Category Archives: Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim

The Left’s Creed: Live In A Herd Or Die, Baby Bison (Or Anyone Else)

Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Parrots

The Left’s creed carries over into its “management” of wildlife: Live in a herd or we’ll kill you.

The details are sketchy because written by left-liberal, state-adulating outlets, like The Washington Post. The same short-on-details storyline is echoed by ALL other news outlets and by the droning clones on social media.

Translated: The official say-so is the only say-so.

A baby bison is found at Yellowstone National Park by two good samaritans. The official account fails to provide inconvenient details because it has a distinct angle. However, logic tells me tourists would not remove a baby bison from its mom and herd. This likely was a solitary newborn. And, indeed, buried at the end of the malicious depiction of the do-goobers is this:

… the tourists found the bison in the middle of a road and tried, unsuccessfully, to make it move.
“Out of desperation,” said a Yellowstone spokeswoman, they took it to rangers. “They were just concerned about the well-being of the animal.”

Before that clarification, the “reporter” at WaPo had asserted the tourists simply “saw a baby bison, … decided it looked cold and needed to be rescued. So they loaded it in the trunk of their car and drove it to a ranger station.”

(Media deserve to die-out if they hire reporters who can’t write sans a personal angle. As an editor, I’m running a red marker through phrases such as “decided it looked cold,” to be replaced with neutral descriptions: “The tourists report/claim the baby was … in the middle of the road, unable to … “)

These “stupid tourists,” whom none of the still stupider journalists and followers of officialdom seemed to have interviewed, are alleged to have absconded with the baby bison because he looked cold.

Naturally, the fanatic rangers who’ll not tolerate deviation from nature euthanized the baby.

“We don’t manage for individuals; we manage for ecosystems.”

Resorting to symbolism, namely “attributing symbolic meanings or significance to objects, events, or relationships,” is not a practice I like. So do forgive me, but I can’t help seeing some symbolism here; some glaring parallels to how the Left treats humankind:

Conform or we’ll make you wish you were dead.

(Not to stray even further, but the convergence of Left and Right is almost complete on most issues, likely on this one too.)

An Ode To Paul Ryan By MSNBC’s Left-Liberal Lawrence O’Donnell

Bush, Constitution, Donald Trump, Government, Kids, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Natural Law, Republicans

Oh what natural bedfellows these fleas make and how they love The People. I’m talking about the Left and the left-leaning “Right” of our political and media establishment.

Last week, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell practically glorified House Speaker Paul Ryan for, as he put it, “giving little Donald Trump his first a major kindergarten lesson in government during a meeting on Capitol Hill, putting into perspective how hard it will be for Trump to pass his outrageous legislative agenda.”

Ryan was the best and smartest Republican negotiator [code for shyster] in D.C.; Trump the worst, exalted statist O’Donnell.

Note how O’Donnell frames the right thing—naturally right thing to do—as ignorant, “magic thinking. “Ryan has been dealing with children like Trump for years,” intones this pompous member of the ruling class, in reference to Tea Party fiscal impulses and Trump Nation inclinations.

Lawrence thinks the good kind of power comes from the Law and from The Constitution, rather than from The People heeding the natural law. Naturally, to O’Donnell, Ryan, a mere boy, is the adult in the room. Trump, a man of the world, who’s built stuff, is the child, sitting at the feet of legislator-cum-apostle Paul, lapping up his wisdom.

It’s simple. If Trump doesn’t fulfill his promises, just as Barack Obama did through Executive decrees (which most certainly are in the overreaching U.S. Constitution), through brute force; he’ll be a one-term president. The Constitution is a dead letter. Has been for a long time.

Besides, “The Constitution has saddled Americans with a very strong presidency, should he choose to act on the veto it grants him. Buried in the constitutional thickets, concedes historian Paul Johnson, are “huge powers.” The American president “was much stronger than most kings of the day, rivaled or exceeded only by the ‘Great Autocrat,’ the Tsar of Russia (and in practice stronger than most tsars). These powers were not explored until Andrew Jackson’s time, half a century on, when they astonished and frightened many people.”

See “The Sovereign Agrees To … A Bourbon Summit.”

Media’s ‘Dah’ Moment On Election 2016 And Demographics

Donald Trump, Elections, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Race

NPR (May 10, 2016): “… there is also the potential that this fall’s presidential battlegrounds could be re-sorted — pitting white, working-class voters, whom Trump is appealing to, against Latino voters, who appear to be in Clinton’s corner. Traditional ways of thinking about the map should and will be challenged.”

Wow. A year on, and the penny may be dropping.

And: “… at this point, polling is almost irrelevant. The cases have not been litigated yet; the campaigns have not been waged; neither candidate has even officially crossed the magic number to win his or her respective primaries yet.”

The Wrong-All-The-Time Media is “rethinking.” Does this mean slow Nate Silver will begin to ask why his numbers fit his hypothesis, but do not comport with reality? There’s another “genius.”

Occasionally Neoconservatives Annoy The Left A Little

Conservatism, Education, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Neoconservatism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism

Jason Riley, of the War Street Journal Editorial Report, was joined by the rest of crew, on Fox News, to swank about being invited and disinvited to speak across the nation’s left-liberal campuses. The rest, Bret Stephens, Mary Kissel, Mary O’Grady, all expressed disinvitation envy.

Following Allan Bloom’s  impressive Closing of the American Mind: How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Souls of Today’s Students (1987), neoconservatives have been quite good at addressing multicultural political correctness in the modern academy, the replacement of the Western canon with bogus disciplines—political constructs, really—devoted to relativism, anti-racism, anti-sexism and anti-elitism studies. They were good at pointing out that “current works promoting multiculturalism written by women and minorities had replaced the classics of Western civilization written by the DWEMs, Dead White European Males,” to quote Phyllis Schlafly, in “Advice To College Students: Don’t Major in English.”

On freedom of speech, neocon establishment circuit speakers limp along as well (although you won’t hear them introduce the deciding variable: private property. Where? On whose property do you wish to speak?)

For the rest, neocons seldom  challenge students on matters racial (except to blame Democrats and left-liberals for the plight of blacks), on foreign policy (some liberals actually like American military interventionism as much as the neocons), on Islam (OK, except for a few bad Abduls) or on immigration (a net positive).

Jason Riley should try never having been invited in the first place to speak to those campus “conservatives.”

I guess he could argue the marginalized Old Right is just not as smart as he and his neocon buddies. Paul Gottfried’s learned scholarship on American conservatism exposes the neocons as not very smart at all.

Donald Trump has certainly run rings around them.