It’s clear that many of the gutless wonders or calculating members of Congress, the Left-leaning media, and those who are indoctrinating young minds in academia are deliberately characterizing intimidation, mob behavior, and occasionally violence as “speech.” At the same time, they claim that speech from conservatives is “violence” … a glaring example of Orwellian “doublespeak”. Silence to condemn mob violence should be considered assent especially from those who are routinely before the public and on the airwaves. Making excuses for it, as some in the political and media class have done by declaring that Republicans who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh (Senate Majority Leader McConnell being the chief offender) have brought it upon themselves and is reminiscent of the charge that America itself was really to blame for the attack on 9/11 and the nearly 3,000 lives lost.

If you think I exaggerate, give a listen to former left-leaning Prof. Janet Fiamengo (University of Ottawa) in this interview with Dave Rubin. At about 16 minutes into the interview, Professor Fiamengo’s references one of the pivotal moments that occurred in her academic career that forced her to completely reevaluate her ideological outlook when she describes the “barely contained vaunting pleasure” of her fellow academics at the University of Saskatchewan when they first learned of the 9/11 attack on New York and Washington, DC.

This should be a cautionary lesson that radical Leftists not only adhere to an “ends justify the means” modus operandi in a matter-of-fact way but some actually take pleasure in mass murder to achieve their ends — in this case, radical Jihadists’ attempt to destroy western civilization, an aim with which Prof. Fiamengo’s colleagues were sympathetic because it was the effort in which they were also engaged.

The lessons of the horrors of communism and fascism, even what’s happening in Venezuela currently, aren’t enough apparently to discredit those in Congress, the media, or academia who gleefully carry water for or endorse the ideology of the oxymoronic democratic socialism. For this is really the fight we find ourselves in. It’s not simply about the Supreme Court or Climate Change or a Woman’s Right to Choose. The core of all of this is the embrace of a movement bent on the complete destruction of a capitalist free republic by force if it cannot be achieved at the ballot box.

When the Left characterizes any speech that runs counter to their ideology as violence, it’s clear that they are done debating ideas, no longer willing to compromise and not interesting in finding common ground on any given issue. The shift of the Democratic Party from the late 1960s onward from a fairly patriotic party to a party increasingly controlled by radical Marxists has been well documented. If Democrats don’t achieve the gains this November or in 2020, do you honestly think that they will moderate their rhetoric and behavior and begin working with Republicans to govern or that radical socialists will seize more control of the party, force unreliable wafflers like Senator Joe Manchin out of it, and openly support more violent tactics even if it means that many leave the party? Any guesses?

While pondering that, one has to also ask, how many Leftist elected officials, so-called journalists, or those throughout academia not only find mob violence necessary to achieve their ends but take pleasure when they see people being hurt? The answer may be more disturbing than you think.

And of course, there’s this: