2016: An Anti-Women Year?

“But scientists? Record-breaking athletes? Leaders? Does. Not. Compute. Still! In 2016. From the lab to the Olympic podium to the Oval Office, America still has a problem with women when they’re good at the things men have long reserved for themselves.” – Petula Dvorak, “feminist” Washington Post columnist

As Crooked Hillary did not win the presidency, scribbler Dvorak has yet another political ax to grind. What else explains her boneheaded assessment that 2016 is somehow globally anti-woman? Like liar Hillary, apparently Ms. Dvorak has an aversion to truth-telling—and modern-day reality. Girl power is everywhere! What of the current resident at 10 Downing Street? British Prime Minister Theresa May doesn't count as a leader? At home, how about Air Force general Lori Robinson: the highest ranking female in U.S. history—and the first women as a combat commander? Further, three women are on the Supreme Court. Isn't it hypocritical for Ms. Dvorak to accuse others of diminishing the contributions of women—when she completely ignores them?

In sport, why has she forgotten tennis pro Serena Williams? This year, Ms. Williams tied Steffi Graf's historic open era record of 22 major championships. Likewise, how about another American phenom, Simone Biles? As the winner of four gold metals, she's considered the “greatest gymnast of all time”. This breakout star of a team of women has established an Olympic legacy. Speaking of the Rio Games, U.S. women were the big winners: receiving 61 metals (to the men's 55), 27 of them golds. In 2016, if these don't count as record-breaking athletes to addled Dvorak, who does?

While it's true that women have not been so publicly acknowledged in scientific circles, even that unfortunate dynamic has been commemorated in today's highly rated movie, “Hidden Figures”. Given Ms. Dvorak's jaded '60s style mind-set, it's no surprise she doesn't pay attention to pro-woman box office trends. What else explains her failure to mention current number one “Rogue One”? That film features a brave, tough and capable female lead, Jyn Erso (played by actress Felicity Jones).

Indeed, 21^st century America is one of the most accepting cultures on earth. Therefore, griping liberals—promoting a false anti-woman narrative—are actually grievance-holding dinosaurs of a bygone era. At present, tolerance is the overwhelming rule rather than the exception. As flawed and out of touch, such MSM misperceivers like Petula Dvorak should be pitied. Rightfully marginalized by current events—and a society that has evolved well beyond her. In truth, the “problem with women” is her own phantom menace. A sour grapes bogeyman of an ideologue's fevered imagination.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976  

Liberal Losers Champion Hypocrisy

“It’s understandable liberals presumed the Rockettes were going to be forced to do something with which they were opposed, because that’s what the liberal establishment [under Obama] has been doing to everyone else.” – Tammy Bruce, author, columnist and radio talk show host

When a handful of Rockettes declined to kick up their heels at Donald Trump's upcoming inauguration—a voluntary gig—liberals wrongly assumed the dancers' employer was “forcing them” to perform against their will. Where was a similar outcry when Christian bakers were compelled by the State to produce cakes for gay weddings? Further, why were libs as silent as church mice when the big government juggernaut that is ObamaCare compelled Catholic nuns to pay for useless birth control? (These Little Sisters of the Poor successfully petitioned the Supreme Court for “protection” from Obama's fascism.) For the last eight years, why has progressive “outrage” been so blatantly selective?

Wasn't the central theme of all civil rights movements—of women, blacks and gays—based upon the intrinsic idea of equal treatment for all? Why is it that today's progressives have inverted this meaning? Why do they seek “special” rights only for their fellow travelers (like one “graceless” Rockette who stated on Instagram that President-elect Trump “stands for everything we're against”)?

Democrats' only true agenda is self-serving power-seeking. Therefore, they distort and exploit a trivial circumstance for their own political gain. What else explains their full-throated lip service to griping, anti-Trump dupes who also constitute their future voting blocs? Ironically, a few Rockettes popping off behind the scenes has inadvertently made center stage leftist hypocrisy.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Shellacked Dems Ignore Trump “Mule”

“There’s no education in the second kick of a mule.” – Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate Majority Leader

President-elect Donald Trump is a political tsunami for returning Democrats as well as the outgoing president. Yet, the signs of an outraged electorate have been apparent for years. In the election cycles of 2010 and 2014, increasing Republican gains to 2017's domination of the federal government prove this assessment true. Why does the progressive political class continue to disregard the meaning of this circumstance? For Mr. Obama's obtuseness, the cost will be enormous: his disastrous legacy. For those remaining, the reelection of old guard leader Nancy Pelosi will likely consign Democrats to minority status for the foreseeable future. Reality is the pro-American wrecking crew of an upcoming Trump Administration.

For their collective defeat, these elitist egotists believe themselves to be “victims”. Post-election is about licking wounds for their sidelined little clique—not respecting the will of the voters. Lacking grace, all make revolving door excuses that deny personal responsibility. As examples, Mr. Obama claims unsubstantiated Russian interference while Mr. Clinton accuses “angry white men” of misogyny. Hillary blames FBI Director James Comey—and seemingly any tangent that readily leaps to mind. For her part, coddled Michelle vents to gal pal Oprah. All this gelded quartet needs is a mirror.

For years, these panderers have lived large as self-absorbed jet-setters. They've demonized opposition with false charges of intolerance. Trump's victory is the country's natural reaction: the third—and largest—kick of the “electorate mule”. Self-regard blinds them to this thunderous jolt. Ultimately, the 2016 election is more than a resounding repudiation of the Obama legacy or a future Clinton presidency. It's a wholesale rejection of the anti-American progressive agenda.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Ending Obama “Cult” Pains Michelle

“Anyone who puts faith in a politician to make his or her life better is worshipping a false god. ... Politicians promote faith in themselves [read: Barack and Michelle Obama] because it helps their careers and feeds their egos.” – Cal Thomas, syndicated columnist in The Washington Times

The only wonderful thing about a false god is its inevitable demise. To progressive ideologues like coddled Michelle, the repudiations of her husband—political shellackings of 2010, 2014 and today—are deeply painful. After all, the Obamas are profoundly narcissistic and ego-driven. In 2014, that's why Mr. Obama said:

“I’m not on the ballot this fall. Michelle’s pretty happy about that. But make no mistake: These [read: my] policies are on the ballot, every single one of them.”

For Michelle's part, five-star White House perks and Air Force One jet-setting aren't enough. She wanted to be paid to be first lady. Indeed, the Obama presidency is defined by self-aggrandizement. What else explains Mr. Obama's habit of governing while golfing or his perpetual Hawaiian vacations? (Aptly, Michelle flew to Hawaii after her parting Oprah interview.) How can the Obamas take for granted the extraordinary faith gifted anyone residing in the White House? No one is entitled to sour grapes for being entrusted with such a lofty position. To helm the greatest nation on earth is a privilege—never an entitlement. It's a disgrace to behave otherwise.

Unlike the clueless and classless Obamas, President-elect Donald Trump “gets it.” That's the real reason behind his 'Thank You' tour. By contrast, neither carping Obama can muster even a few words of gratitude. A modern-day Marie Antoinette, entitled Michelle has happily existed in the echo chamber that is the White House bubble (same as her husband). What other couple has lived so publicly as careless millionaires, impervious to the suffering of their fellow citizens?

The Obama presidency is an anti-American exercise in fascism, the superficiality of identity politics and the cult of personality. The Obamas never even acknowledged harsh domestic or international realities. What of eight years of killing zones in inner cities like Chicago? What of Barack Obama's virtual doubling of America's national debt? What of the escalating worldwide scourge that is his unnamed radical Islamic terrorism? To them, none of these actual problems matter. They hold the ego-centered belief—a collective political delusion—that they are the “real victims”. See this same fiction paralleled by Michelle's griping and Hillary's election meltdown. As Hillary Clinton promised an “Obama third term,” how her failure is a resounding rejection of the Obama legacy. Country be damned: everything is about their marginalized little elitist clique.

Ah, the unceasing agony—to be at the mercy of a Republican Congress and The Donald's pen stroke! In this, America has been blessed with renewed hope and a new beginning. Michelle Obama's self-absorbed pessimism—a serious character flaw—provides the correct context for her out of touch reaction:

“We are feeling what not having hope feels like.”

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Hollywood's Anti-Trump Minstrel Show

“There are 538 members of the Electoral College. You, and just 36 other conscientious Republican electors could make a difference by voting your conscience on [Monday] December 19th and thereby shaping the future of our nation.” – Celebrity-laden political commercial by Unite For America

Fair and square, President-elect Donald Trump won. One meaningful measure is 30 of 50 states. Another is the most counties of any Republican since Ronald Reagan. That translates into a clear and definitive electoral victory of 306 votes. (Recall, the threshold to the presidency is 270.) Though Crooked Hillary conceded the election the morning after, she still backed Green Party Jill Stein's futile recount efforts which came to naught. Now, cry baby progressives have moved on a truly unprecedented step: the use of Hollywood actors as mouthpieces to directly lobby the Electoral College to nullify the people's selection.

So, presidential electors shouldn't do the right thing by honoring the results of the 2016 election? Thus, the standards of 29 states and the District of Columbia that bind their electors (via state law and/or by state or party pledge) to cast their vote for the candidate who wins the statewide popular vote should be summarily ignored? Great advice from people who make believe for a living! Naturally, they don't mean twice-failed Hillary. The empty-headed limousine liberals nebulously advocate “anyone but Trump.” How is that not lawlessness—the naked call of anarchy? Should American representative electors act like Iranian ayatollahs? In Unite For America's fascist propaganda, that's what the unhinged—like former pretend “West Wing” president Martin Sheen—want.

One wonders what's worse for hounded GOP electors: the nutty death threats they've received or being publicly called out by dopey Hollywood elitists? Please immediately send supportive emails to your elector via the website: electorsfortrump.com. Let them hear encouraging messages from patriotic Americans before they cast their votes for our 45^th president this Monday.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976 

The Washington Times: Politically Schizophrenic

“The best path forward for the electoral college is to throw support behind a candidate whom a number of Trump-pledged electors can support: Vice President Joe Biden. As the sitting vice president, Mr. Biden is ready to immediately become president. And he is respected by both the right and left as a great statesman.” – Adam Copley, Pleasantville, PA, published on December 14, 2016

For the holidays, have The Washington Times opinion editors entered “The Twilight Zone”? (Do they think they actually work for The Washington Post?) As it isn't April Fool's Day, what else explains why liberal fascism is granted precious space in their scant Letters section? Given that The Times is supposedly the “conservative” Washington newspaper, the above absurdity is one for the ages. So, American elections shouldn’t count? The people's choice of President-elect Donald Trump shouldn’t really matter? The Electoral College should go rogue, subvert the 2016 election by elevating laughingstock Joe Biden to the presidency?

Let's sample the words and behavior of this “great statesman”. An obtuse gaffe machine with a habit of skinny dipping outside of the vice president's residences in Delaware and Washington (in front of understandably red-faced female Secret Service agents). When clothed, he says J-O-B-S is a three-letter word. He once described candidate Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean”. But wait, the comic relief gets richer. Mr. Biden's unknowing off the cuff remark that his boss “has a big stick” is another real gem. He's only “presidential material” to those lost souls desperately in need of psychological intervention.

Moreover, Joe Biden's political instincts are similarly disastrous. Domestically, as senator, he crafted the federal three-strikes legislation (copied by states like California) that's filled America's prisons to bursting with non-violent offenders. As vice president, he supported the economic fiasco that is ObamaCare. Not to be outdone internationally, he was against the decision to go after terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. He couldn't even arrange a simple Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Iraq, leaving a demilitarized zone ISIS moved into. Mr. Biden can't govern his brain or his mouth—let alone lead America. Therefore, one questions the boneheaded editorial decision to promote such an unworthy buffoon as president.

The Washington Times should not pander to progressives or otherwise parrot the MSM's anti-Trump propaganda. That means ending the practice of promoting liberals' screwball notions in their Letters section. Doing so wrongly alienates their loyal readership. More importantly, The Washington Times mistakenly hobbles the conservative viewpoint it's supposed to champion. Ironically, opinion editors need to read their own publication. Specifically, they should look to same-day column entitled “The mad search for pro-Trump columnists” by R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. Within, Mr. Tyrrell highlights this systemic problem: the legacy media's overt liberal bias disregards the potent ideas that have fueled Donald Trump's populist revolution within the Republican Party.

In retrospect, it's no wonder why it took The Washington Times 33 years—and 1 billion dollars in losses—to reach profitability for the first time in September of 2015. Around the same time, the powers that be condensed the Commentary section. The Letters to the Editor section was halved to the meager size of a postcard. Suddenly, an unimportant daily “book review” was made visually central (given a full column on the other half of the page). As this feature often seems more like an advertisement, it has no business being there. (One presumes the redesign was done for economic reasons. Given their history in the red, it's understandable.) In any case, the problem lies with careless Washington Times opinion editors. They consistently act like their Post counterparts by filling Letter space with anti-Republican claptrap.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Spinning Trump Conspiracy Theories

“Let me be very clear: We do not have evidence of fraud. We do not have smoking guns.” – Green Party rainmaker Jill Stein, who received a whopping 7.33 million windfall after Election Day

For contrast, Jill Stein raised 3.5 million for her unsuccessful 2016 presidential campaign. That's less then half of what she received to challenge the voting totals in three states (pivotal to the election itself, but not to her prospects). She finished dead last of four, garnering zero electoral votes and only 1% of the popular vote or 1,316,040. Therefore, Ms. Stein can't win. As there's no apparent problem with the presidential election, why should a minor candidate with virtually no standing contest the results in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (where Trump's actually up 131 votes)? Likewise, why should Democratic mouthpieces in the press accuse Russian hackers of nebulous “interference”?

Both developments are narratives designed to promote the fiction that Donald Trump's election is somehow “illegitimate”. (Think of “Dubya” of Bush/Gore 2000.) Jill Stein—same as Bernie Sanders during the primary season—is a political straw man for Hillary Clinton. Like socialist Sanders, will newly flush shill Stein buy beachfront property with the leftover recount money?

Put nothing past progressives who call themselves “Democrats.” In truth, they are big government fascists. (Historically, the “switch” occurred when LBJ took over, using the country's grief over JFK's assassination to push his own anti-Kennedy agenda.) Further, attempts to undermine the Electoral College—members voting for Trump have reportedly received death threats—are just the latest example of their treasonous anti-Americanism. Leftists don't respect elections or democracy. They are elitist authoritarians who will do anything for their god: preserving political power.

There's nothing to fear from these divisive and diversionary tactics. They're just sour grapes. Liberals' litany of dirty tricks—via the MSM's trumped-up propaganda—will echo to a griping murmur after the inauguration. Moreover, their efforts to malign and marginalize will be self-defeating. After all, given their repeatedly false election forecasts, who are they but out of touch naysayers unworthy of attention or trust? Even The Washington Post admitted:

“Trump was right all along, and we, the political class, were flat-out wrong. Trump effectively channeled anger and anxiety into a movement.”

Innuendo spread by dishonest journalists (read: Democratic partisans) is the only problem here. Their influence—like their unsubstantiated claims—will fade like shadow: as immaterial as the outlandish stories they peddle.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Clarence Thomas: Ignored Conservative Icon

“The persistent efforts to undermine Justice Thomas and his compelling body of jurisprudence, and to ignore the spectacular Horatio Alger [read: rags to riches] story of his life, are part of a deliberate strategy to silence a conservative voice from someone who might serve as a transformative role model in the African-American community in particular, and the American community more broadly. Sad, really, that the taxpayer-financed institutions of our own government would join in such efforts.” – John Eastman, founding director of the Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence

Disgraced accused serial rapist Bill Cosby is favorably mentioned. So is philandering adulterer, golfer Tiger Woods. One imagines a whole wing of the new Smithsonian African American museum is dedicated to Barack Obama: the worst, most polarizing president ever to hold the office. Why then in our “post-racial” age, is a black Supreme Court Justice—one of the two ever to serve on the nation's highest court—treated like a modern-day Ralph Ellison “Invisible Man”?

Since the Supreme Court's inception on September 26, 1789, a grand total of 112 justices have had the distinct honor to serve. (By comparison, for context, Donald Trump will become America's 45^th U.S. president on January 20, 2017.) To add further insult to injury, the only tangential reference to Justice Thomas is a political smear: a pin-back button reading “I Believe Anita Hill.” (Now ironically a race and gender anti-discrimination professor at Brandeis University, Ms. Hill famously accused the jurist of unsubstantiated sexual harassment at his 1991 Senate confirmation hearing.)

So, between references to Ms. Hill, Mr. Cosby and Mr. Woods, a rogue's gallery of the morally dubious are well-represented. (In fact, at the casual glance this ultramodern structure of sterile glass and oppressively ornate bronze mesh could easily be mistaken for a three tiered prison, an inverse step pyramid or a cubist slave ship.) Opened on the Washington mall on September 24, 2016, this 19^th Smithsonian housing 37,000 objects is a 379,000 square foot eyesore. Within, ample space has been lovingly dedicated to violent quasi-terrorist anarchist organizations like the Black Panthers and Black Lives Matter. Yet, among 12 exhibitions, a person most central to both American history—and specifically the black experience—is wrongly marginalized and negated.

Liberal fascists running a museum cannot render Clarence Thomas invisible. As one of the country's finest legal minds, he's overcome numerous barriers—poverty, oppression and unbelievable odds—to epitomize the American Dream. Solely for his conservative voice, Mr. Thomas's glaring omission from the National Museum of African American History and Culture is a travesty. This heartless institution advocates acceptance and inclusion while exposing to the world their blatant two-faced hypocrisy.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“Santa” Trump Toys with Romney

“The degree of difficulty in Romney's dive last night was greater than a reverse 4½ somersault in tuck position. Stunning flipflop” - November 30^th tweet by ABC News analyst Matthew Dowd on Mitt Romney's complete Donald Trump attitude reversal

When you're a President-elect billionaire—and the world literally is your oyster—what's wrong with a little payback as political sport? Perhaps some subtle score settling for a willing dupe with a history of being manipulated by Democrats? Therefore, what's more fitting than to have this outspoken naysayer publicly humiliate himself with his smirking flip-flopping?

A delicious fate for Mitt Romney: a modern-day GOP Benedict Arnold. In retrospect, was his blistering rant criticizing Mr. Trump last March actually Shakespearean jealousy for a man who ultimately accomplished what he failed to achieve in 2012? To this end, Mitt acknowledged:

“By the way, it’s not easy winning. I know that myself. He did something I tried to do and was unsuccessful in. He won the general election and he continues with a message of inclusion and bringing people together, and his vision is something which obviously connected with the American people in a very powerful way.”

Actually, anyone familiar with winning knows it's easy. It's the losing part—holding grievances—that's tough (ask Hillary!). In this light, publicly condemning Mr. Trump as a “phony,” a “con man” and a “fake” sounds like self-serving sour grapes. Without a shred of proof, how is Mr. Romney disloyalty to the person who became the voters' choice not character assassination?

Ah, the difference eight months and an election make. Today, this brown-noser finds Mr. Trump's dining company to be “enlightening and interesting and engaging.” This dynamic proves that red meat at dinner (in the come-on chance to become Secretary of State) has attracted from the woodwork Mr. Trump's most pesky political housefly. Now, it's sweet revenge to hear Mr. Romney buzzing a radically different tune: that of The Donald's praises.

Out of touch, two-faced Romney epitomizes establishment Republicans: the polished, weak willed status quo. He's another creature of Washington: precisely what Mr. Trump ran against. Therefore, it's sheer folly for anyone to believe Mitt's in serious contention for anything besides further disappointment. In fact, on the campaign trail, Mr. Trump declared:

“I said the guy is a stone cold loser, he choked and when you're a choker, you can never give a choker a second chance. It's too important. A choker is a choker.”

With such a pressing need for a new beginning for the country, why would Mr. Trump hamstring himself with someone he views in this way? Mr. Romney's failed track record in 2008—as well as his unsubstantiated Trump criticisms in 2016—cannot be disregarded. It's obvious Donald Trump doesn't suffer losers or fools—beyond perhaps toying with them a bit. Therefore, logically, this holiday season sycophants like Romney top Santa's naughty list. That roster doesn't include the next Secretary of State.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Trump's Thanksgiving Cooks MSM's Goose

“I think the media is on thin ice with the American people, very thin ice, and they ought to just … dial it [their obvious attacks on Trump] back.” – Hugh Hewett, conservative radio host on Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Now the election is over the MSM happily assumed their relationship with President-elect Donald Trump would be business-as-usual. Last Monday like turkeys to the Thanksgiving table, the elitist news executives and their figurehead anchors filed into Trump Tower with the expectation of what they hoped to get: continued unfettered access. What they got was taken to Trump's woodshed: a barrage of pointed words for a roomful of unrepentant liars, what The New York Post called a “f***ing firing squad.” Of course, the fact that this meeting was off-the-record did not dissuade these media titans from spilling their guts; probably as soon as they got out of The Donald's earshot. (This instance is yet another example of their constant underhanded dealing with Republicans.)

During the lecture Mr. Trump singled out CNN as the worst offender, but he was generally critical of the press for their widespread hatchet job reporting. Purveyors of liberal doctrine like The Washington Post's Dana Milbank called the meeting “part tongue-lashing, part perp walk.” And why not, given their habitual yellow journalism lacking even the semblance of objectivity?

While everyone is entitled to private opinions, journalism is supposed to be neutral and fact-based. Yet, leaf through any major metropolitan paper: at a rate of 93%, these “journalists” are nothing more than progressive ideologues spouting Democratic Party talking points. Despite eight years of Barack Obama's epic economic and international failures, they have nary a critical word for him. Likewise, they endorsed and defended Hillary Clinton's lawbreaking criminality—even going so far as to fundraise for her! Who but them did everything in their power to promote her (failed) candidacy?

Indeed, Donald Trump bested Crooked Hillary—and her Democratic sycophants and surrogates in the press. In a begrudging moment of clarity The Washington Post's Margaret Sullivan acknowledged:

“He has masterfully manipulated the media for the past 18 months—bullying reporters, garnering billions in free publicity and portraying journalists as part of the corporate structure that must be brought down so that the people can triumph.”

For decades, truer words have not been printed in the Post. Yet, despite her admission Ms. Sullivan's perspective is still way off the mark. This cog of the legacy press laughably believes her profession—as it currently stands—is nonpartisan:

“In fact, U.S. citizens need an independent press more than ever.”

Ah, if only that was so! In reality, the corporate media is corrupted by Democratic collaborators—“unbiased journalist” pretenders—like herself and Dana Milbank. These liberal scribblers misperceive Donald Trump—a truly independent voice for mainstream America—as the “problem” rather than themselves. Therefore, their petulant affect and defiant tone deafness are completely out of sync with our nation's character. As that is the case, how honest or valuable can their reporting be? The answer is not at all.

The reality remains that the journalistic neutrality of their ilk is nowhere present. Ms. Sullivan and her fellow travelers populating the MSM share responsibility and blame for this—not the president-elect. Theirs is classic psychological projection: unrecognized self-reproach. Recall, the Fourth Estate was intended to be generally adversarial to both political parties and government; keeping them theoretically accountable to the people by accurately reporting on their activities. Yet, this function is impossible due to the MSM's fundamental flaw: naked political bias. Even worse, the MSM only attempts to “watchdog” Republicans, but never their Democratic counterparts.

For them, the jaded editorial has become every newspaper story under the guise of “legitimate” news. And although unlikely to reform, they richly deserve Trump's Thanksgiving comeuppance. It's the gander's after election gravy: exposing two-faced media elites as squawking, progressive birdbrains. With only 9% of America trusting them, Trump has rightfully pigeonholed their whole worthless industry. After all, going forward who needs a divisive, anti-American propaganda machine lacking the merest shred of journalistic integrity?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“Hamilton's” Burr “Assassinates” Pence

“The fundamental source of all your [read: progressive Democrats] errors, sophisms and false reasonings is a total ignorance of the natural rights of mankind. Were you once to become acquainted with these, you could never entertain a thought, that all men are not, by nature, entitled to a parity of privileges [read: God-granted rights and freedoms]. You would be convinced, that ... civil liberty is founded in that; and cannot be wrested from any people, without the most manifest violation of justice.” – Alexander Hamilton on February 23, 1775

What is it with the unfortunate intersection of troublemaking thespians and political leaders in American theaters? In this case I refer not to Lincoln and Booth, but to Vice President-elect Pence and “Hamilton assassin,” lead actor, Brandon Victor Dixon.

Recall, Mr. Pence is newly elected, not yet in office. He's paid a small fortune for Broadway theater tickets. He's out for the evening with family for a few well-deserved hours of entertainment. It's bad enough that the partisan New York crowd ungraciously boos him. Given this polarized environment, was it really appropriate for Dixon (playing the ironically “murderous” Vice President Aaron Burr) to add editorial heat by publicly calling Pence out? Now imagine if President-elect Barack Obama was in Mike Pence's “Hamilton” hot seat.

By invoking the heightened emotions of a contentious election, Dixon targeted the innocent man present with damning words: disrespecting Pence, Trump and the voters. Despite his lofty rhetoric, this actor's clearly manipulative behavior was unmistakably designed to incite political tensions:

“We, sir, are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us: our planet, our children, our parents or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir. But we truly hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us.”

How is this not metaphorical character assassination? One somehow doubts Dixon would have slandered Barack Obama as he unkindly insulted Pence. If that did happen, identity politics obsessed liberals would be shrieking from the rooftops how close-minded (even racist!) the spokesman of the “Hamilton” cast is. (How dare they not give Obama the benefit of the doubt!) While everyone is entitled to an opinion, another American value is giving the new fellow a fair shake. Thus, Dixon's premature and wholesale condemnation is the only “alarming” element here. It's fascism in full flower.

For the record, arrogantly smug Obama said in January of 2009: “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” (Contrast that to Trump who tellingly said in his victory speech: “we won.”) The fact is that Barack Obama has been the most divisive president of the modern age. With overreaching executive orders he habitually ignored Congress and the rule of law, never considered the conservative perspective (populating the vast spaces between coastal urban centers), and never even pretended to represent the Silent Majority who has tapped Donald Trump to be the 45th U.S. president.

Apparently the “Hamilton” company is corrupted by progressive ideologues in desperate need of a crash course in Founding Father philosophy. They pay lip service to the value of “diversity” while rankly embodying intolerance. Today, poor Alexander Hamilton turns restlessly in his grave! His life is portrayed by a troupe of ignorant pretenders; led by “assassinating” actor Brandon Victor Dixon: the epitome of a rabble-rousing poser.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Spoiler Trump: a GOP Coup de Grace

“A lion doesn't concern itself with the opinion of sheep.” ― George R.R. Martin, “A Game of Thrones”

In the MSM's unrelenting criticism of President-elect Donald Trump (and his transition team), the term “bloodletting” is weirdly telling of their collectively deluded mind-set. The Washington Post misuses that precise word in relation to the unremarkable demotion of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (for the more experienced Mike Pence) and the departure of former congressman Mike Rogers (R-MI).

A couple of understandable personnel changes and The Post's Wednesday front page radiates: 'Key figures purged'? Likewise, the next day obviously aggrieved columnist Dana Milbank called Republicans “one big mess.” The avalanche of farcical and wrongheaded descriptions persist. Also on Thursday, his colleague Karen DeYoung petulantly complained of Trump's “still empty” transition government offices. Newsflash to Ms. DeYoung and her fellow travelers in liberal la-la land: it's only been eight days since Trump's victory! (Is she secretly impatient for The Donald's governance?)

In the postmortem of the 2016 presidential election, failed Democrats—and their still clueless sycophants in the press—are the ones actually bloodletting. Their pollsters repeatedly got everything wrong. Even “newspaper of record” The New York Times is losing money. Yet, the red meat in this scenario is the Democrats as wholesale political road kill. It's a titanic trifecta: Crooked Hillary's unrealized presidential prospects, an absolute repudiation of anti-American progressivism, and Barack Obama's legacy is dead on arrival. While the ground quakes under lame duck Democrats' feet, the mindless “squawking” cacophony of disillusioned ideologues masquerading as journalists resounds.

Hillary Clinton's well-deserved defeat puts all insulated powerbrokers of the coddled beltway bubble ruling class on notice. Today, any establishment politician (read: RINOs) still “with her”—in word or deed—is not with We the People. Our will has been clearly voiced. Populist Donald Trump's surprise election to the presidency makes this assessment factual. Therefore, his famous catchphrase from “The Apprentice” is apropos to Washington elites: “You're fired.”

Similarly metaphorically pink-slipped are urbanite talking head prognosticators and the heedless Chicken Little MSM with their absurdist newspaper propaganda. The media's baseless criticisms are dishonest exaggerations that deny the new political reality. Herein lies the problem: their deeply partisan “reporting” will consign them to irrelevant background noise. (Think of the teacher's voice in “Peanuts” cartoons.) Mourning has indeed come to them, but a new dawn has come to America.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Obama Agenda, Legacy On Life Support

“Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” – President Obama to former House Republican Whip Eric Cantor on January 23, 2009

Fast forward to the 2016 election: how the arrogantly smug have tumbled from Mount Olympus. The final firewall to preserve our republic from Mr. Obama's big government socialism—and his would-be successor Crooked Hillary—held with the surprise election of billionaire capitalist Donald Trump. Now, Mr. Obama's signature law—as well as most of his anti-American legacy—is headed to the trash bin of history.

Washington Times journalist Kelly Riddell's insightful historical analysis of Democrats' identity politics and voting patterns undone by their radical policies—and widespread economic failures—was marred by a seriously erroneous assertion. Regarding ObamaCare, she mistakenly wrote “virtually” no Republicans supported the March 2010 government takeover of 1/6 of the U.S. economy. The truth is that none—that's zero—of the 178 Republicans voted for the legislation. Ms. Riddell implied “some” making her otherwise excellent column murky.

It's easy to see why even a seasoned pro like Ms. Riddell gets confused. With gutless Republicans—cowed like sheep during the disastrous Obama years—it's often tough to tell the difference between them and progressives. In 2015 under RINO House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), the GOP capitulated to Democrats with the passage of a two-pronged 2,242 page debt-busting 1.8 trillion spending behemoth. Like liberals, Mr. Ryan traitorously pushed America to the brink of economic ruin: nearly a $20 trillion debt (almost half accumulated solely during Barack Obama's presidency). Even worse, the expenditures funded rabble-rouser Obama's dystopian priorities. The highlights include:

• Division F: Allows work permits, entitlements, tax credits and federal benefits for 700,000 illegal aliens; and does not prohibit funding of Barack Obama's unconstitutional executive action (his 2012 de facto executive amnesty for “DREAMers” known as Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals (DACA))
• Revives and expands a controversial provision of the H-2B visa program (quadrupling visas for unskilled guest workers to more than 250,000 while in effect denying Americans employment). In the Senate this failed legislation was promoted by Marco Rubio's Gang of Eight (bankrolled by fascist billionaire George Soros who also finances Black Lives Matter anarchy)
• Division B Title II: Funding sanctuary cities like San Francisco (where Kate Steinle was killed by a criminal illegal alien), and killing zone Chicago (where former Obama flunky Mayor Rahm Emanuel recently pledged to ignore federal law, and publicly thumbed his nose at president-elect Donald Trump)
• Division H Title II (Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)) and Division K (Department of State) contain unrestricted appropriations which oversee domestic refugee admissions (including border jumpers, and resettled migrants from Jihadist regions of the world)
• Ryan’s bill does not penalize foreign countries that refuse to repatriate criminal aliens, or counteract Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson's policy of freely releasing criminal aliens back into society and shielding entire categories of them from immigration laws
• Ryan's Omnibus eliminates hard-fought GOP spending caps funding his predecessor Boehner's budget deal with Obama—raised the debt ceiling through March of 2017—and increases spending by $112 billion over two years
• Ryan's bill fails to provide funds to complete the 700-mile double-layer border fence that Congress promised the American people

Despite Paul Ryan's often lofty rhetoric—and the little “R” by his name—this renominated House Speaker is a spineless sell-out. Beyond a lip service pledge of a “fresh start,” Ryan misused the House's vital power of the purse to perpetuate more of the same: Mr. Obama's anti-American “transformation.” Yet, thanks to the pro-America electorate on Election Day all is not lost. Soon there will be a new big dog in town (in the form of president-elect Donald Trump) and one confidently anticipates an instantaneous about-face from 'not ready yet' two-faced Paulie.

Therefore, what's now crystal clear is that overreaching Barack Obama's “pen and phone achievements”—and progressive agenda—are finally on the chopping block. They hang precariously not from Damocles' sword, but from the tip of “45's” Montblanc and a Mike Pence corralled godsend of a Republican Congress.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“The Simpsons” Predicts Trump Presidency!

As life imitates art, why shouldn't the indecent brawl that was the 2016 presidential contest mimic the comedic classic “The Simpsons?” As the longest ongoing sitcom in television history, this generation-long laugh factory has lampooned every element of the American “nuclear” family. As an example of thematic depth, the buffoonishly lovable Dad, Homer, works as an incompetent donut munching safety inspector for a decrepit nuclear power plant. Turns out, this just-wholesome-enough comedic institution has moved into the unusual arena of political prescience.

Although “Simpsons” creators intended many Springfields, as art is a shared experience, the viewing audience fortuitously assumes the show's setting to be the heart-shaped Ohio (politically: so goes this state so goes the nation). Therefore, one marvels at the synchronicity that an obscure reference to a “future”  Trump presidency—in a 2000 “Simpsons” episode—would reflect the most clownish and unconventional political landscape in modern times.

Has “The Simpsons” inadvertently forecast the course of America's political future? That answer is yes! Interestingly, in that same episode, daughter Lisa, now grown, is a female U.S. president. (Undoubtedly, Sen. Elizabeth “'1/32' American Indian” Warren (D-MA) is already gearing up for her own failed presidential run in four years. See ya then, Pocahontas!) Yet, that “Lisa” won't be bawling Hillary (despondent over perhaps her orange jumpsuit future).

Indeed, fate has turned—and “The Simpsons” has mirrored an unlikely reality! The hungover glitterati made the grave mistake of believing the deeply flawed electoral forecasts of their Starbucks drinking compatriots in the MSM. To all of them, the popular vote map resembling a beautiful Jackson Pollock painting is something abhorrent. From their bloodshot eyes, red radiates from coast to coast (with only little drips of blue in urban centers where they commiserate). From the “blue” elitist enclaves of Manhattan and Hollywood, the stentorian wail from these progressives is Homer's famous frustrated catchphrase: D'oh!

All humor aside: Thank you America for choosing president-elect Donald Trump as our 45^th commander-in-chief.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976