Democrat Establishment Mob Stops Rally

rp_343744229_150_150.jpgFriday’s organized protest and counter rally at a Donald Trump Campaign rally in Chicago thankfully ended with minimal violence. Political analysis, including comments from GOP Presidential contenders Marco Rubio, John Kasich, and Ted Cruz are pointing to Trump’s tone as the reason for the protests.

Cruz: “When the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence, to punch people in the face, the predictable consequence of that is that it escalates.”

According to Fox News, Kasich said in a statement that the seeds of division his campaign had planted finally bore fruit, and it was ugly.

Seeking political advantage while camouflaging the purveyors of anarchy only serves to increase the chances of violence the next time, and there will be a next time, whether Trump is involved or not.

There is great danger in mis-diagnosing the cause of this protest, and the cause has nothing to do with Trump.

Some of the protesters chanted Bernie! Bernie! and carried Sanders campaign signs. Some called themselves Chicago community activists, likely in the Saul Alinsky/Barack Obama model. executive director Ilya Sheyman stated that his organization was responsible for organizing the violence. Since endorsed Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton, will Bernie be asked to condemn them?

America is increasingly witnessing massive, confrontational and at times violent demonstrations. From Ferguson, MO to Baltimore, MD huge crowds formed, long before Trump came on the scene as a presidential candidate on 16 June, 2016. Many other people and organizations were, however, on the scene and playing pivotal roles in these uprisings.

Barack Obama has repeatedly sided with protestors over law enforcement. His Justice Department following suit by investigating police departments, over anarchists.

Increasingly militant organizations like Black Lives Matter and the New Black Panthers are present, and radicals like terroristBill Ayers promote these protests. Funding comes from people like democrat and Marxistbillionaire George Soros through sponsored organizations like Move On.Org.

The strategy behind creating, organizing, and capitalizing upon such movements and demonstrations comes straight from the radical left, having its roots in the writings and teachings of Carl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Saul Alinsky, Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven, and the many leftists in America who were taught their tactics and are now putting them into practice.

“You never want to let a serious crisis go to waste”, words spoken by Rahm Emanuel, Obamas former Chief of Staff, underscores the thinking. If you can’t have an organic crisis, create it. Use the ensuing unrest and violence to push your agenda forward.

Blaming Donald Trump for this is like blaming someone for getting robbed in their own home. We must assign the blame where it belongs, or there will be ever more protests with ever more violent results.

Blame the protest organizers. Blame those that fund the protests. Blame those that pay to bus in protesters. Blame the ones that attack constitutional rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Blame the ones in the administration who bread a climate of extremism and excuse those that rise to commit violence. Don’t provide a scapegoat!

The GOP isplaying with fire. Blaming Trump, in order to score tactical election points, excuses the destructive leftist strategy at play. Allowing it escape scrutiny will only cause larger, and likely more aggressive attempts to shut down political rallies, and perhaps even the GOP Convention. This in turn is a dagger at the heart of American Democracy; for without freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, we have no America!

What Rubio Failed to State in Response to Christie

Conventional Wisdom is the Marco Rubio Crashed and Burned due to a repetitive statement at Saturday's debate.

Conventional Wisdom is that Marco Rubio Crashed and Burned due to a repetitive statement at Saturday’s debate.

Marco Rubio got hammered in the media, and by many of the GOP candidates because of his poor debate performance Saturday. Criticism stems from his so-called robotic responses in the debate. Ironically, what Rubio said is exactly right, and its right on two levels. He said:

And let’s dispel once for once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing.

Rubio said essentially that same statement three more times. Admittedly, each one seemingly more out of place. The fourth time he said it was in response to a challenge by Governor Chris Christie that Marco doesn’t have the experience necessary to be president. Marco Rubio reverted back to that same comment:

I think anyone who believes Barack Obama isn’t doing what he’s doing on purpose doesn’t understand what were dealing with here.

As mentioned, there are two messages in that phrase.

The first message is precisely what Rubio stated.

  1. Barack Obama meant the harm that he’s inflicted on America!

We all know that before he was elected Obama ran on fundamentally changing America. He had to dislike our country to feel compelled to fundamentally alter it. You have to fundamentally change it from something into something else. He ran on passingObama care. He wanted to do that. It was intentional. Hillary Clinton tried and couldn’t get it done. Bill Clinton tried and couldn’t did get it done. Barack Obama did. He’s done immense damage to our military. He’s done immense damage to our relationships with our allies. He’s elevated our enemies. He made a deal with Iran essentially insuring that they’re going to get a nuclear weapon. It’s only a matter of time. He’s done immeasurable damage from his executive orders, to the $10 trillion that he’s added to our national debt, to setting back race relations 50 years. These are leftist progressive ideological results, based upon clear intent as taught by radical leftist Saul Alinsky.

The second message in Rubio’s 4 statements must be inferred because unfortunately, to Marco Rubio’s detriment, he didn’t come out and state it. Perhaps he will in a future debate? Regardless, it’s absolutely as true as 1 above and would have rebutted Chris Christie’s attack that Rubio shouldn’t be president since he wasn’t a governor with executive experience.

  1. Barack Obama was neither a governor nor an executive. He never formally led anything. He was barely a US senator for more than about 179 days before he started running for president. Despite no qualifications beyond being a “community organizer” Obama was wildly effective in instituting his radical agenda.

I think what Marco Rubio was trying to say is that he has every bit, if not more experience than Barack Obama had when he took the oath of office. He is every bit as committed ideologically in opposition to Obama, and will be just as effective in undoing the damage Obama inflicted and will put America back on the right path.

I’m not a Rubio supporter. He’s not my number one pick, but if it was a choice between Marco Rubio and any of the other establishment candidates it’s not even close.