

Politics
What’s This Fuss About Conservatives Not Joining the Left in Cheering for Ukraine?
At first glance, most of us thought Russia was out of line invading Ukraine. But then some leading conservatives started questioning things. They got sick of the Democratic-controlled government and MSM whitewashing history and not explaining to the American public how the war came about. We just got out of three years of COVID-19 misinformation, so bad that it probably led to the needless deaths of conservatives overreacting in disgust to the misinformation, so we’re highly skeptical right now of being told how to think.
But the MSM then turned the right’s skepticism around on them and made them look like they supported Russian President Vladimir Putin, which is something completely different. They cherry picked statements by conservative leaders in order to do this.
Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: BLM’s Financial Footing is on the Ropes
In a segment entitled, “Our leaders are lying about Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, and it’s insulting,” top conservative Tucker Carlson said, “They’re forcing the entire American population to mouth childish slogans about good versus evil. It’s insulting, but worse, it’s not helpful.”
He suggested looking to leading UK conservative Nigel Farage to understand the skepticism. Farage warned eight years ago not to provoke Putin, “the moral of the story is if you poke the Russian bear with a stick, don’t be surprised when he reacts.” Farage criticized the European Union’s expansion — and why not, conservatives have warned against a one-world government for years. He said encouraging Ukraine to join NATO, combined with NATO conducting joint exercises in Ukraine, needlessly provoked Putin. Bombing Libya —which many believe was a mistake now — and arming the rebels in Syria exacerbated the pressure. Farage pointed out the moral relativity involved, it’s not all black and white, “in the war against Islamic extremism, Vladimir Putin … is actually on our side.”
The Biden administration has been a disaster so far, from the bloody withdrawal from Afghanistan to record inflation and now the Russia-Ukraine war. So Democrat hacks are desperately spinning to look good, forced to defend their actions under President Barack Obama that deliberately antagonized Putin, bringing this on. They’re spinning Carlson’s remarks, especially his obviously sarcastic ones, into making him look like he supports Putin, which isn’t accurate. And they conveniently leave out the fact the Democrats stand to benefit financially from a war in Ukraine.
So far, the Biden administration is doing almost exactly what Carlson advises (Carlson merely seems a little more hesitant about some of the sanctions) — not getting involved militarily to stop Putin, since the ramifications could drag us into another Vietnam War, or at best, another Iraq War.
Sen. Rand Paul was criticized for questioning giving Ukraine financial aid, but that’s because he’s one of the biggest fiscal hawks in Congress, concerned about “taxpayers who are struggling to buy gas, groceries and find baby formula.” Trump said the invasion was “genius,” but that’s not the same as agreeing with it.
A lot of the quibbling gets into the minutiae. Some on the right point out that Ukraine is not a democracy, then get slammed for pointing that out as if they’re on Russia’s side. Well according to ratings and rankings of how democratic countries are, Ukraine’s scores are mediocre. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2021 rankings place Ukraine at 86th in the world, tied with Mexico, in a section of countries described as “hybrid regimes” due to their authoritarian leanings. Russia is ranked 124, in the authoritarian section.
Where is the questioning of the left’s motives? They jeered at the right for many years for being too interventionist, accused conservatives of trying to make the U.S. the world’s police. Now they’re doing exactly what they accused us of with a straight face; they’ve become more interventionist than the right. Biden said Putin is a war criminal who needs to be removed from office. So where were they defending the U.S. in Vietnam and Iraq?
It’s surreal watching them condemn the type of statements some on the right are saying that they themselves said about Vietnam. Former Hawaiian Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a conservative Democrat, has been slammed for asking on Carlson’s show, “Are we prepared to see our loved ones burn alive in a nuclear holocaust in a war with Russia over Ukraine?”
Evangelicals, who generally represent the conservative base, support Ukraine over Russia in similar numbers to the general population. This is more evidence some of our conservative leaders are deliberately being misinterpreted by the MSM.
Amost no one supports Russian troops murdering thousands of Ukrainians. It all comes down to the Democrats cleverly twisting the words of prominent Republicans. During CPAC this year, a plane flew overhead with a banner stating “Putin Welcomes CPAC to Orlando.” Tellingly, it didn’t come from the right; a Democratic political action committee paid for the banner in order to spin the false mantra.
The Democrats are attacking the right for doing what we do, fully analyzing all aspects of a political issue. Unlike them, we value the freedom to think for ourselves and do not enjoy being told by the government and MSM how to think monolithically.
Look at our conflicted history with Afghanistan. The U.S. supported the mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan in the 1980s against the Soviet Union, which enabled the Taliban takeover in the 1990s. But that switched after 9/11, and we worked with NATO and the Northern Alliance to topple the Taliban regime in 2001.
The Democrats are trying to deflect from the fact Putin is not afraid of Biden, so Biden is ineffective at bringing the war to a close. Many believe if Trump had been in office, Putin would have never dared to invade Ukraine. They had “detente,” a word the MSM will never bring up now, but what effectively worked under President Ronald Reagan in dealing with the Soviets. Putin held a begrudging respect toward Trump, and was secretly terrified that if he pushed him too hard, Trump would hit back hard. The real question people should be asking is why have the Democrats decided to do a 180 on interventionism for this war.
We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
Politics
BLM’s Financial Footing is on the Ropes
A decade of their misdeeds has transpired since BLM came into existence
BLM has proven itself to be a group skilled in corporate extortion, intimidation, and protests that have led to looting, rioting, arson, and violence. Thus, reports of Black Lives Matter’s forthcoming insolvency is heart-warming: it couldn’t happen to a more worthy organization.
In 2021, their demands focused on prosecuting Donald Trump and his supporters. In essence, BLM was searching for a crime, any crime to pin on them. Not that BLM cares one wit about the U.S. Constitution or the Capitol, they had been seeking “full accountability” for anybody who participated in the January 6th breach of the Capitol, and, in their way of thinking, that includes Donald Trump.
Crackdown on Others, not Us
Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: The Pickle DeSantis Finds Himself In
BLM insisted that Congress avoid employing the Capitol breach as a rationale for cracking down on BLM’s own demonstrations and marches. Nonetheless, BLM’s annual summer activities since 2020 have precipitated looting, riots, arson, and even murder. To this day, BLM affiliated demonstrations in major cities are responsible for major property damage, and intimidation of citizens as well local government officials, and violence.
In a press release, BLM stated, “We are joining Representatives Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Cori Bush, Jamaal Bowman, and others who are demanding that Trump be immediately convicted in the United States Senate. Trump must also be banned from holding elected office in the future.”
The group added “Trump has always used his digital media platforms recklessly and irresponsibly to spread lies and disinformation. Now it is clearer than ever that his digital media is also used to incite violence and promote its continuation. He must be stopped from encouraging his mob and further endangering our communities, even after the inauguration.”
If the above is not a textbook case of projection, what is? BLM accuses Trump and his supporters of exactly what BLM does nearly every day.
Chop off Their Heads
BLM has long sought to punish any Republican who exercise the same rights as Democrats did in the 2000, 2004, and 2016 presidential elections. According to BLM, any elected GOP official who voiced concern about the 2020 Electoral College count, or showed support for Donald Trump after the election, must be expelled from office. Apparently, BLM couldn’t be bothered to research the rules of the Senate, and cares little about free speech for all.
BLM asserted that, “More than half the Republican representatives and multiple senators stoked Trump’s conspiracy theories and encouraged the white supremacists to take action to overturn the election.”
Enduring Black Privilege
Against the odds. news about BLM co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors surfaced: She was buying four expensive houses, some in predominantly white, wealthy neighborhoods, all consistent with much of what we know about BLM and its founding. She also was alleged to be viewing resort properties in Bahama, where condo prices range from $5 to $20 million.
A decade full of their misdeeds has past since BLM came into existence in 2013. Khan-Cullors and two other African-American women had established this ‘political’ movement in response to what they deemed to be a miscarriage of justice and non-existent legal regard for black lives. What was the initiating spark? For defending himself after his nose had been broken and while his head was being smashed into the sidewalk, Hispanic American George Zimmerman was acquitted for killing Trayvon Martin.
The Zimmerman verdict is now old news. Anyone who claims that the trial was not fair didn’t follow it closely and relied on second-hand commentary. In the face of intense media and public scrutiny, it is difficult to imagine a more thorough review of all available evidence, by both sides. Yet, lingering media coverage remains highly biased in favor of Martin.
The Hard Facts? Who Cares?
A well-documented police account of the shooting, supported by forensic analysis, revealed that Martin perpetrated “an unprovoked attack” on Zimmerman, first punching him in the face, then knocking him to the ground, and repeatedly bashing his head into the sidewalk, before attempting to grab Zimmerman’s gun.
A highly troubled seventeen-year-old, even with his father present in his life, Martin had embarked upon a life of theft and thuggery. Tracy Martin, his father, was a long time gang member, who introduced his son to guns, violence, and drugs. To ignore Trayvon Martin’s propensity for intermittent violence or to suggest that after he spotted Zimmerman he did not become the aggressor is pure folly.
To the chagrin of BLM founders, the preponderance of evidence revealed that the legal system worked as it should and that Trayvon Martin was the precipitating force leading to his own death.
A Ruse Among Ruses
As such, BLM was founded upon a lie, continues to lie, and has expertly cajoled, threatened, and extorted major corporations, and public and private organizations, raking in multi-millions of dollars for the founders. Their bankruptcy is a just reward. Soon, perhaps, the founders will be exposed for their extensive list of crimes.
– – – – –
News
Allen v. Farrow and the American Quest For Truth
Through his own words, Woody Allen reveals himself.
In an era where truth is a rare commodity, and nothing seems to be definitive, it’s illuminating to watch a four-hour, four-part HBO series: Allen v. Farrow. In methodical fashion, the long-running legal wrangling between Woody Allen and Mia Farrow over his alleged molestation of seven-year-old Dylan Farrow is explored.
The telecast, first aired two year ago, is absorbing for anyone who’s seen more than one Woody Allen movie, knows anything about the controversy, or has any interest in coming to resolution.
A Pedofile Revealed
Much of the broadcast features Dylan, now 37, married with a child of her own. As she reflects back on her experience at age 7, she is coherent and credible. Mia Farrow, who starred in 13 Allen films, comes off as more balanced than the press has allowed us to see in nearly three decades.
Trending on PolitiCrossing.com: BLM’s Financial Footing is on the Ropes
Through his own words and deeds, Woody Allen, birth name Allen Konigsberg, reveals himself: He was obsessed with the young Dylan. He spent much time alone with her. He couldn’t keep his hands off of her.
He claims that he never ‘took her up to the attic,’ there was ‘no train set’ there, and that everyone who has made such observations is wrong. Yet, we learn about the train set in the attic, and that other Allen contentions are wrong.
The Attempt to Normalize His Obsessions
Why was Allen shielded for so long, by so many media outlets? He made so many movies in and about New York that he became a favorite son and easily one of New York’s most popular celebrities. He brought jobs and economic activity and, in virtually every movie, he showed the upside of New York. Few people wanted to believe he was guilty.
All of Allen’s 60+ films, original scripts, notes, and everything related to the making of his movies is archived at Princeton University, as other producers and directors have their film works archived at other universities.
During the telecast, the curator at Princeton makes a compelling observation: Most of Allen’s films focus on an older man with a younger woman, and Allen has been grooming us for 50+ years to accept his worldview. Following his Oscar winning film in 1978, Annie Hall, Allen’s next film was Manhattan, which many people regard as among his best.
Manhattan depicts the 45 year-old Allen dating a 17 year-old portrayed by Mariel Hemingway. This film, like so many of his others, is Allen’s attempt to normalize his preoccupation with vastly younger women. He married Soon-yi, the adopted daughter of his then-girlfriend, Mia Farrow, when he was 56 and she was 21. He met Soon-yi when he was 53 and she was 18.
In Woody Allen films such as Crimes and Misdemeanors, we see Martin Landau as an older ophthalmologist in a relationship with airline attendant and mistress Anjelica Huston, some 20+ years younger. In other Allen films, the same scenario plays out.
Quite Conclusive
After watching all four one-hour episodes in a single night, it became obvious that Allen, now age 87, is guilty. He has used his money, power, and influence to portray himself as something that he is not.
While dating Mia Farrow for 12 years, he steadfastly maintained that he didn’t want to provide care for her children. Yet, once the allegations related to Dylan surfaced, Allen takes Farrow to court to gain custody of three of her nine children: Moses Farrow, an older Asian boy that Mia adopted; Ronan Farrow, Allen’s only biological son; and Dylan Farrow, the young daughter at the center of the controversy.
I personally recall that during the custody trial, the presiding judge asked Allen if he could name any of Dylan’s classmates or neighborhood friends. He could not. He could not name any friends of Ronan Farrow or of Moses Farrow. Further, Allen had never taken any of their children to the dentist or for a haircut. Not one of the children had ever stayed overnight at Allen’s apartment.
Thoroughly Neurotic
What kind of man would take somebody to court to claim custody of three children about whom he knows nearly nothing? This is the kind of man that Woody Allen was and is: a faker, a charlatan, and so neurotic that the elements of his neurosis revealed in his movies don’t even begin to describe his daily afflictions.
As soon as Ronan Farrow, now a renowned investigative reporter, weighs in and defends Dylan’s assertions, Allen’s then 29-year ruse is vanquished.
Allen, like others in high, high office, is a pedophile with zero jail time. The crowning grace is that he’ll go to his grave knowing that he’s been exposed. He cannot spin the voluminous amount of information and testimony presented; a conclusive body of evidence that lays out the truth for all to see.
Comprehensive Coverage?
If only HBO and other major producers would feature comprehensive exposés of, say, Bill Clinton, James Comey, Robert Mueller, Christopher Wray, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe, Eric Holder, Kamila Harris, Merrick Garland, Loretta Lynch, Alejandro Mayorkas, John Kerry, James Clapper, Christopher Steele, Bruce Orr, Susan Rice, John Podesta, Charles Dolan, Christopher Wray, Merrick Garland, Alvin Bragg, Michael Hayden, Sally Yates, and Susan Rice.
Or, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Nelly Ohr, Jussie Smollett, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Dick Durbin, Eric Swalwell, Jerry Nadler, Sheldon Whitehouse, Antony Blinken, Ilhan Omar, George Soros, Katie Hobbs, Liz Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Gates, Tom Steyer, Andrew Weissmann, Marc Elias, Andrew Cuomo, David Axelrod, Barack Obama, James Biden, or maybe, gosh, Hunter Biden.
You know, scoundrels like those.
– – – – –
-
News2 weeks ago
The Pickle DeSantis Finds Himself In
-
News2 weeks ago
Mainstream Media: Intentionally and Diabolically Unfair and Unbalanced
-
Politics2 weeks ago
How Hating White People Became the New National Sport
-
Elections2 weeks ago
Treachery Plagues Our Nation: Democrat Election Tampering is Rampant
-
Military1 week ago
Lest We Forget
-
News7 days ago
Allen v. Farrow and the American Quest For Truth
-
Politics4 days ago
BLM’s Financial Footing is on the Ropes