Anti American left

‘Everybody Takes a Beating Sometimes’

The Rittenhouse trial has exposed a central belief of the antigun left. There is this article, from a licensed New York attorney who specializes in International Human Rights and Islamic studies. The central belief of her opinion?

Kyle Rittenhouse had viable alternatives to patrolling the streets of Kenosha with an AR-15-style rifle… He chose otherwise, and that choice should have had legal consequences.

Then there are several student organizations at Arizona State University, including: the Arizona State University Students for Socialism, Students for Justice in Palestine, Multicultural Solidarity Coalition, and MECHA de ASU. All of them are communist organizations, most are race based.

One of these groups- La MEChA, even has this in their constitution:

Chicano and Chicana students of Aztlan must take upon themselves the responsibilities to promote Chicanismo within the community, politicizing our Raza with an emphasis on indigenous consciousness to continue the struggle for the self-determination of the Chicano people for the purpose of liberating Aztlan.

This MEChA group has a chapter on many College Campuses in this country. For example, they posted on the University of Texas webpage in 2007 (since taken down):

In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historical heritage but also of the brutal “gringo” invasion of our territories

I wrote about them in 2007, back when they were advocating for an armed rebellion. It appears as though they don’t mind guns, as long as the guns are in their hands, not the hands of their would-be victims.

The groups are demanding that Rittenhouse be expelled from Arizona State. In their statement, they had this to say:

Rittenhouse took the lives of innocent people with the intent to do so—by strapping an assault rifle to himself in a crowd of unarmed citizens. That is the textbook definition of intention. 

Nevermind that the citizens he shot were armed with a length of chain, a skateboard being used as a club, a handgun, incendiaries, and other weapons. No, having a firearm for self defense is, to the commies, evidence that you intend to commit murder.

The Rittenhouse case is being used as an indictment of armed self defense as a concept. They hordes of violent Antifa and BLM warriors need unarmed victims for their tactics to work. If their intended victims are armed and begin to actively resist, their movement falls apart.

There is a reason why those “protests” have only been successful in Democrat run, gun restricted states. When your victims have the means of resistance, it’s a bit harder for them to become victims in the first place.

Remember what the ADA said in the Rittenhouse case:

Because ‘Everybody Takes a Beating Sometimes’

By Divemedic, ago

Commies gonna Commie

This professor who is forced to use his PhD at a community college is of the opinion that juries should be given all of the facts, so they don’t arrive at “incorrect” decisions. He uses the Rittenhouse trial as his exhibit A, claiming that the jury should have been told that Kyle was seen at a bar with a bunch of “Proud Boys” five months after the shooting took place, even though that incident had exactly nothing to do with the events that took place during the Kenosha riots.

I am betting he wouldn’t be in favor of the jury hearing ALL of the truth, just those portions of the truth that would tilt the jury to his desired outcome. For example, I am sure he wouldn’t have wanted the jury to hear about the 5 young boys (who were as young as 9 years old) that Rosenbaum raped, or that Rosenbaum wasn’t taking the medicine that he had been prescribed for his mental illness. Perhaps the jury should have been told that Grosskreutz was illegally carrying a handgun, that he had been convicted of “intoxicated use of a firearm” in 2015, domestic abuse, burglary, or that his paramedic license had been revoked.

I am betting that he wasn’t in favor of the jury in the Martin/Zimmerman case hearing about Trayvon’s possession of stolen property and burglary tools.

The professor doesn’t want juries to be fully informed. Imagine the jury in the Chauvin trial being informed about George Floyd’s criminal past, including how he put a gun to a pregnant woman’s abdomen as he robbed her.

I know what kind of person the author of this piece is. His reviews on “Rate my Professor” paint a pretty clear picture. His students mostly receive an “A”. His students claim that they don’t have to show up to class, there is no textbook, and the only thing they have to do in order to get a high grade is to “volunteer” in social justice work and then write a paper about it. One student called him “hands down the most woke professor I’ve ever hand.”

This is how protesters and Antifa are accomplishing their recruitment. The colleges of this country are being used as communist insurgent recruiting centers.

He got his degree in Portland, now he has exported his communist propaganda machine to a community college in Ohio.

That little commie greaseball can eat shit.

By Divemedic, ago

Gun control

New Federal law being proposed. Let me explain:

The problem: There’s no requirement for a background check on ammunition sales.  So you can be someone who just stole a gun, illegally got your gun from some kind of trafficking, or were in possession of it and you are intending a crime. You can walk into any store and buy the bullets and nobody is going to check. If we extend background checks to ammunition, we immediately save lives

Fred Guttenberg, father of Jaime Guttenberg

Fred Guttenberg is pushing for the proposed law, named Jaime’s law after the man’s daughter. Jaime was killed in the Parkland shooting in South Florida. Here is the thing: this law wouldn’t have done a single thing to prevent the shooting that killed his daughter. The killer in that particular case obtained his gun legally because authorities couldn’t be bothered to do their jobs.

If the law passes, it won’t fix a single one of the hypotheticals in the above quote. If a person steals a gun, buys one on the black market, or is intending to commit a crime, there is no way that such scenarios would result in failing a background check.

No, the real purpose of this law is to inconvenience shooters. It requires that ammunition can only be bought from licensed dealers. It also appears to require a permit to purchase ammunition at anywhere other than a shooting range where the ammunition will be fired on the premises. The law also states that there is no limit to the fee that can be charged for the background check.

Keep buying ammo, it may be needed very soon.

By Divemedic, ago

Let’s go HOA

All politics are local. That’s why I am on my HOA board. One of the residents of my neighborhood lives right at the entrance. His house is the first one you see. Attached to his fence facing the street is a flag with a caricature of the President and “let’s go Brandon” on it.

Here is a complaint the HOA got from another resident:

Are we allowed to have offensive flags hung on our fences? The first home on the right has had his Let’s go Brandon flag up off and on as he feels like it. I do not care about which political side. I care it implies a curse word and it’s the first thing people see entering into our neighborhood.

“Let’s Go Brandon” is a political slogan which has been widely used as a minced oath for “Fuck Joe Biden” in reference to Joe Biden, the 46th president of the United States. Chants of “Fuck Joe Biden” were first heard at sporting events in early September 2021. Wikipedia

 That flag is offensive, not Freedom of Speech.LOL. That is why the HOA asked for someone to take down their Trump 2024 sign.  

Great so I am allowed to fly a flag that has a curse word on it? I had to explain to my child with Autism on it what it means. He knows the President’s face and name and was confused by the flag. I was forced to explain it. FUCK JOE BIDEN. Classy for our neighborhood welcome flag. I don’t care which Political party it is for or against. I care it implies an offensive word.  

At least everyone would not have to see it if it was moved to his garage or front. 

The first sign he had up said, “Fuck Joe Biden”. He replaced that with the flag. Since no sign rule.Either way my son got educated on both. He faces them towards the entrance.  

Profane rants that cross the line into direct face-to-face personal insults or fighting words are not protected by the First Amendment. … United States (1969) established that profanity spoken as part of a true threat does not receive constitutional protection.

We told her that there is no HOA rule covering flags, and was thus not an HOA issue. I also explained to her that this is not a “face to face insult” or “fighting words” to anyone except Joe Biden himself.

We then forwarded the complaint to the homeowner in question, who told her to come on over so he could explain it to her.

 

By Divemedic, ago

Video

A teen is walking down the street, not doing anything. An older man is following him after using racial epithets to threaten him. The teen turns and confronts his attacker. There is a short struggle. A shot rings out and one of them falls dead. Remember when the left claimed that the teen being followed should be allowed to attack the one following him?

Given the fact that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon the discussion should really be about Trayvon’s right to stand his ground during Mr. Zimmerman’s unprovoked attack against him. Trayvon was the one being pursued. Trayvon was the one who presumably feared for his life when confronted by Zimmerman who had admitted in the 911 call that he was following the teen. It was Trayvon who had a right to stand his ground and defend himself. Why has the discussion of the right to defend oneself focused on this issue from the perspective of Mr. Zimmerman instead of the innocent teen?

The Huffington Post

Now reverse the roles. The left is now saying that the teen should have run faster.

Those on the left just don’t like self defense.

By Divemedic, ago

Class warfare

For years, we have heard the communists on the left scream about the one percent. The one percent has been demonized for decades. Now that the left has fleeced that particular sheep for as much as they can get, it is time to lower the bar and come after the next target. They are calling it the “9.9 percent.”

Unlike one of the one percent, you probably know someone who is in the 9.9 percent. It takes surprisingly little income to get there, just $158,000 a year puts you into the top ten percent of wage earners in the United States. This is where you find all sorts of educated professionals: doctors, engineers, lawyers, and accountants, just to name a few.

This demographic has a fairly low net worth, too. This group has a new worth of as little as $1.2 million. If you own your own home, have a 401K, and don’t carry a lot of consumer debt, you are probably there.

So what does the left think of this demographic?

  • You are white or Asian.
  • You believe in the value of education
  • You had your children in a planned and responsible way (not at 16)
  • They think you have a “misguided belief that success depends on merit”
  • You claim to have a prejudiced free view of others, which is often a way of evading the economic privilege that is at the base of your success

This is pure class warfare with a racial spin. This is the basis of the communist belief system. They want people to believe that those who are successful did so because they had some kind of hidden advantage that is unavailable to those who are poor.

We have seen this time and again in history- those who would seize power would tell the public that it isn’t their fault they aren’t successful, it is the fault of those who are somehow cheating.

By Divemedic, ago