Delusional, Mentally Ill Left

Trump won and the left has totally lost their marbles. To be clear, I believe most of the left who are situated near the center are reasonable and though they don't like Trump, they certainly do not want him to fail; they are willing to accept their loss. They put up a fight and got their asses handed to them. They knew Hillary was risky to run so they are slowly beginning to put the pieces together. Unfortunately, these reasonable liberals are not being acknowledged. Is it because their numbers are becoming fewer and fewer?Or is it because the media is merely showing the public those that reflect their own feelings? Maybe it's a little bit of both.

The media showed their true colors on election night. The mainstream coverage had insisted on a Hillary win and as the night wore on and votes came in, the media all over seemed to be in an unshakable state of cognitive dissonance. The smug looks had all melted into faces of disappointment and disgust. All of them seemingly asking, if not overtly asking, "What happened? How did we not see this?"

It's true, most all the polls had indicated an assured win for Hillary and the Democrats. The New York Times had insisted Hillary would win and rated her chances of winning above 90%. Liberals all over agreed that Trump didn't have a chance at winning. How soon they forgot that they were the same people who laughed and mocked the idea that Trump would win the primary.

In the following clip, we can see Bill Maher and his audience of clapping seals, laughing and mocking Ann Coulter as she declares confidently that Donald Trump has the best chance of winning the presidency.



I am waiting for Ann to go back on Bill Maher's show. The least he could do is give Ann her chance to glow in the light of success. It is likely this will happen considering the two have been friends for years but, as of writing this, she has not been invited back. Maybe she hasn't been back because she has been doing the rounds on so many other shows; it's clear her popularity has risen because of her accurate prediction.

After the Trump presidency was announced and made official, liberal commentators cried and shouted. Some of them seemed to be in such a state of shock that they could not control the words coming out of their mouths. How is it possible they were so wrong this entire time? For conservatives, it's very easy for us to see why - these people live in a bubble. For liberals, they refuse to acknowledge they live in this bubble so the answers are not quite so simple.

Some of the more devoted left, or what has been coined the "regressive" left, have turned to behaving in very sinister ways. Various protests and riots started being reported across the country. Some people have even been physically attacked for supporting Trump. Even more unusual were claims from SJW-types insisting that Trump supporters had attacked them. Most of these stories have been proven to be false, completely made up lies in order to garner sympathy or perhaps hate toward Trump supporters.

Take the case of Kathy Mirah Tu. Kathy took to social media after the election. She claims she's a student at the University of Minnesota. Her original post is below, click on the image to enlarge it.



In a nutshell, Kathy claims she was walking on a bridge when she heard a white male - yes, WHITE male shout at her and told her to, "Go back to Asia!" She continues walking, and he stops her again telling her she was being disrespectful. The two exchange some words involving affirmative action, which is quite hilarious since everyone knows those Asians are smart people. Let's face it, Asians don't exactly fall under the stereotype of being stupid. Kathy also schooled this WHTIE male on the fact that she is a US citizen and told him he should go back to the country where he comes from or I guess where someone came from in his family from years and years ago because she thinks everyone is from elsewhere? This WHITE male then grabs her by the wrist and suggests the two of them fight. She miraculously uses defense moves to undo his firm grip and then punches him in the throat, telling us she doesn't feel bad about doing so. Well, why would you? Seems a bit superfluous of a detail to add, unless of course, you're making the whole the thing up.

The WHITE man was accompanied by a few friends who watched the entire episode go down, doing nothing, and when they realized she was winning the fight, they called the police. The police put her in handcuffs because all these white men lied and blamed her for being the instigator. After some time, she was finally released and set free! Oh hooray! Thank gawd she was able to escape, find her way home, and post this fairytale for the world to see.

One major problem for Kathy is that this story was so powerful with some who became so outraged, they needed to be her voice and reach out the police and question them for putting her in handcuffs! How dare the police side with racist, white men and handcuff her! The police have no record of this incident or ever interacting with her. Kathy has since removed the post and it seems she removed herself from social media as well. Since there is no official report, not much can be done to punish this woman for making a false claim but hopefully, shame in getting caught in such a ridiculous lie will curtail this behavior in the future.Who knows what consequences there will be for Kathy. Google her name and this story is everywhere. Who will want to hire Kathy? What employer could trust her to work alone or work with others for that matter? What happens if Kathy ever does become an actual victim of racism and no one believes her because of this? Not only has Kathy put her own life at risk but she also has made light of any real incidents that may occur. She is not the only one.

Another student at the University of Louisiana decided she was going to tell the world she was attacked and had her hijab removed. Police investigated the claim and the young women finally came clean to admit she had made up the entire story. There have been several Muslim students who have claimed to be victims of hate crimes since the election but, none so far have really amounted to anything. This doesn't mean any legit crimes haven't been committed, only that most of them so far appear to be hoaxes. Many are still under investigation so, in time we will hear if they are fake or not.

One case under investigation can be found in Brooklyn, NY at a small French restaurant called Bar Tabac. I am not convinced this case is real since it sounds ridiculous.

According to the story, a couple was seated next to two women and the topic of the election was brought up. The white male, Trump supporter had asked the restaurant to throw two women out of the establishment because he heard them talking about Hillary? I'm not sure, the article is horribly written, leaving more questions than answers. The restaurant refused to throw the women out but did seat the male and his date elsewhere. They paid cash and left. Moments later the man returns in a state of rage and almost knocks down a child who was seated in a high chair and punches the woman he doesn't like in the face and somehow manages to escape. Some people followed and caught up with him but the white male, Trump supporter managed to escape! No cameras, no cell phones, no license plate, and of course he paid cash, so no record of who this lone Republican in Brooklyn, NY is. The woman had no injuries and refused medical care.

Anyone else having some major problems with this story?

1) It turns out the only witness to what occurred is the bartender. The only other witnesses did not actually see the main event but saw the women upset about what had occurred. One of these witnesses claimed that the victim sobbed uncontrollably and held her. So do these witnesses know the victim? The articles I have read about this do not reflect these people knew one another prior, but for someone suffering no injuries, why would they hold a stranger and sob unless they were with a familiar face?

2) This supposed Trump supporter is dining in Brooklyn, NY. Now anyone with a few working neurons knows and understands that all of NY is highly populated with lefties and liberals galore. Conservatives do exist but they exist in the shadows, in what appears to be small numbers. Conservatives are not going to be loud and vocal about their support for Trump in a public establishment like this. This would be suicide in many ways. According to the story, this conversation must have been loud enough and attention had to have been called to these people when they were seated on the other side of the restaurant.

Now imagine working in a restaurant and a customer asks you to throw out a pair of women because they don't like their politics. In this case, politics that are largely accepted by all in this area. This particular area voted soundly democrat in the presidential election so the people complaining are the outcasts. You decide to move them away to another area - that sounds reasonable but, I'm now expected to believe that all eyes are not directed toward this man for the duration of his meal? Nobody said anything to this man or followed him out originally to ensure he didn't come back?

3) Why on earth would a man who's candidate won the election be so angry as to re-enter a restaurant and physically hit a woman? He supports Trump and Trump won. He has zero reasons to be upset or angry. If anything, he would be laughing or it would be that woman who would feel emboldened to hit him. I cannot imagine a conservative man doing this but really, I cannot imagine a liberal man hitting a women in the face like this either. Sure, we've heard about men beating their wives like O.J. Simpson or Ike Turner, but these are domestic violence situations, where strong feelings are tied to the women who are victims. In this case, we are dealing with two strangers who have no connection whatsoever. It is not likely that any male would do something like this, especially an older one in his late 30's or early 40's as he was described.

4) No injuries? Really? No visible signs of the assault? I'm not buying it. Some guy comes storming in and clocks a woman in the face and she doesn't find herself knocked out cold? No bruises? No redness? No one witnessed this except for someone that was tending the bar? Then she even refuses medical care? Why would you not at the very least, check yourself out in the case of a possible internal injury? Or at least have a record so you can bolster your case when the man is caught? Or did you just not expect him to be caught because there was no attack and this was all just a hoax to help the bar get some publicity? It sure is funny how the local media picked up on this and it reached quite a few other outlets as well. So far, this is just a simple assault where no harm was done. Why would anyone from the press need to cover this story?

If you go onto their Facebook page, you can see they even made a special meme complete with virtue signals that discuss this incident. Scrolling down through that post you will see calls for opening up a GoFundMe account so that money can be raised. I don't see that they actually did this but, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if they did eventually.

5) Where are the surveillance cameras? Where are any cameras? No one pulled out their phone during any of this occurrence? The articles claim that people followed this man and caught up with him but being the Ninja he was, I guess he escaped in a white car anyway and of course no one got a license plate or a picture? That seems awfully suspicious to me. How likely is it this bar would not have some type of camera security? We aren't talking about upstate NY. We are talking about Brooklyn, NY - a place where a business should most certainly have a camera for their safety, as well as the safety of their customers.

Now, summarizing this all up, we can say that we still do not know for sure because I wasn't there, and neither were most of us. It will be up to the police to investigate and figure out exactly what occurred. I would never say this incident would be impossible to have occurred but, I am very skeptical of this particular claim. Perhaps, we will find out more information later on and until that happens, I'm going to bet this is another hoax.

While the left seems to enjoy engaging in these fake hate crimes and putting on these hoaxes for attention, the right has their share of hoaxes as well. The ones I have been able to find are really easy to debunk. It seems images that were taken from past events (having nothing to do with this election), are recycled and renamed, "attacked from a Hillary supporter." So creativity and complexity points rest firmly on the left when it comes to faux-crimes.

The question still remains - why? Why do people engage in this type of behavior? What good does it do anyone? If you really hate Trump and his supporters, false accusations only reflect poorly on you and other Hillary supporters. Is it purely for attention?

Gad Saad, who is an evolutionary behavioral scientist, who can be found on YouTube, has suggested that these fake cries are very similar behaviors displayed by those who suffer from Munchausen syndrome and Munchausen syndrome by proxy. There appear to be some people who are just looking for ways to seek out attention any way they can. It could be attention from the internet, the media, fellow students or peers, or perhaps looking for attention from friends and family. Playing victim is always an easy, almost no effort way to receive some sort of attention.

This moves us right along to the recount. Jill Stein is now calling for a recount of votes in only certain states she doesn't approve of the outcome where Trump was declared the winner. As with the 2000 election, the left only wants votes recounted in areas of their choosing. I am at a loss for words. We recently heard that Hillary was behind this effort as well. So the same women who criticized Trump for not answering a question about accepting the results, calling him a threat to our "democracy." We live in a Constitutional REPUBLIC, BTW. So not only is she a complete idiot but she is also a total hypocrite. It's not as if we didn't know this before but, these recent events only firmly confirm these characteristics.

Now onto the right, because I have some beef with my side as well. Let's talk Pizzagate. Oh boy. A perfect example of confirmation bias run amuck. I'll get into this in my podcast so be sure to join me.


Some sources:
http://gopthedailydose.com/2016/11/27/hillary-clintons-pizzagate-dnc-pedophile-ring-exposed-by-podestas-emails/

http://rightwingnews.com/racism/sjw-wonder-woman-turns-hate-hoaxer/

Fake crimes
http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/18/election-hate-crimes-hoaxes-hyperbole#comment

Making fun of a disabled reporter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueCdV_wCVrc

Adam and Dr. Drew discuss the Aftermath of Donald Trump's Election 2016

Hillary Hypocrite

Source

Come On Trump!

I swear I think these news stations carry this election stuff on just to frustrate us. I have been  up and down all night. I don't pray much these days but I did tonight - not for Trump, not for me, for our country. I just want what is best for all of us and we need to heal.

G-d Bless us all! G-d Bless America!

To whoever becomes president (please be Trump!), may we get behind them and wish the best for them - for all of us!

~Tooz

It's About That Time...

Source

Yes, I'm anxious and ready for this Tuesday to be over. I'm excited and nervous and happy and overjoyed. I cannot look at polls. I don't even care. I'm ready to vote FOR Trump. I'm not voting against Hillary - I'm voting FOR a man who I see as being the best opportunity America has for healing this nation. For all his flaws, the man is a winner and I believe he's determined to set the country moving in a positive direction that will ultimately lift all of us up and not collectively bring us down.

Whoever you vote for, make sure you are voting FOR that person.

If you haven't figured out who you will vote for...

Make the decision based on facts and not conspiracies. I know both the left and right has been hammered with one conspiracy after the next - I urge you to pay no mind to that gibbering. Focus on what has been laid out for you, the facts that you can verify, and discover which candidate agrees with you the most on what you believe.

You really should vote. I know many of you out there might be saying, "I'm not voting because I can't vote for either of these two clowns," or some other similar phrase. I understand but at the same time, your apathy is what allows the system to stay the same. Trump has at least a realistic shot at winning and a vote FOR him will at the very least shake things up in Washington. I urge you not be discouraged. Many people would love for you to feel this way and to feel hopeless but don't. We are not going to fix everything overnight and there will never be a candidate that will fill the role of Calgon's promise to take you away. This isn't Oz. There are no red slippers for heel-clicking. This is reality and you must deal with it - one step at a time.

For me, I know Trump is not this nation's savior. He will not get into the Oval Office and fix every problem. There's no human being that will do such a thing but, I do believe he will be able to at least accomplish a few of the goals that he has proposed and for me, that's good enough. I'm not seeking a hero; I'm just looking for a leader who believes in America.

I haven't been this excited since Reagan!

Trump 2016 "Let's do this!"

Hillary Cleared by FBI Again - Questions Still Not Answered

Forgive me for writing this quickly but I have to get this all out. I'm still trying to catch up on all the information and make sense of it so everything I write here now has the potential of changing in the following months.

The FBI apparently cleared Hillary from any wrong doing again, concerning e-mails found on Anthony Weiner's laptop.

For months conservatives have ben told via the internet that bombshells were going to be dropped concerning Clinton's alleged ties to child sex crimes and smuggling of children. The Wikileaks were able to confirm Bill Clinton's trips to pedo-island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Hillary is said to have also gone to this same island.

Now, we are finding out that there were indeed some US citizens that were involved in some illegal orphanage and child smuggling but Hillary, as head of State Department, was obligated to defend this person because of her citizen status.

Laura Silsby was arrested in Haiti. From the cable:

Laura Silsby, the leader of the U.S. missionaries, had claimed she planned to build an orphanage in the Dominican Republic, but authorities in the country said she never submitted an application for this purpose. Pagina 12 appeared more objective; however, it reported that while the Americans claimed to be on a humanitarian mission, "it transcended that the children were not orphans and that most were delivered to the U.S. missionaires with their parents' authorization." 

It appears that 10 citizens in total were originally arrested. Silsby was charged and served about 6 months in prison.  It is being reported that the communications concerning the possible charge of child smuggling were then turned into Clinton being involved but again, this would have been part of her job - protecting US citizens charged for crimes in other countries.

So, let's back up a bit...

After the earthquake, Laura Silsby and some other Christians from a Baptist Church went down to Haiti and gathered up some children and attempted to cross the Haiti-Dominican Republic border, to take to a hotel being converted into an orphanage. There were 10 people who were arrested for child trafficking. Eventually, all but Silsby were released and she did end up with a conviction and given time served.

It is quite unfortunate that so many of us were misled to believe this was much more nefarious than what it truly was. On the other hand, it is a relief to know that it does appear everyone is doing fine and no one was harmed; it was a case of people not doing things in a proper, legal way.

Yet, we still don't have any answers concerning Epstein and there are still rumors circulating that there is more to be released once certain people get out of the country for their personal safety. It's Sunday before the election and still nothing. Also, why hasn't NYPD followed up on their claim of releasing everything they have? Was most of this a misunderstanding or have we all been trolled?

Let's just say we have been trolled, why? What good did this accomplish? If they were trying to stir trouble up with Trump supporters, they played their hand so long that it seems to have still worked against Hillary, not for her.

Annonymous is claiming that there is still more but cannot be released for another few months because there is still so much to review and archive.

There is also the issue concerning The Clinton Foundation. Was there pay to play involved or not? Can this even be proven and where is Huma Abedin? How did the FBI manage to go through all 650,000 e-mails in less than 5 days? Even if they were mostly duplicates, that's still quite a few more e-mails than before and what were they doing Weiner's laptop? Isn't Hillary responsible for that information? How can she not be? How is it she has been allowed to be so reckless with e-mails? You can hardly blame people for thinking something disastrous considering we know who Weiner is and his pedophile nature.

The answers to these questions will not be answered anytime soon, if ever. Will it be too late? Are there some more tricks up the sleeves of crooked Hillary?

Tell me what you think. 

Yes, Stereotyping and Broad Brush Strokes Are Real and Here's Why

As someone who has studied politics and has followed politics for over 20 years, I can tell you that every time the presidential election comes along, an influx of people always barge their way into the conversation and then become upset whenever they are actually challenged. It's like being at a party and you're talking to a small group of people for a few hours and someone comes along, they hear a few lines, and then they proceed to lecture the group on all of what they think they know. Everyone tries to be polite, some may even try to correct this newcomer but, in the end, it never seems to smooth out. When it comes to politics, it's even worse because too many are led by emotions and not facts.

In modern times, the internet has made it extremely easier for these "newbies" to get involved and in some cases, these people find their own soap box to stand on. Their audiences are equally unaware of what is going on and it just seems to be a case of the blind leading the blind.

One problem I always run across is the anger that people have when you paint with broad brush strokes or label using stereotypes. To the newcomer, these very common ways of having a discussion are considered rude or "wrong" and should be somehow avoided, not realizing they themselves often engage in the very same tactic. The point is, when discussing politics, in confined amounts of time, we cannot use Pointillism. We must grab that very broad brush and get to painting.  The broad brush is akin to using an average or mean in mathematics. Those of us who regularly engage in political discussion understand that we are not talking about "all" people in a certain category. Of course, we mean "not all" and quite frankly, I'm a bit tired of having to explain this constantly but, if it's not done, you end up with lunatics resorting to calling you a racist or some other bizarre ad hom.

Most all people who involve themselves in American politics fall somewhere in the middle - maybe a little left or right but, generally certain views on issues will fall to the right or left side. This is just how politics works. There's no reason to take offense to this. Of course, you can be on the left and be a person who is against abortion. We all understand this but, generally speaking, when discussing pro-life, we are talking about an issue supported by the right. Generalizations are what moves the conversation forward. When someone has to continually disrupt and demand everyone talk about the anomalies, the conversation is stalled and tension begins to fill the air. One side is trying to discuss something in a way that has always been previously accepted, while another side is demanding the rules be changed because they are "offended" and do not truly understand the general rules.

It's not a matter of a logical fallacy when the general understanding has already been established. So when you turn on the news and you see a political pundit talking in very broad definitions, understand that there is a REASON they do this. They are merely trying to get out as much information as they can and discuss things in a way that allows the listener or viewer to develop a full picture quickly without being bogged down by too much detail. This isn't to say details should be ignored, it's to say that when it comes to general political discussions, we must be focused on the averages and not the deviations.

While I enjoy watching new people become more interested in politics, since this is a very important area that affects everyone who lives in this world, I also would like to encourage people to learn a little bit more about how discussions take place and how to navigate through them without so much emotion and without becoming so offended.

If there is an issue you are interested in learning more about, take the time to really research that topic from all of the different angles you can find. Learn about the history of that issue as well as why it's important to either side. Keep in mind that everyone is very different and we all should know that not every person on the right is the same, just like not every person on the left is the same. These are concepts that are already implied and should not need to be explained.

Political discussion should be fun and passionate but, things really turn sour when some people just don't quite understand the rules. This election has really brought out some disturbing behavior that I have never witnessed in prior elections. I really do believe part of the problem stems from people, 1) not knowing the very basics of political discourse, and 2) not having an understanding of historical reference concerning the issues.

To summarize everything:

1) The general views of issues tend to fall on the right or left.

2) We should all understand that most individuals believe in a combination of views. Some are on the left, some on the right. 

3) Stereotypes or generalities are used in politics, just like means or averages are used in math and science for the purposes of moving along a conversation and not used in a way to demean others.

4) Politics is a science and while emotion and passion can come into play, they should be generally avoided when you analyze an issue.

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #7 - Trump Tales

In this episode, I discuss Donald Trump and the allegations made toward him.. Enjoy.






E-mail from Summer Zervos:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/trump-images/screen_shot_2016-10-14_at_10.38.59_pm.png

Picture Trump Tower:

https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/trump-tower.jpg

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #6 - The 3rd Presidential Debate

In this episode, I discuss the final debate between Hillary and Trump. Enjoy. Share.

Faux Outrage From Left Concerning Trump

I believe yesterday is when I first heard about this leaked audio of Trump. All over Facebook, post after post, there were people in a huge frenzy, claiming Trump was such an awful person who is promoting sexual assault on women. On the other side of the aisle, conservative friends were bewildered by all the outrage.

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #5 - Making a Murderer - Conspiracies Part 2

In Part 2, I discuss scientific illiteracy.

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #4 - Making a Murderer - Conspiracies Part 1

In this episode, I discuss the various conspiracies that surround the Avery case. This will be followed up with a part 2. Enjoy. 

Quick Thoughts on the Presidential Debate #1 Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton

After watching the debate, I felt satisfied. Objectively these are two very different candidates who don't just have different ideas but very different demeanors and styles. Trump is fast in his word pace, trying to get out as much as he can, while Clinton was more controlled and steady. In short, both had a good night of debating - they had strong moments and weak ones as well.

Then, I go to my Facebook and wow oh wow... the reactions were all over the map. Some people were declaring a winner and of course this all fell on party lines. My lefty friends thought Hillary was amazing and Donald was rude and awful. My righty friends were all in for Donald, offering many praises and saying that Hillary failed miserably. I also have friends who are just bitter about the whole thing, offering up their negative-Nancy analysis declaring that both should eat crow.

Let me just say, yes, I'm voting for Trump. I like him. I like his style but, he's not everyone's cup of tea. I get that. I don't expect everyone to agree with me and I'm not interested in living in an echo-chamber either. This is why I have friends who hail from all over the political spectrum. However, I couldn't deny that Hillary put up a good performance.

Too many people seem to believe this was a sporting event but in reality, debates are about observing politicians and how they handle themselves. Are they quick on their feet? Can they command a room in a comfortable way? Or are they awkward? How do they handle uncomfortable situations? Let's face it, presidents will eventually find themselves in uncomfortable situations  and they need to be able to control themselves and still respond in an intelligent way.

One major difficulty both candidates must deal with is HOW they talk about the issues. Audiences often consist of about 20% of the people who have a superior knowledge of politics. They know their history and they know about issues. The other 80% consist of people on a spectrum who know little to very little about politics and in some cases - nothing. It's important for the candidates to state their positions clearly and with precision, demonstrating great knowledge, but not so sophisticated that you talk over the heads of the majority of your audience. It is a very difficult line to walk.

1) I didn't even really notice Trump sniffling but apparently the left did and now they are actually trying to say Trump was sniffing coke. This is so ignorant and if the roles were reversed, the top news story would read, "Racist and Evil Republicans Lose Debate and Makeup Stories About Clinton Using Coke." The accusation is baseless and absurd. I guess the left is just getting desperate to tear Trump down.

2) As far as him not releasing his tax statements, if his attorney advised him not to release the information until after his audit, then of course that's the route he should take. Releasing anything would just cause a delay in his audit and the public would be subjected to superfolous and half-assed biased speculation from liberal pundits. All of this would be a waste of time for Trump and the voters. If the situation were in reverse, the democrats would be calling foul immediately.

3) Trump needs to bring up Beghazi.

4) Hillary's, "I made a mistake," comment in response to her deleting 30,000 e-mails is not good enough. Setting up a private server and using that to send classified information is hardly what anyone with a few firing neurons would call, "a mistake." What she did was deliberate and wiping her server clean only further demonstrates that she had something to hide. It's becoming rather irriating that she thinks Americans are so stupid and she acts as if she's above reproach - the same demenor our current president displays.

5) Someone please tell me how Hillary is "for women" when she herself is a substandard example of a strong woman. She chose to stay with an abusive husband, a man who cheated on her and actually raped at least one woman we know about. She not only protected this sexual predator of women but, she also went after his victims. She slandered them and did everything in her power to shut them up. What kind of an example is this for woman in America?

Strong women who are not afraid of being alone, and not afraid to stand up for themselves are the only kind who have ever provided me with inspiration and help. These are the type of women we need to be an example for our future generations. To me, Hillary represents a weak woman who made the choice to stick with a man who treated her like garbage and she chose to keep this man to be an example for her own daughter. Hillary is more interested in herself then she is with empowering other women.

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #3 - Tale of the Spergy Sycophant

In this episode, I discuss some of the forensic evidence from Making a Murderer and debunk some delusions from a certain red-headed sycophant.





https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/bc000614.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqh82nV-8u4

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #2

For this episode, I will continue to discuss Making a Murderer and will touch upon the topics of confirmation bias and logical fallacies.

I must warn you that I had some difficulty with the audio. In short, I played around too much. When I tried to save some of my work, it didn't save. I'm sure I will be running into new problems as I go along (that's just to be expected when you're learning a new tool), but this time around I did discover some new tricks so hopefully the next one will go a lot smoother. Fingers crossed!



Please use the image below for reference during the first part of the show.


Ascorbic acid or Vitamin C

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/

The Alternative Conservative Podcast - Episode #1

This episode I discuss some basic information about the fauxumentary, Making a Murder. 

Black Salve - TLoNs Podcast #141

I Watched The Ann Coulter [Rob Lowe] Roast

I was a tad anxious and even apprehensive about watching Ann Coulter perform at this Roast of Rob Lowe. I wanted to watch the moment I discovered she would be on the panel of roasters because I was curious what she would say but, I was scared about what the others were going to say. I adore Ann but let's face it, she's not everyone's cup of tea; she certainly is not appreciated by the elites of Hollywood. Still, there was a glimmer of hope that her invite might also be a sign that perhaps some in Hollywood are at least willing to kid around with a conservative - a huge step in the right direction for them, and not just any conservative - this is Ann Coulter we are talking about.

Zarna Joshi - Is She For Real or Does She Have a Mental Illness?

 Zarna with a red dot on her forehead.

Zarna Joshi is credited as being a SJW activist, (that's Social Justice Warrior just in case you don't know). She recently uploaded a video documenting her own actions earlier this month while she attended Seattle's City Council accompanied by Black Lives Matter activists. They were all protesting the construction of a new police station that is being referred to as "The Bunker." 

The video begins with Zarna pointing out someone from the media interviewing a man she identifies as being pro-cop/pro-Bunker. She seems to be rather angry that she is witnessing the media interview this man and not someone from BLM. The man being interviewed has a daughter who was a heroin addict and he gives credit to the police for saving her life.

After his interview is over, the man has no choice but to walk by Zarma and notices she is filming him. He says to her (as best as I can hear), "You took my picture." Zarma confirms she did and then he asks, "you want my name?" She says yes and he responds jokingly, "Hugh Mongous."

The man clearly shows in his expression and name-joke that he is not taking this woman seriously. He certainly doesn't owe this woman anything, much less his real name however, Zarna becomes unhinged. She proceeds to shout at him, "Hugh Mongous what?" repeatedly. When he repeats himself with a smirk, she almost instantly begins to make the accusation that he sexually harassed her, "Is that sexual harassment?" At this point, the man is in utter disbelief. Zarna doesn't stop; she continues to go into a sort of frenzied rage, finishing off with an accusation that she was abused.

In the video, you can see the man slowly dismissing her and backing away with each step she takes towards him. As Zarna becomes louder and more enraged, she begins to reach out to her fellow supporters for affirmation. It's clear she's looking for support and she seems interested in getting other people excited and angered. We then see security intervene and the man walks away completely. Zarna now focuses her rage onto the people handling the security. "Are you going to do anything about how he sexually harassed me?"

The yelling and shouting continue and Zarna portrays herself as an immature, entitled, spoiled brat or someone going into some type of mentally disturbed rage. Her perception of reality is disturbing. I would imagine that most people, like myself, are left cringing watching this video as it unfolds and seems to never stop escalating until the very end. 

Zarna continues to verbally attack the security guards. She calls them vulgar names and insults them. She appears as being in an irrational state of total disbelief as to why they are not hunting down the man who told her a name joke. 

What did she expect them to do? The man has no authority over her; he is a complete stranger who happens to be a natural enemy by supporting the police. He doesn't owe her anything but let's say he did say something inappropriate. Let's pretend he said something real vulgar like, "You're a woman - only good for a pair of tits and a p*ssy. Now go make me a sammich." So what? It's not illegal to say something inappropriate or rude, not in this particular context anyway. If she worked for him that might be another story but, even then you have to prove the harassment. 

Her accusations about this man's behavior are absurd and irrational but what are we, as reasonable observers, supposed to make of this woman? Is she doing this for attention? Does she really believe her own nonsense? Or is she just behaving this way because she's brainwashed to react in this manner? I believe it to be a combination of sorts. I believe someone like this is probably suffering from some sort of mental issue coupled with a lack of intelligence. Add to this her interest in the far-left radical/regressive ideology, which indicates some brainwashing is present, and we are left with a recipe for disaster.

Radio talk show host, Michael Savage, has long claimed that liberalism in its extreme form is a mental disorder and this claim could not be more accurately expressed during this woman's video.

Zarna later took to social media and posted bizarre rants, further informing the world she's bat sh!t crazy. 

Encyclopedia Dramatica

It appears that Zarna has been in the process of trying to delete all traces of the very video she posted. She took down her Facebook post and has made other attempts at shutting down those who mirrored her video.

This woman calls herself a community organizer (imagine that), and can be found working through some extreme group called Backbone Campaign. She appears to be just another classical spoiled woman-child, in a state of arrested development, who is looking for anything to give her life meaning. She will even go so far as to make up things and slander innocent people in order to satisfy this need.

Congratulations to "Hugh Mongus" for dealing with Zarna so quickly and not taking anything this woman said seriously. This is exactly the type of treatment women like this deserve. They should never be taken seriously. Always double down when you encounter these loons. Never apologize for not sharing their mentally disturbed perception of reality. In the meantime, let's hope Zarna gets her medication balanced in the coming months. 

Pam Hupp - Remember Her?

Pam Hupp testifies during a civil trial in January 2016. Image courtesy of Fox 2 / Dave Sharp.

Dave Sharp

****UPDATE**** Pam has been arrested for first-degree murder in this case. ***Grab your popcorn and read below for latest update - written 8/27/16***

If you don't remember Ms. Hupp, be sure to check out my previous post here.

The short version- she is the woman who claimed to friends with Betsy Faria and was the last person to see Betsy before she died. Coincidentally, Betsy had signed over her life insurance policy to Pam just four days before she was stabbed to death. Pam also was used as a witness by the state to convict Russ Faris (Betsy's husband), of murder. Eventually, Russ' conviction was overturned and he is now a free man but during all this ordeal, the speculation over Pam and her possible involvement in Betsy's death continues and today we learn just another reason why that is.

Pam Hupp has found her way back into the headlines of her local news. It is confirmed she killed a man who she claims broke into her home.

So far, the reports confirm Pam claimed she was in her driveway when she was approached by a man. There was some sort of struggle that moved inside her home and she shot him dead. She also managed to call the police prior to grabbing a gun and shooting this man dead. Then she called the police back informing them she had killed the man.

The man has now been identified as 33-year-old Louis Gumpenberger. Pam claims she doesn't know who this man was. It has just been reported that in 2005, Louis had suffered in a car accident where he was driving drunk and steered into oncoming traffic resulting in a brain injury.

Those who knew Louis are suspicious. They simply do not understand how he was able to make his way to Hupp's home and because of his disability and his nature, they are simply not convinced he was there to commit a robbery. Considering Pam Hupp's past, it is safe to say their skepticism is quite reasonable.

According to the latest report, Louis was scheduled for a job interview at BCI Packaging, a place he had worked at before. 

“It was odd that he didn’t show up because he really, I mean he had come up here so many times wanting the job,” program director Katie Jones said. “So we knew something was off not to show up for the interview.”

Even more bizarre is the fact that Louis did not drive. He generally went nowhere without his mother yet somehow he found his way to Pam Hupp's home 13 miles away from his apartment. How?

So far, Pam had a mother who died in a tragic yet odd way. She was the last person to see Betsy alive. We also know that just before Betsy died, she had collected money for a woman who had cancer yet that woman's family never saw a dime from Pam. Pam also had several different stories about Betsy's life insurance policy; ultimately the court allowed her to keep it even though she had already spent all the money on herself. Who in their right minds believes a young woman would rather have had a distant friend gain $150,000 after her death as opposed to her own daughters? Finally, we have a disabled man approaching Pam in her driveway, somehow finding his way inside her home, and shot dead.

Drama, crazy, and death follow Pam wherever she goes. Hopefully, this time, the police will figure out why.

***UPDATE 8/27/16 

TRIGGER WARNING - The image below may terrify the average person. Proceed with caution. Please remove all children from the room before scrolling down. 

Holy sh!t it's Pam Hupp in her new fav color - prison orange. 

Pam has been arrested and you're never gonna believe this crazy ass story - we are talking epic-fail, epic-stupid. So grab your wine or whatever your poison and a snack and let's try our best to dissect this nutzo story.

Louis Gumpenberger was found dead in Hupp's home after she called police informing them a man was trying to break into her home. Initially, not much information was known about what had transpired other than we were told that Pam was cooperating with authorities - how nice of her.

Police have finally laid out the evidence against Pam and why they have chosen to finally throw her this psychotic bitch behind bars and this story is a doozie, let me tell you.
Here's what we know...

Several days before this shooting took place, Pam approached a woman and told her she worked for Dateline. She offered this woman $1000 to read a script that Pam claimed would be them reenacting a 911 call. The woman initially agreed but became suspicious when Pam could not provide any credentials. This woman then took to her Facebook page and warned people about a blonde woman in an SUV claiming to be with Dateline.

When police found this woman, she also described to them the 911 call Pam wanted her to record. It sounded eerily similar to the call police received when Pam reported the break-in.

With all the new information police know, it is believed that Pam had approached Louis just outside of his apartment building. Her cell phone shows it pinged right near his apartment complex about 40 minutes prior to her 911 call. Since Louis was consistently described as someone who was trusting and gullible, Pam's offer of $900 for reading a short script likely seemed believable to Louis and he trusted her enough to get into her vehicle where she proceeded to drive home. The reenactment was then played out resulting in Pam shooting Louis and murdering him. 

Police say they had discovered a note in Louis' pocket that described a plan for Louis to kidnap Pam, take her to the bank to get "Russ' money," and then Louis was instructed to kill Pam and bring the money to Russ. Accompanying the note was $900 and this note was recognized by police as having been planted on Louis. 

Can we just stop and laugh hysterically for a few minutes? 

Holy sh!t this is retarded! So Pam wanted the police to believe that Russ tracked some guy down to get money from Pam and have her killed? This guy was actually supposed to get over a hundred grand from Pam, kill her, and actually bring it back to Russ so that Russ could them give him a paltry 10k???? ...and all this was written in a note the hitman was carrying on his person?? LMFAO!!! ROFL!!! 

Oh but it gets even more stupid. No. Not kidding.

Pam told police that someone dropped Louis off and he approached her in her driveway, held a knife to her throat, and physically attempted to push her into her vehicle so they could get "Russ' money." She also told police she didn't know a Russ.

What the ever--loving f**k? She went through two murder trials where Russ was the defendant and she was the star witness and can't think of who Russ is? Someone slap her around, please. 

Being the super-Pam she is, she managed to get away from a strange man holding a knife to her and she ran inside her home to call police. She then claims this man came into her house and she was forced to grab her gun from her nightstand and when he came closer, she shot him dead. Wow, what a hero she makes herself out to be and in reality, she's just a coward and a cold-blooded killer who has the mentality of a child. 

So this old, fat woman collecting disability told police she got away from a younger man holding a knife to her and she expected someone to believe this? Oh Pam, you did not think any of this through, did you? What makes this even more hilarious is by doing this and getting caught, she fully implicated herself in Betsy's murder. Why else would she bother with such an elaborate hoax?

Pam was arrested. Having access to a pen, Pam went to the restroom at the police station and stabbed herself in the wrists and neck (just like how Betsy died), but as with everything Pam does, she failed to rid the world of her sorry ass existence. She was taken to the hospital and treated. 

From what has been reported, it seems that Pam may have carried out this murder as a way to deflect pressure from police who have likely re-opened the Faria case. It has also been stated that police re-examined Hupp's mother's death and found no wrongdoing however, most people (online), are convinced Pam helped push her mother to an early grave.

Now that Pam is behind bars, it will be interesting if her husband says something to the media or to the police. Who knows what twists and turns are ahead but if the past in any indication of the future, this is going to get even more interesting.