Democrat Party Socialism Turns Deadly: Nine Dead In Ohio

Socialism, along with its militant cousin communism, is responsible for more death and destruction throughout human history than any other political ideology. Nothing else comes close. 

From the millions murdered by Hitler’s National Socialist Party to the tens of millions killed by socialists/communists Joseph Stalin (Soviet Union) and Mao (China) along with a dark collection of lesser dictators, socialism is a proven killer of freedom, opportunity, and many-many human lives.

And now, in 2019, that long and brutal legacy of suffering has come to America, infecting our politics and just this past week in Dayton, Ohio, bringing with it tragic loss of life.

Related image

Via Newsbusters:

“Monday morning following the horrific, deadly mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas over the weekend, as well as Gilroy, California last week, the networks were eager to pin blame on President Trump for “fueling” the violence with his “hateful rhetoric” against immigrants. What they were not eager to do was point out that the alleged social media accounts of one of these shooters (Dayton, Ohio) revealed he was a radical leftist, who supported socialism, Antifa, and Elizabeth Warren for president.”

Should anyone be surprised? Sadly, no.

For years these homegrown American socialists have advocated for the destruction of foundational American values like free expression and self-determination.

They have cheered depictions of President Trump’s decapitation.

They have repeatedly attacked law enforcement.

They have sided with America-hating terrorists.

They have, and continue, to call for violence against any and all who oppose them, easily manipulating those already suffering from mental health issues to take action.

Some among them are now members of Congress.

Some now demand you make them president. 

The socialist barbarians are now well beyond the gate and leaving death and destruction in their wake.

2020 will likely be the single most important election of our lives and the choices have never been more clear.

Choose life or choose socialism…

 

Dayton, Ohio Shooter Was A Warren Supporting Antifa Socialist Who Hated Donald Trump

Two shootings, two shooters, both likely sharing the common threads of mental illness and political radicalization largely created by a far-left media and self-absorbed culture. 

Yet, only the one shooter in El Paso has so far received the vast bulk of media coverage because an alleged manifesto left by him mentions race and immigration as being motivating factors. (The media left out his anti-corporation and radical environmental views in their coverage because those items directly complicate their narrative that the tragedy is somehow President Trump’s fault—a bizarre and dangerous misrepresentation if ever there was one.)

But what of the shooter in Dayton, Ohio? Why no mention of his socialist views, his support of candidates like Elizabeth Warren, and his hatred of President Trump?

Related image

Check out this profile of the shooter via Heavy:

“On social media, the suspect’s biography started to emerge. On his Twitter page, reviewed by Heavy, he described himself as “he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i’m going to hell and i’m not coming back.” He wrote on Twitter that he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, praised Satan, was upset about the 2016 presidential election results, and added, “I want socialism, and i’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding.” The Greene County Board of Elections lists his party as “Dem.”

Other emerging details point to the shooter’s affiliation with the socialist Antifa terror group. Initial reports indicated the shooter was wearing all Antifa black at the time of the shooting spree.

To date, very little of the above the details have been shared by the far-left Establishment Media.

So far it has been President Trump who remains the voice of reasoned compassion following these dual tragedies by pointing out that mental illness is likely at the root cause of both shootings. America has become overly medicated, overly stimulated, and lacking in the kind of common sense and basic values that will inevitably lead to yet more similar tragedies.

Post image


 

REPORT: Why Do Democrats Want To Take American Back To The 1930’s?

The 1930’s were a particularly tough time that saw the frightening rise of Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini, the terrible difficulties of the Great Depression, and the subsequent deaths of tens of millions to war and the enslavement of hundreds of millions to authoritarian regimes. 

With that said, why in the world do Democrats today seem so determined to push America back to the 1930’s?

Image result for democratic presidential candidates 2020 meme

Via The American Conservative:

Democrats Set the Wayback Machine to the 1930s
From court-packing to Weimar Monetary Theory, their new ideas feel distinctly retro.

For a party that prides itself on its appeal to the young, the Democrats sure have a lot of old ideas. Of course, no conservative would automatically gainsay an old idea, but the Democrats are supposed to be, you know, progressive.

So let’s look at some of their oldies.

First up: an idea straight out of 1937. In that year, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, fresh from a landslide re-election (he carried 46 of 48 states), which gifted him more-super-than-supermajorities in Congress, also resolved to build a supermajority on the Supreme Court. In previous years, the court, dominated by conservatives, had derailed many of Roosevelt’s New Deal programs. And so the re-elected 32nd president, feeling hubristic, sent to Congress a plan to expand the body from nine to 15 justices—with the idea being, of course, that he could appoint the new six.

Republican opponents immediately dubbed the initiative “court-packing,” and the label stuck. Soon, conservative and moderate Democrats peeled away. And so, despite Roosevelt’s strenuous efforts—including an attempted purge of recalcitrant Dems—the court-packing plan died. Even worse from the White House’s point of view, the public, alarmed by visions of “Caesarism,” punished FDR’s party in the 1938 midterm elections, handing the GOP a massive victory. Indeed, the result was the formation of a bipartisan “conservative coalition” that dominated Capitol Hill for the next quarter century. In other words, the court-packing plan was the most consequential legislative and political failure of the Roosevelt administration.

Image result for Roosevelt court packing

So perhaps it’s a bit strange that now, eight decades later, “court-packing” is making a comeback in Democratic circles. A March 18 headline in Politico lays it out: “2020 Dems warm to expanding Supreme Court.” As the article details, presidential hopefuls Pete Buttigieg, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren are all at least somewhat supportive of court-packing.

In the meantime, the rest of us would do well to remember that if one side can pack the Supreme Court, the other side can, too. And so maybe both sides ought to agree to give the Constitution a respite from that sort of drama.

Speaking of the 1930s, we can point to other ideas from that decade that are being dusted off. One is the New Deal—oops, I mean, the Green New Deal. As pitched by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and a swelling chorus of Democratic presidential wannabes, the Green New Deal seems to consist of one part concern over CO2 and another part desire to remake the rest of our society. Thus, in addition to the goal of defeating carbon, an early but revealing draft aims at providing free health care, eliminating racism, and guaranteeing “economic security to all who are unable or unwilling to work” [emphasis added].

Image result for san francisco slums

Or as The Economist put it, “Utopia now.”

If it’s impossible to find a conservative who thinks utopia is doable—or that the Green New Deal is utopia—it’s also hard to find a moderate who thinks such an earthly paradise is feasible. So maybe that’s one reason why Ocasio-Cortez’s national unfavorable rating is now substantially higher than her favorable rating. In the meantime, election-minded Democrats hope without much hope that AOC and her zealous allies will learn to chill.

Image result for ocasio cortez crazy

A second and related blast from the past is the idea of a Universal Basic Income (UBI). This is being pushed most notably by long-shot presidential aspirant Andrew Yang—who, we might note, has accumulated 65,000 donors and thus seems destined to get into the Democratic debates. So a March 15 Washington Post headline wasn’t wrong when it pronounced of Yang, “Haven’t heard of him? You will soon.”

Under Yang’s UBI plan, every American citizen would get $12,000 a year, no matter what. (And yes, were a UBI ever to get near enactment, you can bet there’d be a strong push to get rid of the requirement that one be a citizen to get the money.)

In the meantime, UBI has the support of many prominent lefties, such as former labor secretary Robert Reich. And yes, even some libertarians support UBI. In the meantime, the rest of us can say: if you like welfare dependency, you’ll really love UBI dependency.

Here again, UBI is an idea with a ’30s pedigree. Back then, the Townsend Plan was popular, and so was the Ham and Eggs Movement, and so were Senator Huey Long’s slogans of “every man a king” and “share our wealth.” Fortunately for the fisc, those ideas all stalled before enactment. Interestingly, FDR, while okay with providing government benefits, never wanted to sever the connection between work and reward. As he said in 1935, money-for-nothing schemes are “a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.”

A third idea from the wayback machine is ultra-high income tax rates. Ocasio-Cortez has talked about pushing the top rate to 70 percent; she notes correctly that the top rate was that high or higher for much of the 20th century. Specifically, the top rate was raised from 25 percent to 63 percent in 1932, then to 79 percent in 1936, and then to 94 percent in 1944. Today, prominent economists on the left, including the New York Times’ Paul Krugman, agree that such high rates should be reimposed.

We can say that the rich should pay more—here’s looking at you, carried-interest loophole!—and still be aware that raising rates is not the same thing as actually collecting revenues. That is, behavioral effects kick in, as earners and investors adjust their activity—and their accounting—to beat the rate. That’s the lesson of the Laffer Curve, which has guided Republican economics since the Reagan era.

The issue is that money, especially at the high end, is so, well, liquid that it’s easy for fatcats to push their reported income down below whatever the desired threshold might be—or to channel it overseas.

We can observe that for most of the 20th century, the specters of war, fascism, and communism had the effect of trapping American capital in the U.S.; that is, money just wasn’t safe in most places. And yet today, thanks, ironically enough, to U.S. victories in various hot and cold wars, easily 20 countries and jurisdictions around the world qualify as not just tax havens, but plausible places to hold citizenship, and perhaps even to inhabit.

So while one can lament the ingratitude of tax exiles, what one can’t do—at least not without an extraordinary amount of effort—is collect money from them. To be sure, it’s possible to imagine an international regime in which enforcement and harmonization make tax exiling and other kinds of tax avoidance more difficult, even dangerous. But as we have learned, it’s hard to get the world to agree on much of anything. Moreover, there’s always the concern about killing the goose that lays the golden egg.

So perhaps the better answer is to set reasonable rates and then seek to truly collect revenues from rich individuals and profitable companies that never seem to pay anything. For instance, earlier this year, we learned that Amazon made a profit of $11.2 billion in 2018, yet paid zero federal income tax. Does that seem fair to you? Not to me either. So again, before we go raising rates that chase economic activity out of the country, let’s reform the system such that billion-dollar people and trillion-dollar companies pay at least something.

Moving right along, if we continue our look into the Democrats’ 20th-century memory book—if we delve back even further back, in fact, to the 1920s—we come upon an antecedent to Modern Monetary Theory. MMT, of course, is the voguish notion pushed by Stephanie Kelton, a longtime associate of Senator Bernie Sanders, which holds that countries with their own currency can print all the money they want without ill effect.

Yet Modern Monetary Theory might just as well be called Weimar Monetary Theory, as we recall, without affection, the German hyperinflation of 1921-23. Historians regard that monetary debacle, which wiped out Germany’s middle class, as one of that country’s stepping stones on the road to Nazism.

Image result for germans burning money

More recently, the Weimar-ish fate of Venezuela—another country with the freedom to print all the fiat currency it wishes—is also, shall we say, a discouraging indicator.

It does seem that spending and deficits matter less than we were initially told. After all, in the wake of the 2008 meltdown, the Federal Reserve pumped $4 trillion into the economy, and inflation did not tick up. Why not? It appears that in slack times, as we saw during the last decade, the extra money just gets socked away—perhaps in Chinese mattresses. In other words, we could have spent a lot more on, say, productive infrastructure and not paid a price in higher prices.

Yet even if we’ve been over-cautious, fiscally and monetarily, in recent years, the ultimate reality of inflation—that too much money chasing too few goods causes higher prices—is never going to change.

So yes, for many hip Democrats, old ideas are new again. But that doesn’t make them good.


 

“40 Years Ago He Fought For Us.” A Must-Watch Video On The Battle Against Deadly Socialism…

President Ronald Reagan fought so hard to push back the socialists both across the globe and here at home. He succeeded in giving us time but now 40 years later time appears to be running out. The war for freedom and against socialism rages on and it’s well past time you choose a side.

WATCH. SHARE. EDUCATE.

Image result for REAGAN VS SOCIALISM

Image result for cortez crazy eyes gif

Image result for crazy bernie sanders


 

Socialist Ocasio-Cortez Demands Affordable Housing For All Then Moves Into Luxury Apt That Doesn’t Allow Poor People

Not for thee but just for me…

Socialist media darling Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has repeatedly demanded affordable housing be made available to all who live or come to America. (be it legally or not) Ah, but as any good socialist will do, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has since moved into a brand new luxury apartment complex built by a wealthy developer that doesn’t allow poor people to live there. (It is even said to have a security barrier. Gee, kind of like a wall!)  The hypocrisy is made even more glaring when we go back and revisit how the congresswoman blasted what she calls the “luxury real estate lobby” who she said needed to be “kicked to the curb.” Seems the only people Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is now kicking to the curb are the poor people who cannot afford to live where she does.

It just doesn’t get more socialist than that…


 

POTUS Trump Enrages Dems Now Running Scared From Socialism Concerns

It was a page taken from the politically successful Ronald Reagan playbook—remind Americans of how dangerous and damaging socialism can be. President Trump did just that during last week’s State of the Union and within hours ‘what is socialism’ became a trending term on nearly every major Internet search engine as increasingly defensive Dems declared they were not socialist. The fact they’ve embraced socialism so strongly in the form of popularity for Bernie Sanders (a self-proclaimed socialist) and more recently Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (also a socialist) is making that denial much more difficult. It seems most Americans still view socialism as a dirty word which makes the modern Democrat Party the dirtiest party of all.

Related image

Via The Hill:

Trump’s warning of creeping socialism in the United States, deftly mentioned after a section of the speech on the unfolding political crisis in Venezuela, created an immediate public split among Democrats that was caught on live television.

Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Sens. Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio) were among the lawmakers who stood with Republicans to applaud Trump when he pledged that the United States would never slide into socialism.

But other Democrats weren’t so happy about Trump’s choice of words — which was clearly meant to put them on the spot.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who labels himself as a democratic socialist, stayed rooted in his seat, as did Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

Image result for bernie sanders dumb

Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), another leading democratic socialist, smiled in response to Trump’s remark but stayed seated.

Related image

She later argued that Trump’s attack is a sign her growing success.

“I think it was great. I think he’s scared,” she told HuffPost. “He sees that everything is closing in on him. And he knows he’s losing the battle of public opinion when it comes to the actual substantive proposals that we’re advancing to the public.”

The different reactions reflect a battle within the Democratic Party that Trump and Republicans are eager to exploit.

Republicans have seized on Trump’s arguments to attack Democrats.

“Socialism has failed everywhere it’s been tried and we’re not going to try it in this country,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on the Senate floor this week.

Sen. Doug Jones (D), who faces a tough reelection in Alabama next year, also stood up to applaud Trump’s rejection of socialism.

“I think it’s true. It’s a true statement, it’s not going to happen. It’s that simple, nobody wants it to happen,” he said of Trump’s pledge that the nation will never become socialist.

Jones dismissed Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal to tax the nation’s very highest income earners at 70 percent of their top-bracket income.

“There’s a lot of talk about things like that. I think we need to look at practical issues when it comes to tax and things like that and I’m not sure how practical that is,” he said.

Image result for socialism in venezuela


 

American Treasure Thomas Sowell Decimates Socialism

Thomas Sowell remains among our greatest American intellectuals of the modern era. An African American, Korean War veteran, economist, and social theorist, his life and insight would be far more known but for one thing—he’s a small government conservative despised by the left.

His teachings should be required reading in our high schools and universities but those entities are run by anti-American group-think thought police so instead people must seek him out. If you’ve never heard of Mr. Sowell let this be your introduction. Here are his thoughts on the increasingly dangerous attitude of intellectually bankrupt Americans now willing to embrace socialism as a means of rule even as human history makes clear such a choice inevitably leads to no choice in anything. You are told what to think, what to say, how to live, and when to die. That’s the dark reality of socialism and its evils are responsible for the death of hundreds of millions of human beings across the globe. American history used to teach that truth but now those in charge of dictating history to the unthinking masses are themselves supporters of socialism and so the dangerous trap has been set as younger generations, their eyes glued to their social media devices, smile and nod when told to support a socialist regime. They are marching into the political meat grinder constructed upon the foundation of their collective ignorance.

Socialism’s true intent has always been slavery. It would make bricks of us all…

 


 

Candace Owens Challenges Democrat Socialist Darling Ocasio-Cortez To A Debate. Cortez Runs Away…

The rumors have been proven true – Ocasio-Cortez, socialist media darling, is the most current low-intelligence face of the Democrat Party. She can’t explain socialism, (while calling herself one) speaks in political generalities that would make even the political generalities emperor Barack Obama blush, and then when asked to participate in a debate on the current issues of the day, promptly declares debates to be “sexist.” (HUH?) Candace Owens, the fearless Millenial truthsayer of minority America who wants nothing more than people to think for themselves, offers to debate Ocasio-Cortez for charity. Cortez, now fearing the parking lot puddle depth of her intellectualism will be even more openly exposed, promptly runs away.

Via American Spectator:

The prom queen of socialism says debates are sexist.

Everyone’s favorite Democratic socialite continues to entertain, and not merely because of her unique views about how the world works beyond Westchester, NY. She has kept us in stitches with her claim that Medicare-for-All will save the nation zillions in funeral expenses, her weird belief that questions about the costs of M4A are merely GOP talking points, and her unique theory about the SCOTUS ruling in NFIB v. Sebelius. Now she has us slapping our thighs with comical excuses for refusing to participate in a debate about the virtues of socialism versus those of capitalism with black conservative Candace Owens.

Shortly following her refusal to accept a debate challenge from Ben Shapiro, claiming that it was somehow sexist, Candace Owens called out Ocasio-Cortez on that excuse by offering to donate $20,000 to a charity of the latter’s choice if she would debate capitalism vs. socialism. The self-styled “girl from the Bronx” has declined, but Owens isn’t letting her off the hook: “And what exactly was your excuse for having turned down the debate with me? Can’t wrap that one up in fake-feminism.” Not that her excuse is really a secret. Ocasio-Cortez knows little of socialism’s intellectual foundation, such as it was, and less about capitalism.

Gone are the days when serious, if hopelessly misguided, people like Michael Harrington could debate socialism in a civil fashion with heavyweight conservatives like William F. Buckley. All of Harrington’s claims have now been shown by history to be false, leaving the left with a catalog of empty slogans parroted by “progressives” who couldn’t stay in the ring with Buckley for 30 seconds. This is why the American left has now reverted to the suppression of free speech, the verbal abuse of its opponents, and outright violence. History hasn’t been kind to socialism, and honest debate will not be kind to Ocasio-Cortez.

——————

That last bolded sentence is very important because it speaks directly to what is going on in the country right now. The Far Left cannot win on ideas and substance because history has proven time and time again that leftism leads to totalitarianism which leads to chaos, starvation, the loss of human rights, and ultimately the loss of life. And so what is the Far Left in America to do? They attempt to harass, intimidate, and most recently, outright censor ideas that run counter to their own.

The Democrat party and its leftist enablers in the Establishment and Social Media complex are the Brown Shirt fascists of our time. That isn’t mere exaggeration.

It’s the truth.