| WELCOME |
|
comments, ephemera, speculation, etc. (protected political speech and personal opinion) - If this is your 1st visit to this page, please start at the bottom - 2020- 2020-12-31 a MAINSTREAM MENDACITY  The Vicious, Fictitious Narratives of
2020
Though I am not a consumer of the mainstream media, this morning I listened to National Propaganda Radio for about two hours to know the progressive mindset at this late hour when liberty hangs in the balance. Their news readers, bar none, are mendacious and malignant. Pandemic porn poured out of the twin speakers painting a plague scene worthy of Hieronymus Bosch. Their delusions of electoral purity are stronger than ever. Their hatred of Donald Trump and the millions who voted for him is still visceral. They speak fluent Newspeak. They must be laughing at the credulous rubes they imagine believe their every word. Their comeuppance is nigh. It will not be enough to tar and feather them. What should we do with them? And what should we do to the many enemies of liberty who have destroyed so many lives and livelihoods this year? I shall shun them, treating them like moral lepers and imagining them to be wearing a scarlet letter on their tattered robes. Do with them what you please, but do it quickly. Below are excerpts from two articles, to highlight their legions of lies. Search here if you seek more. (please read the entire original) Who Killed George Floyd? Minnesota’s attorney general needs to pay attention to the available evidence, which in this case is incontrovertible. In the death of George Floyd, the State of Minnesota has charged former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin with second-degree murder and former officers Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng, and Tou Thao with aiding and abetting that murder. But, as will be shown in detail below, the physical, scientific, and electronically recorded evidence in the case overwhelmingly and conclusively proves that these defendants are not guilty of the charges and, in fact, played no material role in bringing about Floyd’s death. Instead, the evidence proves that, when he first encountered the police, George Floyd was well on his way to dying from a self-administered drug overdose. Moreover, far from publicly, brazenly, and against their own self-interest slowly and sadistically killing Floyd in broad daylight before civilian witnesses with video cameras, the evidence proves that the defendants exhibited concern for Floyd’s condition and twice called for emergency medical services to render aid to him. Strange behavior, indeed, for supposedly brutal law officers allegedly intent on causing him harm. Similarly, the evidence recorded by the body cameras worn by the police conclusively establishes that Floyd repeatedly complained that he couldn’t breathe before the police restrained him on the ground. As documented by Floyd’s autopsy and toxicology reports, his breathing difficulty was caused not by a knee on his neck or pressure on his back, but by the fact that he had in his bloodstream over three times the potentially lethal limit of fentanyl, a powerful and dangerous pain medication known to shut down the respiratory system and cause coma and death. He also had in his system a lesser dose of methamphetamine, which can cause paranoia, respiratory distress, coma, and death. Beyond those findings, his autopsy disclosed no physical injuries that could in any way account for his demise. ... So why couldn’t Floyd breathe, and how did he die? The clear answers to those questions are to be found in his toxicology report, which overwhelmingly and unerringly supports the conclusion that Floyd’s breathing difficulties and death were the direct and undeniable result of his ingestion of fentanyl mixed with methamphetamine. ... In other words, by the time he first encountered the police, Floyd had already rendered himself a dead man walking and was only minutes away from expiring. So, who killed George Floyd? He did. The only crime here has been the prosecution’s shockingly incompetent investigation of Floyd’s death. In charging and continuing to prosecute these defendants, Minnesota’s attorney general has failed to take into account the most important and material evidence in the case, i.e., the fact that Floyd’s inability to breathe started while he was still upright and mobile and the scientific proof that his death was the direct and inescapable result of a massively fatal overdose of a powerful and dangerous drug known to cause, in the words of the toxicology report, “severe respiratory depression, seizures, hypotension, coma and death.” The proof of the defendants’ innocence is undeniable. But given the violence and rioting that has followed in the wake of Floyd’s death, will it be possible for these defendants to receive justice? In other words, will there be a judge or jury with enough integrity and courage to defy the mob and, in recognition of the clear and overwhelming exculpatory evidence, set these wrongfully accused men free? (read more) (please read the entire original) ... The
Cuckolding
With an earlier, eerily “prescient” Gates Foundation/World Economic Forum pre-game simulation on October 18th, 2019, already in hand, January 10th 2020 dawned, a day that will live in the annals of credulity. WHO “reported” an outbreak in China caused by a “novel” coronavirus. Already, by January 17th, WHO was recommending the Corman-Drosten PCR test as the “gold standard” for detecting C-19, before the paper making the case for it was even published! Drosten’s own academic bona fides have since been questioned, and that is now being litigated. Certainly, little enough scrutiny was proffered on that front. By the 21st of January, the paper was submitted to the currently besieged (for their lack of rigor, candor and demonstrated lack of transparency) journal, Eurosurveillance. It was allegedly “peer reviewed” in two days, something specialists say would take at least three months. One of the many “intrigues” surrounding the test, is that when it was being worked on, the genetic material of
the virus still had to be sequenced.
Ergo, without virus material available, the PCR test was designed using the genomic sequence of the 2003 SARS-CoV, alleging “close genetic relatedness” (though in impact on humans, very different viruses). And yet the test seemed to have been worked on since November! Why? And no one has investigated, therefore, how they got such a precise tip-off? There was also blatant conflict of interest, with probity touting Germany taking noxious ethical short-cuts. Drosten and his co-author Dr. Reusken, are both on the editorial board of afore-said magazine, Eurosurveillance. And to top off the corrosive brew, the company that
developed the test was already
distributing them to the supply chain before the pandemic was announced! Into “lockdown” we went, with “positive tests” being conflated with cases. We were being told there was a Molotov cocktail of rising cases, mysterious “asymptomatic” transmission, lack of pre-existing immunity and widespread susceptibility. Except for the first initially, the second is more than doubtful on facts, and the next two are blatantly false. That over 80% of those contracting this virus had no symptoms or mild symptoms was clearly evident but became more a statistical footnote. Then, it emerged fairly swiftly that mortality followed an age gradient, this was remarked upon by various researchers, eminent ones from Yale and Stanford among them. Our accumulated scientific and public health knowledge (which never included masks or lockdowns) was swatted away, and disinformation and confusion were rampant and magnified through media enablers. And this pandemic follows the course of ‘natural mortality’ rather than afflicting the young as its predecessors did. Though data, including a perfect “case study” of the Diamond Princess Cruise ship (analyzed impeccably and the findings continue to “hold water” today), contradicted the panic porn, and refuted a “one size fits all approach,” catastrophically governments went for an “umbrella approach,” even when the age profile of above 65 with pre-existing conditions was quite incontestable by then. And the “curve flattening” which justified temporary incursions into liberties, morphed into “eradication” and “permanent war” on a middling pathogen, tarted up through extravagant modeling to seem seminal. When the projections failed, and when venues that never shut down, were not overwhelmed, particularly Sweden and Japan as instances, they were either scorned or ignored. Sweden’s two year mortality rate in 2019–2020 is one of the lowest in the last 10 years in fact! Then came June, as everything seemed to be heading towards a manageable norm, the “asymptomatic transmission” mantra was trotted out, “cases” rather than mortality became the new bugaboo. The ludicrous WHO/Corman-Drosten protocol recommended a cycle amplification, Ct setting of 45 (which at that level has also produced positive tests for goats and pawpaw fruit), therefore, allowing the test to “detect” viral debris or “strands” which could not testify to contagiousness or illness at all. There was also the issue of lab contamination, inherent “false positives” in tests, which all get magnified by mathematical distortion when prevalence in a population goes down, as it has virtually everywhere, amplifying the impact of “every” false positive. Finally, finally, in the month of November, there was more concerted focus on rapid Antigen tests that actually focus on contagiousness, though these are still being unfairly sidelined of course, as they are cheap, replicable, and accurate — reducing the economic plunder as well as the terror regime, so little to recommend them; despite being championed in the UK, and at Harvard through highly distinguished medical champions. Numerous scientists have mounted a challenge to the PCR mafia norms, and we await the outcome of their challenge. The grounds for the challenge by 20 plus eminent scientists should be “headline news” everywhere and is not even mentioned in mainstream media. The quite crippling “10
errors” in the PCR test they
identify are scientifically and medically damning and any proper peer review would have picked them up at the outset. Many of the errors are already catalogued (amplification, false positives, lab contamination, lack of a clear protocol, and more), but a review of the full landscape of concerns is well worth your attention (Corman-Drosten Review Report). It’s Not the Pathogen! It has become a quaint affectation to say, “COVID has caused…” and then we have a litany of bankruptcies, medical knock-on effects, mental distress and more. This is absurd. It has
caused nothing, it just “is.”
What has “caused” anything has been our political and personal response to it. ... Remember, 99.95% recovery rate if you’re under 70. So that this dominates our discourse, our lives, our decision making, our economics, our holidays, our celebrations, our rights, is beyond belief, and our sniveling acquiescence awaiting “deliverance” from “authority” is a chilling demonstration of how readily “free” people can surrender to being dominated — anything other than having to think. Ergo, we harken back to Eric Fromm’s monumental discussion of how the most advanced and developed nation in Europe succumbed to the frothing extremities of Hitler’s National Socialism. And it was entitled, Escape from Freedom. And if the question were to be put, does mass incarceration of citizens, strangling your economy, and blowing up educational opportunity, “save” lives? Very few would automatically say “yes!” Study after study shows “lockdown” has produced no benefit. There was The Lancet in July, a weekly peer reviewed medical journal founded in 1823. Fifty countries were studied, and overwhelmingly found no correlation between “lockdown” intensity or timing or perseverance and mortality reductions. In fact, the summary is fairly damning: “…government actions
such as border closures, full
lockdowns, and a high degree of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in number of critical cases or overall mortality.” There was also Frontiers in Public Health, in November. Researchers crunched data from 160 countries in the first eight months of the pandemic to determine how various factors (public health, demographics, government policy, economy, environment) correlated to C-19 mortality. Their conclusion again is fairly definitive: “Stringency of measures
settled to find pandemia,
including lockdown, did not appear to be linked to death rate.” Less analytical, but with similar findings was the Tel Aviv University study in October (published then) on the website medRxiv in which researchers analyzed mobility data from iPhones and found no statistical link between lockdown severity and C-19 fatalities. “We would have expected
to see fewer C-19 fatalities
in countries with tighter lockdown, but the data reveals this is not the case.” All of these were anticipated by an analysis reported in Bloomberg in May from the University of Oxford’s Bavatnik School of Government, which tracked “first wave” stringency measures across Europe (actually if the virus was already wafting around end of 2019, what we are calling “first wave” was most likely “third wave” and only notable for the exacerbation of grief through our misguided policies). Yet again, COVID mortality did not appear to be associated with “lockdown” stringency. And since most of the “spread” happens in tight, indoor environments, not in germicidal sunshine and air, why “locking” people in was ever considered a bright idea is confounding. And since virtually everyone recovers, and despair and gloom manifestly and measurably inhibit our immune system, why being engaged (and still prudent) and living life would not have been the better bet, or indeed the only sane initial bet before foreclosing the survival of our way of life and the literal economic survival of millions, beggars sanity. ... The vagaries of the vaccines, which can address the very vulnerable at best, and which seem to be stockpiling symptoms and side-effects and have set a hellish precedent for bypassing animal trials and not assessing long term impact, can have a palliative benefit, for some a medical benefit, but it will make no difference overall. One mutation and we’re back in the dock. But then it’s self-constructed, and we really do have the keys. (read more) 2020-12-30 e "The mainstream media is not interested in examining the evidence to find out if there’s a there there." Blue Dress Proof
What it takes to get the media to believe a Democrat did wrong. For a damaging story about a Democrat to be true, DNA must be found on a blue dress. There must be Blue Dress Proof™. It’s not enough to have a witness and a victim. It’s not enough to have a computer, a cache of validated emails, thousands of affadavits signed under the threat of perjury. There must be actual DNA, videotaped evidence. If the bad guy is a Democrat, there must be Blue Dress Proof. For a damaging story about a Republican to be true, nothing has to be true at all. Third-hand hearsay about hookers and pee, a smile on a face, or a sarcastic tweet or phrase taken out of context can make even the most absurd conclusion be portrayed as fact and conveyed as truth in perpetuity. If the bad guy is a Republican, no proof is needed. Hunter Biden, the China-compromised (to the tune of a request of 10 million smackers), Russian oligarch–payoff taking, crack pipe–smoking, naked-picture havin’ Democrat has been given every benefit of the doubt. The media and technology companies forbade mentioning the story before the election. No one who watched CNN or NBC or MSNBC or read the New York Times or the Washington Post knew about the story. Those on Twitter whose tweets weren’t throttled or blocked outright were called names by the media. The story, which had witnesses, corroboration, and evidence, was deemed a conspiracy theory. It’s all true. The DOJ and FBI knew it was all true, and, shockingly, the intelligence agencies that leaked like 30-year-old sieves throughout the Trump administration miraculously learned how to keep a secret for over a year. They stayed mum through the primaries. They were quiet through the presidential election while sitting on a laptop full of emails, images, and texts of Biden corruption. Bill Clinton and the media Since everyone has the memory retention of a fart due to the internet turning humans into mindless clickers, I thought it would be good to refresh everyone’s memories about the media during the Clinton years. Bill Clinton was president 20 years ago. An Arkansas guy, he rose above his station and through intellectual brilliance and not a little viciousness blew through the ranks in politics to become the 42nd president of the United States. Bill was known to be a cad and in some cases an “aggressive” date. None of the women he’s (allegedly) raped has been taken seriously by the #MeToo movement even today. No woman assaulted by Clinton back in the day was taken seriously either. Hillary Clinton knew a meal ticket when she had one, and like all good feminists attached herself to Bill like a fungus. She would not let go no matter the stories. They had an understanding. Feminists loved Bill Clinton. They defended him. Gloria Steinem wrote a big op-ed in the New York Times defending Bill. When recently interviewed by the Guardian, Steinem said the following: “I’m glad
I wrote it at the time,” she said. “Because the
danger then was we were about to lose sexual
harassment law because it was being applied to
extramarital sex, free will, extramarital sex, as
with Monica
Lewinsky.”
Feminists defended the appalling behavior of the Leader of the Free World with an intern. While decrying men in power abusing their authority and wanting a sexual harassment law, they looked the other way at the inherently lopsided relationship between the president and Monica Lewinsky. What did Bill and Monica do? Well, they had sex in the Oval Office. Bill used the contents of his humidor creatively. Monica, clad in a blue dress, satisfied the needs of the president of the United States. It was messy. She had genetic proof. Monica loved him. She wanted a souvenir. When the sordid tale unfolded, the media of the time, like the media now, couldn’t believe that the Man from Hope would do something so untoward. Not one major media outlet broke the story. No media wanted to be cut off from the sweet, sweet access at the White House. Hillary Clinton famously fumed that the rumors were a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” Bill Clinton famously held a press conference where he bit his lower lip, pointed his thumb at the reporters, and looked plaintively into the cameras and said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” It was a lie. The media believed him. Let’s parse Bill’s statement for a moment because his words were oddly specific. He didn’t have “sexual relations,” and in a manner of speaking that was true. Bill didn’t bed his intern on a couch in the Oval Office in full-throttle missionary position. He preferred other sexual methods. And then there’s him using the phrase “that woman” — technically, Monica was a woman, but she was not a peer. She was a plaything. But Bill used that word “woman” to plant the idea of her adulthood, when he clearly knew it was wrong to fool around with a woman so junior to him in power. Finally, he put the emphasis on the name “Miss Lewinsky” at the end. Why? Well, to make it clear that she was the villain in this story. He was the victim. It was an evil thing to do. Here was the president of the United states damning an idealistic young intern in front of all the media. To think the media now decries abusing power. It is a laugh. Bill Clinton wrecked this young girl. Wrecked her. Why is this important? Because, like now, the media actively strove to ignore the story because it harmed their hero. After eight years of Ronald Reagan and four years of George H. W. Bush, no one wanted to hear one bad thing about a Democrat. The media loved Bill and Hill. They were a “two-for-one package,” as Hillary said. The Clintons were former hippies, dedicated leftists, and relatively young. Most importantly, they weren’t Republicans. What goaded the media into finally reporting the truth? The blue dress. In the course of the investigation, the president had to produce a DNA sample. The semen on the blue dress proved beyond a shadow of a doubt and forced everyone, finally, at long last, to believe what had been obviously true for months: William Jefferson Clinton had had sexual relations with that intern, that young woman, Miss Lewinsky. Who broke the story? Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report. An alternative internet news source and website, a relative unknown, posted the story. The mainstream media wouldn’t touch it until they couldn’t help it anymore. Not much has changed 20 years later, except that the news environment has gotten worse. Any fantastical story about a Republican is immediately believed — and by conservative news outlets, too. The worst motives, the worst actions are accepted as fact. The conservative commentariat are as hateful to their own and nearly as forgiving of Democrats as the mainstream media. The police in the death of George Floyd? Still condemned despite compelling exonerating evidence. Nick Sandmann, the pro-life teen? Condemned by the mainstream media and conservative media alike. Any bad action by Democrats, in contrast, is instantly viewed as innocent. Joe Biden being beholden to China and using his son to pimp his name for money, giving communists easy access to U.S. information? Why, this is just a father helping out and trying to protect his son — when the exact opposite explanation is far more sensible and has witnesses, emails, corroboration evidence — PROOF — that shows Joe Biden was and is a man willing to use his fragile, drug-addicted son to get money trading on the family name. It’s disgusting, and it’s being swept away by an incurious media. At least he’s not a president who says mean things on Twitter! Election fraud How about the presidential election fraud story? There was fraud. It is documented. There are multiple witnesses in multiple states. There is hard statistical evidence. There are state-level investigations. There are state-level audits that are currently being manipulated (again). This is not some made-up thing. There was a Senate hearing yesterday cataloging the instances of fraud, for heaven’s sake. The question isn’t whether there’s been voter fraud. That’s been firmly established, and people are being prosecuted right now for allegedly violating the law and producing hundreds and in some cases thousands of fraudulent ballots. The question now is whether all these fraudulent votes add up to enough to turn the election for Joe Biden. Some very smart scientists (see Nevada, here), statisticians, and computer experts think it did. And yet the election fraud story is being treated like Monica Lewinsky — a nasty little inconvenience getting in the way of favored politician greatness. There will have to be Blue Dress Proof™ as I’m coining it, for the media, for the Democrats, and for even the so-called intellectual conservatives to believe that this obvious thing that happened actually happened. There has always been voter fraud and maybe the fraud has moved other recent elections, too. We don’t know for sure, but this is something Americans should feel confident about. Americans should know with certainty that their votes count, that fraud couldn’t possibly sway an election of such magnitude. It’s obvious why the Democrats and media want this story to go away. If the fraud is verifiable and it was ubiquitous enough, then Joe Biden actually lost the election. Losing would mean four more years of enduring a politician they loathe. The media and Democrats loathed Ronald Reagan, too. The establishment Republicans were not fond of him, either. Any courageous thing President Reagan did — “Tear down that wall!” or standing by Britain in the Falklands — was viewed by his advisers as risky and imprudent. Reagan was right, of course. Reagan, like Trump, didn’t want foreign entanglements. He wanted “peace through strength.” He wanted to rebuild the pride of the military. He wanted American power to deter conflict. And it did. Donald Trump, loved by the voters and hated by nearly everyone in D.C. left, right, center, and even in his own administration, doesn’t play by the established rules. He just tries to do the right thing. Thus, no new wars. Thus, peace in the Middle East. Thus, his obsessive focus on the working and middle class. America first. This sentiment makes citizen of the world D.C. types crazed. There are lots of motives to look the other way if there was significant enough election fraud. But knowing the truth is imperative not just because half the country feels disenfranchised, but because faith in our voting systems and our system of governance is imperiled. Without the confidence of the people governed, how long does a Republic last? Is it still a Republic? One way or another, the truth must come out. Time to either get Blue Dress Proof™ and convince the jaded and craven. Or, if no proof exists because the election was fair enough and fraud didn’t change the outcome, it’s time to clean up the process to restore faith in future elections, and move on. Moving on comes after the evidence is examined and not before. Moving on comes after putting in vote integrity processes. Faith returns when transparency builds trust. The mainstream media is not interested in examining the evidence to find out if there’s a there there. ... When it comes to election fraud turning the results to favor Joe Biden, the pathetic non-candidate who couldn’t turn out five people to a “rally,” there will need to be Blue Dress Proof. Let’s hope it’s found quickly. This wound should not fester. A Republic is at stake. (read more) 2020-12-30 d "Notice how crises for most of us like the Recession and COVID end up benefiting the wealthy?" The American System is One Big
Grift
The Bidens, and even the Clintons, are small-time players. The real corruption is much bigger, much higher, and entirely unpunished. I learned the facts of life from a drunk uncle. He was not an American, and worked in international construction in Asia. His main job was to bribe people. Over the course of many tiny glasses of some awful, clear Asian liquor I learned every yard of concrete poured required money to gangsters who controlled unions and to politicians who controlled permits. A fact of life, he said. You get used to it. He even had a joke—my hands are dirtier than the guys who dig the foundations. You come to realize someone is pulling the strings behind everything and it usually isn’t you, he said. The odd official just doing his job for his salary is a rube. You feel embarrassed for him, saying no for moral reasons. You learn, uncle slurred, to trust nothing. That politician on TV? The company just dropped off a nice check to his “charity.” Play by the rules? Those were the rules. The first bribe I ever paid was to an Indonesian immigration officer, who noticed some small defect on my passport. Of course, he said, it could be resolved. Between us. With a fine (so many euphemisms). Off to the side. In cash. It was all of $20 to save a vacation but I felt filthy, cheated, a chump. But I learned the rules. In New York we use the euphemism “tip,” and it is as required as oxygen to get through the day. A restaurant table pre-COVID. A last minute anything. A friendlier handling by a doorman. Timely attention to fix-it requests. My, um, friend, used to pay a lot of money for better hotel rooms until he learned $20 at check in with a friendly “anything you can do” often got him upgraded to the same thing at a fraction of the price. What, you still paying retail, bro? I used to think it was all small stuff, maybe with the odd mafia king bribing a judge with real money or something else Netflix-worthy. In America we were ultimately… fair, right? But things started to add up. We have our petty corruption like anywhere, but our souls are filthy on a much larger scale. America goes big or it goes home. Things like the Clinton Foundation accepting donations from the Saudis to help with women’s empowerment, an issue of course dear to the heart of the Kingdom. When it looked like his wife was going to be president, Bill made six-figure speeches to businesses seeking influence within the U.S. government, earning $50 million during his wife’s term as secretary of pay-for-play state. The Foundation, now mostly out of business, was at its peak a two-billion-dollar financial dangle. It spent in 2013 the same on travel expenses for Hillary and her family as it did on charitable grants. The media, forever big Clinton fans, told us we should be used to it. Hey, Nixon was so much worse. Trump refused to be very specific about who his charity donated to. We know its offshoot, the Eric Trump charity, donated to a wine industry association, a plastic surgeon supposedly gifting nose jobs to kids, and an artist who painted a portrait of Donald. Trump-owned resorts received $880,000 for hosting Trump-sponsored charity events. Trump donated money from his foundation to conservative influencers ahead of his presidential bid. With Joe as vice president, the Bidens made $396,000 in 2016. But in just the four years since leaving the Obama White House, Joe and Jill made more than $15 million. In fact, as his prospects for election improved, Joe and his wife made nearly twice as much in one year as they did in the previous 19 years combined. Joe scored $10 million alone for a book no one read. Jill was paid more than $3 million for her book in 2018. Joe has a tax-dodge S Corporation that donated money back to his own political PAC. Then of course there was Hunter, who scored millions in Chinese and Ukrainian money for doing nothing but being Joe’s son. About half the nation got very twisted over Trump’s corruption and actively avoided noticing the Clintons and Bidens, and vice-versa, to the point of covering their ears NYANYANAYNYA. Yeah, politicians are corrupt, but does anyone think the donors in all three cases didn’t know what they were buying? What, you still voting retail, bro? But even all those millions, measured in Epsteins (a unit of influence buying I just made up) are petty cash. Real corruption scales. Pre-COVID America’s 614 billionaires were worth $2.95 trillion. As the Dow hit record highs this month, there are now 650 billionaires and their combined wealth is $4 trillion. The 400 richest Americans own 64 percent of the country’s wealth. Where’d all their money come from? You. Dan Gilbert, chair of Quicken Loans, worth $7 billion in March, is now at $43 billion (thanks for paying on time each month.) Who benefited more from COVID and everyone buying from home then Amazon and Jeff Bezos? It takes a lot of poor people to sustain that amount of wealth at the top. Money is always good. But it is wrong to think just in dollars. That’s how small-time grifters like waiters and the Bidens think. The real rich understand wealth as power. (read more) 2020-12-30 c FIXER SAYS THE FIX WAS IN Greatest Horse-race Fixer of
All-Time Says Democrats Stole Election. Here’s How.
... So, no other conservative media personality has friends like I do. In addition to many of the top GOP politicians, and the President of the United States, my list of buddies includes some “only-in-Vegas” characters- including my buddy “Richie.” Richie is a professional gambler and a convicted horserace fixer. Back in the day, Richie may have been the greatest and most prolific horserace fixer in history. He fixed over 1,000 horse races for 11 years at every racetrack in California, bribing over 100 different jockeys. Eventually he was convicted and served time in prison. That was 25 years ago. Today Richie is one of the good guys and a respected member of his community, as well as a noted philanthropist. But Richie still has his street smarts- something no one in Washington DC has. For over 50 years he witnessed the smartest and sharpest scammers and cheaters in the gambling world. No one can spot a scam like Richie. My buddy has a Ph.D. in “the Art of the Steal.” Richie watched and studied this 2020 presidential election. He calls it “the greatest scam and steal in world history.” He says anyone who denies this election was stolen is either a criminal who was in on the scam; or a bribed politician or bureaucrat who benefits from the scam; or a complete naïve moron. What does the world’s greatest horserace fixer believe happened on Election Night? Richie says it’s clear that President Trump won in a landslide in key battleground states. Trump won so big in these key states that Democrats who tried to rig the election with millions of fake mail-in ballots had to move quickly to Plan B. Trump was actually winning a rigged election by a mile. Trump beat them so badly in these key states, Democrats needed reinforcements. So, they brought in the cavalry- vans, USPS trucks, even planes filled with fake ballots, in the wee hours of the morning, with no GOP witnesses watching. That’s why they stopped the count on Election Night. The millions of fake Biden ballots weren’t enough. Democrat scammers had to call a “timeout” to quickly bring in millions of additional fake ballots to erase Trump’s massive lead. In a coordinated conspiracy so easy to see, Richie calls it “Amateur Hour,” five states all agreed at the same time to stop counting votes- thereby buying themselves time to have millions of additional fake ballots filled out, trucked in, or in some cases flown into nearby airports. In the case of Georgia, the scammers faked a flood, caused by a burst pipe that never happened, and then rolled out suitcases filled with ballots, all caught on video. Any idiot who isn’t blind can see what happened, says Richie. It was as if a brazen gang of 50 hoods robbed five banks at the exact same time, all 50 robbers carrying the same AK47s and no masks, and then showed their IDs on the way out the door. Then every FBI agent and every judge turned a blind eye. Maybe they’re in denial, maybe the DC Swamp got to them, maybe they’re in on the scam. A lot of respectable people in power must be getting filthy rich on this scam, says Richie. Some telltale signs of the scam- GOP witnesses had to be removed from the room; these fake ballots had only one name filled out (Biden) because Democrat scammers were rushing to add fake ballots to the count and didn’t have time to fill out down-ballot races; and many of the ballots looked pristine because they were clearly never mailed. They were rushed untouched from printing presses to counting rooms. But it isn’t only Richie who sees the scam. A math genius and world-renowned statistics professor from Harvard and USC reports the odds of Trump leading by those margins when counting stopped and then losing each of those states is 1 in a quadrillion (that’s one thousand trillions). Meaning it was impossible. Street-smart Richie puts it differently. He says this case is such a slam dunk, any judge who threw these cases out is dirty; and any prosecutor who can’t convict these scammers should lose his license to practice law. Richie compares this case to Scott Peterson’s 2004 murder trial. Peterson got the death penalty based only on circumstantial evidence. This 2020 election scam was so obvious it makes Scott Peterson look innocent by comparison. Yet here we sit, with a conspiracy so deep that political leaders, mainstream media, social media, judges, prosecutors, the entire US Justice System, and virtually every person in power in DC, acts as if nothing happened. And they do it so casually, so matter-of-factly, that my buddy Richie says it’s easy to conclude they’re all in on the scam. January 20th will determine if we are still a nation of laws, or a corrupt third world Banana Republic, where horserace fixers tell the truth, and politicians are the real scam artists. (read more) 2020-12-30 b "In other words, we must be men. We must be strong, quiet, patient, persevering, and principled." New Year’s Resolution For Men:
Read Virgil
The Roman poet's epic of piety and destiny in exile and in war offers lessons in manhood for the lost generation of the 2020s. I see a lot of arms and men who believe themselves in exile. Though, unlike the hero Aeneas who must traverse “far and pathless” ways to find a new home in distant Italy after the destruction of his native Troy, these men feel exiled within their own country. They march in full battle rattle with Rhodesian chest rigs and long guns to defend a democracy from which they find themselves increasingly disenfranchised. They spout their testosterone-infused rhetoric with swagger as a form of rebellion against a dominant woke culture they perceive (admittedly, accurately) as increasingly anti-male. Yet for all their bluster, what will all of this amount to for this generation of young America men? Virgil’s Aeneid offers helpful guidance and correctives for a generation of men lost at sea in search of a home. Great were the sufferings of Aeneas, Virgil tells us at the beginning of his epic poem, as he and his people fled not only the blood-thirsty Greeks who had ravaged Troy, but pounding storms unleashed by the vengeful goddess Juno. “Why did she drive a man famous for his piety to such endless hardship and such suffering? Can there be so much anger in the hearts of the heavenly gods?” asks Virgil. It is a question we too might ask, battered not only by a pandemic incompetently handled by our federal and state governments, but a year marked by an unending churn of racial strife, political animus, and cultural upheaval. Though Virgil was not a Christian (he died a few decades before Christ’s birth), he implicitly answers the problem of pain when he writes: “so heavy was the cost of founding the Roman race.” Good things, and especially the best things, typically cost us something. That is part of what makes them good. Moreover, in our suffering we experience a “refiner’s fire” that forms and shapes us into men of strength and virtue better able to overcome the evils that confront us. You cannot demonstrate courage without facing fear; you cannot possess patience without enduring difficulty; you cannot develop temperance without being tested. Aeneas also orients us towards the transcendent dimension of suffering when he tells his tired fellow Trojans: “We have suffered worse before, and this too will pass. God will see to it.” Pain is part of the divine plan. Virgil presents Aeneas as a man of unparalleled virtue. The Trojan leader, “had no equal for his piety and his care for justice, and no equal in the field of battle.” Nevertheless, even the bold Aeneas sometimes fails to exemplify manly integrity; this, too, can be instructive. We see this perhaps most saliently in his romantic tryst with the Carthaginian princess Dido, a love engineered by the gods to distract Aeneas from his divinely ordained mission to lead his people to found a new nation. The two “indulged themselves and kept each other warm the whole winter through, forgetting about their kingdoms and becoming the slaves of lust.” The god Mercury arrives to remind Aeneas of his duties, asking “Have you entirely forgotten your own kingdom and your own destiny?” He urges Aeneas to consider not only his calling, but his son and future descendants. “What do you hope to achieve by idling your time away in the land of Libya? If the glory of such a destiny does not fire your heart, spare a thought for Ascanius as he grows to manhood, for the hopes of this Iulus who is your heir. You owe him the land of Rome and the kingdom of Italy.” Aeneas comes to his senses and determines to leave Carthage, though there are unforeseen consequences for his sexual sins. Dido descends into the madness of a spurned lover, killing herself, while issuing a Carthaginian curse that will come to haunt Rome: “Let there be war between the nations and between their sons forever.” Aeneas’s neglect of his responsibility to his people likely devastated Trojan morale and elicited bitterness among the ranks. Driven to Sicily by a storm, Aeneas decides to hold funeral games to honor the one-year anniversary of the death of his father, Anchises, and restore that wavering esprit de corps. During the games, Aeneas plays the role of the cheerful, inspiring, and statesmanlike leader, urging on the Trojans to feats of excellence, defusing squabbles over prizes, and even joking with subordinates. He is shrewd, knowing that even the least of his troupe must feel valued, and thus is generous with awards of recognition, declaring “no man of you will leave without winning a prize from my hand.” Aeneas soon leads the Trojan people into central Italy, where he meets both friends and enemies, particularly the Rutuli tribe, led by Turnus, who is incensed that another local tribe, the Latins, have promised one of their princesses to Aeneas rather than to him. War is thus thrust upon Aeneas. While the Trojan exhibits piety and prudence, two younger, impetuous warriors who fail to show the proper deference to the gods plan a daring midnight raid on the enemy Rutuli camp. Though they manage to slaughter many of the sleeping Rutuli, they foolishly plunder their enemies, are recognized by a patrolling enemy cavalry unit, and die on the battlefield. Their youthful lack of judgment, discipline, and piety is their undoing. Though Aeneas manifests comparable levels of bloodlust, his violence is tempered by compassion and loyalty. After mortally wounding one enemy, his heart groans with pity as he is reminded of his own father. He holds out his hand and asks the dying foe: “What will the devout Aeneas now give to match such merit? What gift can he give that will be worthy of a heart like yours?” He contemplates mercy again even for Turnus, though he determines to kill him when he sees his foe wears the belt of a boy whose body Turnus had recently plundered. One of the constant themes of the Aeneid is that there is nowhere else to run. When Virgil writes of the fall of Troy, he observes: “The one safety for the defeated is to have no hope of safety.” During one battle, a Trojan officer rallies his retreating soldiers by exhorting them: “Where are you running to now, citizens? Where is there to go? What other walls have you? What other defences when you leave these?” Pallas, an ally of the Trojans, similarly shouts to his own soldiers: “There is no more land to run to. Shall we take to the sea?” Such sentiments well describe this American moment for conservatives, and certainly for young men. Males feel the pressure of a culture that warns of “toxic masculinity” and seeks to subvert testosterone. Young men comprise a declining percentage of undergraduate students and suffer increased rates of unemployment. They are encouraged to find escape and release in video games, pornography, and forms of hyper-masculinity that seem over-reactive and performative. Yet these are a cheap substitute for the authentic manly qualities taught by the Aeneid. (read more) 2020-12-30 a "We dare not take the maturation of our young people for granted." From Boys to Men
Five decades ago, when the Sexual Revolution was at its peak, there was increasing anxiety among religious leaders that too many young men seemed incapable of escaping adolescence. Fast forward fifty years, and many of the same concerns about boys’ arrested development remain. “The boy problem” has long been the subject of hand-wringing in the United States. Young men in the West fare poorly in comparison with their female peers in numerous areas, including academic achievement, ADHD diagnosis, sexual abuse and harassment, violent criminal behavior, and imprisonment. There is a clear pattern of decreased male engagement with traditional religious community life. And now, during the pandemic, research shows that on the whole, young men in particular have found it difficult to cope. In thinking about how we can best care for our young men, it is worth turning to a religious leader who lived and led through Woodstock and Kent State: Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm, who died earlier this year at age 92. In 1976, Rabbi Lamm assumed the presidency of Yeshiva University, the landmark institution of American Modern Orthodoxy, where he served as president until 2003 and chancellor until his retirement in 2013. In 1972, Rabbi Lamm was still a pulpit rabbi at The Jewish Center, a major Modern Orthodox synagogue on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Rabbi Lamm had earned a reputation as an electric and eloquent sermonizer. Over the course of over two decades, he had addressed the full gamut of contemporary events, including the Swinging Sixties. His congregants regularly published his sermons, which served as the raw materials for nearly a dozen books and an increasingly popular website featuring some 800 of his sermons. Yet even for an orator who had addressed the Six Day War, Kennedy assassination, and lunar landing, October 14, 1972, was unique: It was the day of his second son’s Bar Mitzvah. In his sermon on this occasion, Rabbi Lamm opens by noting that we live during a time “in which adults habitually grasp at the last straws of their vanishing youthfulness by retrogressing into adolescence and preferring to be boys rather than men.” In such an environment, and upon the occasion of his son’s coming of age, he wonders, what does it take to become a man? Rabbi Lamm asserts, “To be a man is an achievement.” Manhood is not simply a stage one reaches, but something one attains. He points to the fact that Noah is called a “man” among his other appellations, including “righteous and pure.” This suggests that manhood is itself an attainment. If entry into adulthood is not simply a biological fact but an achievement, how does one go about raising a child to become a man? Directly addressing his son, Rabbi Lamm suggests that they become partners, even friends, not in
the cheap, vulgar, and now discredited American
way of being “pals,” for that is an excuse for
lack of parental discipline, which in turn is a
cover-up for a father who does not really care
about his children. I mean friends, rather, in the
sense that Maimonides did, when he wrote that the
highest level of friendship is those who are
friends in a common ideal; two mature people who
draw closer to each other because of shared goals,
mutual aims, common aspirations, and which brings
them genuine mutual respect.
Rabbi Lamm then roots his recommendation in his own youthful experience: I reveal
to you publicly some of my own inner biography.
One of the greatest moments of my life, and a
turning point for me from boyhood to manhood, came
when my grandfather and my father began to talk
with me as an equal in matters close to their
hearts: the welfare of the family, the future of
[Judaism], the destiny of Israel and, above all,
matters of Torah and Halakhah [Jewish law] . . .
In short, I became a man when they treated me as
an adult, a friend, a confidant, and a co-builder
in the sacred effort of constructing the edifice
of the words of God.
Drawing on these formative experiences, Rabbi Lamm urges us to invite our young men to join the community of adults by engaging them in conversations centering on matters of substance, through which we can initiate them into the community of the faithful. Seeking to pay this gift forward, Rabbi Lamm extends this offer to his son and proposes that we do the same. The relevance of Rabbi Lamm’s 1972 sermon to 2020 is uncanny. (read more) 2020-12-29 d THE ART OF POLITICAL WAR Is Nothing Happening? Or is
Trump Channeling Sun Tzu?
I’m impatient, as I expect most American Thinker readers are as well. We have been promised a coming storm that will be biblical, or a Kraken released on Deep State conspirators. Despite Attorney General Barr acknowledging spygate as “one of the greatest travesties in American history,” there has not yet been a reckoning. A mid-level FBI attorney, Kevin Clinesmith, pled guilty to falsifying a document which became one of the lynchpins of a FISA warrant on Carter Page and subsequent spying on Donald Trump and his campaign, but he has yet to be sentenced. His co-conspirators are writing books, teaching at prestigious universities, and bashing President Trump on cable news shows. A presidential election was stolen, and Trump’s own executive agencies say ho-hum, roll over, and go back to sleep. The same FBI that sent 15 agents to investigate a garage door handle that Bubba Wallace claimed was a noose, can’t seem to find any reason to investigate a host of election irregularities. Republican members of Congress, who happily rode Trump’s coattails to their elections, are telling him to “accept the results” and “move on,” oblivious to the fact that if they get their wish, their party will become as irrelevant as the Green Party. Media stalwarts that were once “fair and balanced,” have tilted to the left, becoming “unfair and unhinged,” rivaling the standard left-wing cable news gabfests. Perhaps more is going on than I can see, but what is visible to 75 million Trump supporters, those who have endured ridicule and scorn for supporting their president, is that nothing is happening. This is Trump’s administration and he’s the boss. He hires and fires, just as he did in the real estate development world and on “The Apprentice.” The buck stops with him. If nothing is happening, then that’s on him. Is he flailing away in a vain attempt to win a second term? After all that he has been through and overcome, not only to get elected in 2016, but also to stay in office for four years, accomplishing more in one term than most presidents do in two, is he about to lose it all to a senile grifter no more qualified to be president of the United States than a manager at a bowling alley? At one level it sure seems that way. The clock is ticking with important electoral dates breezing by, getting ever closer to the final date of Jan. 20? On the other hand, President Trump may be playing a different game, one not obvious to most observers, certainly not the media or even his supporters. Sun Tzu was a Chinese military general and strategist, author of a treatise on military strategy known as “The Art of War.” Trump is a fan, as this book which made his short list of “best leadership books.” Trump quoted Sun Tzu in this 2012 tweet, long before Twitter was fact-checking his every utterance and attaching warnings and disclaimers to each tweet. Can Sun Tzu’s ancient wisdom and strategy explain the current apparent “nothing is happening” perception for those who, like myself, are becoming increasingly impatient over “all hat and no cattle” promises coming from Team Trump? Is Trump following the Sun Tzu battle plan? Look at some of his quotes. Let your
plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when
you move, fall like a thunderbolt.
If Trump has a master plan, it’s safe to assume that few outside his small inner circle know anything about it. An example would be Secretary of Defense Chris Miller speaking to Vice President Mike Pence, thanking him for “his steady hand and leadership” during “some of the [most] complex military operations this country’s ever conducted.” Why haven’t we heard of such operations? Or were they “dark and impenetrable as night”? And executed, like “a thunderbolt”? This is not faint praise. Pence is not a military guy, but Miller certainly is, a former special forces operator and commander. Miller was close to tears acknowledging Pence’s assistance and leadership. Something is happening. All
warfare is based on deception.
Trump is a master of chaos, with strategic media leaks and disinformation. Is VP Pence a white hat or a black hat? The SecDef says Pence is a white hat. Attorney Lin Wood says Pence is a black hat. What about the rest of Trump’s inner circle – Mark Meadows and Pat Cipollone – friends or foes? Patrick Byrne calls them serpents. Trump hired them and keeps them on. Deception and confusion. Classic Sun Tzu. In the
midst of chaos, there is also opportunity.
Trump tweets in one direction and signs executive orders in another direction. He complains about the GOP Senate while hundreds of conservative judges are confirmed by the same senate. He creates chaos then uses the opportunity to advance his agenda. Trump distracts the media with tweets and comments and while they are in meltdown mode, he is running circles around them. Victorious
warriors win first and then go to war, while
defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to
win.
Has Trump gone to war against the Democrats and the left? Did he send in the military to reclaim American cities under siege by Antifa and BLM? Has he declared martial law, as the Twitterverse assured us he would? Or has Trump gamed this out, knowing electoral fraud was coming when he signed the 2018 executive order regarding election interference? Has Trump already won, now waiting for the optimal time to go to war? The defeated left has been at war with Trump for six years, unsuccessful in their efforts to win? And finally, The
supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without
fighting.
As of yet, there has been no storm, no Kraken. Trump has followed the Constitution, making legal arguments up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court. What Vice President Pence does when it is time to again follow the Constitution and certify the Electoral College votes is to be determined. Will a massive declassification of criminal and seditious activities subdue the Democrats? Will Trump win without a bloody battle? Time will tell. At this point, it’s a binary choice. Either Trump is in over his head and will be dragged out of office. Or he is executing his plan, on his terms and timing, as he has done since his famous escalator ride at Trump Tower in 2015. Trump knows the stakes for himself, his family, and America if Kamala Harris and Joe Biden get the keys to the kingdom and promptly hand them over to China. Want to bet against Trump? How has that worked out in the past? Ponder these words from Trump’s inspiration, Sun Tzu, He will
win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy
unprepared.
Mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. Is Trump unprepared? Au contraire. Listen to Oprah interviewing him in 1988, more than thirty years ago. He looks younger but sounds the same as he does now, speaking of China, immigration, and electoral politics. Trump has been preparing for this moment most of his adult life. Buckle up for an interesting few weeks ahead. (read more) 2020-12-29 c A PANDEMIC OF PROGRESSIVISM GATHERED TOGETHER:
PROGRESSIVISM AS A POLITICAL PARTY
Progressivism was, to a great extent, the culmination of the pietist Protestant political impulse, the urge to regulate every aspect of American life, economic and moral—even the most intimate and crucial aspects of family life. But it was also a curious alliance of a technocratic drive for government regulation, the supposed expression of “value-free science,” and the pietist religious impulse to save America—and the world—by state coercion. Often both pietistic and scientific arguments would be used, sometimes by the same people, to achieve the old pietist goals. Thus, prohibition would be argued for on religious as well as on alleged scientific or medicinal grounds. In many cases, leading progressive intellectuals at the turn of the twentieth century were former pietists who went to college and then transferred to the political arena, their zeal for making over mankind, as a “salvation by science.” And then the Social Gospel movement managed to combine political collectivism and pietist Christianity in the same package. All of these were strongly interwoven elements in the progressive movement. All these trends reached their apogee in the Progressive party and its national convention of 1912. The assemblage was a gathering of businessmen, intellectuals, academics, technocrats, efficiency experts and social engineers, writers, economists, social scientists, and leading representatives of the new profession of social work. The Progressive leaders were middle and upper class, almost all urban, highly educated, and almost all white Anglo-Saxon Protestants of either past or present pietist concerns. From the social work leaders came upper-class ladies bringing the blessings of statism to the masses: Lillian D. Wald, Mary Kingsbury Simkhovitch, and above all, Jane Addams. Miss Addams, one of the great leaders of progressivism, was born in rural Illinois to a father, John, who was a state legislator and a devout nondenominational evangelical Protestant. Miss Addams was distressed at the southern and eastern European immigration, people who were “primitive” and “credulous,” and who posed the danger of unrestrained individualism. Their different ethnic background disrupted the unity of American culture. However, the problem, according to Miss Addams, could be easily remedied. The public school could reshape the immigrant, strip him of his cultural foundations, and transform him into a building block of a new and greater American community. 28 In addition to writers and professional technocrats at the Progressive party convention, there were professional pietists galore. Social Gospel leaders Lyman Abbott, the Reverend R. Heber Newton, and the Reverend Washington Gladden were Progressive party notables, and the Progressive candidate for governor of Vermont was the Reverend Fraser Metzger, leader of the Inter-Church Federation of Vermont. In fact, the Progressive party proclaimed itself as the “recrudescence of the religious spirit in American political life.” Many observers, indeed, reported in wonder at the strongly religious tone of the Progressive party convention. Theodore Roosevelt’s acceptance address was significantly entitled, “A Confession of Faith,” and his words were punctuated by “amens” and by a continual singing of Christian hymns by the assembled delegates. They sang “Onward, Christian Soldiers,” “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” and finally the revivalist hymn, “Follow, Follow, We Will Follow Jesus,” except that “Roosevelt” replaced the word “Jesus” at every turn. The New York Times of August 6, 1912, summed up the unusual experience by calling the Progressive assemblage “a convention of fanatics.” And, “It was not a convention at all. It was an assemblage of religious enthusiasts. It was such a convention as Peter the Hermit held. It was a Methodist camp following done over into political terms.” 29 Thus the foundations of today’s massive state intervention in the internal life of the American family were laid in the so-called “progressive era” from the 1870s to the 1920s. Pietists and “progressives” united to control the material and sexual choices of the rest of the American people, their drinking habits, and their recreational preferences. Their values, the very nurture and education of their children, were to be determined by their betters. The spiritual, biological, political, intellectual, and moral elite would govern, through state power, the character and quality of American family life. SIGNIFICANCE It has been known for decades that the Progressive Era was marked by a radical growth in the extension and dominance of government in America’s economic, social, and cultural life. For decades, this great leap into statism was naively interpreted by historians as a simple response to the greater need for planning and regulation of an increasingly complex economy. In recent years, however, historians have come to see that increasing statism on a federal and state level can be better interpreted as a profitable alliance between certain business and industrial interests, looking for government to cartelize their industry after private efforts for cartels and monopoly had failed, and intellectuals, academics, and technocrats seeking jobs to help regulate and plan the economy as well as restriction of entry into their professions. In short, the Progressive Era re-created the age-old alliance between Big Government, large business firms, and opinion-molding intellectuals—an alliance that had most recently been embodied in the mercantilist system of the sixteenth through eighteenth centuries. Other historians uncovered a similar process at the local level, especially that of urban government beginning with the Progressive Era. Using the influence of media and opinion leaders, upper-income and business groups in the cities systematically took political power away from the masses and centralized this power in the hands of urban government responsive to progressive demands. Elected officials, and decentralized ward representation, were systematically replaced either by appointed bureaucrats and civil servants, or by centralized at-large districts where large-scale funding was needed to finance election races. In this way, power was shifted out of the hands of the masses and into the hands of a minority elite of technocrats and upper-income businessmen. One result was an increase of government contracts to business, a shift from “Tammany” type charity by the political parties to a taxpayer-financed welfare state, and the imposition of higher taxes on suburban residents to finance bond issues and redevelopment schemes accruing to downtown financial interests. During the last two decades, educational historians have described a similar process at work in public, especially urban, school systems. The scope of the public school was greatly expanded, compulsory attendance spread outside of New England and other “Yankee” areas during the Progressive Era, and a powerful movement developed to try to ban private schools and to force everyone into the public school system. From the work of educational historians, it was clear that the leap into comprehensive state control over the individual and over social life was not confined, during the Progressive and indeed post-Progressive eras, to government and the economy. A far more comprehensive process was at work. The expansion of compulsory public schooling stemmed from the growth of collectivist and anti-individualist ideology among intellectuals and educationists. The individual, these “progressives” believed, must be molded by the educational process to conform to the group, which in practice meant the dictates of the power elite speaking in the group’s name. Historians have long been aware of this process.30 But the accruing insight into progressivism as a business cartelizing device led historians who had abandoned the easy equation of “businessmen” with “laissez faire” to see that all the facets of progressivism—the economic and the ideological and educational—were part of an integrated whole. The new ideology among business groups was cartelist and collectivist rather than individualist and laissez faire, and the social control over the individual exerted by progressivism was neatly paralleled in the ideology and practice of progressive education. Another parallel to the economic realm, of course, was the increased power and income accruing to the technocratic intellectuals controlling the school system and the economy. If the action of business and intellectual elites in turning toward progressivism was now explained, there was still a large gap in the historical explanation and understanding of progressivism and therefore of the leap into statism beginning in the early twentieth century. There was still a need to explain mass voting behavior and the ideology and programs of the political parties in the American electoral system. This chapter applies the illuminating findings of recent “ethnoreligious historians” to significant changes that took place during the Progressive Era in the power of government over the family. In particular, we discuss the movement to expand the power of the public school and the educationist elite over the family, as well as the women’s suffrage and eugenics movement, all important features of the Progressive movement. In every case, we see the vital link between these intrusions into the family and the aggressive drive by Anglo-Saxon Protestant “pietists” to use the state to “make America holy,” to stamp out sin and thereby assure their own salvation by maximizing the salvation of others. In particular, all of these measures were part and parcel of the long-standing crusade by these pietists to reduce if not eliminate the role of “liturgicals,” largely Roman Catholics and high-church Lutherans, from American political life. The drive to stamp out liquor and secular activities on Sundays had long run into successful Catholic and high-church Lutheran resistance. Compulsory public schooling was soon seen as an indispensable weapon in the task of “Christianizing the Catholics,” of saving the souls of Catholic children by using the public schools as a Protestantizing weapon. The neglected example of San Francisco politics was urged as a case study of this ethnoreligious political battle over the schools and hence over the right of Catholic parents to transmit their own values to their children without suffering Anglo-Saxon Protestant obstruction. Women’s suffrage was seized upon as a means of increasing Anglo-Saxon Protestant voting power, and immigration restriction as well as eugenics was a method of reducing the growing demographic challenge of Catholic voters. In sum, recent insights into the cartelizing drive of various business interests have provided an important explanation of the rapid growth of statism in the twentieth century. Ethnoreligious history provides an explanation of mass voting behavior and political party programs that neatly complement the cartelizing explanation of the actions of business elites. REFERENCES 28.See Paul C Violas. “Jane Addams and the New Liberalism,” in Karier et al., eds. Roots of Crisis, n. 11, pp. 66–83. 29.Cited in John Allen Gable, The Bull Moose Years: Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1978), p. 75. 30.For further discussion of education, see Robert B. Everhart. ed., The Public School Monopoly: A Critical Analysis of Education and the State in American Society (San Francisco: Pacific Institute for Public Policy Research, 1982). [Originally from Joseph R. Peden and Fred R. Glahe, eds., The American Family and the State (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute, 1986).] 2020-12-29 b A PANDEMIC OF INSANITY Child Who Can’t Wear Face Mask
Several of our Todd Starnes Radio Show listeners in Morehead City, North Carolina sent me video of a disgusting incident at a nearby movie theater. The video shows the manager of the AMC Theater in Jacksonville, North Carolina banning a disabled child from entering the theater. Family members were masked up. However, the child, who was in a baby stroller and is non-verbal, was not wearing a mask. She reportedly has a condition that precludes her from wearing either a mask or a face shield. Police were summoned to the theater and escorted the outraged family outside. We’re going to be speaking with folks who were at the theater on Monday’s edition of the show. (read more and hear audio) 2020-12-29 a TAKING A WRONG TURN The odious young man we read about yesterday
made a fateful (and hateful) turn. He found comfort
and meaning by plotting then carrying out a vile plan.
His victim is a young woman who has never harmed him.
He robbed her of her collegiate dreams. He might also
have taken from her a promising career and a potential
soul mate, the father of her children to be.
He judged his victim guilty of uttering a common term of endearment his own maternal relatives use. His relations may use that term of endearment with impunity because they have the "correct" genetics. His victim, however, has the "wrong" genetics and may never use that term. Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, with good reason. He is perfect. We are not. His vengeance is perfect. Our's is not. The racist young man accepted a divisive ideology that melanin (and melanin alone) defines identity. We are either black or white, or yellow or brown. Those who lead us astray claim the essence of our group identity is superficial: skin deep. We learn the destructive young man has no regrets. If that is so, he is currently irredeemable. He willingly embraced hate. Perforce, hate will consume him. Left unchecked, that same hate will consume this nation. That is the plan. As for me and my house, we shall love. We shall first love the Creator, then ourselves, then our neighbors. We shall not take the wrong turn. 2020-12-28 f TWEETS TO MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT On
[January 6], you and you alone will have the power
to set
not just America, but all of humanity free – or you will have the power to sentence us all to slavery.”@Mike_Pence “@VP’s Rendezvous with Destiny” https://t.co/jmofk412Ph — Ron (@CodeMonkeyZ) December 28, 2020 * “Thomas
Jefferson, author of the Declaration of
Independence, among
the most revered founding fathers of our country, only became President because he used his unilateral power as President of the Senate to open and count the presidential ballots in his own favor.” — Land of the Free (@trustrestored) December 28, 2020 2020-12-28 e TRUMP TWEET - @realDonaldTrump Breaking
News: In Pennsylvania there were 205,000 more
votes than
there were voters. This alone flips the state to President Trump. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 28, 2020 2020-12-28 d JIMMY GALLIGAN IS A VINDICTIVE THUG "The use of the slur by a Heritage High School student was not shocking, many said. The surprise, instead, was that Ms. Groves was being punished for behavior that had long been tolerated." + "I’ve learned how quickly social media can take something they know very little about, twist the truth and potentially ruin somebody’s life,” + “We’re supposed to educate people,” she wrote in a Snapchat post, “not ruin their lives all because you want to feel a sense of empowerment.” A Racial Slur, a Viral Video,
and a Reckoning
A white high school student withdrew from her chosen college after a three-second video caused an uproar online. The classmate who shared it publicly has no regrets. Jimmy Galligan was in history class last school year when his phone buzzed with a message. Once he clicked on it, he found a three-second video of a white classmate looking into the camera and uttering an anti-Black racial slur. The slur, he said, was regularly hurled in classrooms and hallways throughout his years in the Loudoun County school district. He had brought the issue up to teachers and administrators but, much to his anger and frustration, his complaints had gone nowhere. So he held on to the video, which was sent to him by a friend, and made a decision that would ricochet across Leesburg, Va., a town named for an ancestor of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee and whose school system had fought an order to desegregate for more than a decade after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling. “I wanted to get her where she would understand the severity of that word,” Mr. Galligan, 18, whose mother is Black and father is white, said of the classmate who uttered the slur, Mimi Groves. He tucked the video away, deciding to post it publicly when the time was right. Ms. Groves had originally sent the video, in which she looked into the camera and said, “I can drive,” followed by the slur, to a friend on Snapchat in 2016, when she was a freshman and had just gotten her learner’s permit. It later circulated among some students at Heritage High School, which she and Mr. Galligan attended, but did not cause much of a stir. Mr. Galligan had not seen the video before receiving it last school year, when he and Ms. Groves were seniors. By then, she was a varsity cheer captain who dreamed of attending the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, whose cheer team was the reigning national champion. When she made the team in May, her parents celebrated with a cake and orange balloons, the university’s official color. The next month, as protests were sweeping the nation after [...] George Floyd [died of a fentanyl overdose 30 minutes after being admitted to a hospital], Ms. Groves, in a public Instagram post, urged people to “protest, donate, sign a petition, rally, do something” in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. “You have the audacity to post this, after saying the N-word,” responded someone whom Ms. Groves said she did not know. Her alarm at the stranger’s comment turned to panic as friends began calling, directing her to the source of a brewing social media furor. Mr. Galligan, who had waited until Ms. Groves had chosen a college, had publicly posted the video that afternoon. Within hours, it had been shared to Snapchat, TikTok and Twitter, where furious calls mounted for the University of Tennessee to revoke its admission offer. By that June evening, about a week after Mr. Floyd’s killing, teenagers across the country had begun leveraging social media to call out their peers for racist behavior. Some students set up anonymous pages on Instagram devoted to holding classmates accountable, including in Loudoun County. The consequences were swift. Over the next two days, Ms. Groves was removed from the university’s cheer team. She then withdrew from the school under pressure from admissions officials, who told her they had received hundreds of emails and phone calls from outraged alumni, students and the public. “They’re angry, and they want to see some action,” an admissions official told Ms. Groves and her family, according to a recording of the emotional call reviewed by The New York Times. Ms. Groves was among many incoming freshmen across the country whose admissions offers were revoked by at least a dozen universities after videos emerged on social media of them using racist language. (read more) 2020-12-28 c THE COVID-CON I "Many said the statistics supported the idea that people under 60 could live without Covid restrictions, while those most at risk are subject to constraints. " 388 people aged under 60 with
'NO underlying health conditions' have died of Covid
in England's hospitals [since the start of the
pandemic]
•Covid-19 deaths among
under 60s with no underlying health conditions are
388
•A breakdown stated 338 people between 40 and 59 had died after positive test •There was another 44 aged between 20 and 39, and just six under the age of 19 •Pre-existing health conditions include illnesses such as cancer and heart disease Just 388 people aged under 60 with no underlying health conditions have died of Covid-19 in England's hospitals since the start of the pandemic, NHS data has showed. The figures show that 1,979 previously healthy people died in hospitals in England after testing positive for Covid-19 between April 2 and December 23. Just 338 of these people were aged 40 to 59, with another 44 aged between 20 and 39, and just six under the age of 19, according to the data. Meanwhile 45,770 deaths were recorded among those with pre-existing conditions, of which 21 were aged under 20, 263 were between 20 and 39 and 2,926 were aged between 40 and 59. Former Brexit MEP Claire Fox tweeted that the statistics are 'tragic' but restrictions should be eased because people think that the 'virus [is a] mortal threat for all'. Pointing to statistics released up until December 16, she tweeted: 'Only 377 people under 60 without preexisting conditions have died of COVID in Eng. Tragic but when I've stated this as fact, often disbelieved. 'Such is fear, people think far more, that virus mortal threat for all. IMO restrictions on ALL can mean less focus on those most at risk.' Pre-existing health conditions include terminal illnesses such as cancer and heart disease but also include asthma, diabetes and obesity. (read more) 2020-12-28 b THE ETON CHRONICLES "So something many colleagues and parents considered an excellent stimulus for debate is also terrorism?" Eton College attempted to
refer dismissed Master under Prevent duty
School contacted Local Authority Designated Officer to report concerns about Will Knowland's controversial lecture Eton College attempted to refer a dismissed Master under the Prevent duty for advocating male superiority and the glorification of violence, The Telegraph can reveal. The £42,500-a-year school contacted the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead’s Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) to report its concerns about Will Knowland's controversial lecture. The school is understood to have told the LADO, responsible for managing child protection allegations in the borough, that the lecture advocated male superiority and female subservience, glorified violence and promoted far-right and alt-right extremism. Eton has been engulfed in a free speech row following Mr Knowland's dismissal for gross misconduct earlier this year. The video lecture, entitled the "Patriarchy Paradox", questioned "current radical feminist orthodoxy" and was part of the Perspectives course taken by sixth form students to encourage them to think critically about subjects of public debate. But Mr Knowland was banned from giving the lecture to students and then sacked after a dispute over his refusal to remove it from his personal YouTube channel. Eton has maintained that the dismissal was "not a matter of free speech" but one of "internal discipline" and that the video fell foul of equality laws. Simon Henderson, the Head Master at the 580-year-old boarding school, said Eton makes "no apology" for teaching pupils to respect each other's differences. But it has now emerged that Eton also tried to argue that the lecture posed a safeguarding threat to pupils since it risked drawing them into extremist ideologies. Since 2015, when the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act was passed, schools have had a statutory duty to prevent children from being drawn into terrorist acts, known as the Prevent duty. Schools need to report any concerns they have about pupils who are at risk of radicalisation, which can include Islamist terrorism, far-right terrorism and Northern Ireland-related terrorism. However, the LADO found that the lecture did not meet the threshold for the Prevent duty and referred it back to the school to deal with internally. Mr Knowland told The Telegraph that the school's attempted Prevent referral was "laughable", adding: "So something many colleagues and parents considered an excellent stimulus for debate is also terrorism? "The video has over 40 academic references, including work published by Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Yale. Are these the kind of ideas considered akin to terrorism in Henderson's safe-space Eton?" In the lecture, Mr Knowland explores the biological differences between men and women, stating that as well as being physically stronger men are also "more violent by temperament". But he denied that the lecture argues for male superiority or glorifies violence, adding that it points out that men can "afford to treat their lives more cheaply" since they are less necessary to society when it comes to reproducing and nursing infants. (read more) (previous blog entries about Eton here and here) 2020-12-28 a THE BILL GATES VACCINES “I am not saying vaccination shouldn’t be taking place. But I am not going to test an unverified vaccine on my children, or on myself.” + “If someone gave me 10 million euro, I wouldn’t take it,” Lisa Renberg, 32, said on Wednesday Despite hi-tech advances, many
Europeans wary of taking COVID shot
Europe rolled out a huge COVID-19 vaccination drive on Sunday to try to rein in the coronavirus pandemic but many Europeans are sceptical about the speed at which the vaccines have been tested and approved and reluctant to have the shot. The European Union has secured contracts with a range of drugmakers including Pfizer and BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca, for a total of more than two billion doses and has set a goal for all adults to be inoculated next year. But surveys have pointed to high levels of hesitancy towards inoculation in countries from France to Poland, with many used to vaccines taking decades to develop, not just months. “I don’t think there’s a vaccine in history that has been tested so quickly,” Ireneusz Sikorski, 41, said as he stepped out of a church in central Warsaw with his two children. “I am not saying vaccination shouldn’t be taking place. But I am not going to test an unverified vaccine on my children, or on myself.” Surveys in Poland, where distrust in public institutions runs deep, have shown fewer than 40% of people planning to get vaccinated, for now. On Sunday, only half the medical staff in a Warsaw hospital where the country’s first shot was administered had signed up. In Spain, one of Europe’s hardest-hit countries, German, a 28-year-old singer and music composer originally from Tenerife, also plans to wait for now. “No one close to me has had it (COVID-19). I’m obviously not saying it doesn’t exist because lots of people have died of it, but for now I wouldn’t have it (the vaccine).” ... The Pfizer/BioNTech shot has been linked with a few cases of severe allergic reactions as it has been rolled out in the United Kingdom and the United States. It has not [yet] turned up any serious long-term side effects in clinical trials. Independent pollster Alpha Research said its recent survey suggested that fewer than one in five Bulgarians from the first groups to be offered the vaccine - frontline medics, pharmacists, teachers and nursing home staff - planned to volunteer to get a shot. (read more) ______________________ Permission is hereby granted to any and all to copy and paste any entry on this page and convey it electronically along with its URL, http://www.usaapay.com/comm.html ______________________ 2020 - December 21 - 27 ARCHIVE 2020 - December 17 - 20 ARCHIVE 2020 - December 13 - 16 ARCHIVE 2020 - December 8 - 12 ARCHIVE 2020 - December 1 - 7 ARCHIVE 2020 - November 22 - 30 ARCHIVE 2020 - November 16 - 21 ARCHIVE 2020 - November 9 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - November 1 - 8 ARCHIVE 2020 - October 24 - 31 ARCHIVE 2020 - October 16 - 23 ARCHIVE 2020 - October 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - September 16 - 30 ARCHIVE 2020 - September 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - August 16 - 31 ARCHIVE 2020 - August 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - July 16 - 31 ARCHIVE 2020 - JULY 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - JUNE 16 - 30 ARCHIVE 2020 - JUNE 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - MAY 16 - 31 ARCHIVE 2020 - MAY 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - APRIL 16 - 30 ARCHIVE 2020 - APRIL 1 - 15 ARCHIVE 2020 - MARCH ARCHIVE 2020 - FEBRUARY ARCHIVE 2020 - JANUARY ARCHIVE |
...
News and facts for
those sick and tired of the National Propaganda Radio
version of reality.
|
|
| THE ARCHIVE PAGE |
| If
you let them redefine words, they will control
language. If you let them control language, they will control thoughts. If you let them control thoughts, they will control you. They will own you. |
| © 2020 - thenotimes.com - All Rights Reserved |