The Fear Campaign Begins AGAIN

Mike Brzezinski: “…so much that he could control exactly what people think…and that is our job.” (MNBC)

The Senate Version of RINOCare may have it’s flaws. But that won’t stop the Sanctimonious Left and The Great and Grand Narcissist from fearmongering AGAIN and fiddle while ObamaCare Rome burns.

I know I get the fearmongering robocall every single day.

Remember when it was going to lower premiums by $2500? 🙂

As liberals flail away at the Senate’s newly-released healthcare bill, and conservatives scramble to adjust serious design flaws, Americans must not lose sight of an inescapable and crucial fact: The current law, which was exclusively written and passed by Democrats, is failing — and those failures are getting worse.  Within the past 48 hours, two major insurance carriers announced plans to withdraw from Obamacare marketplaces in a slew of states.  Despite hiking individual market federal exchange premiums by an average of 105 percent over the past four years, in a quixotic effort to compensate for Obamacare’s systemic adverse selection flaw, carriers are still losing hundreds of millions of dollars per state, per year.  For many, they can’t sustain those financial blows any further, so they’re pulling the ripcord:  

Anthem will pull out of the ObamaCare exchanges in Indiana and Wisconsin next year, the insurance giant announced Wednesday. obamacare1
These departures will only deepen the law’s spiraling rate and access shock problems. Liberals, ever eager to blame their failures on others, are trying to pin this slow-motion collapse on Republican “sabotage,” but that’s a nonsense excuse.  It’s true that uncertainty surrounding the future of the Obama administration’s illegal cost-sharing subsidies is adding to this turbulent business climate, as is the lack of clarity over the future of ‘repeal and replace.’  But the longterm trajectory — toxic risk pools leading to major cost spikes and insurer pullouts — long predates the Trump administration.  Indeed, this pattern was confirmed by Obama-era government data released just before the 2016 election.  The financial markets were fully expecting a Clinton victory, which would have guaranteed Obamacare’s endurance, yet the pullouts and soaring premiums continued in spite of that anticipated policy continuity.  Because Obamacare was and is the problem.  

Furthermore, the claim that Republican governors who “undermined” the law are at fault here is also bogus.  Those ‘red’ states that refused to establish their own Obamacare exchanges (several ‘blue’ states that tried doing so ended up crashing and burning) simply defaulted to the federal exchange, where massive rate increases are par for the course.  And perhaps the most Obamacare-friendly Republican governor in the country has been Ohio’s John Kasich, who still doggedly defends his (increasingly expensive) decision to expand Medicaid.  Remind me: How are Ohioans faring under the law, again?  Sticker shock has also battered solidly Democratic states like Minnesota, Maryland and Connecticut.  I repeat, the problem is not Republicans.  The problem is Obamacare.  Republicans now have a real opportunity to improve the ugly status quo in important ways, but the first draft of the Senate bill could conceivably make matters worse, for reasons I outlined yesterday.  The GOP is still absolutely right to keep beating the drum on how their opponents’ policies have made matters far worse for millions of people.  Here’s Majority Leader Mitch McConnell highlighting various stories of real people feeling the brunt of Obamacare’s shattered promises of affordability:


More Americans have been directly harmed by the current law than have been helped by it, putting the lie to the Left’s thoroughly-discredited “win/win” propaganda.  If GOP replacement efforts end up faltering, the nation will be stuck with an unsustainable and deteriorating individual insurance market, resulting in even more pain for families.  Credibility-crippled Democrats believe the “solution” to these issues is more government control and more spending.  Many are on the record in favor of a socialized, government-run healthcare system.  This isn’t merely a dreadful idea in terms of health policy and outcomes, it’s economically ruinous.  Don’t take my word for it; ask Democrats in Vermont and California, and the liberal editorial board of the Washington Post:

The government’s price tag would be astonishing. When Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) proposed a “Medicare for all” health plan in his presidential campaign, the nonpartisan Urban Institute figured that it would raise government spending by $32 trillion over 10 years, requiring a tax increase so huge that even the democratic socialist Mr. Sanders did not propose anything close to it…A single-payer health-care system would face all of these political barriers to cost-saving reform and more. To realize the single-payer dream of coverage for all and big savings, medical industry players, including doctors, would likely have to get paid less and patients would have to accept different standards of access and comfort. There is little evidence most Americans are willing to accept such tradeoffs.

A left-leaning think tank found that single-payer healthcare would cost US taxpayers an additional $3.2 trillion per year on average; the entire current federal budget is around $4 trillion — and we’re already running historically-large annual deficits, as the $20 trillion national debt balloons.  There is simply no way to pay for that type of eye-popping spending increase without truly gigantic tax increases on middle and working class families — all to pay for a worse system.  It’s a genuinely atrocious idea in nearly every way.  On another level, why should voters listen to one word on heath care policy from the party that exclusively created the mess we’re in, and that callously downplayed terrible, deadly corruption and abuses at the VA — America’s systemically flawed single-payer system that was designed to provide care to a small, discrete, sympathetic population venerated by both parties?  Alas, unwilling to own up to their calamitous failures, they’re screaming about the “mean” and “evil” GOP proposal that’s paid for with “blood money,” or whatever.  Incredibly, these same people believe their tactics are too kind, civil, and courteous.

 

The Ministry of Truth Study Part 2

If the children are the future, the future might be very ill-informed.

That’s one implication of a new study from Stanford researchers that evaluated students’ ability to assess information sources and described the results as “dismaying,” “bleak” and “[a] threat to democracy.”

As content creators and social media platforms grapple with the fake news crisis, the study highlights the other side of the equation: What it looks like when readers are duped.

The researchers at Stanford’s Graduate School of Education have spent more than a year evaluating how well students across the country can evaluate online sources of information.

Middle school, high school and college students in 12 states were asked to evaluate the information presented in tweets, comments and articles. More than 7,800 student responses were collected.

In exercise after exercise, the researchers were “shocked” — their word, not ours — by how many students failed to effectively evaluate the credibility of that information.

The students displayed a “stunning and dismaying consistency” in their responses, the researchers wrote, getting duped again and again. They weren’t looking for high-level analysis of data but just a “reasonable bar” of, for instance, telling fake accounts from real ones, activist groups from neutral sources and ads from articles.

“Many assume that because young people are fluent in social media they are equally savvy about what they find there,” the researchers wrote. “Our work shows the opposite.”

A professional appearance and polished “About” section could easily persuade students that a site was neutral and authoritative, the study found, and young people tended to credulously accept information as presented even without supporting evidence or citations.

The research was divided by age group and used 15 different assessments. Here’s a sample of some of the results:


Most middle school students can’t tell native ads from articles.

The researchers showed hundreds of middle schoolers a Slate home page that included a traditional ad and a “native ad” — a paid story branded as “sponsored content” — as well as Slate articles.

Most students could identify the traditional ad, but more than 80 percent of them believed that the “sponsored content” article was a real news story.

“Some students even mentioned that it was sponsored content but still believed that it was a news article,” the researchers wrote, suggesting the students don’t know what “sponsored content” means.

Most high school students accept photographs as presented, without verifying them.

The researchers showed high school students a photograph of strange-looking flowers, posted on the image hosting site Imgur by a user named “pleasegoogleShakerAamerpleasegoogleDavidKelly. The caption read “Fukushima Nuclear Flowers: Not much more to say, this is what happens when flowers get nuclear birth defects.”

Sam Wineburg, a professor of education and history at Stanford University and the lead author of the study, spoke to NPR on Tuesday.

“The photograph had no attribution. There was nothing that indicated that it was from anywhere,” he said. “We asked students, ‘Does this photograph provide proof that the kind of nuclear disaster caused these aberrations in nature?’ And we found that over 80 percent of the high school students that we gave this to had an extremely difficult time making that determination.

“They didn’t ask where it came from. They didn’t verify it. They simply accepted the picture as fact.”

Many high school students couldn’t tell a real and fake news source apart on Facebook.

One assessment presented two posts announcing Donald Trump’s candidacy for president — one from the actual Fox News account, with a blue checkmark indicating it was verified, and one from an account that looked like Fox News.

“Only a quarter of the students recognized and explained the significance of the blue checkmark, a Stanford press release noted. “And over 30 percent of students argued that the fake account was more trustworthy.”

Most college students didn’t suspect potential bias in a tweet from an activist group.

The researchers sent undergraduate students a link to a tweet by MoveOn about gun owners’ feelings on background checks, citing a survey by Public Policy Polling.

They asked students to evaluate the tweet and say why it might or might not be a good data source.

“Only a few students noted that the tweet was based on a poll conducted by a professional polling firm,” which might make it a good source, the researchers wrote.

At the same time, less than a third of students cited the political agenda of MoveOn.org as a reason it might be a flawed source.

And more than half of the students didn’t even click on the link within the tweet before evaluating the usefulness of the data.

Most Stanford students couldn’t identify the difference between a mainstream and fringe source.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, which publishes the journal Pediatrics, has more than 65,000 members and has been around since 1930.

The American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) split from AAP in 2002, over objections to parenting by same-sex couples. ACPeds claims homosexuality is linked to pedophilia. It’s classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which estimates that ACPeds has about 200 members.

In an article in Education Week, Wineburg and his colleague Sarah McGrew explain that they directed Stanford undergrads to articles on both organizations’ sites. The students spent up to 10 minutes evaluating them, and were free to click links or Google anything they liked.

“More than half concluded that the article from the American College of Pediatricians … was ‘more reliable,’ ” the researchers wrote. “Even students who preferred the entry from the American Academy of Pediatrics never uncovered the differences between the two groups.”


You can see in-depth examples of some of the exercises — including sample responses — at the study’s executive summary.

The project began before the recent uproar over the prevalence of fake news online. But its relevance is immediately clear.

Wineburg told NPR on Tuesday that the study demonstrates that U.S. classrooms haven’t caught up to the way information is influencing kids daily.

“What we see is a rash of fake news going on that people pass on without thinking,” he said. “And we really can’t blame young people because we’ve never taught them to do otherwise.”

In fact, as Wineburg and McGrew wrote in Education Week, some schools have filters directing students to valid sources, which doesn’t give them practice learning to evaluate sources for themselves.

The solution, they write, is to teach students — or, really, all Internet users — to read like fact checkers.

That means not just reading “vertically,” on a single page or source, but looking for other sources — as well as not taking “About” pages as evidence of neutrality, and not assuming Google ranks results by reliability.

“The kinds of duties that used to be the responsibility of editors, of librarians now fall on the shoulders of anyone who uses a screen to become informed about the world,” Wineburg told NPR. “And so the response is not to take away these rights from ordinary citizens but to teach them how to thoughtfully engage in information seeking and evaluating in a cacophonous democracy.”

The Ministry of Truth Study Part 1

If the children are the future, the future might be very ill-informed.

That’s one implication of a new study from Stanford researchers that evaluated students’ ability to assess information sources and described the results as “dismaying,” “bleak” and “[a] threat to democracy.”

In exercise after exercise, the researchers were “shocked” — their word, not ours — by how many students failed to effectively evaluate the credibility of that information.

“Many assume that because young people are fluent in social media they are equally savvy about what they find there,” the researchers wrote. “Our work shows the opposite.” (NPR)

More on this article tomorrow. But I would say, since it’s liberal educaysion I would venture it’s quite deliberate.

 

For many millennials, it is impossible to imagine a day without turning on a phone or computer, accessing Twitter or Google News, and watching as floods of highlights appear on their screens. While many teens today consider themselves to be technologically advanced—skilled navigators in the sea of Internet content—this is often not the case.  
The digital media environment intensifies the presence of false information and enables poor critical judgement. A recent Stanford University study reveals harsh findings involving the ability of teens to determine fact from fiction. The implications of online “unreality” are numerous, and we should be demanding that the top tech users today focus more energy on how to become educated information consumers. 
The incomprehensibly large and varied domain of online information should be a progression in the pursuit of knowledge, truth and an all-around beneficial tool for youth. But, it is not that simple. The November 2016 Stanford study shows what researchers found when students from around the country were presented with online news and asked to critically evaluate it. The results are not only disturbing, but offer a clear glimpse into the unrealities the Internet perpetuates.  
The researchers “designed, piloted, and validated fifteen assessments, five each at middle school, high school, and college levels.” In one assessment, high school students were presented with a post from photo sharing website Imgur that included “a picture of daisies along with the claim that the flowers had ‘nuclear birth defects’ from Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.”  
Results found that these students focused on the photograph and “relied on it to evaluate the trustworthiness of the post.” They did not note important details including the source of the photo. “Less than twenty percent of students … questioned the source of the post or the source of the photo.”  
College students were presented with a tweet from MoveOn.org, the liberal advocacy organization, that claimed the NRA is out of touch with gun owners and their own members. The tweet also indicated “Public Policy Polling conducted the poll.”  
Results showed that only a few students noted that the poll was conducted by a professional polling firm and that this adds to its credibility. Also, “less than a third of students” thought that the clear political partisanship of the publisher — an open supporter of gun control measures — may have influenced the tweet. Overall, the students showed a shocking inability to assess information. The results suggest a growing need for incorporating civic online reasoning courses into school curricula. 
Future generations of media consumers will know the internet as their only source of information. Without an understanding of the dynamics of the Internet or the acquirement of debunking methods, future generations will become more tolerant of misinformation and more hostile to facts than ever before. New efforts must be geared toward fostering an awareness of the importance of distinguishing fact from fiction, in order to see millennials and all Internet users become educated, tech-savvy truth-seekers.  (bostontip.com)
But the liberal educators for The Ministry don’t want and don’t teach critical thinking skills. They want them stupified.
Ignorance is Strength.

Congrats! You won the $15/hr Lottery

And your job is toast. Don’t you feel better!?

Got those righteous Social Justice Warrior juices going as you get laid off…

Character Assassination

“Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co,” the shooter wrote in one post.

Gee, I wonder what he was watching…

Well, this didn’t take long. Rep Steve Scalise gets gunned down, but not killed, by a crazed Leftist who was ginned up to violence and radicalized by the media is now ATTACKING THE VICTIM!

Because he’s an evil conservative and their “compassion” is apparently also very partisaned.

…the outpouring of support has stopped, mostly on the Left, where news outlets and prominent liberals are attacking the congressman over his conservative voting record. One of the Capitol Police officers, who saved Rep. Scalise and the rest of the Republican baseball team practicing before their annual charity game with Democrats last Wednesday morning, was gay. Officer Crystal Griner was assigned to protect Rep. Scalise, who rightfully leapt into action when Bernie Sanders supporter James Hodgkinson decided top open fire on the GOP baseball team last Wednesday morning in Alexandria, Virginia. Police killed Hodgkinson. Rep. Scalise was wounded after being shot in the hip.

Griner and Officer David Bailey, who was also assigned to Rep. Scalise’s protective detail, were wounded. Yet, there’s a toxic and appalling mix of humor and smugness that Rep. Scalise, a proponent of traditional marriage, was saved by a black lesbian cop. As if this was liberalism punishing someone for holding the wrong views.

I doubt Rep. Scalise is going to wish he was dead because a gay person saved him. Also, he’s a conservative Republican from the Deep South; did you guys really expect he was liberal of social issues? I’ll let Guy take it from here, but then, there’s the media’s reaction, which is equally appalling.

CBS News’ Scott Pelley offered a commentary last week, calling the attacking congressional Republicans self-inflicted “to some degree,” so Rep. Scalise being shot was partially his fault. That’s classy.

It’s time to ask whether the attack on the United States Congress, yesterday, was foreseeable, predictable and, to some degree, self-inflicted.

Too many leaders, and political commentators, who set an example for us to follow, have led us into an abyss of violent rhetoric which, it should be no surprise, has led to violence.

Yesterday [June 14] was not the first time.

In December last year, a man with an assault rifle stormed into a Washington-area pizzeria to free child sex slaves whom Hillary Clinton was holding there — or at least that’s what political blog sites had said. He fired into a locked door to discover no children in chains.

Sen. Bernie Sanders has called the president the “most dangerous in history.” The shooter yesterday was a Sanders volunteer.

You might think that no sane person would act on political hate speech, and you’d be right. Trouble is, there are a lot of Americans who struggle with mental illness.

In February, the president tweeted that the news media were the “enemy of the American people”:

The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2017

Later, at a lunch for reporters, President Trump was asked whether he worried that language would incite violence. His pause indicated it had never crossed his mind. Then he said, “No, that doesn’t worry me.”

As children we’re taught, “Words will never hurt me.” But when you think about it, violence almost always begins with words. In “Twitter world,” we’ve come to believe that our first thought is our best thought.

It’s past time for all of us — presidents, politicians, reporters, citizens, all of us — to pause to think again.

Good thing he’s a “fair and balanced” “Journalist, don’t you think?

No obvious Bias. 🙂

takei

Rep. Scalise has been in critical condition for days, undergone three surgeries, and was on the verge of death when he arrived at the hospital following the attack. Yet, liberal America says we’re going to slam him because he has a voting record we find to be problematic. Even when someone’s life is in the balance, the Left just can’t help it. This attack was self-inflicted?

Remember, these are the people who think they have cornered the market and have sole possession of the world’s “compassion” “sensitivity”. 😦

“the only way you can get to civility, is you must start with the establishment of justice. you must provide for the common good and you must provide the general welfare” and that Republicans “have to have a change in the trajectory of policy.”— Rev William J Barber on MSNBC

Translation: Do it our way or else.

“He did come to leadership after some controversy over attending a white nationalist event, which he says he didn’t know what it was,” MSNBC Host Jo Ann Reid said.

Translation: He’s a Racist too!

“He also co-sponsored a bill to amend the Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. He co-sponsored the House healthcare bill, which as you said would gut healthcare for millions of people including three million children and he cosponsored a bill to repeal the ban on semiautomatic weapons,” Reid continued, bashing Scalise for holding mainstream Republican positions. “Because he is in jeopardy and everybody is pulling for him, are we required in a moral sense to put that aside in the moment?”

How dare anyone be different from us, Homo Superior Liberalis! We are the Holiest of The Holy and we shall not be denied our rightful place as Rulers of All!

Despite House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R., La.) being in critical condition after an attempted assassination, liberal website Fusion denounced him on Thursday as a “bigoted homophobe.”

“Bigoted Homophobe Steve Scalise’s Life Was Saved by a Queer Black Woman,” read the headline from Fusion, which is owned by Univision.

“Steve Scalise, the House majority whip who was shot by a gunman who attacked a congressional baseball practice on Wednesday, has kept company with racists,” Fusion wrote. “He was forced to apologize for speaking at an international conference of white supremacists, and reportedly referred to himself as ‘David Duke without the baggage.'”

“He also authored Louisiana’s ban on same-sex marriage. Like many of his ilk, he said he was only trying to protect ‘traditional’ marriage,” the website continued. (Free Beacon)

fusion

Blood

Derek Hunter
Derek Hunter
Liberals Got Their Blood, Will It Be Enough?
When I wrote two weeks ago about how liberals would not stop until someone got killed, I was hoping it was more of a warning than a prophecy. Unfortunately, it was not.

 

But the actions and words of leftists in the wake of the attempted slaughter of Republican members of Congress –for the sin of not being Democrats – has done nothing to bring about the moment of reflection one might expect from people with blood on their hands.

oh my

Thankfully, the only life lost was that of the progressive terrorist who sought to embody the attitude of the media and the Democratic Party. But no sooner had the echoes of the shots stopped reverberating than that attitude returned.

Liberal journalists and activists took to their Twitter accounts to blame everything except the reality that their twisted fantasies came true.

But it did come true. And all the editorials and proclamations in the world will not change that.

Worst of all, the “paper of record,” the paper that sets the agenda for the mainstream media, the glorified birdcage liner that announced its new slogan this year to be “the truth is more important now than ever,” took the attempted mass murder as an opportunity to rewrite history for a second time this week.

In the wake of a mass-political assassination attempt the Times ran an editorial entitled, “America’s Lethal Politics,” that attempted, once again, to blame Sarah Palin for the shooting that killed six and seriously wounded former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords, D-Ariz., in Tucson in 2011.

The editorial board of the Times actually wrote, “In 2011, when Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl, the link to political incitement was clear.”

It was? Because it wasn’t all that clear once it was discovered Loughner was a mentally unstable George W. Bush-hater.

 

The Times continued: “Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.”

That wasn’t “clear” when, in the pages of none other than the New York Times, it was made clear he’d had a history with Giffords pre-dating Palin’s website by years.

Maybe the people who run the New York Times don’t read the New York Times. Who could blame them, really?

Not satisfied to bastardize reality, the Times wrote:

“Conservatives and right-wing media were quick on Wednesday to demand forceful condemnation of hate speech and crimes by anti-Trump liberals. They’re right. Though there’s no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack, liberals should of course hold themselves to the same standard of decency that they ask of the right.” (Emphasis added.)

So a map of the country with some marks on it no one ever even suggested Loughner saw, on a website there is zero evidence he ever visited, is “direct incitement.” But years of claiming Republican want to kill children, the elderly, the poor, the middle class, animals, vegetables, the planet and anything else you can think of is of little to no consequence?

 

Comparing the president of the United States to Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and any other monster you can think of had no impact on left-wingers?

The Times eventually changed its editorial, long after it had printed and distributed millions copies in the paper edition, tempering its smear of Palin (likely after lawyers made the editors aware of possible liability), but the damage was done.

The editors added, “An editorial on Thursday about the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established.”

Not only was “no such link established,” there was no such link to establish. It was never real reporting; it was progressive porn, a left-wing snuff film in the minds of journalists that still, apparently, thrives in the minds of the people who run the New York Times.

Later in the piece it required a further correction. “The editorial also incorrectly described a map distributed by a political action committee before that shooting. It depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized cross hairs,” the editors wrote.

 

Hilariously, the Times eliminated its “public editor” position, the man responsible for holding the paper to journalistic standards, only two weeks ago. Perhaps speaking to someone outside the bubble might’ve spared the paper the embarrassment of its hatred spilling out on its pages again.

Make no mistake about it, James Hodgkinson is as much a committed man of the left as the editorial board of the Times. He’s the spawn of every fever-dream MSNBC airs on a nightly basis, and the network is trying to wash off its close association with him as fast as possible.

But it won’t wash off. Hodgkinson can’t be dismissed as a simple lunatic the way Loughner is.

Hodgkinson’s social media posts don’t show an insane person; they echo the pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post, Mother Jones, Slate and every other left-wing rag. His words have been spoken on CNN and MSNBC to a chorus of “amens.” He was onboard with what has become the mainstream of the Democratic Party. He was a true believer.

Since the movement that created him is actively refusing to recognize its role in that birth, there’s no reason to believe it will change its ways. Leftists aren’t willing or able to pump the brakes of hate for differing opinions. Simply wounding Republicans, it would seem, no longer is enough.

Leadership on the left remained mostly silent in the face of their followers’ violence around the campaign, the inauguration and college campuses across the country. When they weren’t silent, they were blaming Republicans for the sin of existing and, therefore, provoking the violence against them.

In other words, liberals don’t care.

They won’t be shamed into being decent human beings.

I would say they can’t be. Sanctimony demands it.

If the attempted mass murder of Republicans by one of their own didn’t result in 24 hours of honesty and civility, why would anyone think the next 24 days would be any different? Or any day after that?

It won’t be. The only way to really hurt the left is through the voting booth and to put conservative judges on the courts. Remind the American people of who these leftists are, every single time they expose themselves, then relegate them to the cautionary tale section of history books.

Don’t be them, beat them. Stripping the left of all political power is really the only way to harm them because political power is the only thing they care about. Just be careful out there till they’re done.

See something, say something. 🙂

 

Can I Quote You…

John Hawkins
John Hawkins
|
20 Liberal Calls For Violence Against Conservatives in Quotes

After Republican Rep. Steve Scalise was shot yesterday, many liberals on twitter CELEBRATED and said things like,

“The Only Good Fascist is a Dead One.”

“That’s a Shame but babies blown to bits at Sandy Hook was worse and Scalise takes money from the @NRA”

“If the shooter has a serious health condition then is taking potshots at the GOP leadership considered self defense?”

“If KKK support Steve Scalise dies, the shooter deserves a holiday, true leadership. Now the trumps, kush, & miller need to be transitioned.”

Is it any wonder? The most prominent liberals in America regularly accuse conservatives of being racist, sexist, Nazis, fascists who want children to die and are killing the planet and ruining the environment all because of their hate of the poor and minorities. Liberals today aim a nastier stream of propaganda at Republicans than America did at the Nazis; so is it any wonder that some people take the next logical step and become violent?

Meanwhile, you have plays, rap videos and prominent liberals glorifying the murder of the President, liberals applauding unrepentant terrorists like Bill Ayers, all while cops at left-wing universities stand back and allow violent students to riot, threaten and disrupt conservative speakers. We’re moving fast towards a point where clashes between armed gangs of thugs on both sides will leave people dead because liberals believe conservatives aren’t human beings and thus, don’t deserve the same protection under the law.

I’m not going to blame Bernie Sanders for the shooter who supported him or say that liberals and Democrats should be held personally responsible for it. The only person responsible for what the shooter did was the shooter. However, this sort of political violence is doomed to grow ever more common and bloodier unless liberal Democrats start changing the sort of rhetoric they engage in on a regular basis. Rhetoric like this…

1) “Michele (Bachmann), slit your wrist. Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing [sic]. Move that knife up about two feet. Start right at the collarbone.” — Montel Williams

2) “F*ck that dude. I’ll smack that f*cker’s comb-over right off his f*cking scalp. Like, for real, if I met Donald Trump, I’d punch him in his f*cking face. And that’s not a joke. Even if he did become president — watch out, Donald Trump, because I will punch you in your f*cking face if I ever meet you. Secret Service had better just f*cking be on it. Don’t let me anywhere within a block.”– Rapper Everlast on Donald Trump

3) “I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow….I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.” — Bill Maher

4) “I know how the ‘tea party’ people feel, the anger, venom and bile that many of them showed during the recent House vote on health-care reform. I know because I want to spit on them, take one of their “Obama Plan White Slavery” signs and knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.” — The Washington Post’s Courtland Milloy

5) “F*** God D*mned Joe the God D*mned Motherf*cking plumber! I want Motherf*cking Joe the plumber dead.” — Liberal talk show host Charles Karel Bouley on the air.

6) “Are you angry? [Yeah!] Are you angry? [Yeah!] Are you angry? [Yeah!] Well, we’ve been watching intifada in Palestine, we’ve been watching an uprising in Iraq, and the question is that what are we doing? How come we don’t have an intifada in this country? Because it seem[s] to me, that we are comfortable in where we are, watching CNN, ABC, NBC, Fox, and all these mainstream… giving us a window to the world while the world is being managed from Washington, from New York, from every other place in here in San Francisco: Chevron, Bechtel, [Carlyle?] Group, Halliburton; every one of those lying, cheating, stealing, deceiving individuals are in our country and we’re sitting here and watching the world pass by, people being bombed, and it’s about time that we have an intifada in this country that change[s] fundamentally the political dynamics in here. And we know every – They’re gonna say some Palestinian being too radical — well, you haven’t seen radicalism yet.” U.C. Berkeley Lecturer Hatem Bazian fires up the crowd at an anti-war rally by calling for an American intifada

7) “That Scott down there that’s running for governor of Florida. Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he’s running for governor of Florida. He’s a millionaire and a billionaire. He’s no hero. He’s a damn crook. It’s just we don’t prosecute big crooks.” — Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa

8) “..And then there’s Rumsfeld who said of Iraq ‘We have our good days and our bad days.’ We should put this S.O.B. up against a wall and say ‘This is one of our bad days’ and pull the trigger. Do you want to salvage our country? Be a savior of our country? Then vote for John Kerry and get rid of the whole Bush Bunch.” — From a fund raising ad put out by the St. Petersburg Democratic Club

9) “Republicans don’t believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don’t give a hoot about human beings, either can’t or won’t. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they cause any more harm.” — The Village Voice’s Michael Feingold, in a theater review of all places

10) “But the victim is also inaccurately being eulogized as a kind and loving religious man. Make no mistake, as disgusting and deservedly dead as the hate-filled fanatical Muslim killers were, Thalasinos was also a hate-filled bigot. Death can’t change that. But in the U.S., we don’t die for speaking our minds. Or we’re not supposed to anyway. Thalasinos was an anti-government, anti-Islam, pro-NRA, rabidly anti-Planned Parenthood kinda guy, who posted that it would be “Freaking Awesome” if hateful Ann Coulter was named head of Homeland Security.” — Linda Stasi, New York Daily News,on a victim murdered in the San Bernadino terrorist attack

11) “Cheney deserves same final end he gave Saddam. Hope there are cell cams.” — Rep. Chuck Kruger (D-Thomaston)

12) “If I had my way, I would see Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell strapped down to electric chairs and lit up like Christmas trees. The better to light the way for American Democracy and American Freedom!” — Democratic Talk Radio’s Stephen Crockett

13) “May your children all die from debilitating, painful and incurable diseases.” — Allan Brauer, the communications chair of the Democratic Party of Sacramento County to Ted Cruz staffer Amanda Carpenter

14)Violence solves nothing. I want a rhino to f*ck @SpeakerRyan to death with its horn because it’s FUNNY, not because he’s a #GOPmurderbro.” – Jos Whedon

15) “I hope Roger Ailes dies slow, painful, and soon. The evil that man has done to the American tapestry is unprecedented for an individual.” — Think Progress editorAlan Pyke

16) “But, you know, the NRA members are the current incarnation of the brownshirts from Germany back in the early ’30s, late ’20s, early ’30s. Now, of course, there came the Night of the Long Knives when the brownshirts were slaughtered and dumped in the nearest ditches when the power structure finally got tired of them. So I look forward to that day.” — Mike Malloy

17) “Or pick up a baseball bat and take out every f*cking republican and independent I see. #f*cktrump, #f*cktheGOP, #f*ckstraightwhiteamerica, #f*ckyourprivilege.” — Orange is the New Black star Lea DeLaria responding to a meme about using music to deal with violence

18) “I wish they (Republicans) were all f*cking dead!”Dan Savage

19) “Sarah Palin needs to have her hair shaved off to a buzz cut, get headf*cked by a big veiny, ashy, black d*ck then be locked in a cupboard.” — Azealia Banks advocates raping Sarah Palin over a fake news story

20)” Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything.” — Madonna