No, Actually It Is Both, Willis

As per a 5/12/2021 post by Libertarian Dotard-defending blogger Willis Hart, Dotard Donald never defended torture or the Iraq war.

Clearly this BS is in response to Liz Cheney telling the truth about Dotard Donald losing the 2020 election. Either Willis believes the Big Lie that Joe Biden cheated, or he just doesn't like that the Left is applauding Liz Cheney for telling the truth (even though the Left otherwise disagrees with 100% of Liz Cheney's political positions).

That's aside from the fact that Willis is full of shit. The FACT is that (and I can't believe Willis doesn't remember) Dotard Donald voiced support for waterboarding.

Additionally (in spite of lying about not supporting the Iraq war during the 2016 campaign), Dotard Donald actually did support it.

Fact check: Trump falsely claims, again, to have opposed the invasion of Iraq. Excerpt from a 10/29/2019 CNN article by Daniel Dale and Andrew Kaczynski. What Trump actually said before the war In his 2000 book "The America We Deserve", Trump argued that a military strike on Iraq might be necessary. Trump wrote that the US still did not know the true status of Iraq's nuclear program. He then wrote, "I'm no warmonger. But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us". He continued: "Am I being contradictory here, by presenting myself as a deal-maker and then recommending preemptive strikes? I don't think so. There’s nothing really comparable to unleashing a squadron of bombers, but in the world of business sometimes you have to make quick, secret, decisive moves in order to gain a negotiating advantage". When radio host Howard Stern asked Trump in September 2002 if he is "for invading Iraq", Trump responded, "Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly". Trump did not express a firm opinion about the looming war in a Fox interview in January 2003, saying that "either you attack or don't attack" and that President George W. Bush "has either got to do something or not do something, perhaps". What Trump said during the war The day after the invasion in March 2003, Trump told Fox: "It looks like a tremendous success from a military standpoint". Trump started publicly expressing negative or skeptical thoughts about the war shortly after it began. He called the war a "mess" in a brief comment at an Academy Awards after-party later in the week of the invasion. Six months into the war, Trump said, "It wasn't a mistake to fight terrorism and fight it hard, and I guess maybe if I had to do it, I would have fought terrorism but not necessarily Iraq". Still, Trump did not express definitive opposition in 2003. In a MSNBC appearance in November 2003, he lamented US spending on the war and said that "the question is whether or not we should have been in Iraq in the first place” – but he continued: "I don't think that this president can do anything about that. He is really – he is on a course that has to stay". In December 2003, Trump told Fox that the war had been "tougher than people thought", but he added, "It just seems to be something that, we are there now, we have to stay, we have to win, otherwise we just won't have the same respect". It wasn't until more than a year after the invasion that Trump conveyed explicit opposition to the war.

Hmm. I can understand why Willis thinks Dotard actually opposed the war. He's an idiot that believes Dotard's lies. But Dotard never lied about not supporting torture. He was explicit in his support FOR torture.

Also, Willis was (and remains) opposed to waterboarding? I'm not sure. I'd have guessed he'd be for it. Either way, Willis is incorrect in the assertions he makes in his post. Liz Cheney and Dotard Donald both supported torture and the Iraq war. I didn't have to guess, given that I remembered. Clearly the Hartster doesn't remember.

OST #222

False Equivalencies In Defense Of Dotard's Sedition

According to the Libertarian Dotard-defending blogger Willis Hart, republicans objecting to the Electoral College votes being counted in states that went for Biden is just fine. Because Democrats did it too.

Al Gore and Hillary Clinton insisted for months that the election had been stolen from them? They fomented violence that resulted in supporters storming congress in the middle of the electoral college vote? I don't remember that happening.

Did Al Gore, in his position as outgoing VP, call ANY state rep and ask them to "find" enough votes to make him the winner, Willis? What state officials did Hillary Clinton pressure? Did Al Gore or Hillary Clinton (or any associate) urge their supporters to march on the capitol and engage in "trial by combat"?

I do agree with Willis that we have two sets of political rules in this country; one for Republicans and one for Democrats. He's wrong about who needs to develop a backbone, however. It's the Democrats. republicans (who want fewer people to vote) are going to move agressively to make it harder for people to do mail-in voting. Instead of allowing them to do this, Democrats need to counter them agressively.

As opposed to allowing republicans to get away with it. As they've allowed republicans to get away with supressing the vote for decades. Voter suppression is what allowed gwb to get the vote close enough in FL so his brother (with an assist from the Supreme Court) could steal the election from Al Gore.

High on the Biden Administration's agenda (as well as the agenda of the incoming Democratic congress) should be to pass the John Lewis voting rights act. Also high on the Democratic agenda should be pursuing charges against Dotard for his seditious actions (call to GA threatening that republicans in charge there "find" him enough votes to flip the election, inciting violence in DC, etc).

btw, if the VP can decide to throw out votes (as Dotard believes Pence could have), why didn't Al Gore throw out FL (or any other state) and make himself president?

OST #221

Willis Hart's Covid Delusions

According to the Libertarian trump-voting blogger Willis Hart, if not for the media reporting the news, nobody would have ever noticed we're in the middle of a pandemic.

Sure. Most people wouldn't have even noticed 350k deaths and our hosptitals being pushed to the brink. With the rationing of care being a very real possiblity (aka allowing people to die). If only the media had kept quite. But they had to blow this way out of proportion... what a f*cking idiot.

btw, not warning people with pre-existing conditions that they're more vunerable to a deadly virus certainly would have lead to even more deaths. Apparently Willis would have been just fine with that.

OST #220

Russiagate Deniers "Best Journalists In The Country Right Now"?

According to the Libertarian trump-voting blogger Willis Hart, being a Russiagate denier is what's required to be one of the best.

I don't know. Believing that Dotard was "framed" for colluding with Russia and that it really was a "witch hunt" (despite it being so f*cking obvious) kind of causes me to question your journalistic abilities. IMO it's also incredibly dishonest.

Wills must be a Jimmy Dore fan as well. Not because he's a Progressive, but solely due to his defense of Dotard. Like these three journalists. All of who were desperate to see Dotard "re-elected" over Joe Biden. Not because they are fans of Dotard, but to punish the DNC for not nominating a Progressive (and America as well).

Although now (according to Dore) Bernie Sanders is a "cuck" for getting behind Biden. And Greenwald (originally an AOC fan) now says she's a sell out as well. A female "cuck", if there is a word for that. Because Bernie and AOC both realized the Orange Turd HAD to go because American might not survive another Dotard term.

OST #219

Artwork I recently Acquired

...by left-clicking and downloading it from Willis Hart's blog. Apparently Willis purchased the original. At a higher price than what I paid for my copy, I'm guessing. Which was $0.

OST #218

White Nationalism And Libertarianism

"Liberation Day" is a website run by a dude named Eric Martin. Martin describes himself as "Christian, Libertarian, Constitutionalist". As per an article by "Fred" on Liberation Day, multiculturalism equates to "the de facto destruction of the West by demographic suicide". This is a line from Fred's article "Understanding the Alt-Right".

My takeaway from the article is that Fred believes that the Alt-Right is fighting for "White survival" and that has nothing to do with racism or believing in "White Supremacy". Alt-Right leader, Richard Spencer is neither says Fred. This conclusion he (in part) supports with an inane argument that a group of people, some of who believe that rape is a good thing, would be a "diverse" group. Diversity can be a bad thing, in other words.

So, White Nationalists are Libertarians? Apparently so. Or, all White Nationalists are Libertarians, although not all Libertarians are White Nationalists, I think. At least this is true in the case of the Libertarin blogger Willis Hart. He has quite a few posts on his blog that make it clear he identifies with White Nationalism, even if he wouldn't use this label to describe himself.

Here are some excerpts from Willis Hart blog posts in which he partakes in White Nationalist fear mongering - i.e. diversity is bad and we need to keep America White or we're doomed.

Willis Hart: On the Fact that Iceland Has One of the Highest Rates of Gun Ownership in the Western Hemisphere and Yet They Haven't Had a Gun-Related Homicide In Over a Decade And let me guess, the fact that they're a homogenous country that hasn't force-fed its population multiculturalism via massive waves of third-world immigration is purely coincidental. (9/2/2018 at 4:01pm). Willis Hart: On the Fact that I Can't Help but Think that the Modern-Day Huns and Vandals of the Planet Are Eyeing the U.S. with All of its Gender-Bending Insanity, Hostility to Men, Self-Loathing, Pathological Altruism, Multicultural Experimentation, Eagerness to Commit Demographic Suicide, etc, etc. and Saying to Themselves, "One of These Days, One of These Days". (10/28/2017 at 3:46pm).

Sounds like Willis Hart would really prefer that the United States be more "homogenous" (aka White). Because those darn Black people are just so f*cking stupid and violent.

Willis Hart: On the Fact that the Only Allowable Opinion Pertaining to Race These Days Seems to Be, "Black People Are the Relentless Victims of Relentless White Racism and this Explains Every Fucking Thing (Lower IQ Scores, Poorer Academic Performances, a Lack of Economic Advancement, Wildly Out of Proportion Criminal Activity, the Burgeoning Out of Wedlock Birth Rates, etc)". (10/27/2017 at 9:44pm).

Willis hasn't advocated for a "White Homeland"... yet. Oddly enough, the Hartster rails against Abe Lincoln as racist for his idea that former Slaves should have been shipped back to Africa because Whites and Blacks could never live together harmoniously. I'd have guessed that he would endorse colonization wholeheartedly and proclaim that this was one idea of Lincoln's that he agrees with.

Perhaps it is only a matter of time until the Hartster "evolves" to the point where he starts openingly advocating for white separatism. He surely has been on the edge of doing so for awhile now. I mean, if the West is committing "demographic suicide", wouldn't a White Homeland be the BEST way to ensure the survival of the "White Race"?

OST #217

David Souter & Ruth Bader Ginsburg Say Child Porn Is Protected Speech According To Willis Hart (A Brain Diseased Liar)

The Libertarin blogger Willis Hart writes about child trafficking and pornography frequently on his blog. In his diseased mind Leftists are BIG into sex with kids. The Podesta brothers spoke in code in their Wikileaked emails about child sex rings involving the owner of that pizza shop, for example. And don't believe for one second that this ridiculous story has been debunked. Nutters writing on Reddit know that the Leftist media is in on the cover up (as is the DC police).

In a recent commentary Willis Hart claims that 2 of the more Liberal Justices argued that child porn is protected speech. And of course he refers to this repugnant lie as a "fact". I kid you not!

Willis Hart: On the Fact that Associate Supreme Court Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsberg Argued and Voted In 2008 to Establish Child Pornography as Protected Speech - [Link]. This while others on the hard left think that folks should be prosecuted for "misgendering" trannies. A brave new world indeed. (6/27/2018 at 4:04pm).

Bullshit!! Souter and Ginsburg did NOT vote in 2008 to establish child pornography as protected free speech, you lying piece of crap! The excerpt below is from the article that Willis links to.

..."non-commercial, non-inciteful promotion of illegal child pornography, even if repugnant, is protected free speech". In other words, the judges said merely talking about child porn is not necessarily criminal.

TALKING about it is free speech. Manufacturing it and/or possessing it is NOT free speech, and Souter and Ginsburg never argued or voted that it should be.

Also according to the article that Willis links to.

The 7-2 ruling rejected suggestions the law is overly broad, and will stifle a range of expressive or artistic material that is not obscene.

So Souter and Ginsburg's concern was that the law IS overly broad and WILL stifle a range of expressive or artistic material that is NOT obscene.

Note that the lying Hartster gives no quotes. Because neither Souter nor Ginsburg ever argued or voted to establish child pornography as protected speech. It didn't happen, asshole!

Reading the blog of Willis it becomes crystal clear quickly how much this asshole HATES the Left. So, when he says he once considered himself Liberal (but now considers himself a centrist) I call BULLSHIT on this as well. He may have CONSIDERED himself Liberal, but he never was.

Willis Hart is a HARD Right Libertarian. Although, as far as being a Libertarian goes, I'm not so sure about that anymore. I mean, where are the outraged posts concerning Trump's tariffs? I mean, he has written about it a little, but his commentaries come off as mild disagreement. "Centrist", my ass!

Hating the Left is obviously more important to him. And it ALWAYS has been.

Anyway, when Wills writes "on the fact", what follows is almost always total bullshit. And that's a REAL fact! Also, the notorious RBG spells her last name "Ginsburg" not "Ginsberg".

OST #216