Live Free - Die Free
Fuck Progressives and Progressivism

Appetizers

I am a blue-collar redneck.

Trump: What a world leader looks like. Obama: What a Hollywood starlet looks like.

If Progressives believe that, because some guns are used to kill people, we should ban all guns, then they should also believe that, because cocks are always involved in rape, we should sever all cocks. (There, there! Down, 3rd-wave feminists! You can take/sever my cock when you pry it from my cold, dead hands).

Progressives: Everything you know is wrong is wrong.

Whatdaya call black NFL players who take a knee during the playing of the national anthem? African-anti-Americans.

If hyperbole didn't exist, neither would the Democratic Party.

Obama's 2 AGs: Holder, Eric; Lynch, Loretta. Hey? What do the first letters of their names spell?

Hillary: A greedy, graceless grifter.

LGBT activists are citing current scientific research which supposedly 'proves' that homosexuality is genetic. Radical LGBT activists are therefore claiming that homosexuals deserve to be their own species. Instead of Homo Sapiens, what do they then want to call this new species? Of course, Homo Homo.

There are 2 types of people in the world: (1) Those who support Trump; (2) Brainless, characterless, clueless, feckless, honorless, integrityless, meritless, mindless, senseless, truthless, useless, virtueless, witless, and worthless mother-fucking cocksuckers.

Progressives are Pharisees, conservatives Publicans. Look it up in the Bible. Progressives extol their self-absorbed, malignantly narcissitic pure, prefect moral goodness constantly, but ultimately lack any moral basis. After all, egotism is the opposite of morality.

What did Nazis like to put on their hot dog buns? Anne Franks.

Like they say in San Francisco, "What's good for the goose is good for the goose."

Hey, did you hear about the dwarf phychic who escaped from the slammer? Yea. The headline read "Small medium at large".

Whatdaya call a Buddhist monk who lost his faith and now lives on the street? Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmless.

It's not only youths who join 4-H clubs. Progressives, do, too: Hysteria, hyperbole, hubris, and hatred is what they cultivate.

Victor David Hanson is the Best

Counterfeit Elitism:

But surely if there is decadent, lazy, spoiled white class it is not in places like Bakersfield or Dayton, but more likely on tony college campuses. There a new generation of "spoiled" elites is increasingly poorly educated but strident in its indoctrination. They are zealous about their claims on behalf of wisdom, but ignorant of any broad knowledge that might substantiate that zealotry.

Pulsating, Rigid, Extended Penis of Progressivism

What's the definition of a Progressive? Someone who's more than willing to give you the shirt ... off someone else's back.

A typical oxymoron is two words: "Tolerant Progressive". However, one-word oxymorons are possible. An example? "Progressivism". Think not? What is Antifa, then? Progressive? Or Regressive?

History. During the Dark Ages, royalty and aristocracy reigned supreme, while the peasants and serfs lived in abject, brutal poverty. Then came the Enlightenment, culmininating in the American (and, less importantly, the French) Revolution, which reversed these roles, elevating the individual above government and supreme to it, as stated so clearly and eloquently in the most radical political document ever written, the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Now, more oxymoronical "Progressivism".

To achieve Progressive nirvana, Progressives need an all-powerful state owned and controlled by experts who direct and shape the course of societal human evolution. These experts are, of course, the Progressive elites: the media, Hollywood, academia, government employees, lawyers, serial abortionists, etc. They are the new lords and ladies, and we are the new serfs and peasants.

The relationship between government and citizens is again reversed:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Progressives are created superior, that they are self-endowed with all Rights, that among these are every fucking Right one can conceivably conceive. That to secure these rights, Progressive Government is instituted among Men, deriving its just powers from the prima facie primacy of Progressivism. That whenever any Citizen becomes destructive of this Government, it is the Right of the Government to alter or to abolish this Citizen, and all members of this citizen's family, up to and including fourth cousins. Once so jihaded, ths Governement can continue to effect the Safety and Happiness of only completely compliant Citizens.

Yes, if Progressives have their way, we will progress to a new Dark Age.

Well ... maybe the Dark Age simile is a stretch too far, so, what to do? Hmmmm. Ah. Inspiration.

During the century between the end of the Civil War in 1865 and the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Democrats (nee Progressives) functionally controlled all levels of Deep South government: City, county, state, and federal. Yes, it was Democrats who created and enforced Jim Crow laws. So, if Progressives have their way, we will progress to a new Jim Crow era.

Think about it. During the Democratic Progressive Jim Crow century, slavery was not de jure but de facto. In essence, this state-citizen relationship more closely mirrors Progressive nirvana as opposed to the Dark Ages.

Ahhh! Of course. The Democratic Progressive Jim Crow century was the White Ages.

Fuck you in every orifice, Never-Trumpers, and fuck you, too, in new orificies specifically created only to be fucked

Donald Trump is America's first wartime president in the Culture War.

Trump is winning. He's winning. It's incredulous that politicians who value winning over all else don't recognize that Trump is winning, and emulate being him. To paraphrase Patton, Americans not only value winning, but smash-mouth politics, too.

Muslims and Europe

More inspiration. Why's the EU (functionally dominated by Merkel) importing massive numbers of Muslims? Simple: Muslims are virulently anti-Semitic, and thus are being trained to be the future shock troops during the upcoming Jewish genocide orchestrated by the EU, Germany, and Merkel.

White Privilege

Is the woke left right? As a Christian, heterosexual, conservative white male, am I the undeserved beneficiary of White Privilege? Fuck, no. I have deservedly earned my "White Privilege" status. After all, we white males built the greatest country evah: The USA. Now that we white males are sharing power with non-whites and non-males, we should assess whether these Progressives are earning any privilege of their own. Are they? Fuck, no. Progressives are transforming the USA into a shit pit. What they're earning is, at least, our derision, condemnation, and rejection.

Startingly, accepting logic and rationality as I do, I must affirm a kinship with Progressives. They hate the USA, and I, too, loathe the country Progressives are creating.

You know, "White Males" is not a physical skin color or a sex; rather, it is a social construct identifying anyone of any variety who opposes mother-fucking Progressivism.

Why a Web Page? Why not Facebook? Or a Template-Rich Blog?

Why not? It's fuckin' obvious. The tech giants (ie, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Amazon, et puke) have begun censoring the Web. As of yet, they can't censor shit on individual domains.

Oh, fuck! I inadvertently told the truth!

The Columbia Graduate School of Journalism, founded by Joseph Pulitzer of the eponymous Pulitzer Prizes, and houser and presentor of said awards, is the Vatican of Journalism. In a Columbia Journalism Review article entitled It's time to rethink how we cover Trump, the CJR editor bemoans and bewails Trump setting the agenda:

That is the challenge for the coverage of Trump in 2018: How do we retake the agenda from this man who so hungers for attention, and how do we tell stories in a way that reflects the scale and sweep of the moment we're in?

Wow. Continuing with this stunning hubris:

The idea then was that it was time to take the story back; to not let Trump, and his acolytes, control the conversation. That was going to be our job. We were going to decide what mattered, how our audience spent their time.

Thank God the gods of journalism are finally outing themselves, and admitting what anyone with critical thinking skills could easily conclude by using only a few dozens of critical-thinking-trained brain cells: Journalism no longer exists to simply report the news, but to manufacture it. Of course, the CJR editor isn't so stupid as to outright use the self-condemning word "manufacture", but he nevertheless uses functional synonyms like "tell stories", "take the story back", and "decide what mattered".

What the CJR editor really meant was this:

The real purpose of journalism is to force-feed the populace with Progressive propaganda.

I could easily make my case that what the CJR said and what he meant are co-equivalent, but only Progressives force-feed. We conservatives do it differently, instead relying upon the intelligence of our readers. So, I urge you, dear reader (if there are any, which I doubt) to rest a spell and consider what "tell stories", "take the story back", and "decide what mattered" might force you to conclude, that Journalism has abandoned the journalistic principles championed by Joseph Pulitzer.

Thank you, PDT, for rendering the Progressive propaganda spewed by journalists nearly ineffectual.

If you're interested, you can read an erudite conservative take on the article.

Progressivism Is Totalitarianism

Progressives seek to silence speech not deemed properly PC (Progressive Compliant).

Fucking asshole George Lakoff, Prof at Berkeley:

That's why hate speech imposes on the freedom of those targeted by the hate. Since being free in a free society requires not imposing on the freedom of others, hate speech does not fall under the category of free speech.

ACLU

Q: Does the First Amendment protect speech that invites violence against members of the campus community?

A: In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it intentionally and effectively provokes a crowd to immediately carry out violent and unlawful action. This is a very high bar, and for good reason.

Technology companies (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Totalitarian societies do likewise.

Thus, Progressivism is Totalitarian.

Why do Progressives reject individual liberties? The "Perfectibility of Man" is a core Progressive doctrine, but said perfectibility comes with a price:

Progressivism is intimately tied to modern liberalism and the politics of the welfare state, which holds that the transformation of society can only be achieved by a centralized government that has sufficient power to remake society ...

As an example, in order to transform society, Progressives need to establish universal Pre-K, to inculcate in the impressionable young transformative ideas like "The joy of experiencing all 56 different pronouns".

Continuing with the cite:

Today, progressive ideas are especially prevalent in international politics. Liberal internationalists and neoconservatives ... believe that if democracy and capitalism are spread through the world, peace and stability will be much more likely. Here again lies the underlying assumption of progressivism: evil is the result of a poorly organized world. Reorganization of the world in accordance with progressive ideas will usher in a new age of freedom, equality, and peace.

So, Progressivism embraces "democracy" and "capitalism", eh? If so, then the EU is more democratic and capitalistic than its member states were before the EU was established. Proving that is a harder task than proving Progressives are tolerant.

Progressivism Is Evangelical Relativism, and Definitionally Anti-Science

Progressive deny that sex differences exist, but science proves otherwise. The scientific evidence here is overwhelming and incontrovertible. Even a half-hearted attempt at critical thinking regarding the biological theory of Evolution forces the conclusion that sex differences are real and immutable. In essence, Progressives reject Evolution. Evangelical Christians reject it, too. Thus, Progressivism is Evangelical.

Besides, Satan is a lesbian feminist.

The entire article 'Feminist' Study: Objective Truth, Scientific Method Are Sexist is worth reading, but one excerpt from a paper written by a feminist, University of North Dakota's Laura Parson, nearly says it all:

. . . the STEM (ie, Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) syllabi explored in this study demonstrated a view of knowledge that was to be acquired by the student, which promotes a view of knowledge as unchanging. This is further reinforced by the use of adverbs to imply certainty such as "actually" and "in fact" which are used in syllabi to identify information as factual and beyond dispute (Biber, 2006a; 2006b). For example, "draw accurate conclusions from scientific data presented in different formats" (Lower level math). Instead of promoting the idea that knowledge is constructed by the student and dynamic, subject to change as it would in a more feminist view of knowledge, the syllabi reinforce the larger male-dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use make (sic) the correct decision.

What? "Knowledge" (and by implication truth and reality) are "constructed by the student"? Nice.

Male: Reality is and facts are. Feminist: Reality and facts are mere social constructs which can be redefined to conform to a feminist-defined and feminist-imposed reality.

Think not? Again, Laura Parson:

This study was framed through the lens of poststructuralist feminist thought to provide a lens through which I explored how power is gendered ... Poststructuralism "rejects objectivity and the notions of an absolute truth and single reality," and "knowledge is complicated, contradictory, and contingent to a certain social context and historical context".

Why do Progressives reject reality, facts, and science? Progressives dominate Hollywood, a fantasy factory. They also dominate academia, a utopia factory. Thus, Progressives dwell in fantasy utopias, not reality. Science resides in reality, not in utopian fantasies. Progressives reside in the self-constructed, virtual world of their minds.

Progressivism as ideology: "You will never ever be able to understand the least little jot, tittle, or iota of my absolute reality".

So. Progress is each of us constructing our own universe, different from all other universes? Progress is being almost unable to communicate with each other because each word means something different in each universe? Progress is terminal solipsism? Progressives claim this is progress? Sorry, but I can't conceive of anything more Regressive.

Progressives believe "Gender is a Social Construct" ...

Social constructivists propose that there is no inherent truth to gender; it is constructed by social expectations and gender performance.

... due to this supposition:

Social constructionism is the notion that people's understanding of reality is partially, if not entirely, socially situated.

Ah, it all makes sense now; current Progressive dogma is: Reality is a social construct.

Progress to Progressives, then, is the replacement of science, reality, truth, objectivity, and facts with whatever feelings dominate this very yoctosecond.

We need to stop these mother-fuckers.

Hate Elevated to Winnie the Pooh Status

The Southern Poverty Law Center labels any group not sufficiently extreme Progressive as a hate group, thus identifying themselves as extreme left. If the SPLC values fairness and accuracy, they would rename themselves Socialist Progressive Liberal Communists.

Who Should Blacks Fear?

Now, metrics. First, data.

According to Slate, White extremists (their term) have killed 74 since the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, 1995.

According to CNN, Chicago suffered 762 murders in 2016. According to the Chicago Tribune:

Over the Labor Day weekend, Chicago hit that tragic number: 500 homicides. Nearly all of those killed were black men, shot to death in alleys and on street corners by other black men.

Doing a Google search on "1995 current chicago population" and estimating the numbers from the graph, Chicago's population has averaged about 2.8 million since the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

Doing arithmetic on US population 1995 thru 2017 (data available everywhere), average US population during those years was 297 million.

Second, math; rounded, not precise.

US population since 1995 is 100 times greater than Chicago's population since 1995

The number of years Slate detailed White extremists murders is 20 times longer than the one year 2016 of Chicago's murders.

Let's assume 740 of the 762 2016 Chicago murders were of black men committed by black men. This 740 figure is 10 times bigger than Slate's 74 murders.

Multiplying the 3 figures derived above yields:

100 X 20 X 10 = 20,000

Third, let's use the 20,000 figure in a sentence:

A black is 20,000 times more likely to be killed by a fellow black than a Nazi.

If Black Lives Matter is concerned about black lives, they should be marching and protesting against themselves.

Dear Leader Was Such a Font of Humor

During the Obama administration, comics complained that they couldn't think of any good jokes about Obama.

Hey, did you hear Obama has read nearly up to page 4 in "Being President for Dummies"?

Hey, did you hear that, 2-1/2 or 3 weeks ago, Obama didn't put his finger through the toilet paper?

Did you hear Obama was so irate over Trump's 09/19/2017 speech to the UN that Obama took fewer than 10,000 selfies 3 DAYS IN A ROW!!

Hey, did you hear the PGA is going to name a golf course after Obama? Yep. The Wavering Pines course in Folly Beach, South Carolina will be renamed Total Fucking Disaster.

Hey, did you hear somebody stole Obama's identify? Yep. Now that person is a totally clueless, ruthlessly incompetent son of a bitch.

Hey, did you hear what Obama wants for Christmas? 1,000 selfie sticks.

Due to difficult but fruitful research, it was discovered that 72 of Obama's dogs died due to homework poisoning.

How do you spell "asshole" backwards? A-M-A-B-O.

Obama values third-wave feminists as the new KKK: Krazy Kooky Kunts.

What's the difference between Barack Obama and a heaped, putrescent, maggot- & rat-infested mound of fatally toxic animal offal? Barack Obama is not heaped.

Dozens of Mainstream Media guys have torrid bromances with Obama, to the point where they fantasize about giving Obama a bro-job.

How many Obama's does it take to screw up a light bulb? One.

Obama, a Jewish rabbi, a Muslim mullah, and a Catholic priest walk into a bar. Obama reaches over the bar, grabs the shotgun, and kills the rabbi and priest.

Compared to Obama, Nixon is like a two-year-old toddler telling his first lie.

Obama believes that Global Warming is so bad they'll soon need scuba gear on Everest.

Obama, a narcissist, a sociopath, a congenital liar, a vainglorious do-nothing, a hubristic, self-centered prick, a lazy, good-for-nothing ne'er-do-well, an uninformed ignoramus, a sissified beta male, a raging egotist, a non-entity-except-in-his-own-mind with a breathtaking lack of accomplishments, a serial gaffe-prone, mistake-ridden naif, an amoral postmodernist with no discernible character strengths, and a total, complete fuck walk into a bar. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha!!! Fooled you!! Fooled you!! You thought multiple persons walked into the bar. Nope, only one.

The Rich Pay More Than Their Fair Share

Do the rich pay their "Fair Share"? (© Copyright Eternity by Progressivism's Confiscation Of All Property Antifa subsidiary). Well, from Forbes's list of The World's Billionaires, access date 12Sep17, summing the 10 richest US billionaires yields:

1)   $85.4 - USA - Bill Gates

2)   $83.6 - USA - Jeff Bezos

3)   $82.3 - Spa - Amancio Ortega

4)   $76.6 - USA - Warren Buffet

5)   $71.7 - USA - Mark Zuckerberg

6)   $70.2 - Mex - Carlos Slim Helu

7)   $63.7 - USA - Larry Elison

8)   $59.1 - Fra - Bernard Arnault

9)   $52.5 - USA - Charles Koch

10)   $52.5 - USA - Charles Koch

11)   $45.4 - Fra - Liliane Bettencourt

12)   $44.4 - USA - Larry Page

13)   $44.3 - USA - Michael Bloomberg

14)   $43.3 - USA - Sergey Brin


         $639.5 billion

From the White House Office of Management and Budget, estimated 2017 federal government expenditures from Table 1.1 - Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-): 1789 - 2022 will be:

          $4.061 trillion

Spending per month will be:

          $338.5 billion

So, if we confiscated the wealth of the 10 richest US billionaries, we'd finance the federal government for not quite two months for only one year. After all, if we confiscated everything the 10 richest billionaires had, they'd have nothing more to confiscate, right? Ergo, what would Progressives confiscate next year?

Now that I've led you to water, drink this: Is the entire "Fair Share" argument complete fucking bullshit?

(Yea, yea, yea. There's are many things wrong with the economics inherent in the above 'billionaires' argument, but you don't wanna go there. If we imposed economic rigor on the argument, the Progressive position would be even more untenable.)

Ali

Cain McGore