The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

In The Mailbox: 07.06.16

Posted on | July 6, 2016 | 19 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


It appears that Jeff has hung up his blogging jock for the duration, so I’m taking suggestions for a blog to replace Protein Wisdom in the list. Granted, nobody can really replace Jeff, but one grows weary of seeing the empty space on Feedly where his stuff used to be.


OVER THE TRANSOM
EBL: National Fried Chicken Day
Michelle Malkin: Iovi Et Bovi – The Teflon Hillary Standard
Twitchy: Ted Cruz has The Only Reasonable Response To The FBI’s Disgusting Miscarriage Of Justice


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Hillary Expanding College Plan To Offer “Free” Tuition To Millions
American Thinker: Why Comey Blinked
BLACKFIVE: Book Review – American Underdog By Dave Brat
Da Tech Guy: Fausta – The Day The FBI Kissed The Rule of Law Good-bye
Don Surber: A General For VP?
Jammie Wearing Fools: Top Clinton Aide Testifies Grandma Burned Her Daily Schedules While At State
Joe For America: GOP Rep. Justin Amash Says Propsed Gun Bill Violates 1st, 2nd, 5th And 6th Amendments
JustOneMinute: Big News Day And Aftermath
Pamela Geller: Muslim Migrant Rape Crisis Comes To America As “Refugees” Threaten Minneapolis Neighborhood
Shark Tank: Even After Spending Billions, VA Not Fixed (Breaking news from 1946? -ws)
Shot In The Dark: If There’s A Bubble In Education Administration…
STUMP: Please Help Russian Freedom Fighter Vladimir Bukovsky
The Jawa Report: Sandcrawler PSA – The Palestinians Are Sick Bastards
The Lonely Conservative: Democrats Vote To Protect Sanctuary Cities And Repeat Offender Illegals
The Political Hat: Witch Degentrification
The Quinton Report: Cuban MLB Player Joining Army Reserve
This Ain’t Hell: Convicted Traitor Bradley Manning Attempts Suicide
Weasel Zippers: Ohio Professor Calls For Shooting Up NRA Headquarters, Ensuring “No Survivors”
Megan McArdle: Sorry, Republicans. Clinton’s E-Mails Won’t Take Her Down.


Amazon Devices- All New Dash Buttons in June. Just Press
Countdown to Prime Day – Prime Music Giveaway

Category: Linkagery

Should @Thomas_Arzi’s ‘Works of Darkness’ Be Hidden From the Light?

Posted on | July 6, 2016 | 21 Comments

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.”
— Ephesians 5:11:13 (KJV)

Thomas Mix does not like it when people call attention to his Florida lawsuit against Jeanette Runyon, and after I wrote about that case this morning, he and a person using the name “Nicole Bonnet” began discussing their plans to bring harm to me. He has now changed his Twitter handle “due to stalking,” as if it is “stalking” for me to take notice of someone who is threatening me. Let the light shine.

Let anyone seek if they can find evidence that I was paying any attention at all to Thomas Mix prior to this morning. During the controversy over sex offender Kaitlyn Hunt, Mix’s obsessive activity as a “Free Kate” supporter came to my attention, and you can click here to see how Mix (at that time using the Twitter handle @Periabo) and “Nicole Bonnet” were threatening retaliation against various people in December 2013.

Simple question: Why?

The Kaitlyn Hunt case concluded in October 2013, and she was released from jail on probation two months later. As I said at the time, “Most of us would like to forget about this sordid episode and move on.” So the question arises, why did Thomas Mix and “Nicole Bonnet” continue making threats against various critics of the “Free Kate” movement? Why not just drop it and move on? And why did Mix sue Jeanette Runyon in December 2015, more than two years after Kaitlyn Hunt was sentenced?

Who is “stalking” whom? Thomas Mix’s lawsuit against Jeanette Runyon is a matter of public record. It is news of public interest. Is Thomas Mix attempting to intimidate me into not writing about it? Why?

Show me the “harassment,” ma’am, or shut your filthy lying mouth.

UPDATE: Thomas Mix changed his handle again.

 

He’s gone full Schmalfeldt! Never go full Schmalfeldt.

UPDATE II: Allegedly, these are photos of Thomas Mix:

 

Notice I said “allegedly,” because if that goofy-looking weirdo is not Thomas Mix, it might be defamation to say he did look like that.


Category: Crime, Kaitlyn Hunt

UPDATE: Why Would @NicoleBonnet1 and @_Lazarus___ Be Threatening Me?

Posted on | July 6, 2016 | 43 Comments

 

After I described Thomas Mix’s Florida lawsuit against Jeanette Runyon, suddenly Mix’s Twitter account (@_Lazarus___) began chattering away with @NicoleBonnet1 in a manner that some people might interpret as threatening and conspiring to harm me. Anyone may search the Twitter archives to discover how closely allied these two characters are.

Please, read what I wrote about the case this morning, and see if you can find any legitimate cause for Nicole Bonnet to threaten me, except that I brought attention to Thomas Mix’s lawsuit. What this tells me is that Thomas Mix does not want anyone to pay attention to his lawsuit. Why?

Well, I wrote an email to Mr. Mix’s attorney:

Dear Mr. Rooney:
This morning, I reported on your client Thomas Mix’s lawsuit against Jeanette Runyon. To the best of my knowledge, the conflict between them dates to 2013, when Mr. Mix was advocating on behalf of Kaitlyn Hunt in a sexual abuse case that attracted nationwide media attention. I was among the handful of writers who followed the Hunt case to its final conclusion, and I also reported on the “Free Kate” movement, with which your client Mr. Mix was apparently aligned. While I had not previously noticed the legal proceedings between your client and Ms. Runyon (as the Hunt story was over and done with, as far as I was concerned), when it was brought to my attention, I wrote about this lawsuit in the belief that it was both newsworthy, per se, and relevant to other recent news involving claims of online “harassment.” This afternoon (Wednesday, July 6), I became aware that your client’s response to my notice of his lawsuit was to make comments on his Twitter account that could be construed as threats to harm me, threats in which he appeared to conspire with a person who goes by the name “Nicole Bonnet” on Twitter.
Although it has been my lifelong habit to avoid litigation, it strikes me that your client’s apparent threats against me could be cited as evidence that his actions against Ms. Runyon are intended to stifle First Amendment rights to free expression. Your client’s lawsuit is a matter of public record, and I am free to discuss the facts of the case and to share my opinion. Having spent more than 30 years in the journalism business, I am absolutely certain that nothing I have written could be considered libelous. The truth is always a sound defense against any such claim, and I have written nothing false about your client. If it is the intention of your client to pursue legal action against me, let him do so forthwith, for I am confident that truth and justice will always prevail over malicious lies.
While I am not a lawyer, and therefore cannot advise you of your duty as an attorney, it certainly seems to me that Mr. Mix’s recent behavior, evidently threatening me merely for taking notice of his lawsuit, might not be viewed favorably by the courts. Furthermore, as your client Mr. Mix apparently harbors some malicious intention of personal revenge against me, it would seem within your duty as an attorney to advise him not to engage in any action that might expose him to future legal jeopardy.
Please reply at your earliest convenience to acknowledge receipt of this message, for it is my sincere hope ever to remain
Your most humble and obedient servant,
Robert Stacy McCain

We shall see if Mr. Mix wishes to draw further attention to himself.

 


Category: Crime, Kaitlyn Hunt

The @GretchenCarlson Lawsuit and the Problem of the ‘Boys Club’ Atmosphere

Posted on | July 6, 2016 | 8 Comments

 

As everyone should understand, filing employment discrimination lawsuits is not something I support. If you don’t like your job, quit. It’s a free country. Nobody can force you to work for a company that treats you unfairly. You have skills, your skills have value and, if your employer does not properly appreciate the value of your work, give your notice and leave. Unless you are willing to quit on the spot — “Take this job and shove it!” — you will always be vulnerable to unfair treatment. What happens, too often, is that people become so economically dependent on their employer that they essentially forfeit this trump card. If your boss thinks you can’t afford to quit, and that you can’t find similar opportunity elsewhere, you may be treated badly because of the assumption that you have no choice but to tolerate bad treatment.

Gretchen Carlson has filed a lawsuit against Fox News CEO Roger Ailes and the specifics of these allegations are quite shocking. Her lawsuit conveys a sense of what goes on behind the scenes at FNC, and adds to an existing perception of a “boys club” atmosphere at the network. You can go back and research what happened when FNC’s Geraldo Rivera said he wanted to spit on FNC contributor Michelle Malkin. The network’s executives did not do the right thing in that case — Rivera should have been fired — and eventually, Malkin ended her association with Fox, to the network’s detriment. And this was certainly not the only previous case where women complained about the FNC “boys club” problem.

Fox News has been innovative in developing female on-camera talent, but at the same time, the network has too often tolerated off-camera behavior that should not have been tolerated. You don’t have to fire people or issue formal reprimands in order to prevent the perception that female employees are being treated unfairly. Keep in mind that I do not believe in the concept of “worker’s rights.” Your right to quit should suffice, as far as I’m concerned, to safeguard your own interests in any fee-for-service arrangement. Sometimes, greasing the squeaky wheel is the best approach to handling complaints of unfairness, but on the other hand, sometimes complainers are just complainers. Effective managers must learn to tell the difference on a case-by-case basis.

Over the years, I’ve had the opportunity to witness at close range the ways in which claims of “discrimination” arise. In too many cases, these complaints are just a shakedown: “Pay me what I want, or I’ll sue.”

It doesn’t matter what you think of Gretchen Carlson or Roger Ailes or Fox News, this lawsuit is evidence of a managerial failure. Good managers spot personnel problems long before they reach this stage, and intervene to prevent the kind of escalation to leads to litigation. The wise employee, however, should beware of the danger of becoming so dependent on an employer that your right to quit is effectively void.

(Hat-tip: Memeorandum. More at Hot Air, Red State and MediaGazer.)





 

Category: Fox News

The @Nero Solution (and an Unfortunate Update on the #FreeKate Fallout)

Posted on | July 6, 2016 | 30 Comments

 

Milo Yiannopoulos has solved the “harassment” problem:

The fact is, women are more easily rattled by nastiness than men. That’s a stereotype, but it’s also true — in the landmark Pew study on online harassment, women were more than twice as likely as men to say they were “very upset” by online harassment. That’s why, despite the fact that men are more likely to face abuse online, it’s mostly women you hear complaining about it in the pages of The Guardian and on Buzzfeed.
Men have had enough of third-wave feminism’s incessant and pathetic whinging about everything from gender pronouns to this bizarre “online harassment” craze — or “cyber-violence,” as they sometimes bizarrely call it. Women are upset at men being rude to them, and feel “oppressed,” we are told, whenever they are treated on equal terms as men in the maelstrom of trolling that is social media.
Consider the GamerGate controversy, where gamers fought back against the nannying, hectoring feelings police and were branded “harassers” and “misogynists.” It’s also happened in comics: if you go to an online comics forum and talk about anything but how stunning and brave the new SJW storylines are, you’ll get the boot.
The internet can’t cope any more with such strenuous tension between the sexes. I mean, there’s a reason that male golfers don’t compete against female golfers. They’re in a league of their own, and it would end in tears. It’s time to apply this logic to the online world.
Here’s my suggestion to fix the gender wars online: Women should just log off. Given that men built the internet, along with the rest of modern civilisation, I think it’s only fair that they get to keep it. . . .

Read the whole thing at Breitbart.com.

Of course, the absolute worst to complain about online “harassment” are not actually women. Transgender weirdos like “Brianna Wu” (John Walker Flynt) and Nicholas “Sarah” Nyberg were among the whiniest opponents of GamerGate. Their self-created victimhood, like their self-created “womanhood,” is a delusion in which they would require the rest of us to participate. And, of course, the alleged “harassment” of feminist SJWs is endlessly publicized by the liberal media, whereas the harassment of conservatives (including conservative women) is generally ignored.

 

Our frequent commenter Jeanette Runyon is being sued in a Florida court by a man who is claiming “harassment,” etc., over a flame war that broke out in 2013 about the Kaitlyn Hunt case. Jeanette was one of a handful of people who followed the so-called “Free Kate” movement and exposed the extremism of those who made excuses for a tattoo-covered dildo-wielding dopehead lesbian hoodlum’s sexual abuse of a 14-year-old girl. The man who is suing Jeanette was one of the worst “Free Kate” fanatics who evidently believed either that (a) there should be no laws against statutory rape, or (b) it’s wrong to enforce the law against homosexual predators like Kate Hunt. Thomas Mix, the man who is suing Jeanette, called the parents of Kate Hunt’s 14-year-old victim “bigoted, disgusting people” who “used the laws to express their hatred and rage.”

Question: Why did Thomas Mix care so much about this case?

Here you have parents trying to protect their daughter from Kaitlyn Hunt, whose criminal acts were astonishingly brazen, and yet simply because this case involved homosexual behavior, Thomas Mix insisted that it was wrong for the victim’s parents to expect the law to be enforced. As I wrote of the case after a court hearing in October 2013:

Having sex with a 14-year-old is a crime in Florida, and the criminal sex offender Kaitlyn Hunt pleaded “no contest” today in Vero Beach, accepting the deal offered by prosecutors. It was the third such plea bargain Kaitlyn had been offered and, if she had taken the first deal back in May, nobody outside Indian River County ever would have heard of this foul-mouthed tattoo-covered teenage pervert.
Her parents didn’t think their precious little snowflake had done anything wrong, so they rejected the plea deal and decided to make their daughter The World’s Most Famous Sex Offender.

Everything that happened to Kate Hunt was her own fault.

 

She was an adult when she molested a 14-year-old girl. She was an adult when the girl’s parents asked her to leave their daughter alone. She was an adult when she decided to continue her obsessive pursuit of the victim despite knowing that this was a crime and having been warned by the girl’s parents. All she had to do was walk away, and the case might never have been prosecuted. Even after she was charged, however, Kaitlyn Hunt’s crimes would have been no more than a few lines in the local newspaper’s “police briefs” column, except that she refused to do what nearly everyone charged with such a crime would do in a similar circumstance — take the plea bargain.

No prosecutor ever wants to take a case like that to trial. It is inhumane to expose to cross-examination the victim of statutory rape who, as in the Kaitlyn Hunt case, was a “consensual” victim. The enforcement of statutory rape law is very difficult for this reason, and the subsequent events in this case showed why it is so difficult. Yet if parents are the rightful guardians of their own children’s safety — including the duty to protect teenagers against “consensual” exploitation — the perpetrators of these crimes must be prosecuted. It is rather notoriously true that many such crimes are never prosecuted simply because law enforcement never becomes aware of these crimes. The 15-year-old sneaks off and hooks up with a 19-year-old and nobody ever catches them or complains, so the cops and courts never become involved. In other cases, the parents of the underage victim become aware that their teenager is being pursued by an adult and, as in the Hunt case, the parents warn the pursuer to leave their child alone “or else.” Faced with the threat of criminal prosecution, almost any 18- or 19-year-old would desist from their pursuit, no matter how much they might be “in love” with a minor.

Kaitlyn Hunt did the wrong thing over and over and over again. She could have walked away, but she didn’t. Even after she was charged with serious crimes (of which she knew she was guilty) Kaitlyn Hunt could have accepted the plea bargain offered to her by prosecutors. She didn’t.

What happened instead was a strategy that one psychologist has named DARVO — Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender:

DARVO refers to a reaction that perpetrators of wrong doing, particularly sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. The perpetrator or offender may Deny the behavior, Attack the individual doing the confronting, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender such that the perpetrator assumes the victim role and turns the true victim into an alleged offender. . . .
It is important to distinguish types of denial, for an innocent person will probably deny a false accusation. Thus denial is not evidence of guilt. However, I propose that a certain kind of indignant self-righteousness, and overly stated denial, may in fact relate to guilt.
I hypothesize that if an accusation is true, and the accused person is abusive, the denial is more indignant, self-righteous and manipulative, as compared with denial in other cases. Similarly, I have observed that actual abusers threaten, bully and make a nightmare for anyone who holds them accountable or asks them to change their abusive behavior. This attack, intended to chill and terrify, typically includes threats of lawsuits, overt and covert attacks, on the whistle-blower’s credibility and so on.
The attack will often take the form of focusing on ridiculing the person who attempts to hold the offender accountable. The attack will also likely focus on ad hominem instead of intellectual/evidential issues.

When the criminal claims to be a victim — denouncing law enforcement and demonizing truth-tellers — these DARVO tactics function to confuse observers unfamiliar with the factual background of the case. Anyone familiar with the Brett Kimberlin case knows how confusing this can be. Despite the facts of the case, Kimberlin’s bogus Maryland lawsuit against me and three other defendants went all the way to trial before it was thrown out, and even then, Kimberlin did not cease.

The use of “lawfare” as an element of DARVO tactics is a problem with which I am directly familiar and, while I am not fully aware of all the details of the conflict between Thomas Mix and Jeanette Runyon, his lawsuit against her seems dubious to me, based on my own experience. John Biver believes her case has profound significance:

The more the public learns about large sections of the pro-“homosexual” agenda crowd the easier it will be for proponents of common sense to retake the culture. The public will be stunned to learn how “un-gay,” that is unhappy, many of those people truly are. And because they are miserable people, they lash out. . . .
Sometimes these people with damaged psyches use the Internet to harass and slander those they disagree with.

Read the whole series:

Where are those who will defend Jeanette Runyon’s rights? Where are those who care about religious liberty? Where is the Army of Davids?

Stand up! Stand up! Stand up!

UPDATE: Linked by John Hoge at Hogewash — thanks!

UPDATE II: Are you threatening me, Mr. Mix? Gosh, it’s almost like you believe you can out-crazy Stacy McCain.




 

 

Category: Crime, Gays, Kaitlyn Hunt, Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 07.05.16

Posted on | July 5, 2016 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho


OVER THE TRANSOM
Kurt Schlichter: You Owe Them Nothing
EBL: The Fix Is In – Lying Loretta And Crooked Hillary
Michelle Malkin: We Are NOT Celebrating “The Fourth Of July”
Twitchy: It’s Over, Right Wing! Sally Kohn Says You Can Shut Up About Hillary Now


RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
American Power: Nigel Farage Resigns As Head of UKIP
American Thinker: Comey Speaks, Hillary Skates
BLACKFIVE: Freedom Is Free. Maintaining Freedom Is What Costs
Da Tech Guy: Baldilocks – Lawlessness Flexes Its Muscles
Don Surber: Heirs Bash The Kennedy Legacy
Jammie Wearing Fools: Swedish Feminist – You Know, All These Migrant Rapes Aren’t That Bad
Joe For America: Kerry – Istanbul Attack Proves We Have ISIS On The Run!
JustOneMinute: The Tribe To End All Tribes
Pamela Geller: Muslim Former National Guardsman Arrested For Plotting ISIS Attacks In America
Shark Tank: Rubio Positioned To Face Off Against Charlie Crist Democrat Patrick Murphy
Shot In The Dark: A Whole New Flavor Of “Democracy”
STUMP: Good News For (Last) Thursday – Hooray For Technology!
The Jawa Report: Shocking News – Media Outlets Had “Hillary Is Cleared By FBI” Stories Ready To Go
The Lonely Conservative: Sarah Palin Isn’t Doing Trump Any Favors
The Political Hat: Fighting The White Man With Native Feminist Time Traveling Dogs
This Ain’t Hell: Bryton Mellott’s Free Speech
Weasel Zippers: Hillary Demands Trump Condemn David Duke, Forgets She Was Endorsed And Given $20K BY KKK Leader
Megan McArdle: Forget The White House, Dump Trump To Save The Rest of The Ticket
Mark Steyn: The Blunder Down Under


Countdown to Prime Day – Prime Music Giveaway
Shop Amazon Fashion – Up to 70% off Summer Savings

Category: Linkagery

Is Laci Green (@gogreen18) a Rapist?

Posted on | July 5, 2016 | 32 Comments

 

Laci Green is a “public sex educator, and feminist activist” who has “hosted online sex education content on behalf of Planned Parenthood and Discovery News.” Therefore, I was shocked to hear the suggestion that she is also “one of the most serious sexual predators on YouTube.” However, this was the subject of a video by Dr. Phil Mason helpfully entitled, “IS LACI GREEN A SERIAL RAPIST?”

More than 250,000 people have watched that video, and as Laci Green herself says, we should always believe anyone who makes an accusation, because “only” between 2% and 8% of rape accusations are false. And far be it from me to say that Dr. Phil Mason, a respected scientist, would be among that single-digit percentage who peddle slanderous falsehood “for attention, for revenge, out of jealousy,” as Laci Green said.

The problem is one of (a) math and (b) definition, as I’ve pointed out in relation to the “campus rape epidemic” hysteria. There are about 12 million college and university students ages 18-24 in the United States, of whom 57 percent (about 7 million) are female. If, as feminists have frequently claimed, 1-in-5 female college students are victims of sexual assault, this would translate to many hundreds of thousands of cases annually. Therefore, even if “only” between 2% (1-in-50) or 8% (1-in-12) of rape accusations are false, this still means that thousands of college boys might be falsely accused every year.

Having addressed the math side of the problem, now let’s examine the issue of definition. One of the problems with the infamous “1-in-5” statistic is that the surveys from which this number is derived ask questions about “unwanted” behavior that is not rape. If a couple are dancing at a party and the guy grabs the girl in a sexual way, or if a couple are making out and the guy makes a move toward third base that the girl rejects, either of these incidents might be listed as “unwanted” behavior in response to a survey question, but this is not rape.

Only the idiots who promulgate “affirmative consent” legislation would expect two teenagers in the midst of a makeout session to interrogate each other — “May I place my hand on your thigh now, Kathy?” — at every stage of their sweaty encounter in the back seat of a parked car. There is a difference between a bad date and a felony, an important difference that is obscured by the bogus “1-in-5” number. (See “Statistical Voodoo and Elastic Definitions,” June 15, 2014.) When adults with common sense expressed doubt about the “1-in-5” claim, feminists smeared these skeptics as “rape apologists,” and reasonable discussion became impossible because feminism is a synonym for shut up.

Context matters, definitions matter, math matters and evidence matters. Adults with common sense understand how sex actually happens — steaming up the windows of a 1973 Volkswagen parked behind a shopping center, for example — and we know what rape is. The idiots behind “affirmative consent” are all much younger than me. Certainly there have been changes in sexual culture over the past 30 years that might require us to examine whether, for example, the greater availability of hard-core pornography (since Al Gore invented the Internet) has created new problems, e.g., boys coercing girls into acts which are painful and unsanitary, although we are no longer permitted to call these acts perverse or abnormal, lest we offend the Sodomy Lobby.

Normal people having normal sex with each other are not the problem. Even horny teenagers routinely negotiate their makeout sessions without committing felonies, and common-sense adults are not deceived by the propaganda tactics behind the “campus rape epidemic” hysteria. However, feminists are not normal people with common sense.

 

Laci Green is a “pansexual” who advocates “butt sex.” Laci Green is an atheist who is an expert on lesbian sex and, perhaps not coincidentally, she had to seek professional treatment for serious mental illness. To put it as bluntly as possible, Laci Green is an insane pervert who makes her living by encouraging young people to have abnormal sex.

Does any of this mean Laci Green is a serial rapist? No, and I am not aware of any specific accusations that she has ever coerced or forced anyone into unwanted sexual activity. However, this may be because (a) Laci Green is a feminist and (b) sane normal people avoid feminists.

 

Everybody knows feminism causes herpes, and anyone concerned for their health and safety stays far away from feminists like Laci Green.

This probably explains why no one has ever publicly admitted having sex with Laci Green. Check her Wikipedia page, and you find that this 26-year-old woman has never been married, nor does her biography name any of her alleged boyfriends or girlfriends. Don’t you suppose that a celebrity who has made numerous TV appearances — named by Time magazine as one of the 30 most influential people on the Internet — would have occasionally been the subject of a mention in a gossip column? Wouldn’t you expect to see paparazzi photos of Laci Green with a date at an awards ceremony or something? However, while Laci Green has claimed to have a boyfriend (they “prevent pregnancy together”), this alleged boyfriend never stepped forward to admit that he was having sex with her. Doesn’t this seem rather suspicious, ladies and gentlemen?

Do we have evidence of her known proclivities? Read more

Category: Sex Trouble

‘The Children of Alinsky’

Posted on | July 4, 2016 | 13 Comments

 

Anita Moncrief was one of the major sources who helped expose the radical group ACORN. A friend of the late Andrew Breitbart, now Anita is planning to expose the radical influence of Saul Alinsky:

Decades after the death of “Rules for Radical” author and community organizer, Saul Alinsky, his vision has become reality. Alinsky believed that organized chaos could undermine and fundamentally transform the government. The radical Left has thousands of foot soldiers connecting with their neighbors in what Alinsky dubbed “trouble spots” to further their narrative. His legacy allowed progressives and the Democratic Party to create a permanent, year-around field program. From Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton to ACORN to Black Lives Matter, Alinsky is more alive in his death now than in his four decades of community organizing. The Children of Alinsky will expose the activist leaders, the protesters they lead and the groups that comprise this permanent, agitating grassroots structure which is broad enough, deep enough and efficient enough to win elections.

Visit her Kickstarter page and help make this project happen!

 

Category: ACORN, Movies
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin