Over the course of that last few years, or maybe a bit longer, there has seemed to be an increasing number of leftwing loons who have, for one reason or another, been able to attain the moniker of ‘professor.’  Now I can only assume that in order for such a thing to have occurred, the bar must now be set pretty low.  And in demonstrating just how low the bar has become, we have ‘Professors’ Marc Lamont Hill and Michael Eric Dyson.  Apparently these two boobs are of the opinion that if they use all three names it will somehow make them appear to be smarter than what they actually are.  However, unfortunately for them, it’s as soon as they open their mouth and begin to speak that it becomes noticeably apparent, and in fairly short order, that both are far from being terribly bright.

And as an example of why I say that there was a recent incident that I’m sure most have now heard about where a man in a San Antonio, Texas Whataburger stole a boy’s MAGA hat and then tossed his drink on the group of Trump-supporting teens.  “You ain’t supporting s*it, n******,” the man told the teens after he threw his drink on them.  And it was a couple of days later that ‘Professor’ Marc Lamont Hill, who is also a commentator on the Communist News Network (CNN), took to Twitter taking it upon himself to condone the attack on this 16 year-old kid.  Yup, you have to be some kind of a douche bag, which ‘Professor’ Hill most certainly is, to see the assaulting of child over something as stupid as politics as being in any way appropriate.  It makes clear the very warped mentality possessed by those on the left.

And it was after some TMZ staffer by the name of Van Lathan seemed to defend the man’s behavior in a Thursday tweet, writing, “Wish I could take the high road. But your MAGA hat reads like a swastika to me” that ‘Professor’ Hill then responded with a tweet of his own of three crying laughing emojis.  ‘Professor’ Hill claimed in a follow-up tweet on his own page that while he doesn’t “advocate throwing drinks on people,” still suggested that wearing a MAGA hat invites assault and that it’s hard to “feel sympathy” for the teen.  He said, “Yes, i think MAGA hats (deliberately) reflect a movement that conjures racism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc.”  He added, “So yes, it’s a little harder to feel sympathy when someone gets Coca Cola thrown on him.”  The ‘professor’, it seems, is your typical leftist.

And it was also on Thursday, on CNN’s “New Day,” and albeit on a somewhat slightly different topic, that Hill’s fellow leftwing ‘professor’ and CNN contributor, Michael Eric Dyson, got into a rather heated debate with conservative commentator Scott Jennings over a Quinnipiac poll that apparently showed that 49 percent of respondents believe that President Trump is racist.  Jennings said the poll is a “reflection of the extreme political polarization in America right now.  And he went on to say, “We are willing to ascribe all of the worst motivations to every policy view, to every action that our political opponents take.”  And he continued by saying, “In this case what the people who disapprove of Trump believe he’s a racist and everything he does must be rooted in racism.”

To which the good ‘Professor’ Dyson responded by saying, “The reality is this well, Donald Trump talks like a racist, thinks like a racist, makes statements like a racist, conjures emotions that give support to white nationalists. Yeah, he’s a racist. Racism is as racism does. So here’s the problem, Martin Luther King Jr. said it’s not the white supremacists who are the problem it’s white moderates and conservatives who are complicit by trying to dismiss it. Brother Jennings, much respect for you but what you’re doing is egregious because you’re attempting to make valid what are essentially naked raw statements of racism.”  I dare say that for a black man ‘Professor’ Dyson seems to be rather ignorant regarding what it was that Dr. Martin Luther King was all about. But I’m not surprised.

But anyway, ‘Professor’ Dyson went on to say, “This is easy stuff. This is very, very clear that it has racial animus here, and you’re trying to dismiss it as a difference of opinion. That is complicit in the racist element we’re talking about.”  Jennings responded by simply saying, “I disagree with everything you’ve said. I disagree with the motives you’ve ascribed to me and I think most Republicans and conservatives are tired of being or complicit in racism.”  Let’s be honest here, those who do the most to promote racism in this country are blacks like ‘Professors’ Dyson and Hill.  And I find it more than just a little hypocritical that they claim to see nothing wrong with someone being accused of racism for nothing more than wearing a hat, and yet they can spew all manner racist drivel and it’s ok.

Dyson said, “That a man making inflammatory remarks is not something to just be disagreed with. You should repudiate them and find cause to distance yourself from a man who can call all Mexicans rapists, Muslims who should be banned, black people who should be discriminated against, women who should be treated in a sexually predatory manner. The point is that here is a president who said things quite clearly and you as a figure can’t even say ‘Yes I find it reprehensible and he should be repudiated’ And yet you come on to say ‘I disagree with you in the past.’ That’s part of the problem we’re confronting here in America. Until white folk like you can stand up and find your spine, you will continue to be complicit in the racist animus of this country.”  “The racist animus of this country?”  Seriously?

Let’s be honest here, if anyone is being complicit here it’s racist boobs like Dyson and Hill who I’m quite sure would never agree that the vast majority of racists in this country happen to be black.  Racism still exists in this country because of people exactly like them.  Now I’m not saying that there are not racist white folks, because there are.  But there are far more blacks who are racist than whites, and they seem to base that racism on a practice the ended more than 150 years ago.  And I can’t help but wonder if either of our illustrious ‘professors’ ever found anything that was said by their hero Barry ‘O’ to be either reprehensible or something for which they felt he should have been repudiated.’  Call me silly, but somehow I doubt it.  Because that is how those on the left operate.

And I would argue that it’s racist black folk like Dyson, as well as Hill, who are the ones in rather desperate need of finding a spine, and maybe a little honesty as well.  They need to work up the necessary courage that would allow them to finally walk off the Democrat plantation, and to encourage as many others as they can to do the same.  The sad truth here is that these guys are nothing more than willing accomplices of the Democrat Party in its continuing effort to make sure blacks in this country are kept from straying.  They are little more than traitors to their race.  And they seem to be very comfortable in their role as racial overseers for the Democrat Party.  They are little more than ‘Al Sharptons’ of the academic world.  And as long as people like them are listened to very little will change.

But I do have a question for these black ‘professors,’ and all of the others like them.  If I’m such a racist for having voted for President Trump, and for intending to do so again in 2020, then what about the millions of blacks who voted for Barry ‘O’ for no other reason than because he was black?  Because to me that’s far more of an act of overt racism than is my simply choosing to vote for President Trump because of his positions on those issues that are most important to me.  And speaking of Barry ‘O’, the fact that he is black had nothing whatsoever to do with my reasons for not voting for him or for not supporting him as president.  That was because he was, and remains to this day, a devout socialist who hates the country that I love.  Just like our two previously mentioned supposed ‘professors.’


liberals 06

As liberals flee the respective messes that they themselves helped to create, the net result has been that three Democrat-leaning states have hemorrhaged hundreds of thousands of people in 2016 and 2017 because crime and high taxes had residents seeking greener pastures elsewhere.  And it’s these locusts set loose upon our nation that upon arrival at their chosen destination soon set about turning those red states they settle in, blue.  These liberals never learn. They destroy their liberal Blue states and then move on to various Red states and proceed to destroy them.

The exodus of residents was most pronounced in New York, which saw about 190,000 people leave the state between July 1, 2016 and July 1, 2017, that according to the U.S. Census Bureau data released just last week.  New York’s domestic out-migration during that time period was about the same as it was in the same time 2015 and 2016. Since 2010, the state’s outflow of just over 1 million residents has exceeded that of every other state, both in absolute terms and as a share of population, according to some ‘free-market’ think tank that calls itself the Empire Center.

And yet despite the massive domestic out-migration flow, New York’s net population actually grew slightly, largely due to high levels of international immigration and a so-called “natural increase” — that being the difference between births and deaths in a given year.  New York’s net migration was about minus 60,000 residents, but the state had 73,000 more births than deaths, resulting in a net population growth of about 13,000.  A onetime New York resident myself, it was upon retirement from the military that there was simply no way I was going back to New York.

Illinois, on the other hand, has not been so fortunate. Long-beset by twin budget and pension crises and the erosion of its tax base, Illinois lost so many residents that it dropped from the fifth to the sixth-most populous state in 2017.  Just under 115,000 Illinois residents decamped for other states between July 2016 and July 2017.  Since 2010, the Land of Lincoln has lost about 650,000 residents to other states on net, equal to the combined population of the state’s four largest cities other than Chicago, and that would be according to the Illinois Policy Institute.

Illinois’ domestic out-migration problem has become a nightmare for lawmakers, who must find a way to solve the worst pension crisis in the nation as the state’s tax base continues to shrink year after year.  Illinois’ Democrat-dominated legislature has only made a bad situation worse with numerous tax hikes, causing even more people to leave and throwing the state into a demographic death spiral spiral. Illinois experienced a net loss of about 33,000 residents in 2016, the fourth consecutive year of population decline.  And yet leaders refuse to do anything to stop the bleeding.

And it was Orphe Divounguy, someone billed as the ‘chief economist’ with the Illinois Policy Institute, who said, “As people leave the state, they take their pocketbooks with them. That means there are fewer Illinoisans to pay the bills.” He went on to say, “It’s worrying because if you have a declining population and a declining labor force, you will for sure have a further slowdown of economic activity going into 2018.”  I’d like to ask this supposed ‘chief economist’ on what, or who, it is that he places the blame?  His reply would likely be nothing but more liberal drivel.

And it was, of course, California that was the third deep blue state to experience significant domestic out-migration between July 2016 and July 2017, and it couldn’t blame the outflow on retirees searching for a more agreeable climate.  About 138,000 residents left the state during that time period, second only to New York.  However, because California was the top receiving state for international migrants, its net migration was actually 27,000.  Add to that number a “natural increase” of 214,000 people, and California’s population grew by about just over 240,000.

Going forward, one factor that could worsen domestic out-migration from New York, California and Illinois is the newly-enacted tax reform bill, which caps state and local tax (SALT) deductions at $10,000.  The limit on SALT deduction is poised to hit taxpayers harder in those states than it will in just about any other.  According to the Tax Foundation, New York, Illinois and California had three of the five highest tax rates expressed as a percentage of per capita income, with residents paying 12.7 percent, 11 percent and 11 percent, respectively.

Another analogy that would seem to fit whenever discussing Liberalism is that it has come to resemble the very worst form of cancer.  Because it metastasizes out from an initial or primary site to different or secondary sites within the host’s body. Liberalism can also be defined as being the persistence of human beings failing to achieve a certain result, and then once again making the same attempt in another location, expecting there to be a different outcome.  And it’s those who support this failed ideology that now represents the greatest threat we face.

Ultimately it’s these three states that represent the Blue that so many lefties are very proud of, and that is, in reality, responsible for running up all manner of social spending on the backs of those who choose to remain behind.  They hate where they live, so they move to someplace new, infect it with what is their toxic ideology, and demand that the new host change to make it more like the place they just left. They are an infestation of the worst kind.  And while we may welcome them in we must also work to prevent them from turning us into what it was they left behind.


Michael Moore

It was on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” this past Sunday, during a ‘discussion’ on the current presidential election that leftwing loon Michael Moore said, “I don’t think people do trust the Democrats.”  Now speaking as conservative Republican, and as someone who knows a few folks who vote Democrat, I’ve never thought that those who reliably vote for Democrats do so based on trust.  Usually the ‘only’ reason that many of them even vote for Democrats in the first place is because they feel they’re far more likely to end up receiving lots of ‘free’ stuff than they would be if they were to vote for Republicans.  Because with sleaze bag Democrats, that’s really all they care about.  And besides, it’s Republicans who usually talk about creating jobs and it’s the Democrats who generally are of the opinion that no one should have to work who doesn’t want to.  For Democrats, work is nothing but a dirty four letter word.

Getting back to “Meet The Press” it was host Chuck Todd who said, “Clearly, Democrats let them down, right? I mean, is that the issue here, and she’s just another Democrat, and they don’t trust them anymore?”  To which Moore responded, “I don’t think people do trust the Democrats. How else could a socialist win 22 states?  I mean, in my state of Michigan, Bernie Sanders won.  If Hillary Clinton and the Democrats had a difficult time with him, that should have been the red flag to everybody, that there is a mood out there where people are upset at the Democrats and the Republicans. What has to happen here, though, like with the Brexit vote in England, is that people where I’m from have to understand that why they may not like Hillary that much or she may be a bitter pill to swallow or whatever, you better take your medicine because the opposite is going to be much, much worse.”

Moore asks how it is that a socialist cold win in 22 states?  Has this fat turd not been paying the least bit of attention?  Because in comparing the Democrat Party from as recently as the 1990s to the Democrat Party of 2016 the only thing that they have in common is their name.  Democrats are very fond of saying that if Ronald Reagan were running in 2016 he would not be seen as a suitable candidate to today’s Republican Party.  But much the same thing can be said of John Kennedy.  Kennedy would never be seen as a suitable candidate for today’s Democrat Party.  He would be viewed as being much too far to the right?  Today’s Democrats ARE Socialists.  And it’s upon closer inspection of Hitlery’s choice for VP, Tim Kaine, that it’s in very short order that one would find he has some very close ties with questionable individuals who are some pretty hardcore leftists.  And Hitlery is as much of a socialist as is Sanders.

But trust is from being an issue only for the left.  Because many of us who vote for Republicans have pretty much come to the end of our rope after having been lied to, and very purposely so, in 2009, 2011 and again in 2013.  There were many promises in all three of those election years about how if we voted for Republicans they would do all within their power to curb an out of control Barry.  But after each one of those elections it became very clear, very quickly, that those who had made all those promises actually intended to keep very few, if any.  And in so doing what they did was to essentially lay the groundwork for the current Donald Trump insurgency.  Even George W.  Bush, who had both houses of Congress for 2 years, continued the illegal Sanctuary Cities, as well as his father’s absurd prohibition against firearms on American military installations, both of which resulted in scores of senseless murders.

Look, when it comes to trusting our politicians, regardless of political party, we do so at our own risk.  And it will likely be only after we realize that there is only one political party in America that we will then choose to focus on getting rid of our corrupt politicians.  And to be honest, there is no time like the present to move forward with the process by sending Hitlery Clinton back to New York.  The governed, regardless of party affiliation, expect results from their government.  You can make excuses about intent all day long, but if it doesn’t put food on the table, those intentions are worthless.  Well-intentioned bungling that causes widespread misery is just the same to us as malicious intent. We need jobs that can provide a decent standard of living, not excuses, and not a torrent of ten dollar words they learned in their Ivy League schools to hide the fact that they’re not capable of getting results.

The bottom line here is that we all must move beyond identifying ourselves as being merely Republican or Democrat and focus, to the greatest extent possible, on simply being Americans if we are to have any hope of regaining control of what’s left of our country.  We need to ignore all that we have been told, and are still being told, by the many elites in this country whether it’s those from our entertainment industry, those in corporate America or especially those who have been in Washington for their entire adult lives.  We need to question the motives of those who wish to rule over us, as well as their many accomplices, and in one loud and very clear voice.  Our ‘leaders’, and their allies, must be made to understand that this is ‘our’ country and our ‘leaders’ work for us and it is we who pay their rather exorbitant salaries.  Americans must unite as one against what is a growing threat to our freedoms.