Of course its a lefty book aimed at vilifying the President and Stephen Miller, but there is some important advice in it (according to this excerpt at Politico) that the Republicans generally have failed to heed—you must fight like the Left fights!
And, that comes from none other than David Horowitz who was about as far left as you can get, but woke up one day (after a friend was murdered!).
In December 2012, with the Republican Party reeling from a brutal election that left Democrats in control of the White House and the Senate, the conservative activist David Horowitz emailed a strategy paper to the office of Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions.
Former Senator Jeff Sessions and David Horowitz. There is nothing the Left hates more than one of their own, as Horowitz once was, exposing their strategies.
Horowitz, now 81, was a longtime opponent of immigration and the founder of a think tank and a campus freedom-of-speech advocacy group. He saw in Sessions a kindred spirit—a senator who could reawaken a more nationalist fire in the Republican party. The person he emailed it to was a Sessions aide: Stephen Miller. Horowitz, who recalled the episode in an interview and shared the emails with me, had known Miller since the aide was in high school.
Sessions with aide Miller
Horowitz encouraged Miller to not only give the paper to Sessions but to circulate it in the Senate.
Miller expressed eagerness to share it and asked for instructions. “Leave the Confidential note on it. It gives it an aura that will make people pay more attention to it,” Horowitz wrote. The paper, “Playing to the Head Instead of the Heart: Why Republicans Lost and How They Can Win,” included a section on the political utility of hostile feelings.
Horowitz wrote that Democrats know how to “hate their opponents,” how to “incite envy and resentment, distrust and fear, and to direct those volatile emotions.” He urged Republicans to “return their fire.”
“Behind the failures of Republican campaigns lies an attitude that is administrative rather than combative. It focuses on policies rather than politics. It is more comfortable with budgets and pie charts than with the flesh and blood victims of their opponents’ policies,” Horowitz wrote, adding that Democrats have the moral high ground.
“They are secular missionaries who want to ‘change society.’ Their goal is a new order of society—‘social justice.’” He argued that the only way to beat them is with “an equally emotional campaign that puts the aggressors on the defensive; that attacks them in the same moral language, identifying them as the bad guys.”
Horowitz wrote that hope and fear are the two strongest weapons in politics. Barack Obama had used hope to become president. “Fear is a much stronger and more compelling emotion,” Horowitz argued, adding that Republicans should appeal to voters’ base instincts.
It is perhaps the most compact crystallization of the relationship that propelled Miller, now a senior policy adviser and speechwriter in the Donald Trump administration, to the White House and of the importance that relationship has had in the administration.
This is long, but an important read. I’ve been arguing against spending a lot of time reading and thus feeling like something has been accomplished, but this article is extremely valuable because it helps reconfirm what I suspect you already know—Republicans have been fighting (if you can call it that!) all wrong for most of our lives.
There are, however, still a few months left to get it right!
By the way, if you don’t followNumbersUSA,you should because they do cover the often tedious goings-on on Capitol Hill. I’m posting this bit of news here because I want to refer to it in a post at RRW shortly.
Here is what Numbers reported in an e-mail last night. See why she pulled the funding measure.
Pelosi Blinks
Good news! House Democrats have pulled funding for the Department of Homeland Security from a spending bill. This is good news because Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee planned to use Homeland Security funding to impose extremist immigration provisions.
Too funny! Have you noticed that Miss Nancy coordinates her masks with her outfits?
Reportedly, Democrats from vulnerable districts didn’t want to have to defend the extremist, immigration-related provisions contained in the bill.
I list those provisions below, so you can see just how extreme they are. These vulnerable Democrats from more moderate districts balked because they knew we would be hammering them if they went ahead!
[….]
…we saw that even she just might temper the radicalism of some of her more extreme colleagues.
Here are some of the worst provisions of the bill that was pulled from consideration:
1) Would have limited ICE detention beds to 10,000, compared to a recent high of 55,000.
2) Would have prohibited detention of families, all but guaranteeing their release and encouraging future surges of family units at the border.
3) Would have prohibited the removal of aliens who have been given Temporary Protected Status but have since lost it.
4) Would have exposed more blue-collar jobs to foreign worker competition and called for an increase in temporary work visas, despite the tens of millions of Americans looking for work.
5) Would have drastically cut funding for immigration enforcement, and prohibited reallocation of funding.
In essence, the bill would have made it take far longer to remove illegal aliens, but at the same time, it would gravely restrict holding them. In short, the bill would have required something close to open borders.
[….]
Politico, the Capitol Hill newspaper, quoted a congressional staffer explaining why the bill was pulled:
“Front-line members raised serious concerns that the Homeland bill was a tough vote in swing districts because of its progressive provisions. At the end of the day, front-liners are our majority makers and there is no reason to force them to take a tough vote.”
Interesting admission about “front-line members.”
Are you in a district with a vulnerable Democrat? If so, find out where he/she stands on NumbersUSA’s immigration scorecardand exploit the bad scores you find there.
In case you missed it, Tucker Carlson had a great opening monologue last night about how Google and Facebook are, more than ever, blocking your ability to see anything that goes against the Leftwing narrative about Donald Trump’s presidency and especially his handling of the Chinese Virus panic.
Normally I try not to post information that is widely available, but you need to see this (surprisingly as of this writing it has only 122 views).
I was especially interested in the discussion with Breitbart editor Alex Marlow that begins at the 9:40 mark where he explains how the tricky b******* at Google have limited Breibart’s reach.
And, I guess you have already seen how the Leftwing media has viciously attacked the African doctor speaking on the video that was taken down yesterday. Just a reminder that ALL Black Lives Do Not Matter! Clearly, she is one African immigrant the Left would love to deport!
And, one more thing. I have argued for years that you all should consider setting up blogs and websites of your own. You know if Biden wins that most alternative media will be wiped out, probably me too. But, I’m thinking if thousands of you are blogging, they might not be able to silence everyone.
The Capital Research Centerposted a humorous piecea few days ago demonstrating how through simply parsing words, the Leftists at Snopestried to wiggle out of their “fact-checking” that had concluded that convicted terrorists had not helped fund Black Lives Matter.
(I sure hope none of you rely on Snopes!)
Snopes Avoids Truth of BLM Ties to Terrorism by Torturing Language
In the public policy world, where part of CRC’s mandate is calling out the hypocrisies and fabrications of the other side—hopefully to effect change toward the better—there may be no better measure of success than when the other side is forced to start redefining terms to make their lies sound like truth.
Last week, Capital Research Center achieved that measure of success. Not since President Bill Clinton wrestled with the meaning of what “is” is has America witnessed such tortured verbal parsing.
It began with a well-received June blog post from CRC President Scott Walter telling the tale of Susan Rosenberg, a convicted terrorist who spent 16 years in a federal prison:
Rosenberg . . . started out as a member of the 1960s revolutionary group Weather Underground, graduated into even more violent, and arguably successful, forms of terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s—including bombings at an FBI field office in Staten Island, the Navy Yard Officers’ Club in Washington, DC, and even the U.S. Capitol building, where she damaged a representation of the greatest of the Democrat defenders of slavery, John C. Calhoun.
At some point after President Bill Clinton commuted her sentence in 2001, Rosenberg landed on the board of Thousand Currents, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit that fiscally sponsors the Black Lives Matter (BLM) Global Network Foundation.
Cut to July 14, when suspected less-than-unbiased fact-checking site Snopes decided it needed to set the record straight about Rosenberg and BLM. Snopes likely weighed in because CRC researchers had done several high-profile media appearances—including appearing on the Mark Levin Show—discussing the piece, and formidable cable news pundits such as Tucker Carlson covered the Rosenberg saga as well.
Poor Snopes. In trying to debunk the Rosenberg connection to Thousand Currents, they found that it was, in fact, all true. So, they consulted their Orwellian playbook and simply questioned the definition of the word “terrorism.”
Then they could rate the claim as only half true. Which is exactly what they did in an odd post (see below) that seems to move backward in time.
So while we are on the subject of fact-checking. One of my local friends (Dick) sent me a youtube video (see it below before it disappears, he warned).
(You may have already seen it since it has been circulating since the beginning of the month.)
After watching it, the first thing I did was look for so-called ‘fact-checkers.’ I found two.
Perhaps the most interesting of the two was the one from the Associated Presswhich asserts this at the end of its fact check of ‘Insurgency-911.’
This is part of The Associated Press’ ongoing effort to fact-check misinformation that is shared widely online, including work with Facebook to identify and reduce the circulation of false stories on the platform.
LOL! Follow that link and see that Facebook uses ‘third party fact-checkers’ which immediately raises the question, so who are they and are they unbiased (of course not!)?
There isanother ‘fact-check’ by highly suspect ‘Lead Story’s’ Eric Ferkenoff who is one of Facebook’s independent (ha! ha!) fact-checkers.
So this is what you do. Watch the video, read the fact-checks (consider how they parse words) and see what you think.
BTW, one of my favorite things the Left does is at the outset they say that we think the virus is a “hoax.” By using that word they immediately signal readers/viewers not to believe what they are about to read or see.
I don’t think the virus itself is a hoax and I doubt you do either. The question is whether it has been blown way out of proportion, and has the panic response been warranted.
Decide for yourself (but LOL! if you go to youtube to get the video, you will see that they try really hard to keep you from seeing it and that tells you all you need to know!)
I don’t think preparing for the possibility that we could be visited by chaos and catastrophe this fall and winter is giving into the COVID panic. Sensible people prepare for life changing events—they buy life insurance, change the batteries in smoke detectors and keep their automobile gas tanks full.
Do we call those people preppers? We could because they are!
The warning signs have been right in front of our faces since about March!
The media has over the years depicted preppers as those who take to the back woods, lugging water from a nearby stream, and killing game to eat which they cook over spits in the ‘yard.’ But there is a wide range of possibilities for how much you want to prepare, and some of it is completely sane and sensible.
I had no interest this morning in writing one more crooks and criminals post that will only serve to feed your news reading addiction, because today I’m working on my to-do list for being prepared.
And, hey, look at it this way. If conservative-minded people prep for the worst and the libs think the government is going to take care of them, guess who might survive riots, civil unrest and a pandemic. You guessed it!
I just started reading a great book (well, I’ve only read a few chapters, so shouldn’t prematurely call it great) entitled “Start Prepping”by Tim Young.
The author discusses something that keeps most people from moving when faced with immediate or longterm danger. He calls it ‘normalcy bias.’ He lists several examples of where people died because their brains just couldn’t go there—that they were in danger of being killed—and so they did nothing.
Case in point….
I recently read a novel about the Titanic and subsequently read a non-fiction book on the horrific sinking of the unsinkable ship.
The ship (on its maiden voyage!) sank in about two hours and 40 minutes from the time it struck an iceberg in the north Atlantic until it went down.
Initially the captain and officers didn’t think it was possible that they would lose the whole ship and many passengers did not move to lifeboats (there weren’t enough anyway) continuing to play cards and otherwise entertain themselves as normalcy bias overcame them. At least 1,500 people went down with the ship.
Bad things do happen in history, after all, Rome fell, Nazi Germany nearly conquered all of Europe, the Twin Towers fell, is it so far-fetched that we are due for some rough times.
Heck we have had a little taste of it already.
Six months ago would you have dreamed that millions would lose their jobs and fat women would be punching each other in the aisles of supermarkets over toilet paper?
So what is the downside of learning how to protect your family? A few people might think you are nutty—so what!
I suggest you stop reading this post, and look for a few good books and then head out to the grocery stores near you that are (still) open and begin getting in the things you would hate to live without even for a brief time—coffee maybe?
But, don’t forget water! Author Tim Young says it is the most vital commodity for surviving even a few days. Those of you living on ‘city water’ could find your water supply suddenly shut off for myriad reasons.
And, so what if you spend some time preparing, get in some food, water and other supplies and thank God nothing out of the normal happens later this year, then you can enjoy a few less shopping trips over the winter, eat some of what you have stored, and spend the extra free time on your political news reading addiction instead!
Finally, are you an ant or a grasshopper?Aesopfigured this out, oh, about six centuries before Christ. Of course, one big difference now is that the ‘grasshoppers’ of today are mean SOBs often with weapons. But that is another thing you need to be prepping for!
Of course its a lefty book aimed at vilifying the President and Stephen Miller, but there is some important advice in it (according to this excerpt at Politico) that the Republicans generally have failed to heed—you must fight like the Left fights!
And, so what if you spend some time preparing, get in some food, water and other supplies and thank God nothing out of the normal happens later this year, then you can enjoy a few less shopping trips over the winter, eat some of what you have stored, and spend the extra free time on your political news reading addiction instead!