The Resurgent https://theresurgent.com Committed to Freedom, Faith and Family Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:01:56 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.3 https://theresurgent.com/wp-content/uploads/cropped-favicon-32x32.png The Resurgent https://theresurgent.com 32 32 104855451 Putin Rattles His Saber https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/putin-rattles-his-saber/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/putin-rattles-his-saber/#respond Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:01:56 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44415 Russian President Vladimir Putin engaged in some saber rattling this week, saying that he is ready for another Cuban Missile Crisis with the United States and that he would win. The United States and the former Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987; Russia is the successor state to the Soviet Union […]

The post Putin Rattles His Saber appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
Russian President Vladimir Putin engaged in some saber rattling this week, saying that he is ready for another Cuban Missile Crisis with the United States and that he would win.

The United States and the former Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987; Russia is the successor state to the Soviet Union for purposes of treaties and international obligations. The treaty called for the elimination of “all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers.” The U.S. first accused Russia of violating the treaty in 2014, an accusation which has been repeated every year since. On February 2nd of this year, President Trump suspended the U.S.’ treaty obligations and announced the intention to withdraw from the treaty, due to Russia’s violations. Putin, in response, announced Russia’s suspension of its treaty obligations.

This suspension of the treaty and its likely death has led to noises by the U.S. that it may place nuclear missiles in Europe and by Russia that it may place missiles on naval ships near American shores. Putin spoke about missile flight times and maintained that Russia would have an advantage in a nuclear first strike, because its sea-based missiles would hit the U.S. before the U.S.’ European-based missiles hit Russia.

There are a few things to note about all of this.

First, the INF Treaty was able to be signed because each side had begun to favor sea-based nuclear missiles anyway. That is to say, the elimination of one class of missiles (i.e. land-based intermediate range missiles) provided the funds and ability to focus on more advantageous types of missiles (particularly sea-based). The United States used to have nuclear silos in remote locations in the continental U.S. (you can even buy one), and the Soviet Union had an extensive rail-based nuclear missile platform. The idea behind the U.S.’ silos were that they were hardened and could, potentially, survive a nuclear first strike (it was largely assumed that the Soviets knew the locations of the silos); the idea behind the Soviet rail network is that they could keep their missiles mobile so as to ensure survivability.

The end goal of the Cold War nuclear weapons programs, by both sides, was to be able to survive a nuclear first strike by the other side so as to be able to launch a response strike. Thus, the U.S., for instance, implemented the “Nuclear Triad” – land, sea, and airborne nuclear weapons systems. This ensured that a potential Soviet first strike could be responded to in kind. The Soviets had a similar capability.

This “Second Strike Capability” was essential the the Cold War doctrine of “Mutually Assured Destruction” or MAD (the acronym is appropriate). The idea was that neither side, American or Soviet, could destroy the other side’s ability to respond to a first strike by the other side. Thus, the initial attacker would be hit by the nuclear response of the other side. It, in turn – due to its own second strike capability – would be able to launch another strike.

This brings us to the second point. Regardless of whether it takes 10 minutes for a missile to hit its target or 20 minutes (Putin seems fixated on flight times), the end of the world as we know it would happen in about half an hour. Both the United States and Russia already have an extensive submarine-based nuclear ballistic missile capability and likely have subs just off the coast of the other side all the time right now. The U.S. placing missiles in European territory therefore doesn’t give it a capability it doesn’t already have.

Thus, the third point. The placing of missiles in Europe by the U.S. would be a political statement more than a military one. That is, it demonstrates the resolve of the U.S. to protect its allies as well as U.S. power and influence in the region. This is why Putin does not want this to occur. Russia has been trying to gain back its influence over Europe through economic, political, and military means (e.g. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine). If the U.S. places missiles in the countries over which Russia seeks to exercise influence, this puts a damper on Russian plans.

In addition, Putin’s popularity in Russia has been falling lately. Rattling the saber against a foreign adversary has worked for politicians of all ages to increase their domestic support. Putin is doing the same.

The post Putin Rattles His Saber appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/putin-rattles-his-saber/feed/ 0 44415
Judge in Roger Stone Case Clamps Down Hard https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/judge-in-roger-stone-case-clamps-down-hard/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/judge-in-roger-stone-case-clamps-down-hard/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 22:50:33 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44413 Trump pal, Roger Stone, appeared before a federal judge on Thursday, for the first time since ignorantly posting an image to social media, featuring the judge in his criminal case, Amy Berman Jackson, with what appeared to be crosshairs near her head. He also included his own little spin, with an appeal to raise funds […]

The post Judge in Roger Stone Case Clamps Down Hard appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
Trump pal, Roger Stone, appeared before a federal judge on Thursday, for the first time since ignorantly posting an image to social media, featuring the judge in his criminal case, Amy Berman Jackson, with what appeared to be crosshairs near her head.

He also included his own little spin, with an appeal to raise funds for his defense.

“Through legal trickery Deep State hitman Robert Mueller has guaranteed that my upcoming show trial is before Judge Amy Berman Jackson , an Obama appointed Judge who dismissed the Benghazi charges again [sic] Hillary Clinton and incarcerated Paul Manafort prior to his conviction for any crime. #fixisin Help me fight for my life at @StoneDefenseFund.com,” the since-deleted post read.

He quickly took the image down, but in the land of MAGA, a moment is all it takes to send a message.

Stone’s defense team apparently are much brighter, and whipped off an apology to the judge.

So did she buy it?

Not at all.

The hearing for the day was called because Berman wanted to go over the conditions of Stone’s release, and make a determination as to if there should be some changes made.

Stone was the latest to get swept up in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, and has been indicted on seven charges, including obstructing a congressional inquiry, making false statements to Congress, and witness tampering.

Berman had placed a limited gag order on Stone last week, but the image he posted of her afterwards was a gross abuse of the freedom he was given.

Before Jackson’s ruling from the bench Stone took the stand to beg for forgiveness.

“I abused the order for which I’m heartfully sorry,” he said. “I’m kicking myself over my own stupidity.”

He went on to try and convince the judge that he has several volunteers working for him, and that it was one of them who chose that particular image.

He also tried to convince her that the crosshairs in the image were not crosshairs, at all, but that he had done research, and they were occultic symbols.

So what do they mean?

Well, he didn’t know, but it didn’t matter because he took it down.

Next question: What were the names of the volunteers who offered up that image?

Stone claimed he didn’t know their names.

Stone, 66, a longtime GOP operative and former informal adviser to President Trump, said in court on Thursday that a volunteer had provided him with the photo, but later admitted he had been given two or three pictures from which to choose for the post.

“You had a choice?” Jackson asked, incredulous.

And if the one he chose was that bad, what did the other images look like?

Berman was unmoved by Stone’s court room mea culpa.

“Thank you, but the apology ranks quite hollow,” she said.

When paired with incendiary comments, she said the photo can lead to threats against the judiciary or incite to violence.

She then put a stake through the very heart of who Roger Stone is:

No media interviews about his case, no social media posts, and none of his associates can talk about, or post about it on his behalf.

He can ask for money for his defense fund. He can say he’s innocent, or deny the charges against him. That, however, is it. No more. He was warned that stepping over that very thin line could result in his $250,000 bail being revoked.

“I gave you a second chance, but this is not baseball,” she said. “There will not be a third chance.”

It’s kind of hard to feel sorry for Stone. He’s a particularly noxious and spiteful character.

Something about this just seems right.

Now let’s see if he can maintain his silence.

The post Judge in Roger Stone Case Clamps Down Hard appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/judge-in-roger-stone-case-clamps-down-hard/feed/ 0 44413
NOT BREAKING NEWS: Woman Gets in Shoot Out with Pet Llama https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/not-breaking-news-woman-gets-in-shoot-out-with-pet-llama/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/not-breaking-news-woman-gets-in-shoot-out-with-pet-llama/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 20:30:24 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44411 A Louisiana woman shot her pet llama after being attacked. His name was Earl. This morning, the Associated Press broke the story on Twitter. Authorities in Louisiana say that the woman was working in her pasture when Earl the llama went berserk. She fought him briefly, escaped, and came back with a gun. She blasted […]

The post NOT BREAKING NEWS: Woman Gets in Shoot Out with Pet Llama appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
A Louisiana woman shot her pet llama after being attacked.

His name was Earl.

This morning, the Associated Press broke the story on Twitter. Authorities in Louisiana say that the woman was working in her pasture when Earl the llama went berserk. She fought him briefly, escaped, and came back with a gun. She blasted the llama several times and has been charged with animal cruelty.

The AP says, “News outlets report 67-year-old Madeline Bourgeois told St. Landry Parish Sheriff’s deputies that Earl had attacked her last week while she was working in her pasture. A sheriff’s office statement says Bourgeois told deputies she hit Earl and escaped the pasture, but returned with a gun and repeatedly shot him.”

The sheriff added that she was within her rights to defend herself initially, but once she left, she could not justify using deadly force against a llama.

And the only thing I can think to add to this story is the unnerving parallel to the bizarre world of Napoleon Dynamite. A farmer shoots a cow in the face right in front of a school bus full of children and Napoleon has a pet llama named Tina who is a fat lard.

Other than that, the “Louisiana woman” has given the generic “Florida man” a run for his money for “weirdest story ever.”

My apologies for wasting your time…

The post NOT BREAKING NEWS: Woman Gets in Shoot Out with Pet Llama appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/not-breaking-news-woman-gets-in-shoot-out-with-pet-llama/feed/ 0 44411
The Ignoble Machinations of Jussie Smollett https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/the-ignoble-machinations-of-jussie-smollett/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/the-ignoble-machinations-of-jussie-smollett/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:00:06 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44407 So here it is – “Empire” actor and hate crime hoax subject, Jussie Smollett has turned himself into the Chicago police. It has been a long, publicity-fueled few weeks, since the alleged January 29 attack on Smollett. The attack that never happened, that is. A lot of publicity was generated for Smollett over his pitiful […]

The post The Ignoble Machinations of Jussie Smollett appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
So here it is – “Empire” actor and hate crime hoax subject, Jussie Smollett has turned himself into the Chicago police.

It has been a long, publicity-fueled few weeks, since the alleged January 29 attack on Smollett.

The attack that never happened, that is.

A lot of publicity was generated for Smollett over his pitiful tale of being targeted for his race and sexual orientation.

The grand majority of those who came to his defense have yet to retract their earlier support, or to call out the harm it does to cry “Wolf!” in such a manner.

No matter.

The law has done its job, and Smollett will face the music for his crime – which is exactly what this was. It was a crime.

In a Thursday press conference, Chicago police Superintendent Eddie Johnson blasted Smollett, and revealed the true purpose of such a ridiculous fraud.

Money.

Specifically, he wanted more of it, and it didn’t care if he had to waste law enforcement resources, exacerbate race relations, or damage the dialogue between the heterosexual and homosexual community to get it.

It began before the [lie] alleged “attack” on January 29.

A week earlier, Smollett received what appeared to be a threat letter, with individually cut out letters to make up the text, and an envelope containing a white substance, that turned out to be crushed aspirin.

I’m sure he felt that would be a clever way to set up the coming “attack.” Authorities now say he sent the letter to himself, at the production offices of the television show.

Smollett paid two brothers he knew $3,500 to fake the attack in the 300 block of East North Water Street around 2 a.m. Jan. 29, Johnson said, adding that detectives have the check for the money. The superintendent called the scheme “shameful” and wondered how an African-American could set up a racist attack for a “publicity stunt.”

When investigators figured out the real motive behind the attack, “quite frankly, it pissed everybody off,” Johnson said. “ ‘Empire’ actor Jussie Smollett took advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career.

“It’s just despicable,” he said. “It makes you wonder what’s going on in someone’s mind to be able to do something like that.”

Some people have a level of selfishness that overrides anything they may have resembling commonsense.

Johnson began his news conference by looking out at the crowded room of reporters at police headquarters and noting, “I just wish that the families of gun violence in this city got this much attention.”

Maybe make as big of a deal out of it as was made of this fake “attack”?

He’s right, but the celebrity factor is what got Smollett noticed, and frankly, what got so many detectives assigned to his case.

Smollett surrendered to Chicago police around 5 a.m. Thursday on a felony charge of disorderly conduct alleging he made a false police report. Smollett, 36, turned himself in at the Central District police station at 1718 S. State St., flanked by four or five people, according to police spokesman Thomas Ahern, who was present during the surrender.

“He was very quiet and didn’t say anything,” Ahern said. “He went with detectives and they booked him.”

According to the leader of the investigation, Central Commander Edward Wodnicki, 50 subpoenas and search warrants were issued in this case. Investigators scoured over social media posts and video, until they tracked down the two brothers who were seen in the surveillance video, and eventually brought in for questioning.

Ola and Abel Osundairo were extras on the show. They were on their way back to Nigeria when authorities got to them, arresting them on February 13, but later releasing them without charges.

They cooperated.

The two testified before a Cook County grand jury on Wednesday, hours before charges were announced against Smollett. “I’m told they did an excellent job,” Wodnicki said.

Smollett, who is scheduled to appear later today for a bond hearing, could possibly see three years in jail, as well as be forced to pay back the cost of the investigation.

So let’s see – 3 weeks of work, over 1000 hours, and over 20 detectives assigned to the case – sounds like a hefty sum for somebody who is possibly about to find himself out of work.

Smollett’s attorneys released a statement saying that “like any other citizen, Mr. Smollett enjoys the presumption of innocence, particularly when there has been an investigation like this one where information, both true and false, has been repeatedly leaked. Given these circumstances, we intend to conduct a thorough investigation and to mount an aggressive defense.”

He does, but in this case, where so many saw holes in the story from the beginning, I’d say it’s a lost cause.

Still, this may have served some unforeseen purpose, in opening up a greater dialogue about false reports of alleged “hate crimes.”

It happens far too often. Sadly, those who perpetrate such fraudulent claims feel justified, because in absence of any strong confirmation for their victimhood, they believe “making it up” is just as good.

At the end of his news conference, Johnson was asked what justice would mean in this case. “Absolute justice would be an apology to the city he smeared,” the superintendent said.

“Now, our city has problems. We know that,” he acknowledged. “But to put the national spotlight on Chicago for something that is both egregious and untrue is simply shameful.”

Johnson told reporters Smollett’s actions were particularly harmful to legitimate hate crime victims in the city.

“The Chicago Police Department will continue to investigate all reports of these type of incidents with the same amount of vigor as we did with this one,” Johnson said. “My concern is that hate crimes will now be publicly met with a level of skepticism that previously didn’t happen.”

This is true, but it didn’t start with Smollett’s lie, and sadly, he won’t be the last to push a hateful narrative, based on a lie of perceived victimhood.

The post The Ignoble Machinations of Jussie Smollett appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/the-ignoble-machinations-of-jussie-smollett/feed/ 0 44407
FBI Lawyer Wanted to Charge Hillary https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/fbi-lawyer-wanted-to-charge-hillary/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/fbi-lawyer-wanted-to-charge-hillary/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:00:27 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44400 Forces behind the scenes colluded to make sure it never happened.

The post FBI Lawyer Wanted to Charge Hillary appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
Fresh off the rumors that special counsel Robert Mueller could soon be submitting his final report on the investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election, The Hill has a story related to the other scandal that consumed so much of the news cycle back then, but was quickly buried by the media just as soon as they could get away with it.

It was right around the 4th of July that year, when then FBI Director James Comey held a press conference during which he declared that the Bureau would not be recommending charges against Hillary Clinton, the Democrat nominee for president, for her mishandling of classified material while she worked as Barack Obama’s Secretary of State. As it turns out, however, not everyone at the FBI shared Comey’s view that Clinton’s actions, while careless, did not rise to the level of criminal intent:

For most of the past three years, the FBI has tried to portray its top leadership as united behind ex-Director James Comey’s decision not to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for transmitting classified information over her insecure, private email server.

Although in the end that may have been the case, we now are learning that Comey’s top lawyer, then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, initially believed Clinton deserved to face criminal charges, but was talked out of it “pretty late in the process.”

The revelation is contained in testimony Baker gave to House investigators last year.

For those of us who watched that press conference, during which Comey seemingly laid out the case that Clinton had in fact violated the law by transmitting highly-classified documents over an email server that had likely been hacked by hostile foreign actors—a server, by the way, that she had set up for the express purpose of dodging public records laws—the decision to all but absolve her of responsibility was an outrage. And based on Baker’s testimony, we weren’t the only ones who thought so.

During questioning by Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), Baker was unequivocal about his early view that Clinton should face criminal charges.

“I have reason to believe that you originally believed it was appropriate to charge Hillary Clinton with regard to violations of law — various laws, with regard to mishandling of classified information. Is that accurate?” Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, asked Baker.

Baker paused to gain his lawyer’s permission to respond, and then answered, “Yes.”

So what ultimately caused Baker to change his mind?

“So, I had that belief initially after reviewing, you know, a large binder of her emails that had classified information in them,” he said. “And I discussed it internally with a number of different folks, and eventually became persuaded that charging her was not appropriate because we could not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that — we, the government, could not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that — she had the intent necessary to violate (the law).”

Which, by the way, is the same reason that Comey gave at his press conference. The only problem? It’s complete bollocks. As National Review’s Andy McCarthy has noted, the relevant provision of the law does not require criminal intent to establish guilt—merely a reckless disregard for the proper procedure in handling classified material:

Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require.

In other words, James Comey convinced James Baker that Clinton shouldn’t be charged by interpreting a statute in a way that both of them knew damn well was incorrect. Maybe I’m just being cynical here, but that sure looks to me as if the FBI was bending over backwards to let Hillary off the hook.

It only gets worse when you consider the other unusual ways in which the Bureau conducted this particular investigation. Practically every witness was given blanket immunity. Witnesses were also questioned in the presence of other witnesses—and, in the case of Cheryl Mills, were simultaneously allowed to function as an attorney during these interviews. Clinton had all of the data wiped from her server before FBI forensic specialists could examine it—which amounts to destruction of evidence in a criminal investigation, itself a blatant violation of the law—and yet was never charged for that offense, either.

Finally, there’s the matter of Comey himself getting the final say over whether Clinton would be referred for charges. That has never been the FBI’s job. The Bureau merely investigates crimes, gathering evidence and presenting it to the Department of Justice. It should have ultimately been the decision of the Attorney General—but given Loretta Lynch’s close political ties to the Obama administration, and that Clinton’s innocence had already been predetermined, handing the whole thing to Comey was supposed to give this corrupt enterprise the imprimatur of legitimacy.

My, how appearances have changed.

At any rate, when you compare how the federal law enforcement and intelligence establishment has treated every wild accusation against Donald Trump and his supposed collusion with Russia with grave credulity, all while assiduously looking the other way when it comes to Hillary’s flouting of the law, it’s easy to believe that there’s a Deep State—and that its hand is at work here.

The post FBI Lawyer Wanted to Charge Hillary appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/fbi-lawyer-wanted-to-charge-hillary/feed/ 0 44400
Folsom Lake College Blues: Campus On Alert Because Of A Frog Cartoon https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/folsom-lake-college-blues-campus-on-alert-because-of-a-frog-cartoon/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/folsom-lake-college-blues-campus-on-alert-because-of-a-frog-cartoon/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 16:00:10 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44399 A California college campus is on high alert after someone put a picture of a frog on a professor’s door. Now there’s a sentence your grandparents never would have dreamed of reading. Sadly, sentences like these are all too common these days. A faculty member at Folsom Lake College has an office door that serves […]

The post Folsom Lake College Blues: Campus On Alert Because Of A Frog Cartoon appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
A California college campus is on high alert after someone put a picture of a frog on a professor’s door. Now there’s a sentence your grandparents never would have dreamed of reading. Sadly, sentences like these are all too common these days.

A faculty member at Folsom Lake College has an office door that serves as a Progressive bulletin board of sorts. On the door you’ll find flyers warning you about fascists, flyers about keeping the campus safe, and, for at short time earlier this month, a picture of Pepe the frog.

Pepe the frog is perhaps the most complex cartoon character who has ever existed. Pepe was created by Matt Furie in the early days of MySpace. For over a decade he was among the most popular sources for memes. Even Katy Perry and Nicki Minaj retweeted memes with his image. But a couple of years ago, Pepe was co-opted by white supremacists and it’s all been downhill for the cartoon frog from there.

Whether the cartoon was placed on the professor’s door as a legitimate act of hate or just to trigger a bunch of perpetually triggered Progressives remains to be seen. Either way, the college took the cartoon seriously. Check that. They took the cartoon too seriously.

They called the police.

An e-mail sent to the campus community states that, ““While we do not immediately know the intentions of the person(s) who posted the picture, we are treating this incident with the highest level of seriousness and have already conducted a sweep of all Folsom Lake College campuses to look for other instances of these materials.”

A sweep of all Folsom Lake College campuses?!

This is sort of like when a mom calls the police because her son won’t clean up his room. Sure, the kid has a bad attitude but does this problem really require police activity? In reality, such action reveals a deeper problem. It tells us that the parent lost the child long ago. The kid is running the show.

At Folsom Lake College, the kids are running the show. Had adults been actually leading, the flyer would have been taken down — along with some of the more socially acceptable flyers already on the door — and classes would have resumed as normal. The police would not have been called. There would have been no sweep of campus.

In instances like these, it’s easy to come down hard on the students. Boomers and Gen-Xers are good at critiquing Millennials and Gen-Zers for their safe spaces and snowflake tendencies, all the while forgetting that we were the ones handing out trophies to their last place teams and “protecting” them from threats that did not exist. The type of hysteria we are seeing on college campuses did not just happen. It was created and earlier generations are somewhat responsible for it.

And about the other flyers on that faculty member’s door. You know, the ones that were perfectly fine as far as the students of Folsom Lake were concerned. One flyer referred to references to free speech as “fascist dog whistles” and another said that, “If there is a God, his plan is very similar to someone not having a plan.”

These flyers, while still not requiring a call to the SWAT team, should be seen as every bit as dangerous or offensive as a picture of a frog. Are Christian students at Folsom Lake expected to feel “safe” in that environment? And what’s so anti-fascist about anti-free speech?

The Progressivism we are seeing on campuses like Folsom Lake College is a lot like the thief who started a fire in the farmer’s front yard so that he could steal the chickens out of the back. All of their talk about “safety” and “equality” is really a guise for totalitarianism. It’s not oppression that they’re against. They just want to be the ones who get to do the oppressing. While modern Progressives have people worried about pictures of frogs and things like “environmental racism”, they’ve got their thieving eyes the freedoms in your backyard.

As Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff point out in their excellent book, The Coddling of the American Mind, human beings are designed to grow through opposition. When they are protected from opposing viewpoints and led to believe that any views different from theirs are not safe, they become cult-like and weak. Folsom Lake Community College and campuses like it should be seen as microcosms of what our culture could become. Everyone will be safe but no one will be free.

To quote the words of that great American prophet, “Far from Folsom prison, that’s where I want to stay.”

The post Folsom Lake College Blues: Campus On Alert Because Of A Frog Cartoon appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/folsom-lake-college-blues-campus-on-alert-because-of-a-frog-cartoon/feed/ 0 44399
Kimberly Corban: Don’t Weaponize Sexual Assault Survivors https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/kimberly-corban-dont-weaponize-sexual-assault-survivors/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/kimberly-corban-dont-weaponize-sexual-assault-survivors/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:00:35 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=43627 Motivational speaker and survivor Kimberly Corban-Rourke has a bold message for politicians, Democrat and Republican, who wish to politicize sexual assault: Don’t weaponize survivors and their stories. With more politicians being caught up in #MeToo scandals, it’s a perfect reminder for observers to not weaponize or politicize sexual assault and their victims. If you recall, […]

The post Kimberly Corban: Don’t Weaponize Sexual Assault Survivors appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
Motivational speaker and survivor Kimberly Corban-Rourke has a bold message for politicians, Democrat and Republican, who wish to politicize sexual assault: Don’t weaponize survivors and their stories.

With more politicians being caught up in #MeToo scandals, it’s a perfect reminder for observers to not weaponize or politicize sexual assault and their victims.

If you recall, Corban rose to prominence for helping convict her rapist and famously challenging President Obama on guns at a CNN town hall. She is highly sought-after for speeches on her story and is someone you should cite when discussing this issue.

Watch her December 2018 TEDx Talk on the subject.

The post Kimberly Corban: Don’t Weaponize Sexual Assault Survivors appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/kimberly-corban-dont-weaponize-sexual-assault-survivors/feed/ 0 43627
The Land and Water Conservation Fund Would Disappear Under the Green New Deal https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/land-water-conservation-fund-greenewdeal/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/land-water-conservation-fund-greenewdeal/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:00:56 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44324 The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is set to be permanently reauthorized after Congress failed to meet its deadline last fall. The Senate recently voted in favor to reauthorize the fund by a 92-8 vote, while the House of Representatives will deliberate it soon. It is expected to pass in that chamber, as well. […]

The post The Land and Water Conservation Fund Would Disappear Under the Green New Deal appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) is set to be permanently reauthorized after Congress failed to meet its deadline last fall.

The Senate recently voted in favor to reauthorize the fund by a 92-8 vote, while the House of Representatives will deliberate it soon. It is expected to pass in that chamber, as well.

This bipartisan fund was first authorized by Congress in 1964 to protect and preserve parks, wildlife refuges, forests, open spaces, trails, and wildlife habitat sans tax payer funding. The lands managed under the purview of the program are reserved for innumerable recreational opportunities, clean water, scenic vistas, protecting critical archeological/historical sites, and leaving many wilderness areas untouched.

While permanent reauthorization is on the horizon, the fund could be put in further jeopardy by a more dangerous threat: the Green New Deal.

Right now, the plan is a non-binding resolution. The American public will soon learn where their U.S. Senators stand on the so-called “environmental” plan, much to the chagrin of Senate Democrats. They should be put on record for supporting this destructive plan, while also being held accountable if it threatens LWCF funding, which they overwhelmingly voted for just a short time ago.

Why would the LWCF be in jeopardy again? It’s funded by royalties from offshore oil and gas leasing deals on the Outer Continental Shelf that energy companies pay to the federal government. Annually, the LWCF Act authorizes this fund $900 million each year. However, only a small amount is appropriated by Congress. For every dollar invested in land acquisition through the LWCF, there is a four dollar return in economic value.

If the U.S. were to shift from reliance on natural gas, coal, gas, LNG, and other traditional energy sources to complete dependence on renewables, you could kiss this fund goodbye. Since 88 percent of the traditional economy would be wiped out by the Green New Deal’s plan to go 100 percent renewable by 2030, LWCF’s primary funding source would disappear too.

Do these elected officials seriously weigh the consequences of these destructive plans? How it’ll ironically hurt the environment? It’s highly doubtful since the plan is indefensible and the FAQ page continues to change.

What do the Green New Deal’s supporters plan to replace oil and gas royalties with? Royalties from cow farts? Royalties from renewables? Taxes collected on meat to support vegan lifestyles? Wealth they confiscate from America’s top income earners?

There’s also an inconvenient truth about shifting to full reliance on alternative energy sources like solar and wind not being discussed: it’s backed up by fossil fuels like natural gas, oil, and gasoline. Whoops. Washington Post noted this in 2016:

Because of the particular nature of clean energy sources like solar and wind, you can’t simply add them to the grid in large volumes and think that’s the end of the story. Rather, because these sources of electricity generation are “intermittent” — solar fluctuates with weather and the daily cycle, wind fluctuates with the wind — there has to be some means of continuing to provide electricity even when they go dark. And the more renewables you have, the bigger this problem can be.

Now, a new study suggests that at least so far, solving that problem has ironically involved more fossil fuels — and more particularly, installing a large number of fast-ramping natural gas plants, which can fill in quickly whenever renewable generation slips.

The LWCF should be permanently reauthorized for more Americans to enjoy the Great Outdoors. If the Green New Deal were to be implemented, both the economy and this crucial fund would be killed off.

Preservationist policies like this don’t work. Let’s hope this “New Deal” fails to make it to President Trump’s desk.

The post The Land and Water Conservation Fund Would Disappear Under the Green New Deal appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/land-water-conservation-fund-greenewdeal/feed/ 0 44324
Race, Trump, and Local News https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/race-trump-and-local-news/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/race-trump-and-local-news/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 11:00:48 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44397 A family invited a traveling evangelist to stay in their home. He was preaching at the family’s church. As the parents slept, the evangelist allegedly raped their fourteen year old daughter. Five years later, the man has still not faced a jury of his peers. The fourteen year old is now nineteen. She is in […]

The post Race, Trump, and Local News appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>

A family invited a traveling evangelist to stay in their home. He was preaching at the family’s church. As the parents slept, the evangelist allegedly raped their fourteen year old daughter. Five years later, the man has still not faced a jury of his peers. The fourteen year old is now nineteen. She is in weekly therapy and can get no closure. She must hang on to the memories. She must make sure she remembers because she hopes one day to have justice. She hopes one day the man she says raped her will finally meet justice.

A woman struggles to remember. She is one in a line of women who dated the wrong man. He allegedly beat her badly as he beat others before her. She must remember the details and she knows her memory is going foggy as time passes by. The man is facing twenty years in prison, but like the evangelist, he has ensured his case will not go before a jury.

Both of these men and many others have hired David Ralston, the Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives, to be their lawyer. One admitted he paid Ralston $20,000.00 to just keep delaying his trial. Ralston, as Speaker, can get any case of his continued and no judge can stop him. He has done this repeatedly for years as victims’ memories fade and justice is delayed.

This is a story ripe for national media attention. It is a story of a politician abusing his power. There are multiple female victims waiting for justice. There is even one criminal defendant who admits he paid the Speaker to stop his case from proceeding. It is happening in a swing state where Republicans are at risk of losing power.

Contrast that story with a story that did no national. A newspaper publisher in Alabama who had once won several journalism awards has called for the return of the KKK. National news outlets blasted the publisher, deservedly so. But is it really that big of a story?

Consider the Jussie Smollett story. Having received a death threat in the mail, Trump supporters beat up Smollett on a street in Chicago. The media covered this story for days. ABC News gave a sympathetic hearing to Smollett letting him amplify what happened and letting him blame Trump supporters. Except we now know it did not happen that way. Smollett is now the leading suspect in his own hate crime. The media that rushed to make this a national story fled the story as soon as it stopped working against President Trump and his supporters.

In Virginia, the Governor appeared in blackface and the media pounced. The Attorney General called for the Governor’s ouster. Then the Lieutenant Governor saw multiple women accuse him of sexual assault. Then the Attorney General admitted he too had worn blackface. Once everyone realized the next in line for the Governor’s chair was a Republican, the story faded away.

Local and state political stories deserve national coverage at times. Americans are more and more dependent on national outlets to cover local stories. But national outlets tend to be more focused on narratives than facts. National reporters have a greater propensity to run in a herd while living in a bubble.

The Speaker of the Georgia House is a Republican, but he retains his power with the help of Democrats in the State House. In fact, it is Republicans calling for Ralston to resign. The Democrats are perfectly happy keeping him because the alternative would be more conservative. But the Democrats will undoubtedly use the issue in 2020 to pick off Republican seats in the state legislature. Then it will become a national story.

In fact, it seems the best way to turn a local story into a national story is to find a way to make the President or his supporters look bad. The fall back is to make the story about racial animosity. That may help a political narrative national reporters love, but it does a real disservice to news consumers and victims of real exploitation and abuse.

The post Race, Trump, and Local News appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/race-trump-and-local-news/feed/ 0 44397
Pro-Aborts Aren’t Victims; They Create Victims https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/pro-aborts-arent-victims-they-create-victims/ https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/pro-aborts-arent-victims-they-create-victims/#respond Thu, 21 Feb 2019 09:30:52 +0000 https://theresurgent.com/?p=44237 It’s one of the most curious approaches to a lopsided public policy battle I’ve seen, and yet it continues to work.  The propensity of pro-abortion advocates to play the underdog is so frighteningly effective, I have to ask if the portion of the general population that falls for it has taken complete leave of their […]

The post Pro-Aborts Aren’t Victims; They Create Victims appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
It’s one of the most curious approaches to a lopsided public policy battle I’ve seen, and yet it continues to work.  The propensity of pro-abortion advocates to play the underdog is so frighteningly effective, I have to ask if the portion of the general population that falls for it has taken complete leave of their senses.

I understand this approach meets the “speak truth to power” mantra that the political left has adopted.  But it doesn’t pass the smell test.  Abortion rights rules the day in this country.  It rules in every state of the union.  To say it bluntly (and this may be depressing for pro-life activists), there is absolutely nothing that stops a woman in any state from having their unborn child legally killed in the womb at any stage of pregnancy. 

The “health exception” mandate of the Supreme Court guarantees it.  All the hoops, all the obstacles – things like parental consent, waiting periods, required ultrasounds – may discourage the practice or slow down the efficiency of the kill, but abortion on demand is the law of the land.  Abortion advocates have the legal culture they want, end of story.


That’s what makes comments like these so perplexing:

“Republicans have scheduled a vote Monday on legislation that would ban some women’s health care choices. We can’t turn back the clock on women’s reproductive health.” Kamala Harris

“The attacks on abortion rights that we see now would not be happening if 80 percent of the U.S. Senate were women, not men.” Bernie Sanders

“We cannot for a minute lose sight of the fact that women’s right to control our own bodies is under attack. As long as people in power continue to infringe on that right, the rest of us have to fight twice as hard to protect it. The solution is to change who’s in power.” Kirsten Gillibrand

Perhaps Alexandria DeSanctis responds to this issue than anyone:

“It’s astonishing that abortion proponents get away with portraying themselves as powerless underdogs fighting the system, when in fact they have every structural advantage and are campaigning for the unlimited right to oppress the weak.”

The only dynamic I can compare this to is the humorous transition the ex-hippies from the 1960s who dedicated their lives to rebelling against “the man,” made as they literally became “the man.”  The ones who protested on college campuses now run college campuses.  The ones who loathed the media now run the media.  The ones who hated on the government now make the laws.

It’s the same principle.  You shouldn’t get to play the victimized minority when you control the power and have exactly what you want.  But for some reason the left consistently gets away with it.

The post Pro-Aborts Aren’t Victims; They Create Victims appeared first on The Resurgent.

]]>
https://theresurgent.com/2019/02/21/pro-aborts-arent-victims-they-create-victims/feed/ 0 44237