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

Obama Administration -- Incompetence Or Cover Up?

Is the mishandling of the attacks to our Embassy and Consulate due to incompetence or covering up something else? To be fair there may be a 3rd or 4th option but unfortunately I am not seeing any. We finally learned that the anti-Muslim movie had nothing to do with the attack on our country. You know the movie The White House originally insisted was the catalyst for the attacks that occurred in Libya and Egypt on Sept. 11th.

In fact, when several in the media and on the internet questioned if it was a planned terror attack, these types of conclusions were dismissed and declared to be false. In fact, just a few days later the buzz around this story concluded that not only were the attacks planned but that the administration was warned about them some 24-48 hours before they occurred.







Now Jay Carney is now telling us the attack was an act of terror.



Mitt Romney got a chance to bring up this topic during the debate because of a question asked by a person in the audience. Romney stated that it took two weeks for the president to state that the attacks were those made by terrorists and had nothing to do with a movie as originally stated.

If you saw the debate, you know first hand that the moderator Candy Crowley was none too thrilled with Romney bringing this up and actually went so far as to say Obama did call the attack one of terror.

The moderator in Tuesday night's presidential debate, after appearing to side with President Obama on the question of whether he called the Libya strike a terror attack from the start, conceded afterward that Mitt Romney was "right" on the broader point -- that the administration for days insisted it was a spontaneous act.  

"He was right in the main. I just think he picked the wrong word," Candy Crowley said of Romney on CNN shortly after the debate ended.

Read more here.

However, Obama didn't explicitly label the Benghazi strike terrorism in those Sept. 12 remarks. What he did say is: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."  

Crowley, during and following the debate, pointed out that despite Obama's Sept. 12 remarks his administration was peddling a different story to the public. She said it took two weeks for officials to say more definitively that the attack was more than an out-of-control protest.  

And she continued to clarify on CNN that Romney was making a legitimate point.  

"Right after that I did turn around and say, 'but you are totally correct that they spent two weeks telling us that this was about a tape'," she said.

Well, gee I'm glad she made that so clear because there were people in the audience that were actually applauding and so many more like them watching from home that now believe Obama did say it was an act of terror. Let's face it, Obama relies on people to not pay attention. This is and always has been the strategy of the left in this country. What an awesome group of people we have running this country -- into the ground.

After the debate Tuesday, Obama tried to clarify his remarks. The man who posed the Libya question, Kerry Ladka, told Fox News that the president approached him after the debate to explain he delayed explicitly labeling the attack terror because "he really wanted to take the time to be deliberate, to make sure he had all the information." 

Well, well, well, this is interesting. First he says in the debate with full confidence that he did indeed label the attack one of terror and now he's telling this man that he didn't do that originally? I guess the democrats will call this man a liar too, right?

More stupidity:

Obama also informed us that our gas prices were low when he came into office because the economy was in a state of ruin. He seems to think that we are now on the right track. Our gas prices now are almost 4 dollars a gallon here in the Midwest. So is he suggesting that rates will become even higher if we improve, or that high gas prices is what he has been working towards?

Whatever the reason for Obama's remarks, it's clear that he wasn't very comfortable during the debate. Several times he sort of trailed off. When Romney had a chance to mention Fast and Furious, Obama actually called out for Candy to stop Romney and she complied and was insistent about shutting Romney up.

Obama looked a little hopped up on speed or something. He was too aggressive and once again, seemed like a man about to come unhinged. Both Biden and Obama have made it crystal clear during the past debates that they are unable to control themselves for short periods of time. They both appear to be very angry when they are asked to explain and defend their actions. It is almost as if they truly feel they are above reproach.

My opinion overall was that Obama seemed desperate to do whatever it took to put in a good performance but, once again, we got the same old rhetoric mixed with an over-inflated ego. He gives the audience the impression that he is insecure and he seems to be fully aware of what a failure his administration has been the last four years. It looks like all his ideals, when applied, simply do not work. Had he taken the time to read history a little more and invested some more time in the area of economics, he would have known his old, tired ideas do not work prior to running for office. His knowledge of the economy has proven to be extremely sophomoric. He took a problem and simply amplified it.

On the other hand, I did like Romney's performance overall but there were times that I could see he may not have come off as sincere. I believe him to be sincere, but I was trying to do my best viewing him as someone who is liberal or undecided. He did demonstrate his knowledge and he definitely came off much more presidential. Perhaps if Obama had some facts on his side, he would have done much better during the debate.

If Obama Knew...

If Obama knew that the attacks were going to happen because our government was warned 48 hours ahead of time and he did NOTHING to increase security...that coupled with the terrorists finding an undisclosed location of the "safe house"...this is TREASON! Is it not? Obviously he put some other interest ahead of the American people. He should be locked up, tried, and then put to sleep.

North Korea Promises More Attacks

Click here for story.