Gay Patriot Header Image

The Left Actively Seeks Violence

It’s last year’s news, but worth remembering. George Soros, Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid (and probably still pay) protestors, not only to turn out and carry signs or chant slogans, but also to instigate violence.

YouTube Preview Image

Via Rush.

It’s on people’s radar in the last day or so because The Washington Post now says, who cares if these left-wing protestors are paid shills? So, what? Which is a shift: the Controlled Media used to simply deny that these left-wing protestors were paid shills.

Antifa: A Terrorist, Criminal Conspiracy as dangerous as the Mafia

Terrorists are people who:

  • won’t fight as part of a regular military; and who
  • mainly attack others who are not part of a regular military (that is, civilians); in order to
  • intimidate people into accepting (or not dissenting from) the terrorists’ political viewpoint.

Guess what? That’s Antifa.

Antifa is also a conspiracy to commit crimes. As one of our fine commentors recently suggested, they may be compared to other criminal conspiracies. Here’s my take.

  • On the one hand, Antifa “only” plans crimes of felony assault and vandalism (that could get out of hand and become manslaughter or murder, semi-accidentally). In that way, they’re a bit less dangerous than the Mafia (which plans specific murders).
  • On the other hand, many of the Mafia’s crimes are intra-Mafia. Not so with Antifa, ALL of whose crimes are directed at the larger society. In that way, they’re more dangerous than the Mafia.

Where is the FBI, on Antifa? Or the Department of Justice?

Begun the Civil War Is

Posted by V the K at 8:23 am - March 27, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

The Democrat Left has abandoned any pretense that it respects the Rule-0f-Law or Civic Culture, and has embarked on a dangerous and destructive course that can only end one of two ways; Tyranny, or National Dissolution.

A civil war has begun.

This civil war is very different than the last one. There are no cannons or cavalry charges. The left doesn’t want to secede. It wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control.

The left has rejected the outcome of the last two presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left.

It rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning.

It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama. And now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. (As long as that involves defying immigration laws under Trump, not following them under Obama.) It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over.

For example, states and cities run by Democrats defy Immigration Laws with impunity; but how dare any state defy a Presidential Edict on Transgender Bathrooms, or an EPA regulation cooked up by bureaucrats and environmental lobbyists.

The left has made it clear that it will not accept the lawful authority of our system of government. It will not accept the outcome of elections. It will not accept these things because they are at odds with its ideology and because they represent the will of large portions of the country whom they despise.

There is no sign that the left understands or is troubled by the implications of the conflict it has initiated. And there are few signs that Democrats properly understand the dangerous road that the radical left is drawing them toward. The left assumes that the winners of a democratic election will back down rather than stand on their authority. It is unprepared for the possibility that democracy won’t die in darkness.

Consider that the Democrat Left now embraces an “Anti-Fascist” movement consisting of thugs in black outfits and masks committing acts of violence in support of an Authoritarian Ideology.  (Did you see any conservatives respond violently to the p*ssy hat march? No, you did not.)

Challenge to the “NonViolent Mainstream Left”

Posted by V the K at 1:58 pm - February 8, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

After reading the article linked in the previous post wherein lefty students at the UC-Berkeley defended the use of violence (assault and battery, arson, vandalism) to prevent a conservative from expressing an opinion on campus. The left seems to be trying to say, “Normally, Violence is not OK, but for someone as heinous as Milo Yiannopoulos… violence is good and he should be grateful it wasn’t inflicted on him personally.”

The left seems to be taking the position that “Hate Speech” (i.e. “Words that hurt, or might hurt, somebody’s feelers.”) is so bad that it should be prevented By Any Means Necessary(TM). But they seem to be leaving open a window for speech provided it isn’t being said by someone as vile as Milo Yiannopoulos.

So, I would challenge the College Democrats or any other left-wing group at UC-Berkeley, or NYU, or Mizzou or any other Asylum of Higher Education to demonstrate their commitment to civil discourse by inviting a conservative to speak on campus. And I mean a real conservative, not a Republican squish like Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, or John Kasich. At minimum, a Marco Rubio or a Tim Scott. Let them come and speak.

I doubt they would ever do it because they know the same protests would happen because the left is not interested in a discussion, they are interested in power.

Hollywood Left Cheers Berkeley Riot

Posted by V the K at 6:50 am - February 2, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Apparently, setting fire to your own campus because someone you don’t like is giving a talk is broadly supported by the coastal liberal elite.

Hey, if torching Berkeley is how leftists protest conservative speakers, I say keep sending them until the place is burned to the ground and then salt the Earth where it stood.

Update: Hollywood Dingbat Leftist Sarah Silverman calls for a MILITARY COUP (ALLCAPS in original) to overthrow Donald Trump.

‘Nother Update: Former Obama Administration Official (Counselor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and served as a senior adviser at Obama’s State Department) calls for Military Coup against President Trump.

I guess we need a military coup to “preserve democracy” or something.

Conservative AMA

Posted by V the K at 12:35 pm - January 30, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

John Hawkins takes twenty questions from leftists and attempts to give each a straight answer.  I wouldn’t have answered all of them the same way, but it’s a pretty decent run-down.

Also, the CBC couldn’t find a racist Trump supporter to interview, so they hired an actor to portray a racist Trump supporter.

We’re All ND30 Now

Posted by V the K at 2:34 pm - January 29, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Saw this in the AOS HQ book thread this morning. This is a succinct summation of how the right has historically attempted to communicate with the left.

1. liberal: says something
2. conservative: responds
3. liberal: you’re a racist | sexist | bigot | pejorative du jour
4a. conservative: I am not a racist | sexist | bigot | pejorative du jour
4b. conservative attempts to give evidence for statement 4a.
5. liberal: not good enough
6. Goto step 3

This recent comment illustrates the point perfectly.

But if the eight years of the Obama Administration taught us anything, it was this: The left (liberals, progressives, whatever) have no interest in being reasoned with or sharing a dialogue. The left is about two things: 1. Acquiring power. 2. Using power to punish people they don’t like. The Obama Administration eagerly grabbed executive power wherever it could. Sometimes this power was used directly against political opponents — like oil and coal companies, or Gibson Guitars, or Tea Party groups. Other times, it filtered down to the front lines of the culture wars, and was used to punish Christians who didn’t want to participate or support gay marriage, or college men falsely accused of rape, or small towns in the midwest who suddenly found themselves swamped with “refugees” and illegal immigrants.

Now that we on the right have learned that the left has no interest in real dialogue, this is how conversations take place in the Trump Era.

1. conservative: says something
2. liberal: you’re a racist | sexist | bigot | pejorative du jour
3. conservative: fcuk you.

I wish it weren’t like this, but what’s the point in trying to be reasonable with people who are just going to write you off as a racist | sexist | bigot | pejorative du jour anyway?

Is It OK to Violently Assault People You Disagree With?

Posted by V the K at 12:53 pm - January 24, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

This is a genuine topic of debate on the left.  The consensus seems to be, “It’s OK, as long you call them a Nazi first.” It also helps if the punch is “funny.”

Opponents of the punch tended to say that violence had no place in political debate. Supporters tended to say the punch was funny, and more than a few compared Mr. Spencer’s attacker to famous Nazi punchers from pop culture, like Indiana Jones and Captain America.

Dollar-Menu magazine Newsweek thought seeing someone punched for their political beliefs was pretty good, but it became more “entertaining” when set to music. One of Obama’s speechwriters agreed.

Follow up question: Is it OK to shoot a leftist who assaults you because he defines your beliefs as “Nazi-ish.”

No Winners in This Story

Posted by V the K at 4:59 pm - January 22, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse,Unhinged Liberals

Old leftist “hag” Nasty Woman gets kicked off a plane for harassing Trump supporters.

It sucks that you lost your father-in-law, lady. But that doesn’t give you the right to harass other people on an airplane. You demand everyone around you… including the flight crew… cater to your feelings, while completely disrespecting everyone else’s.


And this isn’t like those “A guy in a Trump hat called me the n-word. There aren’t any witnesses, but I swear it happened,” things. There’s video.

The Unity Paradox

Posted by V the K at 7:37 pm - January 19, 2017.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

A new Pew Research survey finds 86% of Americans describe the country as more politically divided today than in the past, while just 12% say the country is no more divided.” I’m sort of curious who the 12% are.

It’s curious that the country has become so divided when almost every politician preaches the gospel of “national unity.”  Barack Obama: “Instead of giving in to cynicism and division, let’s move forward with the confidence and optimism and unity that define us as a people.” George W. Bush: “We are showing the world the strength of our country, and by our unity and tolerance and compassion.” Donald Trump: “To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.” Everybody claims to want unity, instead our divisions harden and deepen.

Since the 1960’s, the autocratic left has sought to politically unify the country by systematically taking over not just political institutions, but also cultural institutions: the entertainment media, journalism, higher and lower education, religion, even sports… (have you watched ESPN lately? It’s turned into a kind of sports-themed MSNBC.) The idea has been to indoctrinate all Americans with common, leftist political philosophy with the aim of creating progressive leftism as the common currency, not just of politics, but of everything.

Why hasn’t the constant whine of leftist progressive indoctrinated united the country as its designers dreamed?

I would suggest that a constant drumbeat of political correctness fails for several reasons. First, there will always be people who disagree; in our case, conservatives and libertarians. The very intolerance of alternative ideas paradoxically enhances the appeal of those ideas. Also, the unquestioned assumptions monocrop political correctness leads to laziness and sloppiness among its adherents which makes it easy for smart dissidents to seize on the weaknesses of leftist arguments. (It is also helpful, in this regard, that socialism invariably fails in practice.) Finally, the adherents of left-wing political thought themselves become smug and intolerable. i.e. The annual exhortations to leftists to get in the faces of ‘your conservative uncle’ at Thanksgiving and Christmas. When people have internalized the dogma that they are right and anyone who disagrees with them is not just wrong, but evil and stupid, they get kind of obnoxious. And the people on the other side are even less likely to listen to them.

Therein lies the paradox, the more you try to force political unity, the more you deepen and harden divisions in the body politics. We would actually be unified in a society that took pains to segregate politics from the culture. There would be less disagreement if it was normative just to keep one’s political opinions to oneself. The absence of a Dominant Political Culture would make it easier for people to talk to each other and listen to each other.

Are You Ready for Four Years of Unhinged Trump Derangement?

From the left

As the gay Jewish American hero Dan Goldstein pointed out, (Ivana Trump’s) father is trying to ruin our country and she is an accessory to that and she should hear that whenever she leaves the house. We should shout it at her. In fact, it’s unpatriotic not to, because that’s what Americans do: we fucking yell.

But what about her children, the pundits and concerned conservatives wondered. Her poor, rich children! No one was hurt, no one was traumatized, Goldstein, according to witnesses, didn’t even raise his voice. He looked “agitated.” I’ve had more intense and unsettling encounters with my three children online at Target. If she wants to go outside in America, she should be prepared for the occasional unpleasantness, and she can explain to her children why on her own time.

Nor does their temporary discomfort begin to compare, nor can it even be measured against, the pain and sorrow and misery and death that is to come when the Trump Administration dismantles the already flimsy Affordable Care Act, defunds Planned Parenthood, cuts social programs, separates more immigrant children from their families, puts more mothers and fathers in jail, sends their children to jail, and executes his cultural and physical war on our nation’s many millions of nonwhite Others.

And from the right

“My own view is that Donald and Ivanka and Uday and Qusay are genuinely bad human beings and that the American public has made a grave error in entrusting its highest office to this cast of American Psycho extras. That a major political party was captured by these cretins suggests that its members are not worthy of the blessings of this republic…”

“Climate of Hate” update again

I hope future readers (if any) realize that the title is ironic. Left-liberals claim that we’re living in a climate of hate. If we are: It’s the hatred that is spewed by America’s Left.

First: Yesterday, President Obama clarified that he will NOT call off the anti-Trump protestors.

“I would not advise people who feel strongly or are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised over the course of the campaign, I would not advise them to be silent,” Obama said during a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Obama said protests are just something Trump would have to get used to as the leader of the free world.

“I’ve been the subject of protests during the course of my eight years,” he said. “And I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests.”

…Obama [said] that the right of free speech should be exercised…

Let’s be clear: This is beyond baloney. Obama never faced protests where conservatives smashed windows, set fires, and physically attacked his supporters in the streets. Destroying property and people isn’t “free speech”.

As lefties told everyone last spring, when the Left’s paid agitators were trying to foment violence at Trump rallies: The leader’s duty to denounce the violence and insist on peaceful speech/protest from his supporters. That is Obama’s duty, now. Once more, the clown Obama disgraces America and himself.

And by the way: Obama didn’t face protestors in any number, until long after he was sworn in and did some (bad) things. While we’re at it, Merkel’s Germany does not let German citizens have free speech. The article describes Germans who were threatened with jail for criticizing Germany’s refugee influx on social media. Pathetic!

Some other items:

The Steve Bannon kerfuffle

I don’t know a great deal about it. This is a post where I’m not presenting information, so much as asking for it.

But, to set up the question: Via Instapundit we have this from The Hill: Breitbart News planning lawsuit against ‘major media company’.

Breitbart News is preparing a lawsuit against a “major media company” over claims that it is a white nationalist website…

The website has been under intense scrutiny since President-elect Donald Trump named Stephen Bannon as a senior White House counselor and strategist. Bannon is the former executive chairman of Breitbart News…

“…Breitbart News rejects racism in all its varied and ugly forms. Always has, always will,” [said a statement.] “The diversity of the company’s news coverage and its staff continue to embody Andrew Breitbart’s colorblind, distinctly American commitment to ‘E pluribus unum’—out of many, one.”

Critics have taken aim at the site’s coverage in recent days. While Bannon was executive chairman of Breitbart, the website published a story by David Horowitz referring to conservative commentator Bill Kristol as a “renegade Jew,” something that has been mentioned repeatedly in media coverage calling Breitbart a white nationalist website.

So, here’s what I “think I know”, at present.

  • was one of the first to go all-in for Trump. They are pro-deportation of illegals, but in no way white-supremacist.
  • Just as the media’s knickers are in a twist over Trump and over the Alt-Right, they’re in a twist over Trump keeping Bannon as a senior, Karl Rove-type advisor.
  • But it’s ridiculous. If all that the media has is one Jew (David Horowitz) slagging another Jew (Bill Kristol) over something to do with Jewishness, on while Bannon presided, let’s face it: They’ve got nothing.

Correct? Agree/disagree? What I would be most interested in here, is actual evidence – not mere assertion or opinion – that Steve Bannon and/or Breitbart are “white nationalists” or white supremacists. If any exists. (I have a gut-feeling against it.)

UPDATE – I didn’t see this coming: Trump Wants To Deport [Only] As Many Undocumented Immigrants As Obama Already Has.

UPDATE: Spengler (David P. Goldman) describes Bannon as “100% pro-Israel” – which would be unusual for a white supremacist. And the worst against Bannon that Jonah Goldberg can muster, is that Bannon is part of the alt-Right. Yawn, so is Milo. Sorry, Jonah. I do love you, most of the time.

I am open to a point suggested in the comments, that under Bannon’s leadership, has declined journalistically. But that’s a different matter. Being a poor journalist (arguably) doesn’t make you a racist.

How Much of a Jerk Is Dan Savage?

Posted by V the K at 7:53 pm - February 14, 2016.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

This much.

Stay classy, progressive leftists.

I’ll say it again, Dan Savage is a human canker sore.

Grow the Hell Up

Gay conservative gadfly Milo Yiannopoulos gave a talk at Rutgers University where he was interrupted by Social Just Us Wankers behaving like spoiled idiotic children.

Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos’ tour of U.S. university campuses has started off with a bang. His first event, at Rutgers University in New Jersey, was disrupted by feminists and Black Lives Matter protesters, who chanted slogans and smeared fake blood on their faces before storming out of the auditorium.

After their two minutes of fame, the progressives stormed out of the auditorium, leaving a trail of red paint for the janitors to clean up.

This is why I have no respect whatsoever … and actually thorough contempt… for the Progressive Left, for everything the Progressive Left stands for, and for anyone aligned with the Progressive Left.

Things We Condemn – and expect our opponents to condemn

So, this post is written by Jeff; but I may say we/us/our in the following, meaning that I’m pretty sure that other GP authors would agree with me.

From time to time, trolls show up in GayPatriot’s comments section: people who are here not to provide new info or discuss anything for real, but only to throw accusations. They are usually left-wing. It’s fun, because they so often provide evidence for our points about how the Left thinks (or rather, doesn’t think).

You can tell a troll because his accusations are illogical. He usually shows little understanding of our viewpoints as the writers of GP, which may differ among us on some issues, but which are always rooted in our respect for human life including liberty (human freedom).

For example, if you understood anything about our viewpoints, you would know that we condemn violence^^ against gays and lesbians. And against women. And against black people or any minority. We condemn physical violence against anybody who isn’t a perpetrator of physical violence, because we condemn all physical violence that isn’t necessary for self-defense. No peaceful citizen should have to live in fear for his or her physical safety.

Likewise, we condemn anyone who -calls for- violence^^ against gays and lesbians, against women, or against anybody else who hasn’t committed criminal violence. To our way of thinking, we shouldn’t have to say the preceding, because it should be SO OBVIOUS that it flows from our principles. But if it’s important to you that we say it: there it is. Easy to say. Done.

It’s an example of something so basic that we would expect any commenter on GP who wants to be taken seriously to feel the same way. A similar example of something basic would be condemning violence against children – including the sexual exploitation of minors, such as child pornography or pedophilia**.

Rejecting the sexual exploitation of minors is so obvious and basic to being a decent human being that a person should not normally be asked to condemn pedophilia – but, if she is asked to, it should be quite easy for her to say “Of course I condemn it – Done.”

The thing is: When it comes to the Gay Left, and because the Gay Left sometimes tolerates NAMBLA or promotes certain individuals who do condone sex with minors, it may be legitimate to ask the person to condemn it. And when they condemn it, that’s good. You got your answer, and you move on to other topics.

At this point, a gay leftie might say “But then we’re right to ask you if you condemn violence against gays!! Because you tolerate or associate with Christians, and Christians promote or condone violence against gays!!!1!11!1!”

And the answer is: No, Christians don’t. Of course you can find some crazy/fringe person who happens to call themselves “Christian” and calls for violence against lesbians or gays; but the key words there are “crazy” and “fringe”. The words apply because the real world is different. In the real world, all major denominations of Christianity reject violence against gays.

But, sadly, it is not equally true that all major Gay Left groups, Pride parades, etc. shun NAMBLA and condemn anyone who has sex with teenage boys. Sadly, no.

All this came up in a recent GP thread. A leftie commenter asked me if I condemn violence against gays, and/or anyone calling for violence against gays. I replied readily that I do. Thinking that I was throwing the guy a softball, I said, now you can reciprocate my example by condemning pedophilia, right? He couldn’t or wouldn’t. Instead, he claimed that Christian leaders typically call for violence against gays. I demanded contemporary examples – and the one example that he provided (after some stalling and further hand-waving) was just a fringe nutcase, a worthless example.

To summarize.

  1. We (authors at Gay Patriot) condemn violence^^ against gays. (and always have)
  2. We condemn anyone who promotes or calls for violence^^ against gays. (and we always have)
  3. We condemn pedophilia**. (and always have)
  4. We find these things easy to say, when we are challenged about it.
  5. We think that any decent person should find these things easy to say, if they are challenged.
  6. We do NOT normally want people to be challenged on these things, in GP comments. (Why not? For staying on topic, for goodwill / presumption of innocence, etc.)
  7. But, if a troll is going to make challenges on these things, then he or she may expect to be challenged back – and had better come up with the right answers. As we do.
  8. In the future, when we are challenged, we may simply refer the troll back to this post.

(^^Violence meaning: real violence, which of course is physical violence.)

(**Pedophilia broadly also including hebephilia/ephebophilia, the sexual exploitation of teenagers or of any/all minors.)

Let’s Play, “Who’s Classier?”

Posted by V the K at 7:48 pm - August 18, 2015.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Today’s contestants on ‘Who’s Classier:’

Republican Consultant Rick Wilson, for asking Ann Coulter, “Does Trump pay you more for anal?”


Democrat Lesbian Rosie O’Donnell, for her comment, “I’d like to take my period blood I no longer have and write, ‘you’re all assh—s.’ I’d like to smear it all over some people’s faces.

Which one do you think best epitomizes the classiness of their political class, gentle readers?

The Idiocy of the Left

Posted by V the K at 8:01 pm - July 28, 2015.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Check out the signs in the background; this is what passes for insightful political dialogue on the progressive left.


More Class from the #LoveWins Crowd

Posted by V the K at 9:07 am - July 17, 2015.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Via insty: Gay marriage activist throws unhinged hissy-fit at Texas governor, gets bumped from flight.

As he was waiting with family and staff to board a flight back to Austin on Tuesday night after two days promoting Texas in New York City, Gov. Greg Abbott was approached by another passenger who shook his hand and then loudly and profanely expressed his unhappiness with the governor’s opposition to gay marriage. “I hope you [expletive] go to hell because of your stance on gay marriage,” the man told the governor, using an epithet for emphasis, according to Abbott communications director Matt Hirsch, who was with the governor. The man, identified only as a 32-year-old male by Port Authority police, was asked to step back by Texas state troopers traveling with the governor. As he walked away, Hirsch said the man, dressed in jeans and a T-shirt, directed a parting shot at the governor: “I’m going to see you on the plane.”

Gay Brownshirts Against Civility

Posted by V the K at 9:41 pm - June 16, 2015.
Filed under: Civil Discourse

Apparently, the Gay Left wants to make sure no one ever has a civil conversation with a Conservative.  No amount of groveling will make up for talking to one of those filthy people. And if they have to enforce these rules by behaving like middle schools… that’s just how they roll.

A few months ago, the oh-so-tolerant LGBT activists completely lost their minds after two prominent gay hoteliers, Ian Reisner and Mati Weiderpass, hosted a foreign policy discussion event for presidential candidate Ted Cruz. Because GOD FORBID they find some common ground with Cruz. Gay marriage should dictate all of your political views. Every. Single. One of them.

On Sunday, Mati Weiderpass got kicked out of a Fire Island bar for arguing with another customer over hosting the Cruz event.

“One guy got up and asked him what the rationale was to have dinner with Cruz. They got kind of heated and before you knew it, there was a lot of people yelling,” customer Evan Lobel said.

The club’s owner, P.J. McAteer, then asked them to leave. When they left, everyone cheered.

Because tolerance.

On an unrelated note, this is a thing that happened. I don’t feel like writing a post about it, but it happened.