Connect with us

Opinion

With Nothing Else to Offer, The Left Is Itching for A Fight — An Opinion Piece

As we approach mere weeks ‘til the election, Leftists will…

Jeff Davidson

Published

on

As we approach mere weeks ‘til the election, Leftists will become more desperate, their tactics more vile, and their utter disdain for America more evident. Any excuse for another round of riots nationwide will do.

In times of turmoil, is toxic, heated rhetoric emanating from the White House justifiable?

“They bring a knife – we bring a gun.”
“I want you to argue with them and get in their face!”
“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
“Hit back twice as hard.”
“We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.”
“The other party’s victory would mean hand to hand combat.”
“Punish your enemies.”
“I’m itching for a fight.”

Such combative political discourse must be from Donald Trump, right? Except Trump didn’t say any of the above, Barack Obama did, as president. Oh, well… not a big deal, you say? Then your double standard is showing. How can such statements be labeled contentious rhetoric if supposedly uttered by Donald Trump, but not if said by verbatim Barack Obama?

Orchestrated and On Cue

Not coincidentally, the June, July, and August protests and eventual riots were built on the false notion that Trump incited them. The Left – especially George Soros-funded groups – has few other strategies to fire up their base. As he makes one moronic statement after another, there is little enthusiasm for the presidency of Joe Biden, even among many staunch leftists. The uber-liberal New York Times has reported on this. When Biden became his party’s presumptive nominee, the resulting fanfare was non-existent. Bernie Sanders generated enthusiasm; Joe Biden does not. Kamala Harris does not.

Biden’s handful of ‘rallies’ draws tiny numbers; camera coverage and photos are always close-in to mask the size of his minuscule crowds. Meanwhile, the rest of lib-stream press does all it can, non-stop, to make it seem as if Biden is somehow on equal footing with Trump in terms of voter enthusiasm.

Especially as Trump rises in the polls, especially among minorities, the Left’s fallback strategy is to create havoc. This includes:

1) Alinsky-inspired Leftists, posing as violent Trump supporters, deliberately placed, to deceive the public and press into believing that Trump supporters are violent.

2) Attempt to de-populate any future Trump rallies by placing bogus ticket requests.

3) The fawning press not covering the stories of protesters blocking ambulances, throwing objects, and inciting, in many instances, violence.

4) Making constant accusations of racism and xenophobia

To rally the Left, the puppet masters have few alternatives other than fomenting more of the same. Anything else would result in an election doom. Because those on the Right rarely march in the street or protest – most have jobs and responsibilities – it is always easier to generate a Leftist mob. Fewer of them are employed or have any clue about the degree to which they are manipulated.

What About Debating the Issues?

A curious question arises when assessing the Left’s tactics, be they violent, manipulative, or garden-variety political shenanigans. If the truth was on their side, if their proposed policies and platforms had merit, if their plans for America were viable, wouldn’t they be able to intelligently debate issues? Why would they need to resort to anything beyond the power of their policies and principles?

As a case in point, in any upcoming rallies that President Trump might be able to hold, the Left is planning massive campaigns to hassle attendees. How, precisely, does jostling attendees enhance Leftist causes? News of their tactics quickly spread and, presumably, greater numbers of undecided voters will loathe the Left even more than they already did.

Concurrently, no matter what they attempt, the Left cannot increase the number of people who want to attend a Joe Biden rally. So they turn to disruptive behavior to cover for what they cannot logically defend. Because they can’t protest inside of a sealed-off venue, they resort to the next best tactic they can devise: prevent others from attending or from departing gracefully.

Jeff Davidson is “The Work-Life Balance Expert®” and the premier thought leader on work-life balance, integration, and harmony. Jeff speaks to organizations that seek to enhance their overall productivity by improving the effectiveness of their people. He is the author of Breathing Space, Simpler Living, Dial it Down, and Everyday Project Management. Visit www.BreathingSpace.com for more information.

Opinion

Pence v. Trump 2024? Former Veep Leaves the Door Open

WHOA!

Published

on

There has been an incredible amount of speculation as to whether or not Donald Trump will be again running for President in 2024, and there are a number of factors still at play that could create seismic shifts in the race to come.

For instance, if Trump’s former Vice President Mike Pence were to decide to run against him in 2024’s primary…

Mike Pence is not ruling out the possibility of going head-to-head with his old boss Donald Trump in a 2024 Republican presidential primary, a new report suggested on Monday.

‘We’ll go where we’re called,’ Pence told the New York Times when asked about the possible head-to-head.

‘That’s the way Karen and I have always approached these things.’

Trump was not thrilled with the idea.

Meanwhile Trump, despite not formally declaring a 2024 bid yet, has eyes on the competition – including Pence.

In a statement to DailyMail.com, his spokesman slammed his old deputy as ‘desperate’ and mocked him for trying to ‘chase’ his ‘lost relevance’ amid the former running mates’ latest divide over backing separate candidates in the Peach State’s gubernatorial election.

Former President Trump is said to be waiting until after the 2022 midterms to make an official announcement regarding 2024, but there have been plenty of hints regarding his potential campaign – the latest of which came from former First Lady Melania Trump.

 

There has been an incredible amount of speculation as to whether or not Donald Trump will be again running for President in 2024, and there are a number of factors still at play that could create seismic shifts in the race to come. For instance, if Trump’s former Vice President Mike Pence were to decide to run against him in 2024’s primary… Mike Pence is not ruling out the possibility of going head-to-head with his old boss Donald Trump in a 2024 Republican presidential primary, a new report suggested on Monday. ‘We’ll go where we’re called,’ Pence told the New York Times when asked about the possible head-to-head. ‘That’s the way Karen and I have always approached these things.’ Trump was not thrilled with the idea. Meanwhile Trump, despite not formally declaring a 2024 bid yet, has eyes on the competition – including Pence. In a statement to DailyMail.com, his spokesman slammed his old deputy as ‘desperate’ and mocked him for trying to ‘chase’ his ‘lost relevance’ amid the former running mates’ latest divide over backing separate candidates in the Peach State’s gubernatorial election. Former President Trump is said to be waiting until after the 2022 midterms to make an official announcement regarding 2024, but there have been plenty of hints regarding his potential campaign – the latest of which came from former First Lady Melania Trump.  

Continue Reading

Opinion

Verdict Reached in First Russian War Crimes Trial

This is just the first of many, certainly.

Published

on

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been a brutal one, and increasingly so as the Kremlin’s soldiers find themselves in more and more trouble of their own making.

As the war grows ever more impossible for Russia to win, the troops sent into Ukraine have been committing a series of worsening atrocities.  It’s terrorism at the least, (and very likely a full-fledge genocide), and it belies just how poorly things are going for Russia.

Now, in the first war crimes trial of the conflict, a verdict has been reached.

In the first of what could be a multitude of war crimes trials held by Ukraine, Russian Sgt. Vadim Shishimarin, 21, was sentenced for the killing of a 62-year-old man who was shot in the head in a village in the northeastern Sumy region in the opening days of the war.

Shishimarin, a member of a tank unit, had claimed he was following orders, and he apologized to the man’s widow in court.

His Ukraine-appointed defense attorney, Victor Ovsyanikov, argued his client had been unprepared for the “violent military confrontation” and mass casualties that Russian troops encountered when they invaded. He said he would appeal.

There was no doubt about the court’s legitimacy, either.

Ukrainian civil liberties advocate Volodymyr Yavorskyy said it was “an extremely harsh sentence for one murder during the war.” But Aarif Abraham, a British-based human rights lawyer, said the trial was conducted “with what appears to be full and fair due process,” including access to an attorney.

Given the sheer amount of heinous deeds the world has witnessed in Ukraine, there is no doubt that more war crimes trials will be coming.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been a brutal one, and increasingly so as the Kremlin’s soldiers find themselves in more and more trouble of their own making. As the war grows ever more impossible for Russia to win, the troops sent into Ukraine have been committing a series of worsening atrocities.  It’s terrorism at the least, (and very likely a full-fledge genocide), and it belies just how poorly things are going for Russia. Now, in the first war crimes trial of the conflict, a verdict has been reached. In the first of what could be a multitude of war crimes trials held by Ukraine, Russian Sgt. Vadim Shishimarin, 21, was sentenced for the killing of a 62-year-old man who was shot in the head in a village in the northeastern Sumy region in the opening days of the war. Shishimarin, a member of a tank unit, had claimed he was following orders, and he apologized to the man’s widow in court. His Ukraine-appointed defense attorney, Victor Ovsyanikov, argued his client had been unprepared for the “violent military confrontation” and mass casualties that Russian troops encountered when they invaded. He said he would appeal. There was no doubt about the court’s legitimacy, either. Ukrainian civil liberties advocate Volodymyr Yavorskyy said it was “an extremely harsh sentence for one murder during the war.” But Aarif Abraham, a British-based human rights lawyer, said the trial was conducted “with what appears to be full and fair due process,” including access to an attorney. Given the sheer amount of heinous deeds the world has witnessed in Ukraine, there is no doubt that more war crimes trials will be coming.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week