~ “I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.
Last week former President George W. Bush delivered an anti-Trump, anti-America first and pro-globalist speech last week at the George Bush Institute in New York City.
One day later, fired up talk radio host, Laura Ingraham, on her show Friday, had plenty to say about the speech by 44th President of the United States who left office with an approval rating of somewhere between a 30% and 22% depending on whom one asks.
Earlier this week, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson went at it with a climate change activist and babbling idiot, Josh Fox. Typical Marxist elitist, he man is as obnoxious as he is arrogant. Obviously, the man is compensated very well to espouse climate change dribble. Josh Fox lives to hear himself speak lives to hear himself speak and no one else.
The message: People having children is destroying the environment, i.e., fewer children in the minds of the twisted mean a reduction in the carbon footprint. Progressives are obviously distressed that women and girls having abortions are not slaughtering their babies in the womb fast enough.
Josh fox 👎🏻 how about we stop killing our children and that will save the planet big-time #abortionismurder Bad for the climate #Tucker
Transcript [excerpt] —
CARLSON: “So the only country to take this policy and enact it on a large scale is China, which limited reproduction to one child per family for decades. That is also the biggest polluter in the world.”
FOX: “But they didn’t do that because of climate change. Do you understand the science on climate change?”
CARLSON: “That you ought to have fewer kids?”
FOX: “No, no, no. Do you understand the science of climate change? Tucker, science controls — science dictates everything that we do in our society. Science means that climate change is real. Science means that fracking pollutes groundwater. Science means that this television works, that cars work. Science presumably says that underneath your hair there is a brain behind those eyes. Of course, I haven’t seen it. Science would tell us that there aren’t a bunch of hamsters up there or a patch of straw. I mean, you’re not really using your brain right now, but what I am saying to you, Tucker, to make this kind of false arguments about what the scientists are doing — “
CARLSON: “I love being lectured about science by some filmmaker, it’s hilarious. Let me just say this, if you can back up one second —“
FOX: “Tucker, I asked you a question and you haven’t answered it.”
CARLSON: “Which is do I understand science?”
FOX: “Do you understand what the science is telling us about climate change? Because this is what’s very, very important. I find it remarkable.”
CARLSON: “Can you just back up and ask a real question?” [cross-talk]
FOX: “I talked to millennials about this question, I said, ‘Do you have an opinion about whether or not you should have children respective of climate change, and almost every one of them said, ‘Yes, I worry about this enormously. I worry about the future that my children will have.’”
CARLSON: “Can I ask you just one simple question? One second, you’re not winning me over with this. Just hold on.” [cross-talk]
FOX: “Well, I do think it’s important that people care about the future for their children. I really do, Tucker. Don’t you?”
CARLSON: “Everybody cares about the future for their children.”
FOX: “But you deny that our society is based on science. Medicine is based on science. Media is based on science. All of the things that we have to see. What the science is telling us is that climate change is going to create a situation which is very, very dangerous and difficult for civilizations to endure. Climate change will raise sea levels to the point to which it swamps all of our major cities.”
CARLSON: “That’s really scary. Can I just ask you a question, or are you going to continue with this stuff? Let me ask you a really simple question.”
FOX: “You still haven’t answered my question to you which is, ‘Do you understand —‘“
CARLSON: “Do I understand the science behind climate change? I guess not all of it, I’m not a scientist. No, I don’t fully understand it.”
FOX: “Okay, but do you understand — “
CARLSON: “I don’t know that you do either. I don’t think anybody fully does.”
FOX: “Do you understand how dire it is —“
CARLSON: “I’m ending this interview because you’re too obnoxious to talk to unless you just answer one simple question.”
FOX: “Okay, hold on, stop, stop, stop.”
CARLSON: “I just want to ask you a question, okay? You’re just giving me these general bromides about climate change.” [cross-talk]
FOX: “Ask the question. I want to tell you that I find it very moving. Go ahead, say what you’re saying.”
CARLSON: “When you say that climate change is destroying the world and it is the thing that we should worry about most, and then you say simultaneously it’s not really dependent upon our individual choices, aren’t you giving a pass to some of the big individual polluters? If I say I really care about climate change and I fly around —“
FOX: “It is political choices that matter, it’s group actions that matter. Millennials, who are by-and-large the people of childbearing age now — now you’re not letting me talk, so I’m just going to talk. Millennials, who are of childbearing age right now, number one issue is climate change, because they know they’re going to inherit an incredibly unstable world. The United Nations predicts —“
CARLSON: “Yeah, whatever. This is actually too stupid, I’m going to bring this to a close. I’d love to have a conversation with you, but you are moralizing like every Hollywood dopey guy invoking science to get self-righteous.”
FOX: “Tucker, I’m just trying to answer your question. I really want to be civil with you.”
CARLSON: “I’m being civil, I’m just too frustrated because —“
FOX: “No, no, no.”
CARLSON: “I appreciate it, thank you very much for joining.”
There was no shortage of memorable speakers at this year’s 2016 Republican National Convention, some of which should have made the front page but due to unforeseen circumstances were overlooked.
Laura Ingraham’s speech was one of those speeches.
Ingraham took on Progressives from Hillary Clinton onward, after which Ingraham pointed out the mainstream media and then called them on their shenanigans.
O7:43 of video:
“Donald Trump…he understands that America’s greatness, it comes from her people. It comes from her freedom…
Hillary Clinton, well she believes our greatness can only be found in the every growing, bloated government bureaucracy that only she, her majesty, can rule over….She believes that there’s a government solution for every problem….”
“In full retreat, a humiliated and somber Ed Schultz opened his MSNBC show on Wednesday night (video below) by apologizing to Laura Ingraham for using, on his radio show, ‘vile and inappropriate language’ to describe her, language he did not repeat.On Tuesday, the left-wing host had slimed the conservative talk radio host as a ‘right-wing slut’ and a ‘radio slut.’(After Schultz’s statement, Thomas Roberts hosted the rest of the hour.)
Schultz pleaded:’’I am deeply sorry, and I apologize. It was wrong, uncalled for and I recognize the severity of what I said. I apologize to you, Laura, and ask for your forgiveness.’ He added that ‘I also met with management here at MSNBC, and understanding the severity of the situation and what I said on the radio and how it reflected terribly on this company, I have offered to take myself off the air for an indefinite period of time with no pay.’ The official NBC management statement, however, said he had agreed to ‘one week of unpaid leave….”
In my opinion that which is articulated by Schultz are representative of MSNBC and the White House’s perception of those who stand in opposition to a corrupt and tyrannical government.
As Schultz said in the above video, his words were an embarrassment to himself and MSNBC. TRUE. Said embarrassment, however, is by design and nothing new for MSNBC or Schultz among others.
Considering MSNBC never saw fit to reprimand Schultz for earlier rabid rants, why should anyone accept as true that the man is the slightest bit remorseful or that he has learned from the error of his ways.
Yesterday Laura Ingraham interviewed New York Times reporter Charles Blow. The audio interview (interview starts at 3:30) is enlightening and full of sparks as Ingraham takes Blow to task on an article he wrote about a tea party he attended in Dallas last week.
“At first I thought, ‘Wow! This is much more diverse than the rallies I’ve seen on television.’
Then I realized that I was looking at stadium workers. I should have figured as much when I approached the gate. The greeter had asked, ‘Are you working tonight?’
I sat in the front row. But when the emcee asked, ‘Do we have any infiltrators?’ and I almost raised my hand, I realized that sitting there might not be such a good idea.”
It is unfortunate that this journalist went to the Tea Party looking for something that was not to be found, however, that did not stop Blow in his pale in his assessment of the Dallas Tea Party.
“It was a farce. This Tea Party wanted to project a mainstream image of a group that is anything but. A New York Times/CBS News poll released on Wednesday found that only 1 percent of Tea Party supporters are black and only 1 percent are Hispanic. It’s almost all white.”
In the radio interview, Ingraham queried Blow to no avail on his assessment that Dallas Tea Party was a minstrel show.
“Thursday night I saw a political minstrel show devised for the entertainment of those on the rim of obliviousness and for those engaged in the subterfuge of intolerance. I was not amused.”
Judging from Blow’s article and the audio interview, it remains perfectly clear that the reporter simply could not get beyond his own racist mindset.