One of the things that has driven me mad with rage over the last few days is the number of Lefty Jews who have come to the defense of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s antisemitism.

They all have the same boilerplate bullshit talking points, i.e., “I’m a Jew who doesn’t like Israel because it’s non-Democratic, a human rights abuser, Bibi is the Prime Minister, etc.”

Basically, what the self hating Jews hate about Israel is that Israel fights back.  What they hate about Benjamin Netanyahu is that he fights back.

What they hate about Trump is that he fights back.  Notice how much the media supports Republicans who lose after not fighting back against the most vicious of smears.

As I’ve engaged the people online, what happens is that they end up making an argument against Israel that is exactly the same argument we in the pro-gun/pro-concealed carry world have been making for years.

It’s the one that goes “anti-gun activists would rather see a woman raped than murdered than that same woman shoot and kill her attacker.”

So much of the Lefty dislike of Israel – especially from Lefty Jews – come from the same place as the Lefty hatred of guns, reverence for the nobility of victimhood.

The central principle of gun rights and concealed carry is: “don’t be a victim, fight back and kill the fucker who attacked you.”

The central principle of Israel is: “we Jews refuse to be victims anymore and if you attack us, we’ll kill you.”

That is the history of modern Israel.  A small country, founded in one of the few spots in the Middle East with no oil, surrounded by enemies, that by all accounts should have failed or been overrun, is a modern economic and technological powerhouse.  It’s a steadfast refusal to be victims.

You see with this people like Dana Loesch, a woman who advocates for gun rights because she steadfastly reuses to be a victim.

The Left hates them both.

The only morally acceptable position for the Left is to roll over and die as a martyr.

I have no idea why this has become a core tenet of their ideology, because it is downright suicidal.

This needs to be the focus of our push back, teaching kids from the earliest age that there is no nobility in being a victim and that it is good to fight back.

In one of Miguel’s posts, yesterday, one of the lines in that feminist meme was “sex workers get one free kill.”

One of the trends I am seeing on the left is the normalization of prostitution, now deemed “sex work.”

One of the thought terminating cliches associated with this is “sex work is real work.”

A quick internet search shows other articles from Leftist sources like:

So You’re Dating a Sex Worker? Here’s What Not to Do

I’m a Sex Worker Who Is Sick Of Female Misogyny

A Feminist’s Argument On How Sex Work Can Benefit Women

The only Leftist article I saw against sex work, and only sort of, was one from The Nation.

Why Do So Many Leftists Want Sex Work to Be the New Normal?
Yes, let’s erase stigma. But feminists, please: let’s not forget to talk about male privilege.

The criticism wasn’t against prostitution but against the male privilege associated with men buying access to women’s bodies.  Seriously.

Amnesty International has even pushed for sex workers rights as one of thier agenda items.  Forget eliminating torture in North Korea, they want street walking to be legal in the Western World.

WHY!?!

Rampant prostitution is a sign that your society is barely holding on to civilization.

The portrayals of prostitutes from the Wild West was not entirely wrong.  Madams and prostitutes were usually the first women to settle in the mining towns of the frontier.  Today, places like the oil fields of the Dakotas or the fishing ports of the Pacific Northwest experience the same thing, where lots of single men doing hard work, with cash to burn attract pimps and prostitutes to separate these men from their money.  Associated with this is lawlessness and something far removed form a stable, middle class society.

Prostitution is, and rightly so, associated with poverty and misery.  It is many time the last way of making money for women with no other social support.  This could by anywhere from drug addicted women of poor areas of the United States to the slums of the developing world.

It’s not so much that prostitution makes places bad, as much that prostitution flourishes in the bad places, which creates a negative feedback loop.

When Giuliani cleaned up New York, part of his broken windows policing was targeting sex work in the city.  Everywhere from street walking to the peep shows and smut shops that served as fronts for prostitution.

One thing that psychology understands is that casual sex is bad for your mental health.   People with more casual hookups are less fulfilled and generally more unhappy than monogamous couples.

Prostitution takes that and ramps it up out of control.

Miguel as got me thinking about things with the question cui bono?

What is the purpose of this Lefty normalization of prostitution as “sex work.”

All I can think is that misery loves company and the Left is actively out to destroy society.

I can’t imagine there are a lot of Lefty Feminists out there who would look at their daughters and say “when you go to college, don’t get a job at Starbucks, making minimum wage for some corporation owned by a billionaire, you can make more money being a whore.”

Because that is where I think this is going, making young women see being prostitutes as no different than being a barista or a waitress, just another service industry job.

What is the goal here, if anything other than to hasten the downfall of civil society?

Via @Tactical_review

It has been a while since had posted a KaBoom. Always painful.

“The Code Red drill is insane,” said Luz Sandoval, Rodriguez’s mother.
His mother worries about the emotional toll these drills have taken on him and his friends. They’ve taken part in five this school year already.

More Monthly Emergency Drills for Students in South Florida Following MSD Shooting

I am not a parent, but I understand the need for parents to shield kids from bad stuff. But one thing is covering their eyes when they are toddlers and you are driving by a multiple car accident with bodies on the ground. But to deny them preparation and training on what to do for when bad things happen because it may hurt their feelings, it is not only stupid and insane but grossly irresponsible. As a parent, you are the mental equivalent of a vaxxer.

We have now a full generation of people who not only do not know basic First Aid, but won’t even call 911 because that would mean interrupt the video they are taking to upload later on YouTube or WorldStar or once and tragically again, do not want to be involved.

And there is also the gnawing suspicious that the opposition to drills have nothing to do with keeping Junior’s psyche intact but more a political maneuver since you don’t hear the same complains about fire drills an other safety preparations.

Sent by Reader dv (Or DV, not sure on the upper or lower case thing)

Why do they think forced collection and resettlement of armed people is going to go both smooth and their way?

They just do it in Twitter rather than risk loss of teeth by doing it in person. The old farts will remember the sheer hate the Liberal/Progressives had for our Military during Vietnam. And one of the subsets of that hate was the Narrative that every Vietnam vet was a murdering psychopath waiting to explode. Every TV show of the time had at least a couple of shows a year showing crazy veterans snipping civilians or placing bombs all over. Eventually as the country made peace with the war and recognized the effort of the Vietnam vets, the shitting on soldiers became less acceptable to the masses and the Liberals had to store their hate for the Military.

But if given a chance, it pops back out again with all its might: Combat Veterans are just bloodthirsty baby killers and you are going to put them guarding children! Oh my God!

If you keep asking why the Democrats want to give billions to the illegal aliens and zero to our Veterans, that is the answer right there: They hate veterans with all their might.

I saw this in Haaretz:

Why These Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Voted No on an anti-BDS Bill
JTA asked all seven for explanations, and five sent replies. Klobuchar’s staff said she was caught up in hearings, and the office of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., never responded

The Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act (S.1), which the American Israel Public Affairs Committee said “contains critical pro-Israel provisions,” passed 77-23, earning yeas from every Republican but one, Rand Paul of Kentucky. It codifies $38 billion in defense assistance to Israel and provides legal cover to states that target the boycott Israel movement.

The exceptions, however, were notable: Of the seven Senate Democrats who have declared for the presidency or seem poised to, six voted no. Only Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota voted yes.

JTA asked all seven for explanations, and five sent replies. Klobuchar’s staff said she was caught up in hearings, and the office of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., never responded.

So six of the seven Democrats who have thrown their hat into the ring for President voted no on this bill.  Klobuchar voted yes, but according to Monmouth polling, she ranks way down on the list of favored candidates with only 2% support.  She’s ranked No. 8 by The Hill and No. 4 by Kipligner, both of which noted how moderate she is.  That is bad news for her in today’s increasingly crazy Woke Democrat party.

The five no voters based their opposition to what has been called an “anti-BDS bill” on free speech concerns about its anti-boycott element, which would provide federal protections for states penalizing boycotters.

Horseshit.  The Democrats are as principled on free speech as the KGB.

The only principle the Democrats have is “do whatever it takes to get elected and hold or gain power.”

They are not stalwart defenders of the right to protest.

This is a calculated decision.

Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory kicked off the Woman’s March with Jew hatred and ran that for over a year successfully with full media support.

AOC is a rising star of the Democrat party and in her first major interview she went down the path of Israel being the evil occupying force.

Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are also part of that hip #Resistance Freshman Democrat thing.

Just the other day Republican House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy called out the Democrats for allowing Omar’s antisemitic comments to go unchecked.  He mentioned that the GOP pretty much cut Rep Steve Kings balls off* for making white supremacist statements and making the party look bad, and wondered why the Democrats weren’t doing the same with Rep Omar.

*Not just was King stripped of being on the AG Committee, the GOP is actively seeking people to primary him.   It’s bad when your own party is working against your reelection.

How did Rep Omar respond?

“JEW MONEY OWNS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!!”

There is nothing like a double down.  Respond to accusations of antisemitism with more antisemitism.  When challenged on that, she said “AIPAC” as her defense.  This is a deflection of the ignorant because the PAC in AIPAC does not stand for “Political Action Committee” and AIPAC gives not money to political campaigns.

David Duke, yeah that David Duke, jumped in to defend Omar’s statement with his own brand of Jew hating conspiracy mongering.  When it comes to Democrats, a white hood is never that far away.

So why are the Democrats not going after Omar or any of the other overt antisemites aligned with them?

Simple, two reasons.

First: Social Justice, like all forms of radical Leftism hates the Jews.  This time, it’s that the Jews are not white, the Jews are too white.  We’re too rich, too successful, and clearly that makes us evil oppressors and not noble victims.

With Social Justice taking over the Democrat party, it’s not good to be good to the Jews.

Second: Muslims are going to replace the Jews as the second most populous religious minority in America.  It’s a good electoral strategy to make the Muslims a predicable Democrat voting block.

Remember the Democrat principle? “Do whatever it takes to get elected and hold or gain power.”

Well, right now the Democrats’ electoral math is “throw the Jews under the bus to gain the Woke SJW vote and the Muslim vote.”

Some of those candidates are probably Jew haters as well, but in the past it would have been politically necessary for them to at least support Jewish interests for votes.  Now supporting Jewish interests is a liability.

It will start at first with no supporting Israel, but soon enough they will go whole hog on anti-Jewish policy wherever the math says it’s prudent to do so.

This is what the Jews get for voting for the Democrats 85% of the time.  We’re in the bag for them and now they can court the Jew haters for votes.

So if I could say anything to Haaretz, it’s this.  “Promoting or conditioning antisemitism isn’t going to cost the Democrats a whole lot of votes with Jews and their supporters, while it will gain the Democrats a lot of votes with Muslims and the Social Justice crowd.  Once again, the Jews are expendable in politics.”

Short of actually being sent to camps, I don’t know what will make the Jewish community in America change its mind about political parties in the US.  Jews don’t support the Republican President that supports Israel and has Jewish kids and grand kids, but they do support the Democratic candidates who are all to happy to back the antisemites in the Women’s March, BDS, and Palestinian terrorism.

What American Jews need to do, and I will say this ad nauseam until 2020, is stop supporting the Democrat party.  They will undermine us everywhere at every turn.

The same thing is about to happen to the gay community too.  The gays vote overwhelmingly for the Democrats but the Muslims hate the gays too.  So Gay America, you need to look around and ask yourself if you are next on the chopping block?