Month: August 2018

Anti-white racism is endemic among liberals.  For liberals, it is permissible to show disdain for white people in a way that would be totally, totally unacceptable to show for blacks, Hispanics, or people of other “colors” of the liberal rainbow.

This is clearer than ever now that we have been exposed to the ravings of The New York Times’ latest hire, editorial writer Sarah Jeong.  Jeong, who is Asian (a word I despise for its P.C. vagueness), has a long history of making racist comments about white people on Twitter.  When confronted with the fact of this, the Times doubled down, releasing a statement saying it knew about Jeong’s comments but was okay with them because Jeong was just using “satire” to bait people who were making racist comments against her.

Can you imagine the Times excusing such naked racism as “satire” if directed against any other ethnic group?  I think not.  I think Jeong was hired not in spite her racist rants, but rather because of them.  Because I think Jeong says exactly what liberals feel.

Let’s look at some of her tweets:

1. “Dumba– f—— white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs p—— on fire hydrants”

Liberals tell us all the time that the opinions of white people do not matter, only the sensitivities of “victim classes.”

2. “oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get from being cruel to old white men.”

We are constantly told how old the white population is, and the media gleefully count off the years, days, and minutes until the time they are no longer in the majority.  When whites become a minority in a particular school or workplace or town, it is a cause for media celebration.

3. “I dare you to go on Wikipedia and play ‘Things white people can definitely take credit for’ it’s really hard.”

The media constantly report “the first black to do X” and “the first Hispanic to do Y” but never talk about race when a white person accomplishes anything (unless it is a woman), in line with their policy of promoting accomplishments only of non-white males.

4. “White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon.”

See #2 above.

5. “I was equating Trump with Hitler before it was cool.”

The liberal media do this all the time, trying to delegitimize not merely Trump, but the millions who voted for him as racist and extreme.

6. “I open my mouth to politely greet a Republican, but nothing but an unending cascade of vomit flows from my face.”

Liberals encourage violence like this all the time.  What consequences has Maxine Waters faced for encouraging people to harass Sarah Sanders?  None.  How many Berkeley rioters have faced punishment for violent acts against conservative speakers?  None.

You may remember that the publisher of The New York Times met with President Trump two weeks ago to complain about Trump’s adversarial comments about the media.  At the very same time the publisher was complaining about Trump, he was hiring an out-and-out anti-white racist for his senior editorial staff.

Liberals hate white people, even if they themselves are white (the self-loathing makes them feel virtuous, in a twisted way).  But as they issue forth their propaganda, they want to maintain the charade of impartiality.  Sarah Jeong has done us all a great service for once again exposing the liberal media as the base, vile, anti-white racists they truly are.

Ed Straker is the senior writer at Newsmachete.com.

Anti-white racism is endemic among liberals.  For liberals, it is permissible to show disdain for white people in a way that would be totally, totally unacceptable to show for blacks, Hispanics, or people of other “colors” of the liberal rainbow.

This is clearer than ever now that we have been exposed to the ravings of The New York Times’ latest hire, editorial writer Sarah Jeong.  Jeong, who is Asian (a word I despise for its P.C. vagueness), has a long history of making racist comments about white people on Twitter.  When confronted with the fact of this, the Times doubled down, releasing a statement saying it knew about Jeong’s comments but was okay with them because Jeong was just using “satire” to bait people who were making racist comments against her.

Can you imagine the Times excusing such naked racism as “satire” if directed against any other ethnic group?  I think not.  I think Jeong was hired not in spite her racist rants, but rather because of them.  Because I think Jeong says exactly what liberals feel.

Let’s look at some of her tweets:

1. “Dumba– f—— white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs p—— on fire hydrants”

Liberals tell us all the time that the opinions of white people do not matter, only the sensitivities of “victim classes.”

2. “oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get from being cruel to old white men.”

We are constantly told how old the white population is, and the media gleefully count off the years, days, and minutes until the time they are no longer in the majority.  When whites become a minority in a particular school or workplace or town, it is a cause for media celebration.

3. “I dare you to go on Wikipedia and play ‘Things white people can definitely take credit for’ it’s really hard.”

The media constantly report “the first black to do X” and “the first Hispanic to do Y” but never talk about race when a white person accomplishes anything (unless it is a woman), in line with their policy of promoting accomplishments only of non-white males.

4. “White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon.”

See #2 above.

5. “I was equating Trump with Hitler before it was cool.”

The liberal media do this all the time, trying to delegitimize not merely Trump, but the millions who voted for him as racist and extreme.

6. “I open my mouth to politely greet a Republican, but nothing but an unending cascade of vomit flows from my face.”

Liberals encourage violence like this all the time.  What consequences has Maxine Waters faced for encouraging people to harass Sarah Sanders?  None.  How many Berkeley rioters have faced punishment for violent acts against conservative speakers?  None.

You may remember that the publisher of The New York Times met with President Trump two weeks ago to complain about Trump’s adversarial comments about the media.  At the very same time the publisher was complaining about Trump, he was hiring an out-and-out anti-white racist for his senior editorial staff.

Liberals hate white people, even if they themselves are white (the self-loathing makes them feel virtuous, in a twisted way).  But as they issue forth their propaganda, they want to maintain the charade of impartiality.  Sarah Jeong has done us all a great service for once again exposing the liberal media as the base, vile, anti-white racists they truly are.

Ed Straker is the senior writer at Newsmachete.com.

This is something the hucksters at the Southern Poverty Law Center are really going to “hate.”

The Alabama-based group is best known for branding conservative, Christian organizations as “hate groups,” simply for working toward goals that are exactly the opposite of the liberal left. And in doing so has collected obscene amounts of money from gullible (or cynical) liberal donors.

But an announcement this week by Attorney General Jeff Sessions could be putting the SPLC in the cross hairs of legal action. And it’s not the kind of place it’s used to being.

Speaking at the Justice Department’s Religious Liberty Summit on Monday, Sessions announced DOJ is forming a new religious liberty task force aimed at protecting the freedom of religion Americans that are guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution.

“A dangerous movement, undetected by many, is now challenging and eroding our great tradition of religious freedom,” Sessions said, according to a Justice Department transcript of the remarks. “There can be no doubt. This is no little matter. It must be confronted and defeated…

TRENDING: Tucker Skewers Illegal Alien Attorney Over Basic Constitutional Privileges

“We have gotten to the point where courts have held that morality cannot be a basis for law; where ministers are fearful to affirm, as they understand it, holy writ from the pulpit; and where one group can actively target religious groups by labeling them a ‘hate group’ on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

And while he didn’t name any names specifically, it wasn’t hard to guess one particular group Sessions had in mind as presenting a direct threat to what Sessions called a “core American principle.”

Many organizations on the left and in the mainstream media toss around the term “hate group” to brand anyone they disagree with. But the SPLC’s use of the word – and its unchallenged acceptance by major corporations and media organizations – is in a class by itself.

It was the SPLC’s branding of the Family Research Council as a “hate group” that led directly to a 2012 attack on the FRC’s Washington headquarters that was foiled by an unarmed security guard who wrestled the gunman to the ground. According to the Washington Examiner, the attacker specifically cited the SPLC in explaining his motive to the FBI.

It was the SPLC that designated the religious legal group Alliance for Defending Freedom as a “hate group” that led to the ADF being removed from a fundraising program operated by Amazon.

And it was the SPLC that produced its own “hate map” of monuments to, and places named for, Confederate figures – including schools. It doesn’t take a genius to see a move like that could put huge numbers of children in danger, simply because the liberals at the SPLC don’t like the name of their school.

Despite the years of mounting evidence that the SPLC has long since abandoned its primary mission as a civil rights organization, it continues as a liberal fundraising behemoth, capitalizing obscenely on racial strife in the United States.

In the aftermath of the Charlottesville riot in June 2017, it received $1 million donations from Hollywood actor George Clooney and his wife, Amal, as well as Apple, according to a commentary piece in The New York Times by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the anti-Islamist former Dutch lawmaker.

This spring, according to the Washington Examiner, the SPLC had roughly half-a-billion dollars in its war chest, thanks to the donations it receives from people who either think it really is a civil rights organization, or from groups and organizations that have a vested interest in helping the SPLC attack conservative groups – the ones it brands “hate groups.”

RELATED: Sessions Cheers Young Cons for Not Backing Down, Then Backs Down from Anti-Hillary Chant

So, no, Sessions didn’t specifically cite the SPLC in his remarks about the new task force to defend religious liberty, but he didn’t have to. It was SPLC-style bigotry he clearly had in mind. And those who have been attacked by the SPLC knew who he was talking about.

“My guess is that Sessions is setting the FBI or some outlet of the Justice Department to take an objective look at this whole concept of hate labeling, its impact, its origins, and its legitimacy,” retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, executive vice president of the Family Research Council, told PJ Media.

“The SPLC has targeted religious groups particularly — not exclusively, but particularly Christian groups and Christian individuals — that’s why we at FRC were targeted.”

Boykin also noted a relationship between the SPLC and the FBI that started in the Obama era, according to a Fox News report by Tucker Carlson.

“When you’ve got an organization in the United States that is illegitimately targeting groups because of their Christian views and you have agencies in the federal government that are legitimizing that data, that is a recipe for disaster,” Boykin told PJ Media.

“Attorney General Jeff Sessions has got to get to the bottom of that problem.”

With Monday’s announcement of the task force for religious liberty, Sessions might have started to do just that.

And the SPLC might really have something to “hate.”

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

To hear most liberals talk, there is no need at all for the average citizen to own a gun, much less carry one in public and certainly not around young children.

But a young father of six in Georgia with a concealed carry permit just proved how very wrong that assumption by the left truly is, as he used his handgun to protect his children, along with the children of others, from a potentially threatening naked man at a park, according to The Daily Caller.

The incident occurred Sunday at an Atlanta-area park in Newton County, Georgia, where Tae Lovelace and his family were helping feed the hungry homeless people.

A man wearing only underwear soon arrived and began to behave strangely, then later shed even that minimal article of clothing to become completely naked while making moves toward the children.

“It was a life-changing experience to be put in a situation like that. I don’t wish no one to be put in a situation like that,” stated Lovelace in an interview with WAGA.

TRENDING: Tucker Skewers Illegal Alien Attorney Over Basic Constitutional Privileges

It was the first time that Lovelace had ever felt the need to draw his licensed and permitted handgun in public, and it is likely a good thing he didn’t hesitate.

Lovelace explained to WAGA that he and his family were feeding the homeless at the Covington Park basketball courts around 5 p.m. Sunday when the flasher, later identified as Josten Meeler, arrived in only his underwear.

The armed father recalled that Meeler had arrived “… in his underwear and he proceeds to not act normal and it seemed like he was under the influence of something.”

That man then exposed himself to the children on the playground and was quickly chased away by adults, only to return again a short time later, this time entirely naked.

“He runs up on my kids and the mother of my child and at that point in time I go and get my firearm,” stated Lovelace.

“He was already touching people before he was naked so when he came up running directly toward the kids, that’s a problem,” the protective father continued.

“It could’ve went sour if I didn’t have anything to defend myself. I didn’t know what he was capable of doing,” he added.

According to a report from the Covington Police, Lovelace proceeded to hold Meeler at gunpoint until officers arrived on the scene and took the naked man into custody.

RELATED: Surveillance Video Shows Groped Waitress Take Matters into Her Own Hands

“I’m a family man,” Lovelace said. “I had to protect my family by all means. Having my firearm and being licensed to carry definitely came in handy that day.”

Indeed it did. Thankfully, the armed family man didn’t have to actually fire his gun, as its mere presence was enough to stop the situation from escalating, and it is worth pointing out that no harm came to anyone at the park … because of the father’s firearm, not in spite of it.

Let this story be an object lesson for the anti-gun liberals about why so many American citizens cherish and staunchly defend their God-given, Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

An independent congressional candidate in Oregon recently issued a disgusting and disparaging remark about first lady Melania Trump on Twitter, and the first lady’s office just let that candidate know how “pathetic” he truly was for doing so.

According to The Daily Caller, Mark Roberts — who is running independently for Oregon’s 2nd Congressional District seat, and has labelled himself a “conservative” — issued the jaw-dropping comment in response to a post from conservative Turning Point USA President Charlie Kirk.

Kirk’s post was in regard to the dramatic difference in staff size of the current first lady as compared to her predecessor, former first lady Michelle Obama — Trump’s staff is reportedly less than half of Obama’s — and Roberts responded with an incredibly misogynistic attack on the wife of the president.

Roberts tweeted, “Did you know the First Lady works by the hour?” and included the hashtags “#thinkdirty” and “#hoebag” in his reply to Kirk, the obvious implication being that Melania Trump is some sort of prostitute.

Needless to say, the “despicable” tweet received heavy fire in the replies for the utterly classless manner in which Roberts maligned the first lady, and now even the first lady’s office has weighed in on the matter with a statement that should leave him sufficiently shamed … if he is even capable of feeling shame.

TRENDING: Tucker Skewers Illegal Alien Attorney Over Basic Constitutional Privileges

“This is just more hypocritical intolerance from those who oppose her husband’s administration,” said Stephanie Grisham, spokeswoman for the first lady, in a statement provided to CNN reporter Kate Bennett.

“To say such ugly words about a mother, wife and our First Lady is not just a pathetic attempt at getting himself in the news, it is disturbing and despicable,” the statement added.

From @StephGrisham45
“This is just more hypocritical intolerance from those who oppose her husband’s administration. To say such ugly words about a mother, wife and our First Lady is not just a pathetic attempt at getting himself in the news, it is disturbing and despicable.” https://t.co/eEEFU7VCru

— Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) August 1, 2018

Perhaps in light of the shockingly low nature of the attack launched at the first lady, even a number of self-proclaimed Democrats in the replies to the statement sided with Melania.

One commenter, in response to the few who didn’t seem to care about the character assault on the first lady, asked the obvious question: “Would you be okay if this was said about Michelle Obama?”

Of course, we all know the answer to that question — had Roberts issued the same statement about Obama, he would already have been forced to withdraw from the congressional race and likely would have gone into hiding from outraged liberal mobs intent on extracting blood as retribution. But since it’s an attack on Melania Trump, #TheResistance is strangely quiet.

Yet, he remains in the race at this point, and despite the outcry against him — even including a demand from House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy that Roberts be banned from Twitter — the account remains active and the offending tweet has yet to be deleted, according to The Oregonian.

That article noted that Roberts has a history of posting odd, and at times misogynistic, tweets about a number of female politicians on both sides of the political aisle.

In truth, Roberts is little more than a “fringe” candidate with literally no hope of defeating long-time incumbent Republican Rep. Greg Walden, as he has made minimal effort to raise campaign funds or conduct voter outreach.

RELATED: Always Remember: ‘Down to Earth’ Michelle Had WH Staff Twice as Big as ‘Spoiled’ Melania’s

His attack on the first lady, as well as the others in the months preceding, were most likely intended solely to draw attention to himself, which he most certainly has done.

Roberts may claim to be a “conservative,” but his trashy remark disparaging the character of the first lady proves he is anything. Hopefully, he will quickly fade away into obscurity now that everyone of all ideological stripes realizes what a “pathetic” woman-hating loser this guy truly is.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.