considered vulgar and anathema.

But Burlingame wasn’t just a simple protest.  It was a riot and an assault on the First Amendment.

Leftists couldn’t give a fuck about the First Amendment, as witnessed by our pussified willting sensitive little Millennial flowers in universities across the nation.

Look.  Let’s get something straight up front.  I don’t like Donald Trump.  He’s not “my guy.”  I advocate and have contributed to Ted Cruz, who is an actual Conservative and has fought in our Supreme Court for conservative values, including gun rights and a refusal to accept amnesty for illegal aliens.  When John Boehner called Ted Cruz “Lucifer” I took that as a feather in the cap of Cruz.  Because John Boehner is a simpering, tearful fuckwit whose over-bronzed persona found little fault in most everything the Demorats proposed.  He frequently did his level best to suck Barack Hussein Obama’s political cock.  Anyone who is an enemy of John Boehner is a friend of mine.

When Republicans bent, America broke.  And America is broken.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, is a Johnny-Come-Lately and a self-serving individual whose philosophies change with his personal self interests.  He cannot provide serious details about his positions and wishes to actually expand government and increase taxes.

I know where he came from.  I know why he emerged.  The GOP let everyone down time after time after time.  People got tired of the GOP and Trump resonated because he said, initially, what many people themselves were thinking and feeling.

That said, he’s not my guy.  He’s too coarse and unspecific for me.  He is too unfamiliar with vastly important topics critical in today’s global scheme.

Fine.  He is still resonating with Americans and he appears to be chosen by quite a number of Americans.  Therefore, he is deserving of his own freedoms.  The freedom to make speeches, the freedom to appear at various locales, the freedom to not have his thoughts and expressions suppressed.

Trump Protest Burlingame

Trump protest Burlingame. Mexican flags predominate. La Raza’s reconquista.

George Soros, the Leftist billionaire, doesn’t believe in America.  He doesn’t believe in our Founding Fathers, he doesn’t believe in the US Constitution, he doesn’t believe in our Bill of Rights.  This doddering Greek motherfucker believes in turning America into Europe.

But what is revealed is even more foundational.  Yes, this is a rally — a riot, really — against Donald Trump.  But at its core this is an anti-American spasm.  Rioters burned the American flag and held the Mexican flag up high.

This is what Trump supporters had to endure just to get inside the convention.

This is what occurred to another person who simply wanted to attend the convention.

Sacramento’s very own Leftist Maile Hampton, a wonderful Islamist, led the flag burning in Burlingame.

Leftists cannot stomach opposition.  They cannot stomach mere protests.  Now it must be violent.

Stationed at the California GOP convention outside the Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport in Burlingame, reporters documented the moment angry demonstrators set Old Glory ablaze while labeling it a symbol of “genocide.”

“Fuck colonialism, fuck genocide, fuck slavery. That’s what the American flag stands for,” yelled a woman with a bullhorn. “We don’t stand for that shit.”

Free Tit LeftistsThe wacky Free Tit Leftists had to weigh in as well.

Good to know that Mexicans couldn’t care less for American laws.

A few words to that Mexican cunt.  First, I thank you.  I thank you for your clarity and your honesty.  You’ve outed yourself and your other “reconquista” La Raza adherents as the baldly-naked racists you areLa Raza means “the race.”  Not just any race.  The race.

I guess I need to go “bottom line.”

The bottom line is this.

If Trump is the Republican nominee, I will vote for Donald John Trump.

Because that is how much I hate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And fuckwit Leftists.

BZ

 

Your government working AGAINST you

Founders_Finger_GulagUnder Barack Hussein Obama.  With the overt and covert/tacit approval of Barack Hussein Obama.

First, from the UKDailyMail.com:

FBI tells teachers to inform on students who express ‘anti-government’ and ‘anarchist’ political beliefs as high schools are ‘ideal targets’ for extremist recruiters

by Wills Robinson

  • Document urges faculty members to assess behavior of students 

  • They suggest to watch for certain signs, such as tendency toward violence

  • Bureau hopes indications could prevent future terrorist attacks 

  • They believed it would help reduce the number of youngsters joining terrorist or anti-government groups

It would seem to me the real “extremist recruiters” could be some of the teachers already employed in public schools.

The FBI wants teachers to inform on ‘anti-government’ or ‘anarchist’ students.

In a document titled ‘Preventing Violence and Extremism in Schools’, the bureau urges faculty members to assess concerning behavior of schoolchildren as they may be ’embracing extremist ideologies’.

They also list a number of indications, such as violent tendencies, which may be a sign they are planning an attack or may want to join a terrorist group.

Officials then want staff to pass on information to authorities in a bid to prevent any actions which could put others in danger.

In other words, the United States government wants to make an enemy out of me once again — but oddly enough, only during Leftist administrations.  The federal government wants to make an enemy of its soldiers, of those who believe in religion (excepting that of Islam) and those who believe in the Second Amendment.

Obama American CRAZIESThose who cling to their God and guns.  Who believe in the US Constitution.  Who believe in the Bill of Rights.  Who believe in a religion other than Islam.

Second, the US Department of Justice was actually contemplating prosecution of those who deny climate change/global warming.

Seriously.  The actual Obama-sanctioned Belief Police.

From TheBlaze.com:

AG Lynch Testifies: Justice Dept. Has ‘Discussed’ Civil Legal Action Against Climate Change Deniers

by Jon Street

Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified Wednesday that the Justice Department has “discussed” taking civil legal action against the fossil fuel industry for “denying” the “threat of carbon emissions” when it comes to climate change.

A Democrat asked and was answered:

“My question to you is, other than civil forfeitures and matters attendant to a criminal case, are there other circumstances in which a civil matter under the authority of the Department of Justice has been referred to the FBI?” he asked.

“This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch answered. “I’m not aware of a civil referral at this time.”

Corporations first.  You and me next.

Finally: who else is an enemy of the federal government, according to official US government documents as per Michael Snyder?

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

10. “Anti-Gay”

11. “Anti-Immigrant”

12. “Anti-Muslim”

13. “The Patriot Movement”

14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

15. Members of the Family Research Council

16. Members of the American Family Association

17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

21. Members of the Christian Action Network

22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

27. The militia movement

28. The sovereign citizen movement

29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

41. “General right-wing extremist”

42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

45. Those that are “anti-global”

46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

58. “Rightwing extremists”

59. “Returning veterans”

60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

64. “Anti-abortion activists”

65. Those that are against illegal immigration

66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

72. Evangelical Christians

Am I — we — truly the danger to America?  Am I the one to be feared and tattled-upon?  Am I the one over which you should worry?

Obama True Danger To America

Or should you worry about a Hillary Clinton, a Bernie Sanders?

I think you have your answer.

BZ

 

Obama: who needs Article 1 anyway?

Obama Crime Spree PresidencyI’ll just do it all my own self, Mr Obama says.  I shall rule from on high via executive fiat.

Marco Rubio says, “Barack Obama is obsessed with undermining the Second USAmendment.”

Let’s watch Mr Obama’s condescending and tearful lecture to law-abiding Americans, shall we?

Obama wants:

  Licensing requirements for smaller-scale gun sellers.
The hiring of an additional 230 FBI employees to process background checks 24/7
Provisions enabling states to share mental health information
Dollars for research into “gun safety technology.”  I.E., “smart guns”

The truth is that currently 38 states submit less than 80% of their felony convictions into the background check system.  DC won’t even repair the current system.  Now they want to expand it.  Nonsense.  All you have to do is ENFORCE the federal gun laws currently on the books.

This isn’t so much about the “gun control” EO as it is about Mr Obama’s continuing disregard for the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Obama American CRAZIESFor the ignorant amongst us — that would include you, Millennials — here is what Article 1 of the US Constitution says.  In a nutshell.

Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress its powers and limits. Congress is the legislative branch of the government, meaning they are the ones to make laws for the United States of America. The article also creates the two sections of Congress, which is called a bicameral legislature.

Meaning: Congress creates laws, not the president.

But here’s the truth: federal firearms convictions under Obama have fallen 15.5% in the past five years, and 34.8% in the past ten years.  Yes, that IS under Mr Obama’s rule.  Those stats are from the Syracuse University TRAC Project.

Meaning: again Mr Obama is two-faced, duplicitous and a LIAR.  He could direct his AGs to go after gun crime tenaciously BUT — here is the further truth — the suspects would be predominantly BLACK and from large urban areas like Detroit, DC, Chicago, Atlanta.  Mr Obama certainly cannot have that.

Sure.  Violent felons and gang members buy all their guns online and in gun stores and at gun shows.  There’s nothing more satisfying to a dealer with an FFL than selling an AK-47 to a tatted-up MS-13 gang member or a frothing nutcase holding a stuffed toy who walks up to their counter.

A further lie: yes, you can purchase a firearm online.  But to whom does it go and where?  Oh yes.  Your local dealer who has an FFL and must then run a background check before physically handing the gun over to you.

Sometimes the FBI and the DOJ actually miss those few felons who attempt to purchase handguns.  That’s not a local problem, that’s a federal problem.  As in: just enforce what’s on the books with more efficiency.

Obama Gun Sales Soar 1-5-2016Plus: now you’re a single mother.  You suffer from post-partum depression.  You want a firearm for protection because your apartment complex is rife with drug dealers and you want to protect your child.  Is your doctor now mandated to contact the FBI?  Under this EO your doctor is mandated to go around HIPAA privacy laws to rat you out.  But who truly is “fit to own a firearm”?  No one in the federal government can answer that question.

Second Amendment Gun NUTSIdeology doesn’t just stop at the Spite House.  It can surely exist in your doctors office.  What will you say?  What can you say?

Further you cannot wrap suicide numbers in with the homicide numbers in terms of “gun violence.”  But of course Mr Obama does that very same thing.  The vast majority of gun deaths stem from suicide.

Gun Crime STATISTICSBackground checks will not solve the issue of gun suicide.  Those who are intent on suicide will simply transition from guns to rocks to pills to knives to state-sponsored death.

Will you “commit” anyone who mentions depression, anxiety, who has talked about giving up?  How will that affect civil liberties?

AGAIN, Republicans miss a golden opportunity to state the OBVIOUS: Mr Obama couldn’t care less about our foundational documents and, instead, issues laws by imperial fiat, completely bypassing an entire THIRD branch of government.

And if you don’t know the three branches of government, then you are a massive part of the problem in America.

Because you are incompetent.

BZ