I like liberals, especially older ones! I feel sorry for progressives, social justice warriors, and socialists! I dislike the progressive media and I am disgusted with the Democratic House! Here's why:

1. The current Democratic house and progressive media have turned the term "r****t" into a meaningless word. - We all know the recent tweet that President Trump made. Democrats and the media would have you believe that tweet was r****t and they've done a pretty good job of it. When I first saw the tweet the media showed I thought the tweet was r****t as well - until I realized that the media had manipulated the narrative. If you look at the tweet itself, you will see that President Trump never mentioned African Americans or even people of color. What he said in his tweet was Democratic Congresswomen. Here is his tweet in exact words: 'So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!' - For those who keep up with Trump's tweets, you would very likely be aware that Trump was making a joke here and a funny one at that. An argument could be made that Trump was offensive and politically incorrect. An even stronger argument could be made that Trump was being sexist and a male chauvinist. However, the media and elected Democrats pushed the argument that Trump was being r****t and w***e s*********t instead. Why? Because Trump mentioned other countries and because that's the narrative they want to push. Our elected Democrats and progressive elite media have an endemic belief that any white person who questions or criticizes an elected Democrat who happens to be a minority is being r****t. During a press conference while Obama was president, homosexual Fox News journalist Shepherd Smith asked Obama a difficult question about the B******i attack. Journalists from every major progressive network accused Shepherd Smith a r****t. This is the same Fox News anchor that progressives are now cheering for asking Trump difficult questions and calling Trump out on inaccurate statements. Fox News, by the way, is the only network that gives a voice to both liberals(Shepherd Smith) and conservatives(Tucker Carlson). It even went so far as to give Bernie Sanders a "Town Hall Campaign Meeting" which proves that its attempts to be "fair and balanced" are genuine. I challenge any progressive to show me a conservative journalist on any progressive network. The only network that comes anywhere close is ABC. It's an atrocious double standard which I find sickening because the elitist progressive media and elected democrats are only to happy to applaud a white democrat who calls a Republican African American an "Uncle Tom" (Examples are Colin Powell, Dr. Ben Carson, and Condaleeza Rice). I'm getting slightly off point. A week prior to Trump's tweet, the same Democratic Congresswomen that Trump was referring to were calling Nancy Pelosi a r****t and accused her of supporting a Democratic r****t regime. Notice Trump did not call for them to be deported. He suggested they go and come back and show us how it's done. Yet, DNC Chairwoman Maxine Waters, in 2015, called for Trump to be deported.

2. Elected Democrats and the Progressive Media would have you believe this is the first time they have called a Republican President a r****t, a facist, a w***e s*********t, and a neo-n**i. They would further have you believe that this president is part of the extreme right and that the extreme right had never been in power until now. - In reality, the extreme right hasn't been in power for a hundred years. Worse, every single Republican President since Richard Nixon has been branded a r****t, a f*****t, a w***e s*********t, and a N**i by the progressive media and elected Democrats. ( watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUNynMEtRFk before commenting) This is despite the fact that many of those Republican Presidents made major contributions to African American communities and African communities.

3. Partisanship has poisoned both parties and the media - In this area, I condemn both parties. It is unfortunate that increased partisanship began with the Republican Party in 1992 when Newt Gingrich pushed elected Republicans to v**e only along Party lines instead of their beliefs, even to the point of having the RNC and elected party leadership punish elected Republicans who refused to "get with the plan". This led to RNC corruption to the point that it drew in the cooperation of the progressive and conservative media alike in a widespread media blackout of P**********l candidate in 2008 and especially in 2012. Both medias even went to the extent of intentionally misrepresenting polling data. (watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMXPgo47Dww) This was because Ron Paul was one of the only Republicans against the Iraq war from the beginning, not one of the elite, and pushed for auditing the federal reserve. The RNC rules committee, of which P**********l Candidate Mitt Romney was somehow a committee chairperson of in 2012, then changed the rules, so that Ron Paul could not even be v**ed for at the Republican Nomination. ( watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syD3_uQKES0 )Donald Trump, by the way, used the exact same rules Mitt Romney corruptly passed in 2012 in order to steal the Republican Nomination, in order to win the Republican Nomination in 2016. Mitt Romney, coincidentally, tried to get his own rules repealed in 2016. For you Republican Never Trumpers who h**ed Trump's Republican nomination, the person you have to blame for that is none other than Mitt Romney. I wish I could say thethe Democrat party and DNC was better. Instead it copied what the Republican Party had begun and became even more corrupt and ruthless. During the Obama administration, several Democratic house and senate members that opposed certain Obama policies found themselves being targeted, audited, or jailed under vague corruption charges. In 2011-2013, during the IRS targeting scandal, 75% of the refused or delayed tax-exempt filing organizations were conservative and had conservative names or themes such as "tea party", "9/12", "patriots", and "Israel". ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy ) In 2017, an investigation into the liberal and progressive organizations denied or delayed found that 90% of those organizations denied or delayed opposed at least one of Obama's policies including Occupy Movement organizations which opposed Obama's handling of mega banks and wall street companies that the Obama administration bailed out from 2008 to 2010. In 2015, Hillary Clinton used the media and DNC to literally steal the Democratic nomination from Bernie Sanders. (watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8qBexfR3r4 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldg76_Awp3A ) Bernie Sanders, along with Ron Paul, also, coincidentally, supported auditing the Federal Reserve. ( watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=869POIyGm2E ) It is very possible that the Federal Reserve rules the US and is likely more powerful than the President, Congress, and Supreme Court combined. Don't believe me? You can type any member of congress and get dozens of results from major news media. Type Audit the fed in google and you will find news from mostly minor news media. Major News media avoid it like a hot potato!

4. Elected Democrats and Progressive Media blame Trump for Mentally Ill Shootings, Pretend Trump has Never Condemned R****m or W***e S*******y - Here is Trump Condemning r****m and w***e s*******y ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhs5_kMmRnQ ). Let's go back to the first part. Elected Democrats and the Media have blamed Trump's words for the mass shooting in El Paso. Why? Because the guy was anti-immigrant and a w***e s*********t. This is the lowest bar elected Democrats have ever dropped to. I wish with all my heart that this was the lowest the progessive media has ever dropped to but, they've done much worse, as you'll soon see. There's only one problem with their current dialogue: The El Paso shooter was also anti-Trump. Why would this guy have listened to Trump if he was anti-Trump. Trump isn't anti-immigrant. He's anti-i*****l i*******t. There's a difference! The progressive media and elected dems apparently seem to think you're too stupid to know the difference! Even if this guy was pro-Trump when he went on a shooting spree, that still would not make it Trump's fault. The Dayton shooter was pro-Bernie Sanders and Pro-Elizabeth Warren. The DC shooter was also a Bernie supporter. So, why aren't we blaming Bernie Sanders? Because they both used guns? What if they both used crossbows? Would we blame Bernie Sanders because he wasn't anti-crossbow? Medical Errors are the third highest k**ler in the US behind cancer and heart disease. By progressive logic, we should be banning doctors, nurses, hospitals, and medical clinics thereby eliminating the number 3 k**ler in America because, people don't k**l people, medical care k**ls people! Wow, Beto O'Rourke could win with that one! Medicare for All! Medical Care for None! Even better, we could ban guns for cops first and watch the police bodycount skyrocket thereby appeasing Black L***s M****r! Goriest! I mean Glorious! Sorry! I keep getting off topic!

5. The progressive media deceives its viewers. - Think Farhenheit 9/11 times 10,000 news stories and that's what you get with today's progressive news media. Michael Moore cropped videos and pictures, took sentences out of context, removed controverting evidence and outright lied when the t***h didn't fit his narrative. Think the progressive media is trustworthy? Think again! Let's start with cropping! Have you ever noticed that there's a difference between footage of Fox Trump Rallies and CNN Trump Rallies? White people sometimes feel like something is different but, they usually have a hard time pinning it down. This applies especially to progressive white people. African Americans comparing the same footage from different news organizations notice it immediately. The progressive media tends to crop African Americans from Trump rallies. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AkbfmMNVP8&t=468s ) I'm sure that they will say it was unintentional. I've personally compared several of the exact same Trump rallies from different news organizations, and it's kinda hard to believe this was unintentional. Yes, the Republican Party is not nearly as diverse as it should be but, the progressive media seems to be trying to make the Republican Party appear "whiter" than it is and, if that's true then, they are far more r****t than Trump supposedly is!
People see what they think they're going to see but, the progressive media appears to be catering to what white progressives expect to see - a couple of black people in a group of hundreds of thousands of white people.
Next, let's look at taking sentences out of contexts. Remember when the media told us Trump was a r****t because he said "All mexicans are rapists!" Progressives told me this over and over. There's only one problem. That isn't what he said. Here's what he really said ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5n17hPlsQs ) This is a generation that is challenging more and more what we're being told. We're not as dumb as Clinton era democrats who made the unconscionable choice to support a man who used his power for sexual favors and scourged a poor woman named Monica Lewinsky for fearfully choosing not to say no to the most powerful man in America at the time. We research to see if what the media tries to dumb down is accurate. If Trump said "Mexico has some good citizens but, it also has some murderers.", the progressive media t***slation would be this 'R****t Trump Calls all Mexicans Murderers!' It was progressive stereotyping like this that caused Hillary to lose the last e******n, and it was intentional misrepresentation like this by the progressive media who assumed they would be believed regardless of t***h or accuracy that has continued to erode and destroy national trust in the media as a whole. When you have a media that, not only takes sentences out of context but also, changes the sentence altogether, it's easier to believe this headline "Progressive media caught meddling in US e******ns" than this one "Russia caught meddling in US e******ns"!
Finally, let's discuss the progressive media's removal of controverting evidence and outright lying when it doesn't fit their narrative. Remember this? ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9siALpqSSKw ) The progressive mainstream media quickly took the side of Gothamist Reporter Jake Offenhartz statement that the sign was an "alt-right" plant in order to troll A****a and A****a simply failed to read the sign that three A****a members were holding because some random person told them to hold it. First of all, that's very hard to believe. Why would any A****a member much less three hold up a sign in front of the entire A****a group without bothering to read it first. Yet, it could be true. BAMN (BY Any Means Necessary), the group that organizes these A****a events has been caught trying to brainwash and intimidate students multiple times. ( https://dailycaller.com/2017/05/02/school-district-berkeley-r**t-organizers-tried-to-brainwash-students-into-left-wing-activism-video/ ) So, it is conceivable that these students have been brainwashed to the point of holding up signs without bothering to look at what they're holding first. The vast majority of A****a members have no idea what their organizers truly believe in or really stand for. The real question isn't whether this was an accident or not but whether being pro-p********a has anything to do with BAMN's A****a or not. That answer is unfortunately yes. BAMN's founders and organizers have a parent organization which funds and assists them. That organization is NAMBLA(North American Man/Boy Love Association). (https://dailycaller.com/2017/04/28/documents-tie-berkeley-r**t-organizers-to-pro-p********a-group-nambla/ ) ( https://www.dangerous.com/12031/a****a-link-nambla/ )

The liberal mainstream media has been propagating a lie for about 30 years now that goes like this: When the founders gave us our bill of rights, they gave us the right to bear arms with the flintlock rifle in mind and were not aware that machine guns and assault rifles would be created in the future. There's only one problem with that. Machine guns and assault rifles were already in existence during that time.

Here is an assault riflle from 1780: https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/07/26/assault-weapon-1780/
It carried twenty two bullets.

Machine guns were even older. The first machine gun was created in the late thirteen hundreds. It was called an organ gun and used multiple barrels to fire a volley of shots rapidly. It shot 12 bullets at once. Although it was rare, it was greatly feared on the battlefield and given the nickname "the infernal machine". This was followed by the revolving arquebus in 1597. By the late 1700's, there were already several different types of machine gun in use. Congress was well aware of them. This was followed by the Kalthoff repeater(which had 6 to 30 rounds) and the Cookson repeater (which had 14 rounds and two barrels). This was followed by the puckle gun in 1718 which could shoot up to 9 rounds per minute. By the late 1700s, there were several different types of machine guns out, and congress knew about them.

I don't know. Some laws are really stupid. I's not easy to change them though. You have to have some financial backing.

Affirmatively destroying America’s neighborhoods in the war on suburbia

Few of us understand patient gradualism. We live and have our being within a few years and mostly in an unconscious automated state of mind.

But people in power are long-term planners. They absolutely understand human nature and how to channel it to the evolution and refinement of the authoritarian state.

Authoritarianism is based on long-term planning. Authoritarianism is a philosophy of collectivism. Some call it democracy. Some call it c*******m. Some call it f*****m. Some call it National Socialism. But wh**ever you call it, it is all collectivism or authoritarianism; and in its ultimate form it is globalism.

The goal is perfect docility and perfect harmony with authoritarianism (economic, social and spiritual). Until the people accept collectivism under some pretext, they are not docile and completely subdued. Once they do, r*******n and confrontation are impossible. This is the ultimate goal of the g*******ts, and the American system is nearing this state.

The dismantling of the middle class has become the appointed, full-time task of the largest government alphabet soup agencies and Wall Street on behalf of globalism. The purpose behind this is that if those big middle-class producers and consumers can be decimated once and for all, then they can join the ranks of low-wage workers and more readily accept government largess and, thereby, become “hooked” on collectivism.

Collectivism is a certain means of social, economic and religious control. Politicians regularly espouse individualism, human liberty and democracy at the same time. Impossible! Individualism and human liberty are opposite to democracy and any other form of collectivism. The collectivist mentality or the mass collective mind is the spirit of the New World Order.

But something is standing in the way. Despite the years of indoctrination through the public (non)education system and mass programming by the national propaganda media and public (i.e., government) policy, rural Middle and Southern middle-class Americans — the “Red States” of “flyover country” — continue to resist the g*******ts’ dreams of a socialist/Marxist “utopia” and egalitarianism. That’s because they are, by and large, more independent and more self-reliant and also demand equitable reward for their labor and product, placing them in competition for resources and goods with the global elite.

Efforts to remove this obstacle are behind the current war on the middle class and individual liberty and the spirit of individualism through the attempts to whitewash Southern culture from existence and distort the true nature of the Confederate cause by casting it and Confederate symbols as r****t and treasonous. The bigoted elites in the District of Criminals and pointy-headed “thinkers” in the prestigious institutes of learning continually promulgate the meme that w****s — rural w****s in particular and Southern w****s specifically — are backward, r****t buffoons riding in trucks looking for b****s to lynch while ridiculously clinging to their guns and religion.

The purpose is to stir up racial animosity and manipulate the people against one another. Manipulating minorities who are naturally drawn to socialism is basic political strategy to cover government crime and justify government politics and plunder.

The principle of government is that political power is maximized by forcibly leveling every individual to the same status of conformity, collectivism, egalitarianism and serfdom.

The t***h goes deeper. Because of perceived social, cultural, racial and psychic inferiority, minorities desire to parasite on government force and socialism to subvert those they envy and wish to imitate. (This includes all so-called minority groups, not just racial minorities.)

In 2014, there was an invasion of i******s from Central and South America stemming from the immigration policies and statements of President Barack Obama. Over the ensuing months, the Obama regime shipped those i******s into communities and cities across the country and immediately began efforts to grant them some sort of legal status in order to ultimately provide them with v****g rights in a back-door effort to change the local demographics and, therefore, the v****g outcomes in these communities from a conservative bent to one more socialistic.

Third World immigrants are attracted to cradle-to-grave nanny state socialism because it is what they know and all they have known. They are also more accepting of gun control and the police state. They have no understanding of or experience with individual liberty or the concept of natural rights.

Gaining v****g “rights” for non-citizens is the main driver of the federal opposition to v**er ID laws.

The Obama regime attempted but failed with a mass social re-engineering scheme in 2010. That effort, fueled by corruptocrat Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), sought to fulfill the United Nation’s Agenda 21 plan, adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and signed onto by “New World Order” President George H.W. Bush.

Using a typical government “carrot-and-stick” policy, the bill sought to award or deny grants from the federal treasury to cities based on their compliance with amending or passing zoning laws to restrict housing in rural areas and force the residents into city centers.

The stick, in addition to denial of the funds, would be bad publicity generated by “Green” organizations working on behalf of the federal government criticizing local government officials for turning down free money and neglecting so-called “Green” initiatives.

Then came Obama’s speciously titled Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing edicts from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This extra-constitutional rule change had been in the works for more than four years, but was largely glossed over by the MSM. It sought to do the reverse of the Dodd bill. That is, rather than drive the suburbanites into the cities, it sought to move inner-city minorities into the suburbs.

The AFFH will have the federal government imposing preferred racial and ethnic composition on neighborhoods in exchange for federal funds provided or denied. It will change zoning laws, require a certain amount of government-subsidized housing in rural areas in order to achieve “racial balance,” control t***sportation and business development and remove the authority of state and local governments in the areas of zoning, t***sportation and education.

As National Review’s Stanley Kurtz writes:
Fundamentally, AFFH is an attempt to achieve economic integration. Race and ethnicity are being used as proxies for class, since these are the only hooks for social engineering provided by the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Like AFFH itself, today’s Washington Post piece blurs the distinction between race and class, conflating the persistence of “concentrated poverty” with housing discrimination by race. Not being able to afford a freestanding house in a bedroom suburb is no proof of racial discrimination. Erstwhile urbanites have been moving to rustic and spacious suburbs since Cicero built his villa outside Rome. Even in a monoracial and mono-ethnic world, suburbanites would zone to set limits on dense development. Emily Badger’s piece in today’s Washington Post focuses on race, but the real story of AFFH is the attempt to force integration by class, to densify development in American suburbs and cities, and to undo America’s system of local government and replace it with a “regional” alternative that turns suburbs into helpless satellites of large cities. Once HUD gets its hooks into a municipality, no policy area is safe. Zoning, t***sportation, education, all of it risks slipping into the control of the federal government and the new, unelected regional bodies the feds will empower. Over time, AFFH could spell the end of the local democracy that Alexis de Tocqueville rightly saw as the foundation of America’s liberty and distinctiveness.

To accomplish its goals, HUD will dig into the racial balance ZIP code by ZIP code looking for areas of segregation, with the segregation threshold being nonwhite populations of 50 percent or more. Federally funded cities deemed overly segregated will be pressured to change their zoning laws to allow construction of more subsidized housing in affluent areas in the suburbs and relocate inner-city minorities to those predominantly white areas. HUD’s maps, which use dots to show the racial distribution or density in residential areas, will be used to select affordable-housing sites, according to the New York Post.

To employ this policy, the federal government has undertaken a massive Orwellian-style data collection initiative, prying into the medical records, credit card purchases, mortgage business records, IRS filings, employment records, educational records and local government policy initiatives searching for racial “inequalities” for the Justice Department to prosecute.

The only way to resist this tyranny is for local governments to eschew all federal monies including Community Development Block Grants going forward. Of course, local residents always pressure their community leaders to accept government monies under the auspices that they have paid their “taxes” and want a return on their “investment.” But once the Feds get their hooks into the local community through the distribution of money from the federal treasury, they can exert total control over local government’s functions regarding housing, zoning and regulations far more than they do already.

The g*******t agenda is the most comprehensive program for world f*****m and world collectivism ever conceived. Its basis is esoteric deception, as carried out pragmatically by mass politics, international mass banking and the mass media. It operates as a whole — as an organism. Today’s democratic g*******ts make the c*******ts and the N**is look like amateur totalitarians.

Conservative Republicans, Libertarians, and classical Liberals should take note. This will lead the US into the same level of federal authoritarianism that Great Britian is now employing. City, County, State, and ultimately individual freedom will once again be diminished all in the name of "The Common Good" unless something is done. Call your Senator and Representive now! Say you want Obama's extra-legislative AFFH repealed immediately!

Cops as Criminals
Steve Chapman

Late one night, during high school, I was driving home when several police cars zoomed by. Curious about what was going on, I followed them down a residential street, where they pulled up to a house.

I drove by and saw some officers walking up the sidewalk, but couldn't tell what they might be after. So I pulled into a driveway, turned around and drove back. My curiosity still unsatisfied, I then looped around the block to make one more pass.

Wrong decision. One of the cops pulled his car up behind me, turned on his lights, jumped out and ordered me to get out of my car. When I did, I was surrounded by men in uniform, one of whom screamed profane threats and invective in my face. I quietly endured the abuse, and when they finally let me go, I considered myself lucky not to have been beaten or arrested.

The police would have had trouble finding a reason to arrest me, since driving on a public street is not illegal. Nor was I interfering with what they were doing. But my unassailable legal position was not foremost in my mind at that moment.

What was foremost is that they had guns, batons and badges and could do pretty much wh**ever they chose without fear of punishment. Had I argued, I have no doubt the encounter would have ended badly.

I was breaking no law. The cop who threatened me, however, was guilty of assault -- which Texas says occurs when someone "intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury." Since he had a gun on his hip, he may have been guilty of aggravated assault. But it didn't matter. He and his colleagues acted as though they were in the right, and self-preservation dictated that I pretend they were.

The lesson imprinted by the experience was one I already understood, even if I had never thought much about it: Some of the scariest people are the ones who are supposed to keep us safe.

I've had only a few unwanted contacts with police since, and I've been very careful not to antagonize them. Even when I was ticketed for failure to come to a complete stop at a stop sign -- which I was quite sure I had -- I didn't argue.

When I went to traffic school for that citation, the instructor confirmed my instincts. "When you're stopped, I'd strongly advise you not to talk back," he said with a smug grin. "If you do, any cop can find five or 10 things to write you up for."

Sandra Bland probably understood the nature of this reality. She cooperated with the Texas state trooper who pulled her over for her trivial failure to signal a lane change on a mostly empty street.

But when she failed to grovel sufficiently, he demanded an explanation -- and didn't like the one he got. Soon he was angrily yanking her out of the car, taking her to the ground and handcuffing her. Why did the confrontation escalate out of control? Not because Bland violated the laws of Texas, but because the cop felt unconstrained by them.

In many instances, police can trample on citizens' rights with impunity. Stopping and frisking without legal justification was the practice in New York City until 2013, when a federal judge intervened. Some Chicago cops tortured suspects, and for years they got away with it.

The only reason police brutality has come to light via video cameras is that some officers are so used to committing it that they never dream of being held to account.

It's no secret that they can and do get away with lying. A prosecutor I know once marveled at how often motorists leave illegal drugs on the front seat, where they can be easily spotted by police during stops. His implication was that the cops conduct illegal searches and afterward invent stories to make them appear legal.

Video cameras expose some of this behavior, but they're not necessarily enough to change it. The officer who stopped Bland knew a dashboard camera was recording him -- yet he proceeded to flip out.

He acted on a view that too many cops have and that civilians learn at their peril: The police are obligated to enforce the law, not obey the law.

The N**is, Medical Research, and Planned Parenthood
Michael Brown

The testimony of Prof. Dr. Julius Hallervorden (1882-1965) during the Nuremberg Trials for N**i war crimes was chilling, with obvious implications for Planned Parenthood today.

Hallervorden was a famous neurologist who became head of the Neuropathology Department of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research in 1938.

He was also a staunch N**i.

In order for Hallervorden to do his medical research, he needed brains to study, and in 1939, a tremendous opportunity presented itself to him.

As explained in an academic, medical article, “his work as a pathologist during the Third Reich put him in close proximity with the implementation of biologic solutions (i.e., euthanasia) targeting those individuals with significant intellectual or physical disabilities in chronic-care facilities. The N**i program of active euthanasia provided a scientific opportunity to gain quick access to pathologic materials. This opportunity was recognized and used by Hallervorden to achieve personal scientific objectives and research efforts.”

What exactly does this mean? What were these “biologic solutions” that so helped his work?

The medical website Whonamedit? (“A dictionary of medical eponyms”) puts things in more stark terms. In 1939, “a euthanasia centre had been established at the Brandenburg-Görden centre, where there was a sudden surge in institutional deaths. It is now assumed that a majority of the some 700 brains [Hallervorden] investigated during the N**i period were victims of euthanasia, and that he was present at the k*****g of more than 60 children and adolescents in the Anstalt Brandenburg on October 28, 1940.”

Yes, although he knew he was using the brains of human beings slaughtered in cold blood by his N**i coworkers (the mentally infirm and the handicapped, many of them children), he explained during the Nuremberg Trials that “those brains offered wonderful material, of mentally poor, deformities and early children's diseases. Of course I accepted the brains. It really wasn't my concern where they came from and how they were brought to me.”

Really? That was his justification? To paraphrase: “Even if innocent human beings were being murdered” – the very ones society should protect, seeing that they are the weakest and most vulnerable – “their brains were used for a good cause.”

Does this sound like Planned Parenthood? And is anyone more innocent, vulnerable, and dependent than a baby in its mother’s womb?

To paraphrase their pathetic excuses, “Oh, we’re doing the compassionate thing, using this fetal tissue to advance medical research and save lives. And the companies obtaining the tissue from us are doing a real service to humanity.”

At least Hallervorden was honest.

A pro-choice reader would surely protest, saying, “How dare you compare Planned Parenthood to the N**is. The N**is k**led lived human beings. Planned Parenthood is helping women decide what to do with their fetal tissue.”

Really? Well consider this testimony from a pre-med student who went from pro-a******n to pro-life in one day after witnessing the a******n of a baby less than 14 weeks old:

“When I entered the operating room, it felt like any other I had ever been in. On the table in front of me, I saw a woman, legs up as if delivering a child although she was asleep. Next to her was a tray of instruments for the a******n and a vacuum machine for suctioning the fetal tissues from the uterus. The doctors put on their gowns and masks and the procedure began. The cervix was held open with a crude metal instrument and a large t***sparent tube was stuck inside of the woman. Within a matter of seconds, the machine’s motor was engaged and blood, tissue, and tiny organs were pulled out of their environment into a filter. A minute later, the vacuum choked to a halt. The tube was removed, and stuck to the end was a small body and a head attached haphazardly to it, what was formed of the neck snapped. The ribs had formed with a thin skin covering them, the eyes had formed, and the inner organs had begun to function. The tiny heart of the fetus, obviously a little boy, had just stopped — forever. The vacuum filter was opened, and the tiny arms and legs that had been torn off of the fetus were accounted for. The fingers and toes had the beginnings of their nails on them. The doctors, proud of their work, reassembled the body to show me. Tears welled up in my eyes as they removed the baby boy from the table and shoved his body into a container for disposal.”

Are you so sure the comparison is invalid?

As for Hallervorden being directly involved in putting children and adolescents to death (or, being complicit in their deaths), his actions pale in comparison to those of Planned Parenthood, which not only devised the plan for the slaughter of millions of babies in the womb but which profits from that slaughter. The more a******ns, the merrier! (We’re not even talking about the potential profit that Planned Parenthood makes from marketing the aborted baby parts.)

Yet defenders of Planned Parenthood have the audacity to compare aborting a baby and selling its parts to the act of donating blood. Dr. Hallervorden would certainly have concurred.

Today, we look back at this N**i doctor’s words with utter disdain. I fervently hope that history – maybe the not too distant history – will look back on Planned Parenthood’s pathetic justifications the same way it looks back on the words of Julius Hallervorden.

A study commissioned by the National Black Chamber of Commerce to evaluate the potential economic impacts of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) clean power plan (CPP) on minority groups, found the CPP would increase poverty in the black community by 23 percent and cause the loss of 7 million jobs for b***k A******ns by 2035. The Black Chamber of Commerce represents 2.1 million black-owned businesses in the United States.
Looking at the impact of the CPP on the Hispanic community, the study found it would increase poverty among Hispanics by 26 percent and result in the loss of 12 million jobs in the Hispanic community by 2035.
In testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on June 23, National Black Chamber of Commerce President Harry Alford discussed the report, Potential Impact of Proposed EPA Regulations on Low Income Groups and Minorities, testifying, “The study finds that the Clean Power Plan will inflict severe and disproportionate economic burdens on poor families, especially minorities. The report found the CPP would "decrease Black and Hispanic median household income by $455 and $515 respectively, in 2035," Alford testified.

You should watch this video that shows just how dangerous and evil guns are:

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/07/24/horrific-gun-facts-guns/

These evil guns are so evil! They should be destroyed! They should put before a firing squad!

Here's another example of Democratic and Republican Hypocrisy:

https://absoluterights.com/ted-cruz-mitch-mcconnell-a-liar-on-senate-floor/

There should have been some applause from Congress. Tell me what you think!

Right! Just because something can be interpreted as r****t doesn't mean it is. I am not a republican or conservative. I'm a libertarian. I can typically see both sides of the argument and respect the points of both but, in 2012, the US started becoming an increasingly ugly place, in large part, due to progressive elitism in the Democratic party which was pushing intolerance for traditional ways of life to an extreme and becoming oppressive and intolerant of our rights as a whole. This is what has given rise to A****a which IS f*****t in its actions and goals.

Actually, I can but, it's only half true. I understand how liberals think. I don't always agree with them but, I respect their opinions. I used to understand progressives but, not anymore. The latest batch of progressives appear to be ugly and anti-1st amendment.

Lately, I've begun to wonder if they purposely ensure the polls are skewed. If so, then, it's more than media bias.

The organization that got the answers it wanted?

They've lost any credibility they once had, and that doesn't just apply to liberal mainstream media.

This video is hilarious and awesome! It shows just how full of hypocrisy both parties have become:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5wn8zn5fF8

So, what do you think?