Bourbon & Bullets

New York Times Warns Readers: Unhinged Leftist Hate ‘Helping Trump’ 8081 17 Michael Ares/Palm Beach Post via AP by   BREITBART NEWS 19 Feb 2017 2,013 SIGN UP  FOR OUR NEWSLETTER Reporter Sabrina Tavernise writes in the New York Times that “many seemingly persuadable conservatives say that liberals are burning bridges rather than building them.” From the  New York Times : Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous. But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right. In recent interviews, conservative voters said they felt assaulted by what they said was a kind of moral Bolshevism — the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one. Disagreeing meant being publicly shamed. Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood may seem to liberals to be about policy ...

THE UNTOLD STORY Top 10 Trump Myths by Gavin McInnes   January 12, 2017 View as Single Page photo credit: Big stock Fake news site Buzzfeed just  published  a fake news story that is so fake, it’s not even fake news. “It’s just fake,” as Kellyanne Conway  put it . The editor of Buzzfeed himself says he  has  “serious reason to doubt the allegations in it,” but he published it anyway because this is “how we see the job of reporters in 2017.” So, the role of reporters is to just barf out whatever anyone throws at them? The dossier implicates the president-elect in everything from being a stooge for the Russian government to demanding women  pee  on him. It’s written like a prank from our side to lampoon how gullible and biased their side is. It’s also a good jumping-off point to discuss 10 other myths about our next president.  (1) TRUMP IS AN ADMITTED SEXUAL PREDATOR Jesus LORD in heaven above am I sick of talking a...

There has of late been great media consternation about the proliferation of fake news sites that mislead voters and generally misinform. There is a growing movement within the MSM, college campuses and even at the White House to have these types of news sites banned. Well, as a free speech absolutist I'm not in favour of restricting anyone's right to publish misleading and even downright false information (as long as it's not slandering an individual). However, as a public service, since there is so much concern over 'news' sites like these, I've compiled a list of some of the most egregious fake news sites online. They range from sites that bend stories to fit a certain narrative to others who create elaborate fake stories, or feature opinion writers writing columns that many of today's university students would consider hate speech (such as the Guardian's Julie Bindel advocating putting all men in concentration camps). At any rate consider yourself f...

It's hardly a revelation that those on the left often have a tenuous relation with reality. After all how do you reconcile free university education and free healthcare for 320 million people if you're not able to simply divorce yourself from basic economics (they really do believe the U.S can simply print enough money to make all their socialist dreams come true). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-8spGrLrUM Those ideas were fervently embraced by the Bernie Sanders supporters, who apparently thought that Bernie's idea of turning America into a latter day Weimar Republic was just the sort of bold thinking needed for today's problems. How they might have divorced themselves from the reality of no longer being able to afford consumer goods might have been comic relief as we watched the economy self-destruct under a Sander's presidency, but that would have been a small consolation indeed. Instead Hillary won, er, that is had the Democratic nomination given to her, an...

We're just two days away from the U.S presidential election and incredibly, Hillary Clinton, who is under not one, but two FBI investigations retains a close lead over Donald Trump. The media, that is the Main Stream Media (including Fox) still point fingers at Trump, saying he wants to imprison Hillary, and that somehow is beyond the pale. Actually what Trump said, in front of millions of viewers during the third debate, was that, when elected, he would appoint a special prosecutor to look into Hillary. Considering what we know already about the Clinton Foundation and pay for play, her mishandling of classified material, and the continued bombshells from Wikileaks that sounds entirely reasonable, to my mind anyway, but then I consider myself relatively sane. The MSM rail against FBI Director James Comey, but barely a peep is heard about why he is (supposedly) breaking protocol, in conducting a major investigation close to an election. Ask yourself this, if evidence of ...

In less than two days America will finally decide who, after a long and bitter election battle, the next president of the United States is. Going into the final weekend however it's anyone's guess what the final result will be. Although, admittedly Clinton does have the edge (the aggregate of polls consistently gives her at least a two point edge). That's not an insurmountable lead, although every presidential nominee since LBG in 1964, who was leading in the polls (no matter how slim the margin) in the last week, won the presidency. I'm not trying to depress you, that's just the cold hard facts. Still, in a close race the 2000 presidential election is instructional. George W. was a three point favourite on the eve of the election (despite the November surprise that he had a DUI conviction from 1976, and ya, I'm really sure the press only just uncovered that tidbit on Nov 2.) The election, as you may remember, ended with Gore up +1 on the popular vote but Geor...

The biggest question from the predictable liberal media yesterday (Oct 28) was not what had Hillary done now, but why would Comey reopen the investigation now? Before it was confirmed the new emails of interest came from an unrelated investigation into the sexual antics of Anthony 'Can't Keep it in his Pants' Weiner, most observers felt the renewed investigation was the result of an internal revolt at the FBI. Dozens and dozens of agents spent over a year investigating Hillary's private (and illegal) email server, confirmed that she was in violation of U.S. national security laws, the same laws that saw (as just one example) General Petraeus convicted of offences regarding the leaking of classified information to a girlfriend. Obviously it was without the intent to commit treason, but the law is the law... unless you are Hillary Clinton. With that in mind (the General Petraeus part) one can imagine the outrage from aforementioned dozens and dozens of FBI agents, when...