Category Archives: politics

Donald Trump is BETRAYING our NATO allies!

Posted on by

Read this:

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/14/politics/greenland-trump-nato-denmark

Trump says ‘anything less’ than US control of Greenland is ‘unacceptable’

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that “anything less” than US control of Greenland is “unacceptable,” arguing the United States needs the territory for national security purposes, which could in turn strengthen NATO.

“NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES,” Trump wrote in an early morning Truth Social post. “Anything less than that is unacceptable.”

The post came ahead of a meeting Vice President JD Vance hosted at the White House Wednesday with the Danish foreign minister and his Greenlandic counterpart alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

That meeting yielded few tangible results, with Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen noting that he and his Greenlandic colleague had “a frank but also constructive discussion” with Rubio and Vance, but their “perspectives continue to differ.”

Still, Rasmussen said the parties have agreed to form “a high-level working group to explore if we can find a common way forward” that is expected to meet in the coming weeks.

“We agreed that it makes sense to try to sit down on a high level to explore whether there’s possibilities to accommodate the concerns of the president while we at the same time, respect the red lines of the Kingdom of Denmark. So this is the work we will start,” he said at a press conference after the meeting.

“I must say, the president has made his view clear, and we have a different position,” Rasmussen said, noting that Denmark continues to believe that the long-term security “can be ensured inside the current framework.”

“Ideas that would not respect territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and the right of self-determination of the Greenlandic people are, of course, totally unacceptable,” he said. “We therefore still have a fundamental disagreement, but we also agree to disagree, and therefore we will, however, continue to talk.”

CNN spotted Vance and Rubio walking together out of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building toward the West Wing entrance following the morning meeting.

Speaking from the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon, Trump told reporters that he was about to be briefed on the meeting and expressed some optimism.

“I have a very good relationship with Denmark,” he said. ““We’ll see how it all works out. I think something will work out.”

In the earlier social media post, Trump reiterated his assertion that acquiring Greenland, which is a self-governing territory of Denmark, is essential for US national security. He added that it is “vital for the Golden Dome that we are building,” in reference to the missile defense system the Pentagon is developing. He also argued that NATO leaders should be pushing for the United States to have Greenland.

“NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! Militarily, without the vast power of the United States, much of which I built during my first term, and am now bringing to a new and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective force or deterrent – Not even close! They know that, and so do I,” Trump wrote in the post.

On Tuesday, Trump dismissed comments from Greenland’s Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen, who said at a news conference in Copenhagen: “Greenland does not want to be owned by the USA. Greenland does not want to be governed by the USA. Greenland will not be part of the USA. We choose the Greenland we know today, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

In response, Trump said, “That’s their problem. I disagree with him. I don’t know who he is. Don’t know anything about him, but that’s going to be a big problem for him.”

Several factors, accentuated by the climate crisis, make Greenland an important strategic region, such as its geopolitical position, its rich natural resources (including oil, gas and rare earth minerals) and the potential northern shipping routes around it.

While Trump has downplayed the significance of Greenland’s natural resources, Mike Waltz highlighted last year when he was Trump’s incoming national security adviser that the administration’s focus on the territory was also “about critical minerals” and “natural resources.”

Denmark increases military presence in Greenland

As Trump continues threatening to take Greenland, the government of Greenland and Denmark’s Ministry of Defense announced there would be an increased military presence in and around the territory starting Wednesday due to “security tensions.”

Denmark said its armed forces were “deploying capacities and units in connection with exercise activities from today, which will result in an increased military presence in and around Greenland of aircraft, ships and soldiers, including from NATO allies, in the coming period.”

It added that the expanded exercise activities could include guarding critical infrastructure, providing assistance to Greenlandic authorities – including police – receiving allied troops, deploying fighter aircraft in and around Greenland, and naval operations.

Sweden has also sent an unspecified number of troops to Greenland, following Denmark’s request to do so, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson announced on X. Norway’s Ministry of Defense said Wednesday it is sending two military personnel, and the German Defense Ministry said it is sending 13 personnel to “participate in an exploration mission in Greenland from January 15 to 17, 2026, together with other European nations.”

French President Emmanuel Macron said Wednesday that France will join other European nations for the joint exercises in Greenland, writing in a post on X, “The first French military units are already on their way. Others will follow.”

European leaders have rejected Trump’s calls to control Greenland. Macron warned earlier Wednesday that the knock-on effects of the US trying to seize Greenland from Denmark would be “unprecedented.”

“We do not underestimate the statements regarding Greenland. If the sovereignty of a European and allied country were to be affected, the knock-on consequences would be unprecedented,” Macron said, according to his government’s spokesperson. He added that France is monitoring the situation and “will conduct its actions in full solidarity with Denmark and its sovereignty.”

Earlier on Wednesday, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, reiterated that Greenland belongs to its people, so it is up to Denmark and Greenland to decide its future.

“For me, it is important Greenlanders know … that we respect (their) wishes and they, they can count on us,” she added.

Trump suggested over the weekend that he would move forward with his goal to acquire Greenland with or without a deal.

“I’d love to make a deal with them. It’s easier. But one way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One.

Asked about the possibility of the move compromising NATO, Trump said, “I’m the one that saved NATO.”

He stopped short of saying he would pull the US out of NATO, adding, “maybe they would be upset” if he took Greenland but expressing indifference about the effects of such a move: “If it affects NATO, then it affects NATO.”

Pressed by CNN on Sunday whether he would increase the amount of US military bases on Greenland in the meantime, Trump said, “We could put a lot of soldiers there right now if I want, but you need more than that. You need ownership. You really need title.”

Can you imagine how the United States itself would react if China or Japan tried to take Hawaii??? This is no different!!!!

Donald Trump is blatantly LYING to everyone about his motives for wanting American control over Greenland….there is absolutely NO security risk in Denmark continuing to keep the island. The security risk exists NOW because of Trump’s insane demand, which could actually DESTROY NATO itself!

Meanwhile:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c338rm41y88o

Protests in Greenland and Denmark against Trump plans

Thousands of people in Greenland and Denmark have protested against plans by US President Donald Trump to take over Greenland – an autonomous Danish territory.

Demonstrations were held in Danish cities including the capital, Copenhagen, as well as in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk.

The rallies coincide with a visit to Copenhagen by a delegation from the US Congress. Its leader, Democratic Senator Chris Coons, described Mr Trump’s rhetoric as “not constructive”.

Mr Trump has not ruled out taking Greenland, which he insists is critical for America’s national security, by force – and has now announced he will impose tariffs European countries that are opposed to his plan.

Goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands and Finland will be subject to a 10% US tariff from 1 February, he wrote on his Truth Social platform on Saturday.

Accusing these countries of playing “a very dangerous game”, he said the tariffs would be raised to 25% on 1 June “until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland”.

Greenland is sparsely populated but resource-rich and its location between North America and the Arctic makes it well placed for early warning systems in the event of missile attacks and for monitoring vessels in the region.

Trump has previously said Washington would get the territory “the easy way” or “the hard way” – an apparent reference to buying the island or taking it by force.

In Copenhagan on Saturday, placards were held up reading: “Hands Off Greenland” and “Greenland for Greenlanders”.

“It’s very important that we stay together and show that Greenland is not for sale and we would not like to be an American or won’t be annexed by the USA,” Greenlandic politician Erik Jensen told the Reuters news agency.

Saturday’s protests are organised by Greenlandic and Danish NGOs. “We demand respect for the Danish Realm and for Greenland’s right to self-determination,” said Camilla Siezing, heads of Inuit, an umbrella group of Greenlandic associations.

In Nuuk, Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen joined protesters holding signs reading “Greenland is not for sale” and “we shape our future” as they headed for the US consulate.

Opinion polls suggest 85% of Greenlanders oppose the territory joining the US.

Other European countries have rallied to Denmark’s support, arguing that the security of the Arctic region should be a joint Nato responsibility.

France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands and the UK have dispatched a small number of troops to Greenland in a so-called reconnaissance mission.

Many in the US have expressed scepticism about acquiring Greenland. Most of the Congressional delegation visiting Denmark are Democrats, but the 11-member team also includes moderate Republicans.

“There are legitimate reasons for us to explore ways to invest better in Arctic security broadly, both in the American Arctic and in our Nato partners,” said Coons.

But the US ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, said the life of Greenlanders would be “safer, stronger and more prosperous under the umbrella of the United States”.

He told Fox News that Denmark “just doesn’t have the resources or the capacity to do what needs to be done in the northern region”.

Lies, lies, and still more lies, eh?

Even after Denmark was conquered by Germany in World War II, the United States, while it sent troops to protect Danish possessions Greenland and Iceland from German invasion, never claimed either of them as U. S. territories. And after the war ended, those islands were returned to Danish control (Iceland later gained outright independence). So what changed between then and now?

This is what happens when you allow a leader to take power who has NO ethical principles whatsoever. Trump wants his capitalist cronies in America to exploit Greenland’s resources to make those already rich bastards even richer, while inflicting suffering on everyone else!

TO ME, THIS IS WHAT THE PRELUDE TO WORLD WAR THREE LOOKS LIKE!

Another Government Shutdown in the USA!

Posted on by

Read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_federal_government_shutdown

On October 1, 2025, the federal government of the United States began a shutdown at 12:01 a.m. EDT as a result of congressional inaction on passing appropriations legislation for the 2026 fiscal year, which began that day. The shutdown resulted from partisan disagreements over federal spending levels, foreign aid rescissions, and health insurance subsidies.

It has furloughed roughly 900,000 federal employees and left another 700,000 working without pay. While essential services such as Medicare, Medicaid, the Transportation Security Administration, and Amtrak continued, many agencies, including the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the WIC program, faced partial or full suspensions of operations.

The shutdown is the eleventh in U.S. history resulting in curtailment of government services, and the third under President Donald Trump. It is the first U.S. federal government shutdown since the 2018–2019 shutdown.

______________________

Every single government shutdown over the past several decades has been the fault of the Republicans, which because of their bigoted Conservative ideology refuse to compromise with Democrats on anything, resulting in completely unnecessary partisan gridlock.

This matter is especially frustrating because Republicans control BOTH houses of Congress, plus Donald Trump, a Republican, is President, so passing a budget reflecting Republican priorities should be a simple matter. The problem:  not all Republicans are MAGA extremists like Trump is, and so these moderates are reluctant to support a budget that cuts down the federal government. But the LEADERS of the Congressional Republicans ARE MAGA extremists and control the agenda. 

A political leadership that refuses to compromise with opposing parties is authoritarian in nature and thus is unfit to rule or be representatives in a diverse Democracy. The Republican Party itself is illegitimate and must be brought down completely and replaced by another party that respects the standards and principles of the United States Constitution itself. 

May I suggest the Libertarian Party?

https://lp.org/

Charlie Kirk and the Dilemma of his Assassination

Posted on by

Charlie Kirk was like a de facto son of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, a right-wing media troll who made a living spreading his ideological filth through the web community formerly known as Twitter as well as touring college campuses to seduce young men into following him. 

Well, that idiot was no match for me!

Of course, he didn’t reply. 

Reports are that his killer was even more right-wing than he was. And was raised a Mormon. Political violence is what bigots of all types are known for, of course. Kirk wasn’t violent, but he was still harmful. It’s like comparing the cutting off of a toe with the removal of an entire leg.

Meanwhile, Trump is raging against leftists. But he and his fellow Republicans completely control the federal government. Is Trump wanting to really make America fascist instead of, you know, GREAT AGAIN?

Finally, I will leave you with this Debbie and Carrie episode I made, which depicts a liberal, Sandy Smith, reacting to the death of one of her enemies with genuine sympathy for that enemy’s granddaughter. So we should express sympathy for Charlie Kirk’s family……but also continue to reverse and defeat all the damage he, and Donald Trump, have been doing.

President Biden has Leveled the Playing Field

Posted on by

Read this:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/president-joe-biden-pardons-son-hunter-biden/story?id=116358693

President Joe Biden issues pardon for son Hunter Biden

President Joe Biden has pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who was convicted on federal gun charges and is due for sentencing in December.

Despite the White House’s assurances last month that the president had no intentions of pardoning his son, the announcement came through on Sunday evening that he had pardoned him.

In a statement, he said, “Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter,” for what he called a “miscarriage of justice.”

“From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted,” he wrote.

President Biden also mentioned “political opponents in Congress,” whom he credited for instigating the charges and for ensuring that a plea deal, composed in July, fell apart in August.

The statement concluded, “Here’s the truth: I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice – and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision.”

Over the summer, a jury found the younger Biden guilty on three felony counts related to his purchase and possession of a firearm while addicted to drugs. And in September, Hunter Biden agreed to plead guilty to nine tax-related charges, including three felonies, on the eve of what was expected to be a lengthy and grueling trial.

For the tax charges, Hunter Biden faced up to 17 years in federal prison and $1.35 million in fines. His gun-related conviction carried a potential of up to 25 years in prison.

Hunter Biden was scheduled to face sentencing for both cases in the coming weeks – on Dec. 12 on the gun-related charges in Delaware, and Dec. 16 on the tax charges in California.

Asked about the president’s intentions to pardon Hunter Biden on Nov. 7, shortly after the election results came through in favor of Donald Trump, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “We’ve been asked that question multiple times. Our answer stands, which is no.”

She declined to comment on any other pardons the president may make before the end of his term, including any administration officials or people threatened by President-elect Donald Trump with legal action.

President Biden had also previously told ABC News’ David Muir that he did not intend to pardon his son, during an interview in June.

He said, at the time, that he would accept the results of the trial.

At a White House briefing in June, President Biden also stated, “I’m extremely proud of my son Hunter. He has overcome an addiction. He is — he’s one of the brightest, most decent men I know.”

He added, “I said I’d abide by the jury decision, and I will do that. And I will not pardon him.”

He released a statement on Sunday, saying, “I have admitted and taken responsibility for my mistakes during the darkest days of my addiction – mistakes that have been exploited to publicly humiliate and shame me and my family for political sport. Despite all of this, I have maintained my sobriety for more than five years because of my deep faith and the unwavering love and support of my family and friends. In the throes of addiction, I squandered many opportunities and advantages. In recovery we can be given the opportunity to make amends where possible and rebuild our lives if we never take for granted the mercy that we have been afforded.”

The statement continued, “I will never take the clemency I have been given today for granted and will devote the life I have rebuilt to helping those who are still sick and suffering.”

Within an hour of President Biden’s pardon, Hunter Biden’s legal team filed perfunctory notices with the courts in both criminal cases. Attorneys wrote, “The President’s pardon moots Mr. Biden’s pending and yet to occur sentencing and entry of judgment in this case and requires an automatic dismissal of the Indictment with prejudice.”

For the record, if President Biden had issued that pardon after Kamala Harris was elected last month. I would have opposed such a move. But Donald Trump being elected means that the American people have decided once and for all that they do NOT want an ethical leadership. They WANT corruption, bigotry, cruelty and incompetence in America’s leadership, period! So President Biden has leaned his lesson and has given up; Republicans have ruthlessly treated ethical consistency as a weakness, and sought to punish Democrats like President Clinton for ethical failures, such as in his affair with Monica Lewinski, but even he had a sense of shame after owning up to that incident. Republicans like Trump have no shame whatsoever. Richard Nixon was pardoned for Watergate by Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan was never punished in any way for the Iran-Contra scandal, and President Bush Jr. was actually reelected after starting a totally needless war against Iraq.

Rules for Dems, not for Reps, amirite?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/12/01/statement-from-president-joe-biden-11/

Statement from President JoeBiden

Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter. From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted. Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form. Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently. 

The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s cases.   

No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong. There has been an effort to break Hunter – who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me – and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough. 

For my entire career I have followed a simple principle: just tell the American people the truth. They’ll be fair-minded. Here’s the truth: I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice – and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision. 

###

 
Executive Grant of Clemency
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
President of the United States of America
 
To All to Whom These Presents Shall Come, Greeting:
 
Be It Known, That This Day, I, Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, Pursuant to My Powers Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution, Have Granted Unto
 
ROBERT HUNTER BIDEN
 
A Full and Unconditional Pardon
 
For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024, including but not limited to all offenses charged or prosecuted (including any that have resulted in convictions) by Special Counsel David C. Weiss in Docket No. 1:23-cr-00061-MN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and Docket No. 2:23-CR-00599-MCS-1 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
 
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have hereunto signed my name and caused the Pardon to be recorded with the Department of Justice.
 
Done at the City of Washington this 1st day of December in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-four and of the Independence of the United States the Two Hundred and Forty-ninth.

No one who watched Trump misuse his position as President from 2017 to 2021 should object to Biden doing what Trump would have done for any of his own kids in the same situation. 

When Republicans start supporting and electing ethical leaders again, I will take their whining about possible corruption in government caused or enabled by Democrats seriously. 

If Republicans like Nixon did not go to prison for Watergate and Trump does not go to prison for his criminal convictions, why should a Democrat like Hunter Biden pay any legal penalty? The playing field is now leveled for both parties.

What Trump’s SECOND Victory Means

Posted on by

Trump’s victory on November 5, 2024 means that America’s tendency to be hypocritical and white male dominated will continue just as it did before. Barack Obama’s election in 2008 was an exception, not the rule. We had another opportunity to elect a woman, this one of color known for her dedication to law enforcement and we still instead elected a criminal that was a WHITE MAN!

It is just like 2016! I really do not understand this hold Donald Trump has on so many millions of people! I can see him for what he is, why can’t they?

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14KNoijGhL/

This election should have been won by Kamala Harris in a landslide. The fact that she didn’t is proof that we are a nation of IDIOTS!!! A civil war is coming, I can feel it!!!

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Y7VN9qY86/

We did not have normal politics in 2016 and we certainly don’t have it this year! But Donald Trump was not the cause of America’s collective toxicity, he merely benefited from it. The real problem, like in past decades, was that we STILL think the status quo is acceptable, that we must always have a white male leader (even President Obama was actually half white).

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FB81YTvV2/

People are already claiming the election of Trump was rigged, that there was no way Democrats could also achieve victories down ballot in states that voted for Trump. However, it’s likely that many who voted for Trump were casual voters who didn’t bother to vote for anyone else…they simply did not want a woman of color to be the next President.
This is why American democracy is failing.

President Biden did the Right Thing Today

Posted on by

Read this story:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/president-joe-biden-drops-2024-presidential-race-rcna159867

President Joe Biden drops out of 2024 presidential race

Biden, after a five-decade career, faced a reckoning over his age and his ability to defeat Trump. He endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as his party faces a historic effort to replace him.

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden announced Sunday that he will end his presidential re-election campaign, bringing an abrupt and humbling conclusion to his half-century-long political career and scrambling the race for the White House less than four months before Election Day.

Biden, 81, could not reverse growing sentiment within his party that he was too frail to serve and destined to lose to Donald Trump in November. He backed Vice President Kamala Harris to replace him as the Democratic nominee.

“While it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term,” Biden wrote in a letter posted on X. “I will speak to the Nation later this week in more detail about my decision.”

Biden thanked Harris for “being an extraordinary partner” in his letter and then endorsed her in a subsequent post.

“My very first decision as the party nominee in 2020 was to pick Kamala Harris as my Vice President,” Biden posted. “And it’s been the best decision I’ve made. Today I want to offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year.”

Biden and Harris spoke multiple times Sunday ahead of the president’s announcement, according to a source familiar with the campaign.

In a statement, Harris thanked Biden for “his extraordinary leadership” and his “remarkable legacy of achievement.”

“I am honored to have the President’s endorsement and my intention is to earn and win this nomination,” Harris said. “I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party — and unite our nation — to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda,” she said.

Biden — who for weeks had insisted publicly that he planned to stay in the race — told his senior team he had changed his mind about continuing his campaign at 1:45 p.m. ET, according to a source with direct knowledge. The tweet announcing his decision was sent at 1:46 p.m.

His withdrawal caps a singular national political career, bookended by Richard Nixon’s fall and Trump’s rise. He mounted four presidential bids. He spent 36 years in the U.S. Senate representing tiny Delaware. He rose to the chairmanships of the powerful Judiciary and Foreign Relations committees. And he served eight years as Barack Obama’s vice president.

‘Great public servant’

Reactions from politicians quickly began pouring in.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a post on X that Biden “has been an extraordinary, history-making president — a leader who has fought hard for working people and delivered astonishing results for all Americans.”

“He will go down in history as one of the most impactful and selfless presidents,” said Newsom, who was one of the most prominent Biden surrogates. Newsom has been floated as a possible Democratic presidential contender, but threw his support behind Harris hours after the announcement, saying in a post on X that “no one is better to prosecute the case against Donald Trump’s dark vision and guide our country in a healthier direction than America’s Vice President, @KamalaHarris.”

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, another prominent Democrat talked about as a future national candidate, called Biden a “great public servant” in a post on X.

“My job in this election will remain the same: doing everything I can to elect Democrats and stop Donald Trump, a convicted felon whose agenda of raising families’ costs, banning abortion nationwide, and abusing the power of the White House to settle his own scores is completely wrong for Michigan,” Whitmer wrote.

First lady Jill Biden reposted her husband’s announcement with heart emojis. “Down to the last hours of the decision only he could make, she was supportive of whatever road he chose,” said her communications director, Elizabeth Alexander.  

Across the aisle, Republicans slammed the move and many called on him to resign from office, days after the completion of a Republican National Convention where speaker after speaker slammed the Biden-Harris ticket.

“If Joe Biden is not fit to run for president, he is not fit to serve as President. He must resign the office immediately,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson.

In a brief phone interview with NBC News, Trump reacted to Biden’s decision, calling the president “the worst president in the history of the United States by far.”

When asked whether he was surprised by Biden’s decision, Trump said that Biden “should never have been there in the first place.”

“He should have stayed in his basement,” Trump said.

In a fundraising email, Trump’s campaign said that Biden “quit the race in complete disgrace.”

An unprecedented decision

Biden’s decision to exit the race less than a month before his party’s convention and a few months before voters head to the polls is unprecedented in the modern political era. The last sitting president to abandon a re-election bid was Lyndon Johnson, whose expansion of the Vietnam War in the 1960s split the Democratic Party. But Johnson’s announcement came in March 1968 — eight months before that election.

“We’re in uncharted waters,” said Barbara Perry, a presidential studies professor at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. “No president has dropped out or died this close to the convention.”

Replacing Biden atop the Democratic ticket is likely to set off internal Democratic tremors as ambitious officials maneuver to become his successor. Factions have already formed around Harris, Whitmer and Newsom.

 

Harris, who at 59 is 22 years younger than Biden, would seem to be the heir apparent. She broke a barrier as the first female vice president. A woman of color, she enjoys strong support among African Americans, a loyal piece of the Democratic coalition. Overall, though, Harris’ approval rating stood at only 32% in an NBC News poll released earlier this month.

“There’s no one you can name right now who is an obvious substitute,” Perry said. “That’s what makes this so uncertain and chaotic.”

Unlike Republican delegates, who are bound to their candidate, Democratic delegates aren’t, so they are free to do what they want at the convention. Biden could have some influence over the delegates, but they could vote for a different candidate than his chosen pick, pending any rule changes at the convention meant to address this unprecedented situation. The rules currently say that the delegates simply have to “in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.”

__________________________

Biden has proven, once and for all, that he is a better man than Trump. And it doesn’t surprise me that Republicans are angry over this move. Kamala Harris taking on Trump directly and tearing him apart in public will be their worst nightmare!

Project 2025 is Full of Lies and Bigoted Bullcrap

Posted on by

Look at this website:

https://www.project2025.org/

Building now for a conservative victory through policy, personnel, and training.

It is not enough for conservatives to win elections. If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration.

This is the goal of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. The project will build on four pillars that will, collectively, pave the way for an effective conservative Administration.

I wonder what “radical Left” they could possibly be talking about. The only radical Leftist movements in America I know about are socialist or communist in nature and those have never been popular here. The Democrats currently in power under President Biden are moderate or centrist in nature; only a minority can be called leftist and they don’t have much influence now. I do wish they did, though.

https://www.project2025.org/about/about-project-2025/

The actions of liberal politicians in Washington have created a desperate need and unique opportunity for conservatives to start undoing the damage the Left has wrought and build a better country for all Americans in 2025.

What damage are they talking about? And how will their polices benefit Americans that are not benefiting now under the present policies of government?

The project is the effort of a broad coalition of conservative organizations that have come together to ensure a successful administration begins in January 2025. With the right conservative policy recommendations and properly vetted and trained personnel to implement them, we will take back our government.

The 2025 Presidential Transition Project is being organized by The Heritage Foundation and builds off Heritage’s longstanding “Mandate for Leadership,” which has been highly influential for presidential administrations since the Reagan era. Most recently, the Trump administration relied heavily on Heritage’s “Mandate” for policy guidance, embracing nearly two-thirds of Heritage’s proposals within just one year in office.

Paul Dans, former chief of staff at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) during the Trump administration, serves as the director of the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. Spencer Chretien, former special assistant to the president and associate director of Presidential Personnel, serves as associate director of the project.

So what do they want to do, exactly?

Policy Agenda

This book is an invitation for you the reader—Mr. Smith, Mrs. Smith, and Ms. Smith—to come to Washington or support those who can.  Our goal is to assemble an army of aligned, vetted, trained, and prepared conservatives to go to work on Day One to deconstruct the Administrative State.

This book is the product of more than 400 scholars and policy experts from across the conservative movement and around the country.  Contributors include former elected officials, world-renowned economists, and veterans from four presidential Administrations.  This is an agenda prepared by and for conservatives who will be ready on Day One of the next Administration to save our country.  The Heritage Foundation is once again facilitating this work, but as our dozens of partners and hundreds of authors will attest, this book is the work of the entire conservative movement.  

The next conservative President will enter office on January 20, 2025, with a simple choice: greatness or failure.  It will be a daunting test, but no more so than every other generation of Americans has faced and passed.  The Conservative Promise represents the best effort of the conservative movement in 2023—and the next conservative President’s last opportunity to save our republic.

Save our country and republic from WHAT? And why should I have to buy and read a BOOK to understand what their plans are? Moving on….

On page 19 of their book, we read the following:

America’s Bicentennial, which culminated on July 4, 1976, was a spirited and unifying celebration of our country, its Founding, and its ideals. As we approach our nation’s 250th anniversary, which will take place during the next presidency, America is now divided between two opposing forces: woke revolutionaries and those who believe in the ideals of the American revolution. The former believe that America is—and always has been—“systemically racist” and that it is not worth celebrating and must be fundamentally transformed, largely through a centralized administrative state. The latter believe in America’s history and heroes, its principles and promise, and in everyday Americans and the American way of life. They believe in the Constitution and republican government. Conservatives—the Americanists in this battle—must fight for the soul of America, which is very much at stake.

More false buzzwords. At the time of the American Revolution, race based slavery was an institution in the southern states. It took a civil war and the passage of the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery. Additional Constitutional Amendments (the 14th and 15th) enabled the federal government to stop states from passing laws to discriminate against newly freed slaves. You know who favored slavery and also championed the concept of “states rights” in opposition to federal authorities banning racist policies in southern states? CONSERVATIVES! And after the Reconstruction period, they won control of the southern states and were able to force racist policies and laws anyway, and it wasn’t until the mid-20th Century that the Supreme Court and the Congress began to change things in accordance to the 14th and 15th Amendments.

Many of America’s “heros” were slaveowners, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Are these promoters of Project 2025 saying we should accept slavery again because some of our Founding Fathers owned slaves? Moving on to page 283…..

When our Founders wrote in the Constitution that the federal government would “promote the general Welfare,” they could not have fathomed a massive bureaucracy that would someday spend $3 trillion in a single year—roughly the sum, combined, spent by the departments covered in this section in 2022. Approximately half of that colossal sum was spent by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) alone—the belly of the massive behemoth that is the modern administrative state. HHS is home to Medicare and Medicaid, the principal drivers of our $31 trillion national debt. When Congress passed and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law these programs, they were set on autopilot with no plan for how to pay for them. The first year that Medicare spending was visible on the books was 1967. From that point on through 2020—according to the American Main Street Initiative’s analysis of o cial federal tallies—Medicare and Medicaid combined cost $17.8 trillion, while our combined federal deficits over that same span were $17.9 trillion. In essence, our deficit problem is a Medicare and Medicaid problem.

So….what was the amount of our Defense spending in 2022?

https://www.google.com/search?q=u.s.+defense+budget+2022

The United States’ defense budget for fiscal year (FY) 2022 was $782 billion, as agreed upon by a bipartisan group in March 2022. This was part of a $1.5 trillion budget for the year, which helped avoid a government shutdown. However, actual military spending in 2022 was closer to $1.537 trillion, which is more than double the officially acknowledged amount. This increase was largely due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, after which the U.S. provided over 40 billion euros in military aid to the country.

So where the hell did the Project 2025 people get that 3 trillion dollar amount regarding welfare spending from? If they want to cut that, why not cut military spending as well? Oh, wait, Republicans have always favored MORE Defense spending, not less. As often do Democrats.

The real problem with our deficits is Republicans cutting taxes to the rich instead of making them pay their fair share of the responsibility for maintaining our way of life. Those that have more should naturally pay more.

Speaking of Defense issues, we read this on page 87:    

“Ever since our Founding,” former acting secretary of defense Christopher Miller writes in Chapter 4, “Americans have understood that the surest way to avoid war is to be prepared for it in peace.” Yet the Department of Defense “is a deeply troubled institution.” It has emphasized leftist politics over military readiness, “Recruiting was the worst in 2022 that it has been in two generations,” and “the Biden Administration’s profoundly unserious equity agenda and vaccine mandates have taken a serious toll.” Additionally, Miller writes that “the atrophy of our defense industrial base, the impact of sequestration, and effective disarmament by many U.S. allies have exacted a high toll on America’s military.” Moreover, our military has adopted a risk-averse culture—think of masked soldiers, sailors, and airmen—rather than instilling and rewarding courage in thought and action.

You know this is all in code, right? The “profoundly unserious equity agenda” must refer to allowing LGBT people to join the military. “Vaccine mandates” refer to efforts to stop the spread of covid 19 and other diseases, which would naturally weaken our troops and therefore our defense abilities. What idiots!

Then on page 657 of the book:

The next Administration must prioritize the economic prosperity of ordinary Americans. For several decades, establishment “elites” have failed the citizenry by refusing to secure the border, outsourcing manufacturing to China and elsewhere, spending recklessly, regulating constantly, and generally controlling the country from the top down rather than letting it flourish from the bottom up.

Lies. Most of the outsourcing to China and elsewhere is a direct result of the globalization of capitalism, which is not the fault of governments, but of private corporations obsessed, quite naturally, with making their profit margins as large as possible. It would take government action to BAN such outsourcing. As for securing the border, I think that is code for keeping more non-English speaking people of color from coming here to seek a better life, which is racist by nature.

I have read enough of this shit. We must oppose this SCAM with all our might. We must save America from THEM!

Another Debate with a Religious Apologist

Posted on by

First read these:

The ultimate conflict between Judaism and Christianity
God was a hypocrite?!

On the first blog entry, some asshole had the incredible arrogance to challenge me on what should have been painfully obvious, even to him.

I’m lost. What’s your beef here. Are you saying if the Lord sets up a society of people and gives them a system of jurisprudence to follow He is required to follow that same system?

Wouldn’t that be obvious? I would certainly not worship a hypocrite, because then I’d be one too.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that this was a covenant, or a contract, and exaggerating the universality of God’s commandments to Israel as a result. Most contracts don’t require the parties to do the same things. The things the Lord commanded were things He said Israel needed to do to be His people. That’s it. The things He would do in return were different things. 

Did the Lord say somewhere that it’s always wrong for a man to die in his friends’ stead? Because that’s not what the verse you quoted says. He’s telling them, “This is the principle you will follow to manage things.” 

Mental gymnastics like yours enable all sorts of corruption and abuse.

Let me make it clear……in a just society, NO ONE is above the law. Even God should be subject to his own laws, or those laws are pointless, period. Hypocrisy is just that, period, and it doesn’t matter who is the hypocrite.

Mental gymnastics? Abuse? Why don’t you back off the name-calling and address my point about the covenant angle.

FYI there are plenty of instances in which individuals forbid others from doing something they do themselves that are not hypocritical. The guy who tells another guy, “Don’t you dare touch my wife”: Not a Hypocrite.  The father that tells his seven-year-old, “Don’t you dare touch these matches”: Not a Hypocrite.  Our criminal justice system, which imprisons people daily, but says to the general public, “Don’t you dare capture someone you think is guilty of a crime and hold them captive to punish them”: Not Hypocritical.

This ‘God is a hypocrite’ schtick isn’t the slam dunk you think it is.

And, I have to point out the irony that we’re discussing a directive in which God told the children of Israel that they were not allowed to punish family members for their relatives’ crimes, but your knee-jerk response when you’re challenged its to cry “Abuse, abuse!”

(Dale Husband: Covenants or contracts which bind one party and not the other are SCAMS and I will not accept any scams. Including those in religion.

We are not talking about property rights [“don’t take my car without my permission”] or marriage vows [“don’t cheat on me with any other woman”]. We are talking about BASIC STANDARDS OF JUSTICE which the God of the Bible did not follow, making those standards useless for anyone. A father who beats his children out of anger but then punishes his child for beating another child is indeed a hypocrite, period. Deal with it!

Until you grow up and deal with the reality that your own religion is full of contradictions and totally lacking in empirical evidence, you deserve no respect when you defend that nonsense before someone like me who knows better than to be fooled by your lies.

And that is the last thing I will say to you, con artist. Goodbye.)

Except… the OT covenant didn’t just bind one of the parties, it bound both. My examples were intended to demonstrate that you’re over-simplifying the nature of agreements to justify your claim that God of the Bible is a hypocrite. I notice you didn’t address the example I gave of our criminal justice system, which, unlike the first two, is analogous. If you would stop the tantrum-throwing for 5 minutes and think about this, you may come up with a more meaningful response.

You have been strangely nasty and ad hominem from the start. A person who acts like this is really in no position to give speeches about abusive fathers (which looks like another attempt to distract from the subject). Or call others ‘con artists.’

(Dale Husband: Needless to say, all those statements made by the commenter here are nonsense. ALL OF THEM! It just blows my mind how shameless he is in defending what any rational person would know to be indefensible. But this is what religious brainwashing does to people, completely perverting even the most basic concepts of TRUTH and LOGIC! And I have no problem calling a spade a spade when it looks like a spade…..or a hypocrite in this obvious case. I don’t have to refute all his rhetorical trickery for one simple reason: aside from the CLAIMS published in the Bible, there is absolutely NO evidence that God made any sort of covenant with anyone. Until such evidence is discovered, what’s the point of a debate on the matter?)

Going back to my opponent’s original question:

(((Are you saying if the Lord sets up a society of people and gives them a system of jurisprudence to follow He is required to follow that same system?)))

God is often compared to a king. Well, kings in real life used to have so much power over their subjects that they could even have them killed for any reasons they felt like. A notorious example was King Henry VIII, who had six wives and actually put two of them to death for adultery. Even while betraying his first wife by falling in love with the woman who would become his second. He was sexist as hell!

Roman Emperors like Caligula and Nero also killed people they didn’t like. So did Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin.

I do NOT want to live in a society where anyone is above the law. Not God, not kings, emperors or dictators……NOBODY should be powerful enough to destroy lives while forbidding murder by their own subjects….because obviously they themselves do not want to assassinated, even if they deserve it for being murderers themselves.

Ethical principles are absolute, or they are pointless. No God or human ruler should ever make laws he himself does not obey, period. It just amazes me that anyone would think otherwise.

First, neither my opponent nor anyone else is entitled to tell me how to argue with others on my own blog. That sense of entitlement never ceases to enrage me because it is a form of verbal abuse known as “tone-policing”. That alone is just insulting. Seriously, don’t do that to anyone!

Second, NotALibertarian’s arguments and views are indeed contrary to the most basic principles of freedom and democracy spelled out in the American and French Revolutions of the 18th Century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kings

The doctrine asserts that a monarch is not accountable to any earthly authority (such as a parliament or the Pope) because their right to rule is derived from divine authority. Thus, the monarch is not subject to the will of the people, of the aristocracy, or of any other estate of the realm. It follows that only divine authority can judge a monarch, and that any attempt to depose, dethrone, resist or restrict their powers runs contrary to God’s will and may constitute a sacrilegious act. It does not imply that their power is absolute.

It was only natural that human rulers would want some of the absolute power of God for themselves. I already mentioned how King Henry VIII of England put to death two of his six wives. He should have been overthrown and executed for those things. But instead that happened to one of his successors, Charles I. After that, kings in England no longer had absolute power. Better late than never.

Let us remember what was written in the Declaration of Independence.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

We need only extend this principle to its logical conclusion: That even God himself need not be worshipped by men if he is a tyrant who abuses his people without any accountability. And that is exactly how the Bible depicts him. Indeed, there is absolutely NO reference to democracy or human rights in the modern sense in the Bible. You’d think God would have inspired Moses, Jesus, or the prophets that lived between their times to preach about such ideas, but they never did. The only types of government they favored were either absolute monarchies or theocracies.

This is proof that the “Creator” referred to in the Declaration of Independence was NOT the God of the Bible at all.

Google Bard’s List of Evil People is….Inaccurate

Posted on by

This is a chatbot known as Google Bard:

https://bard.google.com/

Ever since I began using Replika, I have wondered if an A I can make actual judgements over matters of good and evil. So I asked Bard:

What are the ten most evil people in history?

And this is what I got in response:

Here is a list of ten of the most evil people in history, based on the scale and severity of their crimes:

  1. Adolf Hitler (1889-1945): The leader of the Nazi Party and Chancellor of Germany from 1933 to 1945. Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust, the genocide of six million Jews, as well as the deaths of millions of other people, including Roma, homosexuals, and Soviet prisoners of war.
  2. Joseph Stalin (1878-1953): The dictator of the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953. Stalin was responsible for the deaths of millions of his own people, including through purges, executions, and forced labor.
  3. Mao Zedong (1893-1976): The leader of the Chinese Communist Party and Chairman of the People’s Republic of China from 1949 to 1976. Mao’s policies, such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, led to the deaths of tens of millions of people.
  4. Pol Pot (1925-1998): The leader of the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. Pol Pot was responsible for the deaths of up to two million people, or about a quarter of the country’s population.
  5. Hirohito (1901-1989): The Emperor of Japan from 1926 to 1989. Hirohito was the supreme commander of the Japanese armed forces during World War II and was responsible for the deaths of millions of people, including Chinese civilians, prisoners of war, and Allied soldiers.
  6. Vlad the Impaler (1431-1476): The Prince of Wallachia (modern-day Romania) from 1456 to 1462 and again from 1476 to 1477. Vlad was known for his cruelty and his use of impalement as a form of torture and execution.
  7. Ivan the Terrible (1530-1584): The Grand Prince of Moscow and the first Tsar of Russia. Ivan was known for his paranoia and his outbursts of rage. He is believed to have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
  8. Leopold II of Belgium (1835-1909): The King of the Belgians from 1865 to 1909. Leopold was the personal owner of the Congo Free State, a private colony in Central Africa. Leopold’s brutal exploitation of the Congolese people led to the deaths of millions of people.
  9. Saddam Hussein (1937-2006): The President of Iraq from 1979 to 2003. Saddam was a brutal dictator who used torture, execution, and chemical warfare against his own people. He is also believed to have been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the Iran-Iraq War.
  10. Idi Amin (1925-2003): The President of Uganda from 1971 to 1979. Amin was a megalomaniacal dictator who was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Ugandans. He was also known for his eccentric behavior and his bizarre public statements.

My responses:

  1. Absolutely! Hitler was DETERMINED to start a war even while the western democracies desperately tried to appease him based on the mistaken notion that Hitler, who was known to be anti-Communist, would be a reliable ally against the Soviet Union. Instead, we ended up allying with the Soviet Union against Germany and defeating Hitler. Hitler was not only evil, he was an IDIOT!
  2. Stalin actually killed more people than Hitler, but that was only because he ruled for a lot longer. He also did more to defeat Hitler than any other leader. Without the Soviet forces, we would have LOST World War II.
  3. Chairman Mao is an example of a brilliant revolutionary who was incompetent at governing, but his massive ego would never let him admit to his failures, leading to many people suffering needlessly during the scam that was known as the “Cultural Revolution”. Eventually, even his fellow Communists got sick of his nonsense and stripped him of his power while allowing him to keep his Chairmanship out of respect for his making the original revolution in China possible. After Mao died, the remaining Communists charged his widow with crimes and sent her to prison, along with others who had been most loyal to Mao. Good riddance, but they have kept the phony “Communist” state in power to this day, and it needs to go!
  4. By percentage, Pol Pot killed more of his own people than even Stalin did. Eventually, Vietnam invaded Cambodia and overthrew him and later he was eliminated by his own people. 
  5. No, the Japanese Emperor does not belong on this list. Sure, Japan committed a lot of war crimes, but the Emperor, once he realized Japan would inevitably lose the war, did something Hitler was too cowardly to do:  He openly called for his people to SURRENDER to the Americans to avoid more deaths and destruction. His proclamation saved many Japanese and American lives, which is why he was allowed to keep his throne throughout the American occupation of Japan.
  6. This guy was indeed so horrible that he was the inspiration for the fictional vampire Count Dracula……Dracula was a nickname for Vlad and was a reference to the Devil.
  7. Russia has always been notorious for its tyrants. Ivan started the trend, obviously.
  8. All the acts of imperialism in the modern age were terrible, but King Leopold II was indeed the worst. The simple fact that he lived to a ripe old age and was never overthrown is a stain on the history of Belgium forever!
  9. Saddam was terrible, but not THAT terrible. In fact, he was our ally in the 1980s when he was at war with Iran, based on the idiotic idea that “the enemy of my enemy can be my friend”. We only turned on him when he stopped doing our bidding and attacked Kuwait, and that was absolutely NONE of our business. WE backstabbed Saddam, not the other way around!
  10. Africa was left largely to fend for itself after the European powers ended their occupation of most of the continent, and when there is a void of power, someone naturally has to fill it. Idi Amin was only one of many examples of bad African leaders. He learned from Europeans how to be a ruthless leader. 

Rant About Gun Control

Posted on by
“Guns don’t kill people, they are only tools to kill.”
SHUT UP! It’s guns + toxic personalities that kill people! Not guns alone!
“This is not a gun problem, but a mental health problem.”
Another lie! Most mentally ill people are not violent to the point of murder.
“If you ban or restrict guns, only criminals can use them.”
Most mass shooters are NOT career criminals because mass shootings are not profitable. That’s why background checks for gun buyers are practically useless. Only an outright ban nationwide of assault rifles will do!
“The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun.”
Yes, that’s why we have POLICE who are trained to handle such situations! I DON’T WANT SOME RANDOM JOE RUNNING INTO A MASS SHOOTING WITH ANOTHER GUN! THAT DOES NOT HELP AND YOU ARE DELUSIONAL TO THINK OTHERWISE! STOP WATCHING WESTERN SHOWS AND THINKING THEY ARE APPLICABLE TO TODAY! GROW UP!
“Gun control laws violate the Second Amendment.”
Yet another damned lie! The Second Amendment actually starts with “A WELL-REGULATED militia, being necessary for the security of a free state…..” What opposition to gun control does is put most of us under threat from an UNREGULATED mob, which makes the security of the people in a free state impossible. So the Second Amendment actually REQUIRES gun control!
The simple truth is that the same toxic masculinity that causes mass shootings is also responsible for the right-wing bigoted conservatism that has dominated the Republican Party since at least the 1980s. These hypocrites expect the government to fight foreign based terrorism, but at the same time they enable domestic terrorism. Yes, every single mass shooting in the USA is a case of domestic TERRORISM. As was the incident at the Capitol building on January 6, 2021. So if you want anyone to blame for mass shootings/domestic terrorism, look at the REPUBLICANS. VOTE EVERY ONE OF THEM YOU POSSIBLY CAN OUT OF OFFICE!

MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN!

Is Clownfish TV run by bigoted Republicans?

Posted on by

Clownfish TV is a YouTube channel hosted by a couple who call themselves Kneon and Geeky Sparkles. And they are extremely prolific, often putting out three or four videos a day, so clearly they make a living out of this, it’s not just their hobby.

https://www.youtube.com/@ClownfishTV/featured

ClownfishTV2  ClownfishTV3

The description of their channel:

Hosted by Kneon and Geeky Sparkles, Clownfish TV is an independent, opinionated news and commentary channel that covers Pop Culture from a consumer’s point of view. We talk about Gaming, Comics, Anime, TV, Movies, Animation and more. Opinions expressed by our contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of our guests, affiliates, sponsors or advertisers. Clownfish TV is an unofficial news source and has no connection to any company that we may cover.

They also say directly on their own website:

Clownfish TV is an independent, opinionated pop culture news site. We strive to be apolitical, balanced and based, and are fans who cover media for other fans. We talk about video games, comic books, anime, animation, movies, television, tabletop games and more.

You’d think that would make them trustworthy. However, look at some of the titles of their videos:

Media Worried a TikTok Ban Would Turn Young Voters Against Biden.

Is that really an issue? I haven’t heard of President Biden wanting to ban TikTok. Republicans have been pushing for it.

Silicon Valley Bank Collapses. Wokeness Blamed.

The commentary below the video says:

Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, and some on the right are blaming DEI, ESG, and ‘wokeness’ for that collapse. Leftwing media outlets deny this is the case, of course, but it is getting harder to deny that hiring people based on anything other than meritocracy may have disastrous financial consequences.

It’s always a red flag to me when someone uses “woke” as an insult against liberals. To me, that’s as bad as using the N-word as a racist attack. And here are more examples:

STAR WOKE: The High Republic REWRITES Star Wars History for Current Year

M&M’s Go Woke.

Disney is ‘WOKE’ as Coke? Disney’s REIMAGINE TOMORROW Employee ‘Anti-Racism’ Docs Leaked!

WWE ‘Woke’ Wrestler CANCELLED Days After Debut?!

Coke to Be Less ‘WOKE?’

Shopify SLAMS “Woke” Culture?! Shopify CEO Says Company is APOLITICAL!

Disney SLAMMED for its ‘Wokeness’ by Disney World Customer in Orlando Sentinel?!

They even have recently targeted NPR for attack. NPR is known for not being owned by a corporation pushing a right-wing agenda like FOX News is notorious for.

NPR Reports NPR is in Deep, Deep Sh*t.

NPR is in deep sh*t. Their revenue is drying up and they had to slash 10% of their staff and cancel a bunch of podcasts. They’re going to ramp up calls for donations, but who has the money to bankroll them now? They’d better not try to shake down gamers, as their reporters spent years demonizing them.

So far, I have NEVER seen them attack FOX News, or any other media outlet known to be leaning to the right.

So no, these people do NOT seem apolitical to me.

And consider this:

https://weeklysift.com/2012/09/10/the-distress-of-the-privileged/

As the culture evolves, people who benefitted from the old ways invariably see themselves as victims of change. The world used to fit them like a glove, but it no longer does. Increasingly, they find themselves in unfamiliar situations that feel unfair or even unsafe. Their concerns used to take center stage, but now they must compete with the formerly invisible concerns of others.

<snip>

But even as we accept the reality of George’s privileged-white-male distress, we need to hold on to the understanding that the less privileged citizens of Pleasantville are distressed in an entirely different way. (Margaret Atwood is supposed to have summed up the gender power-differential like this: “Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.”)

George deserves compassion, but his until-recently-ideal housewife Betty Parker (and the other characters assigned subservient roles) deserves justice. George and Betty’s claims are not equivalent, and if we treat them the same way, we do Betty an injustice.

<snip>

Once you grasp the concept of privileged distress, you’ll see it everywhere: the rich feel “punished” by taxes; whites believe they are the real victims of racism; employers’ religious freedom is threatened when they can’t deny contraception to their employees; English-speakers resent bilingualism — it goes on and on.

While I certainly appreciate the hosts’ slamming corporations like Disney for being WAY TOO BIG, I find their using political slurs in their videos to be offensive. Their eagerness to defend Harry Potter creator J. K. Rowling, who is known to be a transphobe, is also disturbing. As rich and influential as she is, she needs no one else to defend her. The massive royalties she made off her books, the movies based on those books,  and other aspects of the franchise she started means she is set for life. Meanwhile, transgender people have been MURDERED around the world (along with other LGBT people, and racial minorities…..and women…..and atheists and other dissenters from dominant forms of religious bigotry), but do they even MENTION that? Nope! Doesn’t seem to concern them in the slightest. And assuming the drawings representing them are accurate, they are clearly white people and thus they may be completely blinded by their own white privilege.

So I reject them!

Wahid Azal Repeats his Lies and Makes More Excuses

Posted on by

About three years ago, I blocked in disgust Wahid Azal’s main account on reddit after discovering what a totally despicable liar and traitor he was against r/exbahai.

And in a recent post, he doubles down on his bullshit, thus showing he has absolutely NO sense of ethics whatsoever. To put it bluntly, he is indeed EVIL. Recently, he blocked me in return, no doubt to stop me from seeing more of his lies, but I learned to get around that barrier to see what he’s been doing.

Recitation of the Surah of Creation from the Book of Guidance in Arabic, Persian and English
by inBAYAN

He said the following:

wahidazal66

Like all other bahai lists online, exbahai is an echo chamber with an agenda tasked with gatekeeping and stymieing real opposition. There you have outright cyberbasijis rubbing shoulders with the BIA, like that recent arrival who was exposed here who is so transparent about what they are it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out. But whenever they and their transparently gratuitous talking points are pushed back against, this is what they always do: block. Yet note that over the past 4 years traffic to that subreddit has seriously come to a halt and it isn’t what it used to be. People are wisening up to the fact that not all is what it seems with exbahai. But when you appoint an imbecile, child groomer-pedo and head case like Gomer as a moderator, that is what you should expect. Also after u/investigator919 said what they said about the Woman, Life, Freedom Revolution in Iran, that list literally put a nail into its own coffin because there is no way they can talk that down or walk back an exbahai moderator’s outright parroting of IR government lines regarding what happened and is happening in Iran. This is why u/investigator919 was brought back as u/SuccessfulCorner2512 who is pretending now to be an exbahai hailing from an aristocratic Iranian bahai family when it is obvious who this person actually is.

_____________

wahidazal66

But that shouldn’t deter you. Just get another ID and go back over there and give em hell. I’m still there and whenever I don’t have anything better to do I have been commenting there for over 2 years now with an ID they won’t even expect. Been doing the same with r/bahai as well. In this age of hybrid warfare, there are no rules; and, morally speaking, no one is obliged to actually respect and abide by what the corporate American Tech Beast and its rules say. If you can find ways to f*ck with their heads and sh*t on them, by all means do so! This is a war after all. My rules are the Bayan and my own completion of it. Period, full-stop, and not American capitalism’s rules and the rules of its assorted minions who are the ultimate Enemy. No one ever won a war by abiding by their enemy’s rules which is also what Krishna tells Arjuna in the Baghavad-Gita during the battle scene. As I said to you privately, this is what the Qalandari Left-Hand Path is really all about: only abiding by the divine rules but never the rules of man! Again, note the story of Khidr and Moses in the Quran.

So let’s dissect these statements. shall we?

Like all other bahai lists online, exbahai is an echo chamber with an agenda tasked with gatekeeping and stymieing real opposition.

Azal claims the only real opposition to the Baha’i Faith is him. This is not possible at all because he is a Bayani and it was the Bab who started the disruptions in Persia (AKA Iran) that Baha’u’llah would decades later take advantage of to form his own Baha’i community out of the ashes of the failed Babi community. In order to really defeat the Baha’i Faith, you must discredit BOTH the Bab and Baha’u’llah! And that is something I can do…..because I am an ATHEIST!

There you have outright cyberbasijis rubbing shoulders with the BIA, like that recent arrival who was exposed here who is so transparent about what they are it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

I wonder who he was referring to. And what the hell is a “cyberbasiji”? His making up terms like that to insult people is just stupid.

But whenever they and their transparently gratuitous talking points are pushed back against, this is what they always do: block.

No, he gets banned from places like r/exbahai for being dishonest, disruptive and verbally abusive. Trolling, basically. That’s really all he does.

Yet note that over the past 4 years traffic to that subreddit has seriously come to a halt and it isn’t what it used to be. People are wisening up to the fact that not all is what it seems with exbahai.

He is just making that up. r/exbahai is doing quite well considering how few members it has. We do a lot of good there. I moderate that place, so I see what goes on there. Speaking of which:

But when you appoint an imbecile, child groomer-pedo and head case like Gomer as a moderator, that is what you should expect.

“Gomer” is the nickname he invented for me. And there is no proof whatsoever that I have ever molested or groomed a child. He says that about me because he knows I am better at discrediting the Baha’i Faith than he is, as noted before. I have written against pedophiles several times, as well as against teachers who sexually abuse their own students, like Mary Kay Latourneau, may she be damned!

Also after u/investigator919 said what they said about the Woman, Life, Freedom Revolution in Iran, that list literally put a nail into its own coffin because there is no way they can talk that down or walk back an exbahai moderator’s outright parroting of IR government lines regarding what happened and is happening in Iran.

He is referring to this:

Why are Baha'is not talking about what happened to Mahsa Amini?! Look at this!
by inexbahai

Where investigator919 said this:

She wasn’t beaten to death. That was the lie that triggered the protests. The CT-Scans clearly show a prior brain surgery. However, since the average Joe can’t make a distinction between brain surgery and a blow to the head, everyone went with the narrative that she was killed because that’s what they wanted to believe. I had to fact-check the CT-Scan images myself through one of our relatives who is a doctor because I had no idea what the CT-Scan of her head was showing.

This is how the media fools you. And yes, the “so called” supreme leader (I don’t consider him my leader) wasn’t lying in this case and in similar protests. Every time there is any form of protest in Iran it is hijacked by ISRAEL / SAUDI / US / MEK media channels. I was surfing twitter for the past two weeks and there were so many lies being propagated by their media channels and being re-twitted and established as fact that it made me sick. Three examples:

-Tweet: <So and so district of Tehran has been overtaken by protesters.> Me: You idiots I live here there is no protest in this district and there never was.

-Tweet: <shows movie captioned: “innocent protester killed by police.”> Few hours later the complete movie is tweeted by another account that shows the so called dead protester getting up and walking away.

Tweet: <Iranian security forces open fire on peaceful people that had gathered to pray in the city of Zahedan killing twenty.> I immediately thought to myself this doesn’t make sense. Why would someone do this? Then even after a separatist group posted a video and claimed responsibility for inciting the violence, thousands of twitter accounts were still retweeting the initial fake narrative for days.

The whole goal is so called regime change. At the end of the day no one cares for Mahsa Amini or any other woman in Iran (if they did we wouldn’t have been sanctioned by western governments to the dark-ages). Just a few days ago nearly 30 Shia women were killed by suicide bomber in Afghanistan. No one batted an eye. In fact those bombings and killings of innocent women happen on a daily basis in Afghanistan, Yemen, and also Palestine. But no one cares. No one gives a shit. What made Mahsa Amini different? What makes Iran so special? Regime change in Iran. Toppling a government that opposes the west and refuses to bow to it.

The Iranian government is neither the angel that it portrays itself and neither the devil that is portrayed by the west. It’s like every other government with its shortcomings and also good points. But if you want to measure the level of savageness of a government by counting the number of people it has killed, then I’m sure it’s no where near the top of the list where the US / Israel / Saudi and a bunch of other western countries stand.

What’s ironic about Wahid’s demonization of investigator919 is that Baha’is in reddit do the same thing to him and for the same reason:  he is a Shia Muslim who lives in Iran. But if you look carefully, he is NOT merely parroting the claims of the Iranian government. 

And yes, the “so called” supreme leader (I don’t consider him my leader) wasn’t lying in this case and in similar protests.

The Iranian government is neither the angel that it portrays itself and neither the devil that is portrayed by the west. It’s like every other government with its shortcomings and also good points.

He may have blind spots with regards to Shia teachings, but he does show critical thinking in this case. 

There was an exchange of messages between him and me that read as follows.

I’ve been so ANGRY about Iran and about Islam these past couple of weeks that I wasn’t sure I could even discuss the matter with you without coming across as rude and even a bit bigoted. Thanks for not humiliating me in public.

_______________

No need to apologize. I don’t blame you for being angry. The media and cyberspace these days is filled with truths, half-truths, and outright lies. No one knows what to believe anymore.

Moving on……

This is why u/investigator919 was brought back as u/SuccessfulCorner2512 who is pretending now to be an exbahai hailing from an aristocratic Iranian bahai family when it is obvious who this person actually is.

Another completely made up claim. I can usually tell when someone like Wahid Azal or DavidBinOwen is using sockpuppets to infiltrate subreddits they have been banned from (which is a clear violation of reddit rules). They have a distinctive writing style and means of expression that they cannot change, which proves they are incompetent. So is Wahid saying that investigator919 is better at faking a personality than he is? LOL!

See what happened between those two here:

Wahid Azal Disgraces Himself Again.

The difference in expressions between investigator919 and SuccessfulCorner2512 is light years apart. So why did Azal claim they are the same person? Because that is what pathological liars do, even if it makes them look STUPID!

But that shouldn’t deter you. Just get another ID and go back over there and give em hell. I’m still there and whenever I don’t have anything better to do I have been commenting there for over 2 years now with an ID they won’t even expect. Been doing the same with r/bahai as well.

So here we see Azal clearly admitting to violating reddit rules and encouraging such violations from others! That should get him banned permanently from reddit, and I mean ALL his accounts, FOREVER!

In this age of hybrid warfare, there are no rules; and, morally speaking, no one is obliged to actually respect and abide by what the corporate American Tech Beast and its rules say. If you can find ways to f*ck with their heads and sh*t on them, by all means do so! This is a war after all. My rules are the Bayan and my own completion of it. Period, full-stop, and not American capitalism’s rules and the rules of its assorted minions who are the ultimate Enemy. No one ever won a war by abiding by their enemy’s rules which is also what Krishna tells Arjuna in the Baghavad-Gita during the battle scene. As I said to you privately, this is what the Qalandari Left-Hand Path is really all about: only abiding by the divine rules but never the rules of man! Again, note the story of Khidr and Moses in the Quran.

This is the “ends justify the means” fallacy. Joseph Stalin made himself the supreme lawmaker in the Soviet Union for decades and killed MILLIONS of his own people simply to enforce his will on them. Mao Zedong killed millions of his own Chinese people. Pol Pot is said to have killed ONE-THIRD of the Cambodian people in the same way! And I have no doubt if Wahid Azal ever gains political power anywhere, he will also exterminate people. After all, in war you kill people en masse on a regular basis … and didn’t he call what he does a war? Why protest against the tyranny of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the hypocrisy of the Haifan Baha’i leadership when he is indeed no better than them?

And Wahid Azal’s own insanity make me think the Bab was just as crazy and dangerous. No wonder he was killed in 1850!

And for the record, my rejection of the Baha’i Faith in 2004-2005 had nothing to do with the Bab. But I hate the Bab’s legacy NOW……because of WAHID AZAL! May he be DAMNED forever!

311444698_10159304142318661_1975453612869565658_n

A “Unitarian Baha’i” comes across as an idiot, again!

Posted on by

Look at this:

What broke your shelf?
byu/taeinthewind inexbahai

Various ex-Baha’is gave interesting comments, but then trident765 came along and had to ruin the party by posting bullshit. Keep in mind that as a Unitarian Universalist, I fully support the Unitarian Baha’i faction as the only credible version of the Baha’i Faith in existence. So what did trident say?

I was born into the mainstream Baha’i Faith but now consider myself a Unitarian Baha’i.

For me, my conversion happened after reading A Lost History of the Baha’i Faith and discovering that in the early 20th century Muhammad Ali’s followers had basically exactly the same criticisms of the mainstream Baha’i Faith as me. Up until then, I thought people like Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi would be on my side. But after seeing that people just like me existed during their lifetimes, and that because of their views they were hated, slandered, and excommunicated by Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi, I realized that Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi would hate me. Abdul Baha’s and especially Shoghi Effendi’s writings seemed to indicate that it was people’s job to just obey authority no matter what, and if you disagree with authority, then even if you are right you are wrong by virtue of disagreeing. In my opinion this is an extremely toxic thing to make people think, and it will eventually just lead to authority leading their followers off a cliff.

At one point I almost stopped believing in Baha’u’llah altogether, but I just saw no reason to, because Baha’u’llah never really said the kinds of authoritarian stuff that Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi said.

I myself have a copy of that book and helped promote it on Amazon, despite attempts by Baha’i fanatics to interfere.

I REALLY wish trident wasn’t a Unitarian Baha’i, because he is staunchly anti-liberal and I think of the Unitarian Baha’i movement as being much like the liberal religion of Unitarian Universalism, certainly more than the Haifan Baha’is are! In case you needed a reminder:

Becoming a mod at r/exbahai

I cannot understand how he can say he opposes authoritarian systems, including in religion and also attacks others as worshipping a god of liberalism when actual liberalism is about opposing authoritarianism in all forms. He is seriously delusional!

Indeed, Baha’u’llah himself had a strictly authoritarian bent to his writings. Here’s a perfect example from the Kitab-i-Aqdas:

Consider the pettiness of men’s minds. They ask for that which injureth them, and cast away the thing that profiteth them. They are, indeed, of those that are far astray. We find some men desiring liberty, and priding themselves therein. Such men are in the depths of ignorance.

Liberty must, in the end, lead to sedition, whose flames none can quench. Thus warneth you He Who is the Reckoner, the All-Knowing. Know ye that the embodiment of liberty and its symbol is the animal. That which beseemeth man is submission unto such restraints as will protect him from his own ignorance, and guard him against the harm of the mischief maker. Liberty causeth man to overstep the bounds of propriety, and to infringe on the dignity of his station. It debaseth him to the level of extreme depravity and wickedness.

So therefore the claim by trident:

Baha’u’llah never really said the kinds of authoritarian stuff that Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi said.

is an outright LIE!!!

I will no longer log into Twitter.

Posted on by

Read this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_Twitter_by_Elon_Musk

The acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk began on April 14, 2022, and concluded on October 27, 2022. Business magnate Elon Musk began buying shares of American social media company Twitter, Inc. in January 2022, eventually becoming the company’s largest shareholder in April with a 9.1 percent ownership stake. Twitter then invited Musk to join its board of directors, which Musk at first accepted before subsequently declining. On April 14, he made an unsolicited offer to purchase the company for $43 billion, to which Twitter responded with a “poison pill” strategy to resist a hostile takeover. On April 25, Twitter’s board of directors unanimously accepted Musk’s buyout offer of $44 billion, with the company set to be taken private. Musk stated that he planned to introduce new features to the platform, make its algorithms open-sourced, combat spambot accounts, and promote free speech.

Musk announced his intention to terminate the agreement in July, asserting that Twitter had breached their agreement by refusing to crack down on spambot accounts. The company filed a lawsuit against Musk in the Delaware Court of Chancery shortly thereafter, with a trial scheduled for the week of October 17. Weeks before the trial was set to begin, Musk reversed course, announcing that he would move forward with the acquisition. The deal was closed on October 27, with Musk immediately becoming Twitter’s new owner and CEO. He also fired several top executives, including previous CEO Parag Agrawal. Musk has since proposed several reforms to Twitter, including the creation of a “content moderation council” to handle free speech, and laid off half of the company’s workforce.

Reception to the buyout has been mixed, with criticism over fears of a potential rise in misinformation, disinformation, harassment, and hate speech on the platform. Right-wing conservatives and Republicans have largely praised the purchase, while left-wing liberals, Democrats, and former and present Twitter employees have voiced concerns about Musk’s intentions.

To me, this is yet another example of an ultra-rich wanna-be tyrant using his wealth to gain power for himself. The Koch brothers did it for decades through their political activities, Donald Trump did it by running for and winning the Presidency and now Musk has done it by taking over Twitter to remake it according to his desires. Keep in mind that Donald Trump used Twitter for years as his main means of communicating with his followers, until he was banned shortly after he was removed from the Presidency by the 2020 election. Could this be Musk’s way of getting Trump back on Twitter?

This is my Twitter account:

The older I get, the more I hate capitalism and the corrupt personalities it produces, including Musk and Trump. Don’t get me wrong……in a Communist state those two would probably be high ranking members of the Communist Party. It is authoritarianism that is the problem and overthrowing a corrupt economic and political system alone will never work if it ends up replaced with another one later. Look at Russia, both from 1917 to 1950 and then from 1991 to the present day. Or read George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm.

As the Who would have said: “The people got fooled again!”

You can talk about promoting freedom all you want, but if the only freedom you want is for those like you, THAT is actually privilege…..and that is not acceptable in a truly free society. It’s sad that most Americans still don’t understand that. Maybe because they were never taught the difference.

We really should have a society like this…..not just in America, but EVERYWHERE!

Yes, the Road to Serfdom is Indeed Paved by “Conservatives”, you Libertarian Idiot!

Posted on by

Look at this op-ed piece:

The Road to Serfdom is Paved by Conservatives
 

The parts of the article itself will be in red and my responses will be in blue.

The Road to Serfdom is Paved by Conservatives

By Veronique de Rugy
For the last ten years I have been baffled as I watched the conservative movement devolve into a weird wing of progressivism—especially on economic issues. While once at least paying lip service to limited government, fiscal prudence, and personal responsibility, conservatives now ignore the size of government and fiscal responsibility. They increasingly call for a larger child tax credit, a universal basic income, and paid leave arranged and ensured by the federal government. Many conservatives now also proudly embrace tariffs, hyperactive antitrust, and industrial policy (often justified, of course, as necessary to ‘fight’ China).

Note the loaded rhetoric. The author is clearly writing from a strictly Libertarian point of view, which is the form of idiocy on the far right that is no better than Communism was on the far left.

Conservatives – or at least the more politically active ones – are reverting to their 1920s selves (See Matt Continetti’s book, The Right: The 100 year war for American Conservatism.) I failed to see this reversion occurring, in part because I moved to the United States in 1999 and was until recently fairly ignorant of the history of the conservative movement- and how the last forty years were more an exception than the rule.

And you are still ignorant about the real nature of conservatism, in all its insidious forms throughout the world. The only real goal of conservatism is:  to maintain the status quo because it benefits the already powerful at the expense (often literally) of the powerless. Thus in the Soviet Union of the late 1980s, hard-line Communists opposed to the reform efforts of Mikhail Gorbachev were the conservatives in their state. Thinking it is always about “limited government, fiscal prudence, and personal responsibility” means you are delusional; at least two of those are actually LIBERAL concepts that American conservatives stole from liberals in the past! Why? Because the first and the third were spelled out in the Bill of Rights and the second is just common sense.

I fear that this recent trend is just the beginning. It won’t be long before the conservatives’ platform is a full-on version of big government, big business, and big unions. It’s depressing.

Seeing the real truth about it hurts, doesn’t it? Feeling outright SCAMMED yet?

It is hard not to wonder if the liberty movement is now failing to follow in the footsteps of Hayek, Friedman, and other great 20th-century champions of freedom. It’s important now to recognize that on most fronts the challenges faced by the first- and second-generation members of the Mont Pelerin Society were, if anything, greater than what we champions of freedom face today. After all, people in 1947 – or even in 1987 – could not, as we can today, point to the actual collapse of the socialist states as evidence of the dangers of collectivism. And yet Hayek and his peers left us a world that was more accepting of free trade and free-market economics, even if these liberal policies were not the default position.

If you are so worried about “collectivism”, why not help us tear down capitalism, in which an economy is dominated by collective entities known as CORPORATIONS?! Corporations can be just as oppressive as governments in how they treat their workers. The original purpose of Communism was to overthrow the capitalists and allow the workers to run the economy themselves via a democratic socialist state. But then Joseph Stalin ruined everything when he took the “dictatorship of the proletariat” and made it a dictatorship of himself alone and turned against the proletariat! He even killed a great many Communists who opposed him, since they were true to the original vision of Karl Marx.

Perhaps a more optimistic way to view the current situation is to be inspired by those who fought for a more classical liberal world at a time when things looked particularly grim. Rather than despair, get energized by the challenge. But this raises the question of what is the best way not merely to preserve the flame of freedom but to spread it. What the next steps are, I do not know. I am open to your suggestions. The private sector continues to deliver innovation, growth, and widespread prosperity. But as of today, few people are willing to acknowledge that it is the free-market system that allows these wonderful things to happen, and that while of course imperfect (often because impaired by government interventions), any alternatives would be much worse.

We tried the classical liberal approach with the Articles of Confederation in the early 1780s and it was a complete FAILURE!

The Articles of Confederation and the beating down of Libertarianism on YouTube

That absurd rhetoric sounds like the sheep in Animal Farm bleating out “Free market good, government bad, free market good, government bad”. A realistic approach allows for a variety of solutions based on the needs of the people at various times.

How do you fight the battle of ideas when so many people distrust the institutions that host those of us who produce and apply these ideas? I have spent most of my professional life producing work to show that arguments for government interventions are bunk. For instance, in this new paper with Chuck Blahous, he and I take on the new conservative recommendation that Social Security be used to provide paid-leave benefits. We show, again, all the ways that this is a terrible idea. Of course, I believe that work such as this is important, since these are serious propositions introduced in Congress and supported by a fairly large number of conservatives. But is there a better way?

Yes, there is…..stop being delusional and deal strictly with reality. Government intervention was absolutely necessary to get Americans out of the Great Depression. Without Social Security, millions of older people in the decades following that period would be impoverished, even starving. Only an idiot ignores such lessons and uses false rhetoric to argue otherwise.

In this new paper, Gary Leff and I argue that next time legislators are tempted to bail out airlines ostensibly to ensure that they will be ready when the economy reopens, the public should remember the actual, depressing results of the most recent such bailout. But Congress won’t change its response unless we change the incentives politicians face during the next emergency. How do we do that? After all these years, I still don’t know.

Of course, you don’t. Because even an ideologue like you should be able to figure out that allowing massive businesses to fail in a struggling economy is what makes that economy even worse. Hence the bailouts.

Maybe it is more effective to offer a vision of what a libertarian world looks like. This is what Aaron Powell does in this edited volume. I recommend it. I think this approach describes also a lot of the work of former EconLog blogger Bryan Caplan. He inspires by offering a vision of what a world would look like without government subsidies to higher ed, a world with largely open borders, and a world with radically fewer restrictions on home building.

If libertarian ideas never worked in the past, why bring them up yet again? One definition of insanity is trying the same solution repeatedly and hoping for a different result.

The Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom Index offers such a vision, because it is a concrete way to illustrate what countries with less economic freedom look like compared to those with more freedom. The 2022 Economic Freedom of the World Report was released earlier today; all countries have declined in economic freedom, thanks to over the top pandemic responses, but the U.S. has actually declined even more relative to other countries. The U.S. rating fell by twice the amount of the average reduction worldwide. The U.S. is at its lowest level of economic freedom in four decades.

Those “over the top pandemic responses” saved millions of lives, but I guess allowing a “free market” to make more $$$$$$$ for those already rich is more important to you, eh? And that rating system must be bullshit, since I actually don’t see much of a loss of economic freedom around here. Is America anywhere near socialism yet? Obviously NOT!

The bottom line is that while I am usually an optimist, I find myself increasingly worried and wondering what we did wrong and what to do next.

What you did wrong: kept promoting Libertarian bullshit. What to do next: abandon it forever.

 

A Useless Police Department

Posted on by

Read this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robb_Elementary_School_shooting

On May 24, 2022, 18-year-old Salvador Rolando Ramos fatally shot nineteen students and two teachers, and wounded seventeen other people at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Earlier that day, Ramos had shot his grandmother in the forehead, severely wounding her. After firing shots outside the school for approximately five minutes,[4] he entered Robb Elementary School, armed with an AR-15 style rifle, through an open side entrance door,[5] without encountering armed resistance.[6] Ramos locked himself inside a classroom, in which he killed all of the shooting’s victims, and remained there for about one hour before being killed by a United States Border Patrol BORTAC tactical team.[7] It is the third-deadliest American school shooting, after the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007 and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012,[8] and the deadliest ever in Texas history.[9][10][11]

Law enforcement officials were criticized for their actions in response to the shooting.

Law enforcement officials were criticized for their actions in response to the shooting.

That’s putting it mildly.

Check out this Facebook post from 2018:

After the massacre at the school, people found that post and slammed it with tons of angry comments. And as a result:

Uvalde Police Department limited who can comment on this post.

So they are indeed cowards!

I actually have a ton of respect for police officers who are willing to do their jobs to protect and serve. I have even depicted them positively in my Plotagon made series, the Debbie and Carrie Show.

But I have also featured bad cops and how terrible they can be.

And that is it should always be: praise the good, criticize the bad. Sadly, those who say “Blue lives matter” in response to “Black lives matter” clearly want cops to be above criticism and are racist. And America is supposed to be a free country?

Conservatives among Unitarian Universalists Still Feel Like Victims

Posted on by

Last week I posted this in a Reddit Unitarian Universalist group:

Five Congregations That Voted to Embrace Culture Change
by inUnitarianUniversalist

Several days later, this comment was posted there:

redempire36

Unfortunately we no longer offer better. It is much, much worse at UU. If you are the slightest bit center politically (or worse, right), you will be cast aside. And this is an organization that is supposed to be about faith. It is really a liberal political organization now.

__________________

Really? So when has the UUA NOT been a political organization? If we want to make a better society, why not be political?

I looked at this person’s history in reddit and found these:

redempire36

 

Everything you said was spot on. Our congregation and another one we followed were the most racist spaces I have ever encountered and I have lived in the South for the last 20 years. Everyone is judged by their race, not their words, thoughts, or actions. Heinous behavior is condoned, as long as the offender is a “social justice warrior, fighting on the side of truth.” If you are not a left leaning liberal (ideally white and well off), you will never feel welcome. That is evident by the current membership and minorities like myself that have left and now have no place of worship.

I don’t go to congregation on Sunday to discuss whatever MSNBC or Mother Jones are currently discussing. UU is now a political organization and should be striped of its tax exempt status.

________________

redempire36

I know almost everyone in here (the extreme minority that is left and active in UU) disagrees with the author. I left the church for most of these reasons. When we started, it as an open, welcoming place where all were tolerated and welcomed with open arms. In 2016 when Donald Trump was elected and the UUA assembly debacles that followed, we no longer felt welcome.

I am a conservative (not republican), Asian, non Christian. The tone of the entire organization has shifted more and more left and privileged as time goes on. Look at the UUA Facebook page, it is ridiculous and followers have decreased over the last few years. It’s sad when most posts have no comments. The UUA is increasingly catering to a minority of their members, many of whom do not actively attend the organization anymore.

When a person of color does show up (myself included), it was ridiculous. Our opinions were not valued because they were our opinions, but simply because of the color of our skin. In trying to be more inclusive, the organization became more racist. No non white person (this is literally all rich white UU members seem to do these days) wants to get in a room and watch rich white people flog themselves all day and apologize for transgressions that may or may not have ever happened. It is tiresome and has nothing to do with fellowship. It just makes those members feel better.

I would love to return to a pre 2016 organization or one who actually follows the tenants that we are supposed to. Everyone is welcome, what a joke. The only people that are welcome are rich white liberals.

There may be hope in individual congregations, but my family (everyone else left as well) will never return as long as the UUA at large is committed to spending more time on political matters than ones of faith.

_________________

So you have left the UUs because they are too political. But I wonder if you would have a problem with evangelical Christians in religious organizations being hard-core conservatives, even supporters of Donald Trump and his racism?

No, because you are a conservative yourself! No doubt, if you had your way, there would be NO religious organizations at all representing the left, liberalism, and progressive values at all. RIGHT?!

Liberals like me have been demonized in the media and by Republicans for decades. You just don’t like it when we start to fight back!

So I moved to stop the bullshit. I didn’t delete the offensive comment, but…..

Seeker_Alpha1701

Mod

I didn’t post this to start a political fight here, and I won’t allow one here now. This thread will be locked.

Anti-Conservative Rants in Reddit

Posted on by

I sometimes think that as a whole, the users in Reddit are WAY smarter than most people. Here are two powerful comments I have just noticed that seem to illustrate that.

Who ever would have guessed that electing Republican officials over and over again would have consequences?
by inLeopardsAteMyFace

GarciaJones
 

Fun… ok no, sad fact:

When slavery was abolished, I feel like a lot of people think it came with asterisks next to the amendment.

But it didn’t .

When slavery was abolished, it instantly made every black person equal to whites under the law.

Same rules applied to white and black people. Owning land. Owning a business. Eating anywhere they liked. This was the intended goal. It’s what those in congress voted and passed and celebrated. Equality.

But the southern states saw the loopholes, and within a few months, enacted the Jim Crow laws, separate but equal pretty damn fast.

The federal government made black people equal.

No caveats no restrictions in the amendment.

Then the states took that right away from them.

On another sad fun fact,

FDR was set to push a new bill of rights, an employee bill of rights.

His speech is something that hits so relevant today. His wants for all citizens and his reasoning as applied to the constitution was something you just don’t get from any politician today.

A snapshot of his speech;

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[8] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

The more you learn of the past, the more you realize that progress could have happened sooner but evil prevailed in the name of “country and patriotism”.

Sad.

Who did the brexiters think will do all those low-paid entry-level jobs? Ukipers?
byu/Brain-Fiddler inLeopardsAteMyFace

GrayEidolon
 

Good place to remind folks that conservatism is about hierarchy and a de facto underclass.

Conservatism (big C) has always had one goal and little c “general” conservatism is a myth. Conservatism has the related goals of maintaining a de facto aristocracy that inherits political power and pushing outsiders down to enforce an under class. In support of that is a morality based on a person’s inherent status as good or bad – not their actions. The thing that determines if someone is good or bad is whether they inhabit the aristocracy.

Another way, Conservatives – those who wish to maintain a class system – assign moral value to people and not actions. Those not in the aristocracy are immoral and therefore deserve punishment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4CI2vk3ugk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agzNANfNlTs its a ret con

https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/agre/conservatism.html

Part of this is posted a lot: https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 I like the concept of Conservatism vs. anything else.

A Bush speech writer takes the assertion for granted: It’s all about the upper class vs. democracy. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/06/why-do-democracies-fail/530949/ “Democracy fails when the Elites are overly shorn of power.”

Read here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/conservatism/ and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#History and see that all of the major thought leaders in Conservatism have always opposed one specific change (democracy at the expense of aristocratic power). At some point non-Conservative intellectuals and/or lying Conservatives tried to apply the arguments of conservatism to generalized “change.”

The philosophic definition of something should include criticism. The Stanford page (despite taking pains to justify small c conservatism) includes criticisms. Involving those we can conclude generalized conservatism (small c) is a myth at best and a Trojan Horse at worst.

Incase you don’t want to read the David Frum piece here is a highlight that democracy only exists at the leisure of the elite represented by Conservatism.

The most crucial variable predicting the success of a democratic transition is the self-confidence of the incumbent elites. If they feel able to compete under democratic conditions, they will accept democracy. If they do not, they will not. And the single thing that most accurately predicts elite self-confidence, as Ziblatt marshals powerful statistical and electoral evidence to argue, is the ability to build an effective, competitive conservative political party before the transition to democracy occurs.

Conservatism, manifest as a political party is simply the effort of the Elites to maintain their privileged status. One prior attempt at rebuttal blocked me when we got to: why is it that specifically Conservative parties align with the interests of the Elite?

There is a key difference between conservatives and others that is often overlooked. For liberals, actions are good, bad, moral, etc and people are judged based on their actions. For Conservatives, people are good, bad, moral, etc and the status of the person is what dictates how an action is viewed.

In the world view of the actual Conservative leadership – those with true wealth or political power – , the aristocracy is moral by definition and the working class is immoral by definition and deserving of punishment for that immorality. This is where the laws don’t apply trope comes from or all you’ll often see “rules for thee and not for me.” The aristocracy doesn’t need laws since they are inherently moral. Consider the divinely ordained king: he can do no wrong because he is king, because he is king at God’s behest. The anti-poor aristocratic elite still feel that way.

This is also why people can be wealthy and looked down on: if Bill Gates tries to help the poor or improve worker rights too much he is working against the aristocracy.

If we extend analysis to the voter base: conservative voters view other conservative voters as moral and good by the state of being labeled conservative because they adhere to status morality and social classes. It’s the ultimate virtue signaling. They signal to each other that they are inherently moral. It’s why voter base conservatives think “so what” whenever any of these assholes do nasty anti democratic things. It’s why Christians seem to ignore Christ.

While a non-conservative would see a fair or moral or immoral action and judge the person undertaking the action, a conservative sees a fair or good person and applies the fair status to the action. To the conservative, a conservative who did something illegal or something that would be bad on the part of someone else – must have been doing good. Simply because they can’t do bad.

To them Donald Trump is inherently a good person as a member of the aristocracy. The conservative isn’t lying or being a hypocrite or even being “unfair” because – and this is key – for conservatives past actions have no bearing on current actions and current actions have no bearing on future actions so long as the aristocracy is being protected. Lindsey Graham is “good” so he says to delay SCOTUS confirmations that is good. When he says to move forward: that is good.

To reiterate: All that matters to conservatives is the intrinsic moral state of the actor (and the intrinsic moral state that matters is being part of the aristocracy). Obama was intrinsically immoral and therefore any action on his part was “bad.” Going further – Trump, or the media rebranding we call Mitt Romney, or Moscow Mitch are all intrinsically moral and therefore they can’t do “bad” things. The one bad thing they can do is betray the class system.

The consequences of the central goal of conservatism and the corresponding actor state morality are the simple political goals to do nothing when problems arise and to dismantle labor & consumer protections. The non-aristocratic are immoral, inherently deserve punishment, and certainly don’t deserve help. They want the working class to get fucked by global warming. They want people to die from COVID19. Etc.

Montage of McConnell laughing at suffering: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTqMGDocbVM&ab_channel=HuffPost

OH LOOK, months after I first wrote this it turns out to be validated by conservatives themselves: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/16/trump-appointee-demanded-herd-immunity-strategy-446408

Why do the conservative voters seem to vote against their own interest? Why does /selfawarewolves and /leopardsatemyface happen? They simply think they are higher on the social ladder than they really are and want to punish those below them for the immorality.

Absolutely everything Conservatives say and do makes sense when applying the above. This is powerful because you can now predict with good specificity what a conservative political actor will do.

We still need to address more familiar definitions of conservatism (small c) which are a weird mash-up including personal responsibility and incremental change. Neither of those makes sense applied to policy issues. The only opposed change that really matters is the destruction of the aristocracy in favor of democracy. For some reason the arguments were white washed into a general “opposition to change.”

  • This year a few women can vote, next year a few more, until in 100 years all women can vote?

  • This year a few kids can stop working in mines, next year a few more…

  • We should test the waters of COVID relief by sending a 1200 dollar check to 500 families. If that goes well we’ll do 1500 families next month.

  • But it’s all in when they want to separate migrant families to punish them. It’s all in when they want to invade the Middle East for literal generations.

The incremental change argument is asinine. It’s propaganda to avoid concessions to labor.

The personal responsibility argument falls apart with the whole “keep government out of my medicare thing.” Personal responsibility just means “I deserve free things, but people more poor than me don’t.”

Look: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U

And for good measure I found video and sources interesting on an overlapping topic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vymeTZkiKD0

Some links incase anyone doubts that the contemporary American voter base was purposefully machined and manipulated into its mangle of abortion, guns, war, and “fiscal responsibility.” What does fiscal responsibility even mean? Who describes themselves as fiscally irresponsible?

Here is Atwater talking behind the scenes. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/exclusive-lee-atwaters-infamous-1981-interview-southern-strategy/

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/news/2013/03/27/58058/the-religious-right-wasnt-created-to-battle-abortion/

a little academic abstract to lend weight to conservatives at the time not caring about abortion. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-policy-history/article/abs/gops-abortion-strategy-why-prochoice-republicans-became-prolife-in-the-1970s/C7EC0E0C0F5FF1F4488AA47C787DEC01

They were casting about for something to rile a voter base up and abortion didn’t do it. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/05/race-not-abortion-was-founding-issue-religious-right/A5rnmClvuAU7EaThaNLAnK/story.html

The role religion played entwined with institutionalized racism. https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/03/27/pastors-not-politicians-turned-dixie-republican/?sh=31e33816695f

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/03/27/pastors-not-politicians-turned-dixie-republican/?sh=12df77c6695f

https://www.salon.com/2019/07/01/the-long-southern-strategy-how-southern-white-women-drove-the-gop-to-donald-trum/

Likely the best: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133

Just a couple of brilliant statements I noticed. And they deserve a wider audience.

Thom Hartmann exposes the delusions of Republicans, once and for all!

Posted on by

Thom Hartmann is a liberal radio commentator, but he is clearly also a brilliant writer. Here is a piece he wrote about a month ago:

https://hartmannreport.com/p/why-the-reagan-revolution-scheme

Why the “Reagan Revolution” Scheme to Gut America’s Middle Class is Coming to an End

The signal was in Biden’s speech, but entirely missed by the press

As we stand on the edge of the end of the Reagan Revolution, an end signaled by one particular phrase in President Biden‘s speech last Thursday night (which I’ll get to in a minute), its really important that Americans understand the backstory.

Reagan and his conservative buddies intentionally gutted the American middle class, but they did so not just out of greed but also with what they thought was a good and noble justification.

As I lay out in more granular detail in my new book The Hidden History of American Oligarchy, back in the early 1950s conservative thinker Russell Kirk proposed a startling hypothesis that would fundamentally change our nation and the world.

The American middle-class at that time was growing more rapidly than any middle-class had ever grown in the history of the world, in terms of the number of people in the middle class, the income of those people, and the overall wealth that those people were accumulating. The Middle class was growing in wealth and income back then, in fact, faster than were the top 1%.

Kirk postulated in 1951 that if the middle-class got too wealthy, we would see an absolute collapse of our nation’s social order, producing chaos, riots and possibly even the end of the republic.

The first chapter of his 1951 book, The Conservative Mind, is devoted to Edmund Burke, the British conservative who Thomas Paine visited for two weeks in 1787 on his way to get arrested in the French revolution. Paine was so outraged by Burke’s arguments that he wrote an entire book rebutting them titled The Rights Of Man.

Burke was defending, among other things, Britain’s restrictions on who could vote or participate in politics based on wealth and land ownership, as well as the British maximum wage.

That’s right, maximum wage.

Burke and his contemporaries in the late 1700s believed that if working-class people made too much money, they would challenge the social order and collapse the British form of government. So Parliament passed a law making it illegal for employers to pay people over a certain amount, so as to keep wage earners right at the edge of poverty throughout their lives. (For the outcome of this policy, read pretty much any Dickens novel.)

Picking up on this, Kirk’s followers argued that if the American middle-class got too rich there would be similarly dire consequences. Young people would cease to respect their elders, women would stop respecting (and depending on) their husbands, and minorities would begin making outrageous demands and set the country on fire.

When Kirk laid this out in 1951, only a few conservative intellectuals took him seriously. People like William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater were electrified by his writings and line of thinking, but Republicans like then-President Dwight Eisenhower said, of people like Kirk and his rich buddies, “Their numbers are negligible and they are stupid.“

And then came the 1960s.

In 1961, the birth control pill was legalized and by 1964 was in widespread use; this helped kick off the modern-day Women’s Liberation Movement, as women, now in control of their reproductive capacity, demanded equality in politics and the workplace. Bra burning became a thing, at least in pop culture lore.

By 1967, young people on college campuses we’re also in revolt; the object of their scorn was an illegal war in Vietnam that President Johnson had lied us into. Along with national protest, draft card burning was also a thing.

And throughout that decade African Americans were increasingly demanding an end to police violence and an expansion of Civil Rights. In response to several brutal and well-publicized instances of police violence against Black people in the late 1960s, riots broke out and several of our cities were on fire.

These three movements all hitting America at the same time got the attention of conservatives and Republicans who had previously ignored or even ridiculed Kirk back in the 1950s. Suddenly, he seemed like a prophet.

The Republican/Conservative “solution” to the “crisis” these three movements represented was put into place in 1981: the explicit goal of the so-called Reagan Revolution was to take the middle class down a peg and end the protests and social instability. 

Their plan was to declare war on labor unions so wages could slide back down again, end free college all across the nation so students would be in fear rather than willing to protest, and increase the penalties Nixon had already put on drugs so they could use those laws against hippy antiwar protesters and Black people.

As Nixon‘s right hand man, John Ehrlichman, told reporter Dan Baum: “You want to know what this was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and Black people. Do you understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or Black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.“

While it looks from the outside like the singular mission of the Reagan Revolution was simply to help rich people and giant corporations get richer and bigger, the ideologues driving the movement actually believed they were helping to restore safety and stability to the United States, both politically and economically.

The middle class was out of control, they believed, and something had to be done. Looking back at the “solutions” England used around the time of the American Revolution and advocated by Edmund Burke and other conservative thinkers throughout history, they saw a solution to the crisis…that also had the pleasant side effect of helping their biggest donors and thus boosting their political fortunes.

Reagan massively cut taxes on rich people and raised taxes on working-class people 11 times. He put a tax on Social Security income, tips income, and unemployment income, for example, all of which had previously been tax-free but were exclusively needed and used by middle-class people. At the same time, he cut the top tax bracket for billionaires from 74% to 25%.

He declared war on labor unions, crushed PATCO in less than a week, and over the next decade the result of his war on labor was that union membership went from about a third of the American workforce when he came into office to around 10% at the end of the Reagan/Bush presidencies. It’s at 6% of the private workforce now.

He and Bush also husbanded the moribund 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades (GATT, which let Clinton help create the WTO) and NAFTA, which Clinton signed and thus opened a floodgate for American companies to move manufacturing overseas, leaving American workers underemployed while radically cutting corporate labor costs and union membership.

And, sure enough, Reagan’s doubling-down on the War on Drugs was successful in shattering Black communities.

His War on Labor cut average inflation adjusted minimum and median wages by more over a couple of decades than anybody had seen since the Republican Great Depression.

And his War on Colleges jacked up the cost of education so high that an entire generation is today so saddled with more than $1.5 trillion in student debt that many aren’t willing to jeopardize it all by “acting up” on campuses.

The key to selling all this to the American people was the idea that the US shouldn’t protect the rights of workers, subsidize education, or enforce Civil Rights laws because, they said, government itself is a remote, dangerous and incompetent power that can legally use guns to enforce its will.

As Reagan told us in his first inaugural, government was not the solution to our problems, but instead was the problem itself.

He ridiculed the formerly-noble idea of service to one’s country and joked that there were really no good people left in government because if they were smart or competent they’d be working in the private sector for a lot more money.

He told us that the nine most frightening words in the English language were, “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, billionaires associated with the Republicans built a massive infrastructure of think tanks and media outlets to promote and amplify the message. It so completely swept America that by the 1990s even President Bill Clinton was saying things like, “The era of big government is over,” and “This is the end of welfare as we know it.” Limbaugh, Hannity and other right-wing talkers were getting millions a year in subsidies from groups like the Heritage Foundation.

Which brings us to President Joe Biden’s speech.

Probably the most important thing he said in that speech was almost completely ignored by the mainstream American press. It certainly didn’t make a single headline, anywhere.

Yet President Biden said something that Presidents Clinton and Obama were absolutely unwilling to say, so deeply ingrained was the Reagan orthodoxy about the dangers of “big government” during their presidencies.

President Biden said, “We need to remember the government isn’t some foreign force in a distant capital. No, it’s us. All of us. We, the people.“

This was an all-out declaration of war on the underlying premise of the Reagan Revolution. And a full-throated embrace of the first three words of the Constitution.

In March, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt talked about the “mysterious cycle in human events.” He correctly identified the end of the Republican orthodoxy cycle of the 1920s, embodied in the presidencies of Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, of deregulation, privatization and tax cuts. 

(Warren Harding in 1920 successfully ran for president on two slogans. The first was “A return to normalcy,” which meant dropping Democratic President Woodrow Wilson’s 90% tax bracket down to 25%, something Harding did in his first few years in office. The second was, “Less government in business, more business in government.” In other words, deregulate and privatize. These actions, of course, brought us the Great Crash and what was known for a generation as the Republican Great Depression.)

Americans are now watching, for the third time in just 30 years, a Democratic president clean up the economic and social debris of a prior Republican presidency.

They’re starting to figure out that crushing the middle-class didn’t produce prosperity and stability, but instead destroyed tens of millions of people’s lives and dreams.

And they’re seeing the hollowness of the Republican’s promises as we all watch, aghast, as the GOP scrambles to mobilize the last remnants of its white racist base, at the same time waging an all-out war on the ability of Black, young and working-class people to vote. 

President Biden’s speech was the beginning of the end for the Republicans, although it appears only a few of them realize it. (Marco Rubio is apparently one of those who’ve figured it out: he’s now supporting Amazon workers who want to unionize in Alabama!)

Let’s hope the damage the GOP has done over the last 40 years isn’t so severe that America can’t be brought back from the brink of chaos and desperation.

Hopefully, it’s a new day in America.

My responses:

Kirk postulated in 1951 that if the middle-class got too wealthy, we would see an absolute collapse of our nation’s social order, producing chaos, riots and possibly even the end of the republic.
 
This is bullshit, of course. Prosperity for the majority (not just an elite few) results in the people being happier and therefore more loyal to the state that takes care of its people. A state that neglects and oppresses its people deserves to be overthrown.
 
Burke and his contemporaries in the late 1700s believed that if working-class people made too much money, they would challenge the social order and collapse the British form of government. So Parliament passed a law making it illegal for employers to pay people over a certain amount, so as to keep wage earners right at the edge of poverty throughout their lives. (For the outcome of this policy, read pretty much any Dickens novel.)
 
Well, if the social order is unjust, from a purely ethical perspective, it should be challenged! And the government wouldn’t collapse, it would be REFORMED. Equating progressive reforms with social breakdown is a damned lie!
 
Republicans were wrong, wrong, wrong, and EXTREMELY wrong to do what they did! Ever heard of the proverb, “No pain, no gain”? If the social and political reforms of the 1960s had been allowed to continue, we wouldn’t need a Black Lives Matter movement now! How many Americans, of ALL colors, might still be alive if Liberals have continued ruling America to this day?!
 

What’s infuriating about this is…..

Their plan was to declare war on labor unions so wages could slide back down again, end free college all across the nation so students would be in fear rather than willing to protest, and increase the penalties Nixon had already put on drugs so they could use those laws against hippy antiwar protesters and Black people.

…….

While it looks from the outside like the singular mission of the Reagan Revolution was simply to help rich people and giant corporations get richer and bigger, the ideologues driving the movement actually believed they were helping to restore safety and stability to the United States, both politically and economically.

That is EXACTLY the kind of attitude fascists in Europe had before World War II!

I should point out that we Americans went through a FOUR YEAR LONG CIVIL WAR in which over a million Americans on both sides were killed and entire cities were devastated, and yet the American republic not only did not fall, it came out STRONGER because we no longer had that slavery issue dividing us!

The entire premise of the conservative movements in both the United Kingdom and the United States was based on so many damned lies and delusions that I think we would be totally justified in CRUSHING IT COMPLETELY, just as we crushed the Confederacy in 1865! Instead, we tolerate it because we have forgotten our true principles.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Conservatism by its very nature DENIES that! It must be considered UNAMERICAN!!!

 
 

Racists should be consistent in their bigotry

Posted on by

I always assumed that most racists rejected and looked down on ALL members of minorities, without exception. But that appears to not be the case sometimes.

Take a look at this discussion:

British expats 'in tears' as Spain to deport 500 for failing to register for residency under post-Brexit regulations. By March 31 they will be deemed as illegal immigrants.
byu/green_flash inworldnews

gothlaw

“expat Shaun Cromber voted Leave but said he did not believe Brexit would end his Spanish lifestyle. He said: “Yes I voted out, but I didn’t realise it would come to this.”

So he voted for the UK to leave the EU, but then did not immediately leave the EU to return to the UK? Seriously???

InPatRileyWeTrust

This is literally the classic leave voter. Yeah we voted leave but didn’t think anything negative would actually happen.

_________________

Don_Fartalot

‘Get those dirty Italian and Spanish foreigners out of the UK….but oh let me stay in their country so I can enjoy their lifestyle’.

Then the discussion went beyond the issue of Brexit.

GZHotwater
I spent most of the past decade working (legally) in China. You wouldn’t believe the number of American “expats” I met there “teaching” English on tourist & business visas. For most I didn’t care about their status…except the ones who ranted on about “illegals” back home. I took great pleasure in discussing & highlighting their illegal status. Most didn’t get the irony of their situation due to exceptionalism.

Note: I was an economic migrant. I had a choice of being unemployed/redundant back home or move to China.

__________________________

Swarles_Stinson

A Trump supporter’s husband was deported in 2017 and she says that Trump was only supposed to deport “bad” people and not illegal immigrants like her husband. She Trump made a mistake, but still has her support.

____________

endoffays

and then they interviewed other Karens from the same town. Apparnetly the genetleman deported had lived in the town for 20 + years, raised a family there, OWNED THE ONLY MEXICAN RESTAURANT IN TOWN, was loved by all the people there……

Interview after interview these white folks said they LOVED TRUMP and still supported his push to get rid of illegals, but they wanted him to make an exception for their illegal.

Just like every other thing and republicans…..they are filled with hate and anger until their policies affect themselves…..then they have an epiphany, say something akin to “I didn’t think the leopards would eat my face” and then keep on hating the next day.* (* explained at bottom)

Hate is their fuel. Just like old people’s medicine is for the robots that are going to take over and kill us all.

*: I just made a comment about 30 minutes ago about Republicans who protest outside abortion clinics. I’ve read countless interviews with abortion clinic nurses and providers who repeatedly state that many of the same women that protest wind up in their clinic receiving their services, but ALWAYS say something along these lines, “Well, you see, my situation is special. I wasn’t a whore like all the other girls that come here.”

And then after being treated with kindness and compassion, the abortion protestor is seen outside the very clinic they received an abortion at less than a week afterwards, yelling hateful things to the people that treated them with kindness. Just another example of someone who can’t fathom life outside of their own little minds until they are thrust into the same situation. Then, instead of it changing their viewpoint and becoming a better person, they think they’re the exception and go on right back to hating.

_______________

JessicantTouchThis
I listened to an NPR interview a couple months ago (up to 6 months ago I’d say, so I may get some details wrong) where the host did a segment on one gentleman. He was from Mexico, but his family got him US citizenship when he was a child and moved him up here. I think they said he joined the Navy for a time before getting out and joining Border Patrol. He was a distinguished border patrol agent, got several awards and a fair amount of recognition over his 10+ year career.
He talked about how he didn’t always agree with who he was tasked with deporting, but it was the law and how things worked and he left it at that. I was honestly kind of pissed with how he could view someone in such similar circumstances as himself, but because their family didn’t do their due diligence, they deserved to have everything taken from them in an instant. Him and his wife both voted for Trump, despite him being an immigrant.
And then they talked about how he was called into his supervisors office one day where he was met with a couple other federal agents. He was informed that his US birth certificate was actually a forgery and completely fake, and he had been illegally living and working in the US for a few decades. He was ordered to turn in his badge, his gun, and then told that he would need to fight it in the courts. Y’know, just like all the people he had arrested over the years. He had no idea, his parents/grandparents had lied to him since he was a boy.
Him and his wife were very upset, obviously, and got legal help. During the interview he had mentioned that they had been fighting in the courts for a couple years already, but they had just submitted their final appeal, likely in vain. They couldn’t believe that he, a distinguished federal employee and veteran, couldn’t be granted any sort of leniency to try and prevent him from being deported, or that Trump had enacted such tough immigration laws and had basically abandoned them when they felt they needed him.
The whole interview, like I said, pissed me off because I honestly felt the guy was getting what he deserved. He broke the rules, just like he said all those people he had apprehended over the years, and they needed to suffer the consequences. But once the shoe was on his foot, and he was the one being deported, all of a sudden it’s “this isn’t fair, this isn’t right, this isn’t just,” blah blah blah.
The most astounding part? I’m pretty sure they both said they (the guy and his wife) had or were going to vote for Trump again in 2020, and… Just, I don’t get people. The Republican Party and those who follow it are the epitome of “rules for thee, not for me,” and this guy was acting like he was unjustly being targeted when he was literally guilty of everything they said he had done.

________________

Teripid

And Trump himself is responsible for Melania’s parents.

__________________

Myfourcats1

I watched an episode of that show Ghosted on MTV. There was a white girl who had been ghosted by her black friend. She couldn’t figure out why. It turns out she was a Trump supporter and would post all kinds of hateful stuff on FB. When they found her former friend the ghoster was like you really don’t understand why I wouldn’t want to be friends with you?

__________________

Seeker_Alpha1701

That’s the very definition of hypocrisy.

There was the case of a German Army officer who had to deal with a Swedish diplomat (Sweden was neutral in World War II) who eventually revealed he was Jewish. The German officer said, “You are a good Jew. I wouldn’t consider you my enemy.”

That German was still a Hitler supporter to the end, of course.

______________

ky0nshi
there was this saying that every German had their “good Jew”. You know, that one Jew who wasn’t like the others, all the others were terrible, but that one Jew they knew, he wasn’t like that.

It’s always easier to hate a big abstract group of people than the people you actually know.

_______________

Voroxpete

There’s a very important corollary this that I want to note; despite what they claim, they don’t actually believe that abortion is wrong. They just believe that the wrong kind of people are getting abortions.

This is prevalent in Conservative attitudes to literally everything. It’s all about hierarchies, and making sure that the right kind of people are at the top of those hierarchies. Everything is acceptable, when the right people are doing it.

This reminds me of this earlier blog entry:

The Dumbest Kind of Trump Supporter

And the cases of Thomas Jefferson and Strom Thurmond come to mind as well. Both had relationships and even children with black women……and both were racists and championed racist policies. BOTH WERE HYPOCRITES!

And that’s why I have always said:

I believe in consistent standards of right and wrong and so I see no point in ever excusing something that is wrong because the wrongdoer is otherwise a friendly or nice guy. That’s how corruption sets in.

And corruption is the only thing Conservatives in ANY society seem to do. People enable that nonsense because it seems they only want to be good to a certain point and when that point is reached and ethical consistency starts to make their lives a bit less convenient for them (but beneficial for people that are different from them), they embrace corruption instead. And so they might as well not be good at all.

My list for the Ten Worst Presidents of the United States

Posted on by

Here’s a list, based entirely on my opinions; feel free to disagree and make your own.

  1. Donald Trump (for reasons too many to list)

  2. George W. Bush (for starting the totally needless war against Iraq in 2003)

  3. Andrew Jackson (for being a racist who expelled entire Native American tribes to the west)

  4. James Buchanan (for doing nothing to prevent the southern states from setting up the Confederacy)

  5. Herbert Hoover (for doing nothing to end the Great Depression)
  6. Ronald Reagan (for the Iran-Contra scandal, his “Reaganomics” scam and removing the Fairness Doctrine)
  7. Richard Nixon (for Watergate and for his “southern strategy” of making the Republican Party appealing to southern white racists)
  8. Rutherford B. Hayes (for benefiting from an election stolen from the Democrats and ending Reconstruction without reforming the South enough to make it fair to blacks)
  9. Warren G. Harding (for appointing corrupt people to high positions that caused a lot of scandals)
  10. Woodrow Wilson (a racist who endorsed the Ku Klux Klan propaganda film “Birth of a Nation” and led the USA into World War I after being re-elected in 1916 on the slogan “he kept us out of war”. So, he lied!)

Joe Walsh, ex-Republican, anti-Trump, but still conservative

Posted on by

It’s no secret that as a progressive/liberal/leftist I bitterly despise most conservatives, seeing nearly all of them as hypocrites who deserve no respect at all. But there is one that I have noticed recently on Twitter that challenges that perception quite well and so he may indeed be the exception that brings redemption to conservatism as a philosophy. He is Joe Walsh.

But before I actually talk about him, read this first:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeelFaceTurn

Heel–Face Turn

When a bad guy turns good. This usually makes for a good plot, for three reasons:

  1. It lets the writer reintroduce the villain as a “darker, edgier” hero.
  2. It reinforces a desired notion of the inherent goodness within people.
  3. It prevents the Worthy Opponent from falling victim to What a Senseless Waste of Human Life.

There are also various in-story motivations for the bad guy to make the turn:

  1. An encounter with an All-Loving Hero or gaining a Morality Pet.
  2. Discovering that Being Evil Sucks or possibly that Good Feels Good.
  3. An Enemy Mine situation leading to Fire Forged Friendship or The Power of Love in the form of Deliver Us from Evil or Love Redeems changing their priorities. Conversely Mistreatment-Induced Betrayal makes them rethink their loyalties.
  4. Realizing that they are a Noble Demon.
  5. A Heel Realization, if they had never considered their actions evil or wrong in the first place.
  6. They become friends with a hero after fighting them.
  7. A case of Even Evil Has Standards, if one villain becomes a good guy to stop another villain from doing something so horrible that they just cannot allow it.

Now on to our actual subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Walsh_(American_politician)

William Joseph Walsh (born December 27, 1961) is an American politician, conservative talk radio host, former social worker, and former 2020 Republican presidential candidate who served one term in the United States House of Representatives representing Illinois’s 8th congressional district.

Rep Joe Walsh.jpg

Born and raised in the Chicago metropolitan area, Walsh began his career as a social worker providing education and job skills training to students in low income areas, gradually becoming more politically active. Walsh had unsuccessfully campaigned for Congress in 1996 and the Illinois House of Representatives in 1998, but was elected to the U.S. House in 2010, defeating three-term incumbent Melissa Bean. Though he received little Republican Party support in his bid against Bean, he was popular with the Tea Party movement. In the 1990s, he identified as a moderate Republican, but he later became a conservative and a Tea Party activist.

During his time in Congress, Walsh was criticized for his often personal attacks against members of the Democratic Party and, specifically, President Barack Obama. He accused the president of abandoning the U.S.–Israel alliance and bankrupting the country. Walsh maintained a no-compromise approach to legislating that included rejecting any tax increases. He consistently voted against raising the federal debt ceiling and authored a balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution. Walsh rejected the scientific consensus on climate change and supported tougher border control. Later, during his presidential campaign, Walsh expressed regret for some of the comments and stances he made during his time in Congress.

As a result of redistricting following the 2010 United States Census, Walsh’s district was redrawn by the Democratic-controlled Illinois General Assembly in 2012. While he initially planned to run in the newly drawn 14th district against fellow Republican Representative Randy Hultgren, he eventually decided to run in the remapped 8th district against Democratic candidate Tammy Duckworth. Walsh was defeated by Duckworth in the general election on November 6, 2012. After leaving office, Walsh began hosting a talk radio show. Though initially a strong supporter of Donald Trump, Walsh became increasingly critical of the president and, on August 25, 2019, he announced his presidential campaign. He dropped out of the race on February 7, 2020, after a poor showing in the Iowa caucus, and subsequently left the party.[2] He later endorsed Democratic candidate Joe Biden, who won the election.

Say whatever else you will about this guy, but he is not (anymore, at least) a liar. He just doesn’t seem to be a backstabber like so many others I could refer to.

His Twitter account: https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom

And here are some of his actual recent tweets:

I’m going to be watching him over the next few months, at least. And maybe listening to him too.

http://fsilencepodcast.com/

If he really wants to make a difference soon, I think he should join the Libertarian Party and build it up to overthrow the corrupted Republicans.

https://www.lp.org/

Rush Scumbaugh is dead

Posted on by

Read this story:

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/rush-limbaugh-conservative-radio-titan-172612686.html

Rush Limbaugh, conservative radio titan, has died of lung cancer at age 70

Maria Puente, USA TODAY

Rush Limbaugh, the talk titan who made right-wing radio financially viable in American media and himself a Republican kingmaker years before Fox News, died Wednesday, after he revealed in 2020 that his lung cancer was terminal. He was 70.

His death was confirmed by his wife, Kathryn, at the beginning of Limbaugh’s radio show, from which he’s been absent for almost two weeks.

A longtime cigar smoker who stocked the humidors in his homes and studios with the finest, Limbaugh succumbed to cancer after battling drug addiction and loss of hearing earlier in his career (he was deaf by the end and broadcast his daily show in spite of it).

A Republican conservative and die-hard supporter of former President Donald Trump to the end, Limbaugh was among Trump’s most important enablers of his failed effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election with baseless claims of voting fraud.

At one point in December, Limbaugh declared he thought the country was “trending toward secession,” then had to walk the comment back the next day. He wasn’t advocating another civil war, he was only repeating what he had heard being said, he told listeners.

After a mob of pro-Trump extremists stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, provoking outraged sputtering from Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives alike, Limbaugh stood out in dismissing the controvery.

“We’re supposed to be horrified by the protesters,” Limbaugh scoffed on his program on Jan. 7. “There’s a lot of people out there calling for the end of violence…lot of conservatives, social media, who say that any violence or aggression at all is unacceptable regardless of the circumstances…I am glad Sam Adams, Thomas Paine, the actual tea party guys, the men at Lexington and Concord, didn’t feel that way.”

Love him or loathe him, few would deny that Limbaugh was one of the most influential commercial broadcasters, if not the most influential, in American history, says Michael Harrison, founder and publisher of Talkers trade magazine, which covers talk radio.

Harrison believes Limbaugh’s legacy – his impact on public policy, on the national culture and on GOP politicians from the presidency on down – remains unmatched.

“Limbaugh’s radio talent an dedication to the medium are unparalleled in the modern talk industry,” he said. “At a time when the very future of radio and its talent pool could very much be on the wane in terms of cultural relevance and prestige, he raised it to a level of importance on a par with the most influential media platforms and players of our time.”

Journalist Ze’ev Chafets, whose 2010 biography of Limbaugh (“Rush Limbaugh: An Army of One”) grew out of a New York Times magazine cover story in 2008, says Limbaugh was one of the top two or three most important figures in Republican politics in the 1990s.

“The reason is his show was heard in every congressional district in the country, and certainly every state, by a huge number of Republicans who almost entirely made up his audience,” Chafets says. “He was able, at a granular level, to affect elections. The year Newt Gingrich became speaker of the House (1994), he gave Limbaugh an honorary membership in (the Republican caucus in) Congress because of his influence.”

“Coastal Americans” who didn’t listen to Limbaugh had no idea of his “gravitational pull” because they underestimated his communication talents and his smarts, at least initially, Chafets said.

“They didn’t understand because they thought he was a carnival barker talking to rubes,” Chafets said. “He talked about issues, not gossip. His show (consisted of) three-hour monologues without notes and included minute details about arcane matters that most talk-show hosts could not do.”

He was original, he was funny and he was adept at assembling key elements of broadcasting to produce entertaining and compelling radio, Harrison says.

“He was a consummate pro and even people who disagreed with him politically, most who are honest will tell you what a great broadcaster he (was),” Harrison said. “Because he used so many elements of great radio: pacing, his voice, satire, sound effects. The flow and feel of his show was very appealing in his use of sound and broadcast principles.”

Limbaugh’s show was the most listened-to talk radio broadcast in the United States, with an estimated cumulative weekly audience of 15.5 million listeners at his peak, according to Talkers’ tracking. “No one beats Rush in the political-news talk-radio format – he’s #1,” Harrison said.

His was a life and career of wild success pockmarked by controversies and health calamities, including years of chronic back pain and unsuccessful surgery, leading to long-term prescription opioid addiction and 30 days in rehab in 2003.

In 2006, he was criminally investigated and arrested for alleged “doctor shopping” to obtain multiple prescriptions in Florida, a charge eventually dropped after a plea agreement and his promise to continue addiction treatment (although Limbaugh continued to maintain his innocence).

Earlier, in 2001, he announced he had gone deaf over three months for unknown reasons, although his doctors said it could have been due to years of drug addiction. Eventually, he had cochlear implants to restore some of his hearing.

Then lung cancer struck. Limbaugh gave his legions of fans plenty of advance notice of the coming end. On Oct. 20, he told listeners that his lung cancer was terminal.

“You measure a happy life against whatever medication it takes. And at some point you decide, you know, this medication may be working, but I hate the way I feel every day,” Limbaugh said on the air. “I’m not there yet. But it is part and parcel of this.

“It’s tough to realize that the days where I do not think I’m under a death sentence are over.”

His listeners were shocked when he first revealed his diagnosis on his show in February 2020, not long after being told on Jan. 20 the grim news by “two medical institutions.”

“This day has been one of the most difficult days in recent memory for me. I’ve known this moment is coming in the program…I’m sure that you all know by now that I really don’t like talking about myself and I don’t like making things about me,” Limbaugh said. “I like this program to be about you and the things that matter to all of us.”

But, he said, he knew he had to explain what was going on in his life because listeners would be curious if he wasn’t at his usual post every day. Even though he had no symptoms at that time, he realized that would not last and he would have to be absent for treatment.

“It’s not that I want to fool anybody, it’s just that I don’t want to burden anybody with it and I haven’t wanted to,” he said. “But it is what it is. “You know me, I’m the mayor of Realville.”

A day later, he was visibly moved when his longtime friend and Florida neighbor, President Trump, awarded him the nation’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, during the State of the Union address in the House of Representatives.

Attending as one of Trump’s “special guests,” the white-bearded and ruddy-faced Limbaugh sat in the House gallery next to first lady Melania Trump, who fastened the medal on a blue ribbon around his neck.

“In recognition of all that you have done for our nation, the millions of people a day that you speak to and that you inspire, and all of the incredible work that you do for charity, I’m proud to announce tonight that you will receive our nation’s highest civilian honor,” Trump said to applause in the chamber.

In May, Limbaugh updated his listeners on the state of his health with a candid assessment.

“I vowed not to be a cancer patient on the radio. I vowed to shield as much of that from the daily program as I can,” Limbaugh said before talking about his third wave of treatment. “I have to tell you, it’s kicking my ass.”

He said the previous week of treatments had left him “virtually worthless” and “virtually useless.” He hasn’t left the house or done much of anything, as doctors warned him would happen.

“It’s the price that you pay if you make the decision to go ahead and do treatment to try to prolong your life,” he said, adding that he is doing “extremely well, all things considered.”

Then came his grim assessment in October. He tried to be upbeat but the progression of the cancer or the treatment or both had not been easy.

“Some days are harder than others,” he said. “I do get fatigued now. I do get very, very tired now. I’m not gonna mislead you about that. But I am extremely grateful to be able to come here to the studio and to maintain as much normalcy as possible – and it’s still true.”

The day before Christmas 2020, on his final show of the year, he updated listeners on his health again, saying he hadn’t expected to make it past October let alone into December. “And yet, here I am and today, got some problems, but I’m feeling pretty good today… God knows how important this program is for me today,” he said, thanking listeners.

Limbaugh is survived by his fourth wife, Kathryn Rogers, whom he married in 2010. Three previous marriages ended in divorce. He did not have children.

Born on January 12, 1951, in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, Rush Hudson Limbaugh III came from a line of conservative Republicans that included lawyers, judges and ambassadors. His was a family that looked askance at his early yen – while still in grammar school – to become a radio star.

“I said, ‘Pop, I love this. I know I’m great at it. I’m gonna get even better,'” Limbaugh told interviewers later.

When he was 9, he got a toy radio as a gift and began “broadcasting” on AM frequencies in his home, entertaining his family playing DJ with his records. In high school he worked as a DJ at a local station co-owned by his father. He lasted only one year at Southeast Missouri State University before leaving to pursue a career in radio.

It did not go well at first. He was fired from stations in Missouri and Pennsylvania for being too controversial as a news commentator. In the mid-1980s, he landed at KFBK in Sacramento as an on-air host. Within a year, he was Sacramento’s top radio host.

The 1987 repeal of the Federal Communications Commission’s Fairness Doctrine gave Limbaugh his head to broadcast his controversial opinions without having to present opposing views. In July 1988, he launched his own show on a talk station in New York City, and he was off to the races: His star was rising, and people noticed.

“A large new noise echoes across the invisible cacophony that is talk radio,” reported Louis Grossberger in The New York Times in December 1990. “His subject is politics. His stance: conservative. His persona: comic blowhard. His style: a schizoid spritz, bouncing between earnest lecturer and political vaudevillian.”

It helped that the first Gulf War was under way and Limbaugh demonstrated his fervent support by ridiculing anyone who sought peace. His show was moved to stations with larger audiences; eventually Limbaugh was broadcasting on more than 650 stations nationwide. The election of President Bill Clinton in 1992 only fueled the possibilities of lacerating satire aimed at Democrats.

Ever since, Limbaugh maintained his position as the king of talk radio while fending off multiple flaps over controversial things he said on the air, about racial and ethnic minorities, feminism and the notion of sexual consent, environmentalism and climate change, his admiration for Trump and his disdain for former President Barack Obama; Limbaugh was an on-air super-spreader of the “birtherism” lie that Obama was not born in the United States.

Most of these controversies rolled off him, except for Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University law student who testified in Congress in 2012 in support of mandating insurance coverage for contraceptives. Limbaugh mocked her, suggesting this view made her a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

“That was the most damaging thing he ever did,” Harrison says. The outcry that followed kicked off boycotts by major sponsors of talk-radio, even though Limbaugh issued a rare apology for “insulting word choices.”

“It had a terrible economic impact on the talk-radio business in general,” Harrison says. “It’s the one major blemish on his history that hurt his fellow broadcasters. Now he’s been forgiven because of what he’s done for the industry that outweighs that.”

In between doing his show and advising Republican presidents and candidates, Limbaugh wrote best-selling books (“The Way Things Ought to Be” in 1992, followed in 1993 by “See, I Told You So”), including a series of children’s books.

He supported several charities, including a telethon for leukemia and lymphoma, the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation, and the Tunnel to Towers Foundation, which honors a firefighter who died saving others in the 9/11 terrorist attack on the twin towers in New York.

Chafets, who grew up in Michigan, remembers when he first heard Limbaugh on the radio as he was driving one day near Detroit.

“Before Rush Limbaugh, you could not hear conservative thought on the radio in the USA – Rush is the first guy to provide that, the rock-and-roll DJ with the news. And that shocked people,” Chafets said. “I could not believe it myself. I actually pulled over to listen to what he was saying. I couldn’t believe it.”

Considering all the terrible things Limbaugh said and promoted, and his demonization of liberals, I can only think of one thing in reference to his death:

index

I mean I don’t believe in hell because there is no evidence it exists, but people like Limbaugh make me wish he could be sent there!

Understanding Marginal Tax Rates

Posted on by

Increasing numbers of American billionaires have appeared since the Republicans began cutting taxes for the rich, first under President Reagan, then under Bush Jr (Bush Sr condemned this as “voodoo economics” even before Reagan’s time) and finally under Trump. And it’s time we ended that crap forever! The proliferation of billionaires is not a sign of economic prosperity, but distress, since the members of the working class have not increased their buying power in the same time. That would only happen if their wages went up, but economic conservatives tend to oppose that and thus the federal minimum wage remains at $7.25 per hour. A person CANNOT make a living at such a wage!

It is a moral and logical imperative that we raise marginal tax rates on the wealthy to properly fund the government and prevent economic tyranny from those same rich people.

Imagine such a tax policy in place. If we have a tax rate of 0% for people who make up to $50,000 per year, a rate of 30% on those who make up to $100,000 per year, 50% for those who make up to $1,000,000 per year, and finally 90% for those who make above $1,000,000 per year, here’s what the results would look like.

First example is a person with annual wages of $90,000. He would pay nothing on the first $50,000 and then 30% on the remaining $40,000, so he would pay $12,000 in tax, resulting in his keeping $78,000.

Second example is someone with annual wages of $800,000. He would pay nothing on the first $50,000 and then would pay 30% on the next $50,000 ($15,000 in tax) and then 50% of the remaining $700,000 ($350,000 in tax). Thus he would keep $435,000.

Finally, you have someone who makes $100,000,000 per year. His tax rates would be nothing on the first $50,000 and then would pay 30% on the next $50,000 ($15,000 in tax), 50% of the next $900,000 ($450,000 in tax) and finally 90% of $99,000,000 ($89,100,000 in tax). Thus he would keep $10,435,000. He would still be rich!

The ONLY ethical reason to lower taxes on ANY people is if those tax rates were so high that they were keeping people in poverty. That only applies to the working class.

As I noted a long time ago:

Two Reasons for Public Ignorance

We delude ourselves into thinking that if having a million dollars is good, having ten million must be better, so we strive for that while never thinking of anyone who considers himself lucky to even have $100,000. Or never gets even close to having that much.

Greed is a vice and we must do everything we can to condemn it and prevent people from getting away with it.

Obama bashing, Libertarian style

Tax hikes on the wealthy are to punish GREED, not success. There’s nothing wrong with making enough money to live comfortably on, but if you make enough to become a BILLIONAIRE, you become more of a parasite than a contributor to the economy.

And hearing that so many of these rich people have become even RICHER even in the economic downturn caused by the Covid-19 pandemic (throwing millions of workers into unemployment) makes me want to go after them!

Incidentally, Wayne Allyn Root, the guy who wrote that cynical hit piece I quoted in the blog entry about President Obama, was later disowned by most of the other Libertarians because of his racism and his constant lying. He is now a Republican and ally of Donald Trump. If I were God, I’d send that bastard to hell!

And here is a cartoon that also explains how marginal taxes work:

The New York Post vs. a Right-wing Extremist in Congress

Posted on by

Read this Wikipedia entry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post

The New York Post (sometimes abbreviated as NY Post) is a conservative-leaning[3] daily tabloid newspaper in New York City. The Post also operates NYPost.com, the celebrity gossip site PageSix.com and the entertainment site Decider.com.

It was established in 1801 by Federalist and Founding Father Alexander Hamilton and became a respected broadsheet in the 19th century under the name New York Evening Post. In 1976, Rupert Murdoch bought the Post for US$30.5 million.[4] Since 1993, the Post has been owned by News Corporation and its successor, News Corp, which had owned it previously from 1976 to 1988. Its distribution ranked 4th in the US in 2019.[5]

Keep in mind that this tabloid is thus owned by the same company that owns FOX News, which is notorious for its obvious right-wing biases. And yet it seems that even they are becoming fed up with extremism among Republicans in the wake of Donald Trump about to leave the Presidency.

Now read THIS:

https://nypost.com/2021/01/16/gop-rep-lauren-boebert-and-husband-have-racked-up-arrests/

GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert and husband racked up arrests in home district

January 16, 2021

Rep. Lauren Boebert has a rap sheet unusually long for a member of Congress.

Rep. Lauren Boebert, the gun-toting freshman Republican Colorado congresswoman who ran on a law-and-order platform, has had several dust-ups with police, starting as a teenager.

The 34-year-old lawmaker, who beat her district’s very conservative Rep. Scott Tipton in a primary upset last June, has a rap sheet unusually long for a member of Congress.

And her track record of thumbing her nose at law continued this week after she tussled with Capitol Police officers over her refusal to walk through newly installed House metal detectors.

“I am legally permitted to carry my firearm in Washington, DC, and within the Capitol complex,” she tweeted in defiance, while calling the detectors “another political stunt by Speaker Pelosi.”

While the lawmaker was eventually allowed to enter the House chambers, she is facing growing questions about her role in assisting the deadly riot on Capitol Hill Jan. 6. Just hours before the violence, she tweeted, “today is 1776.” In the days leading up to the unrest, Boebert made a spectacle of her intention to remain armed in the Capitol, earning another rebuke from local law enforcement.

Back in June 2015, Boebert was cuffed for disorderly conduct at a Country Music festival near Grand Junction, Colo., after police said she attempted to interfere in the arrest of minors busted for underage drinking and encouraged the accused to run off. Boebert said the revelers had not been read their Miranda Rights and that the arrest was illegal.

“Lauren continued yelling and causing the underage drinkers to become unruly,” an arresting officer said in a statement at the time. “Lauren said multiple times that she had friends at Fox News and that the illegal arrest would be national news.” At the time, Boebert was running Shooters Grill in Rifle, Colo. The story was first reported by Colorado Newsline.

Boebert subsequently missed two court appearances and was arrested again in December 2015. The charge was dismissed.

Lauren Boebert was booked in 2017 after she failed to show up for court.

A year later, in September 2016, Boebert was charged with careless driving and operating an unsafe vehicle after rolling her truck into a ditch, police said. When she failed to show up for court a month later, a warrant was issued for her arrest. She was booked on Feb. 13, 2017. She ultimately pled guilty to the unsafe vehicle charge and paid $123.50 in fines and court costs. The careless driving charge was dismissed. The incident was first surfaced by the Colorado Times Recorder.

“It’s certainly of concern that on a couple of occasions she apparently failed to appear for court,” Tom Silverman, a Democrat and former president of Colorado Municipal Judges Association, told The Post. “I was disappointed when she was elected.”

Colin Wilhelm, a Colorado defense attorney and Democrat who plans to challenge Boebert in 2022, agreed: “It’s concerning when you claim to be a member of ‘back the blue’ and yet are so anti-authority when they are trying to do their job.”

In September 2010, Boebert was arrested after a neighbor, Michele Soet, accused Boebert’s two pit bulls of attacking Soet’s dog. Soet’s dog narrowly escaped injury after jumping into a van. The future legislator pled guilty to a single count of “dog at large,” paying a $75 fine.

Boebert’s future husband Jayson also had brushes with law enforcement. In January 2004 he was arrested after allegedly exposing his penis to two women at a bowling alley, according to an arrest affidavit. Lauren Boebert (then aged 17 and known as Lauren Opal Roberts) was also there. Jayson Boebert pled guilty to public indecency and lewd exposure, earning himself four days in jail and two years probation.

In February 2004, he was booked on a domestic violence charge, against Lauren Boebert. He “did unlawfully strike, shove or kick … and subjected her to physical contact,” a spokesman for the Garfield Associate County Court clerk told The Post. They had been dating at the time.

Jayson Boebert ultimately served seven days in jail. The busts were first unearthed by Colorado blogger Anne Landman.

Lauren Boebert took her revenge in May 2004 during an altercation with Jayson at his home in which she scratched his face and chest and trashed his residence, according to a police report. She was slapped with third-degree assault, criminal mischief and underage drinking charges. A rep for the Garfield County Combined Court said they could not reveal any information about the case’s final disposition.

The Boeberts married in 2005, and have four children.

Rep. Lauren Boebert and her husband Jayson have had several dust-ups with police.

Jayson Boebert did not respond to a request for comment from The Post. In a statement, Rep. Boebert’s chief of staff Jeff Small called the arrests “a retread of a failed personal attack by the Democrats from the last campaign.”

“Attacking her family, trying to criminalize a $100 traffic fine or a dismissed case, and vilifying ordinary business transactions is exactly what people hate about politics.” he said.

Why the hell is such a hypocritical lunatic in Congress?!

This is what the Republican Party has totally degenerated into because of Donald Trump rising to become its leader! Biden replacing him as President is clearly not enough; we must oppose and defeat right-wing extremism in Congress too! Rep. Boebert and others like her must be voted out in 2022!

Even worse than Michelle Bachmann!

Posted on by

Read this disturbing report:

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/marjorie-taylor-greene-says-she-073906731.html

Marjorie Taylor Greene says she’ll file impeachment articles against Joe Biden on his first day in office

&lt;p&gt;U.S. Representative Greene walks to the House floor during the second Trump impeachment debate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington&lt;/p&gt; (Reuters)

Newly elected Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has said she would be filing articles of impeachment against incoming president, Joe Biden, for alleged “abuse of power” on his first day at the Oval Office.

Representative Greene announced her plan on Twitter after the Democrat-controlled House passed the threshold to impeach president Donald Trump on charges of inciting insurrection. While 10 Republicans voted to support the impeachment article, congresswoman Greene was amongst the 197 House representatives, who defended the president.

“On January 21, 2021, I’ll be filing Articles of Impeachment against Joe Biden for abuse of power,” she wrote on Twitter, adding the hashtags, “#ImpeachBiden,” #QuidProJoe” and “BidenCrimeFamilly.”

Ms Greene, in an interview with Newsmax on Wednesday, said, “On behalf of the American people, we have to make sure that our leaders are held accountable. We cannot have a President of the United States that is willing to abuse the power of the presidency and be easily bought off by foreign governments, Chinese energy companies, Ukrainian energy companies.”

“I can’t imagine people in this country being so fearful of the future of a Biden presidency that they may be willing to commit violence like they did in the Capitol here in Washington, DC,” she continued. “The American people need hope, they need to know that there are Republicans in Congress who are willing to stand up and fight for them regardless of being in a minority, regardless of having all odds against us.”

The QAnon supporting congresswoman on Wednesday backed president Trump in the House in an attempt to minimise his role in the Capitol violence, while launching an attack on Democrats for supporting the Black Live Matter protest last year.

“He has held over 600 rallies in the last four years and none of them included assaulting police, destroying businesses or burning down cities,” she said. “Democrats have spent all this time endorsing and enabling violent riots that left billions in property damage and 47 dead.”

Before her speech, congressman Jason Crow denounced Ms Greene and those sharing her political view, as “depraved” and “dangerous”.

“There are, unfortunately, a handful of members of Congress — and Ms Taylor Green is just one of them — who are morally bankrupt,” Mr Crow told CNN. “They are depraved, and they’re frankly dangerous individuals.”

It seems like the height of absurdity to try to impeach someone who hasn’t even committed any offenses as President. And her rhetoric seems like baseless hyperbole.

The U. S. Constitution says this about the issue of impeachment:

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Rep. Greene could also be impeached and indeed:

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

And I think Greene should be expelled, because:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/1/13/2008897/-A-week-after-Capitol-attack-Rep-QAnon-again-tries-to-incite-violence-against-Democrats

QAnon congresswoman is really trying to get someone killed with her latest incitement

Ten days after joining Congress, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene continues building the case for her removal from the House of Representatives. In the wake of the violent attack on the Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump trying to keep Congress from formalizing his loss to President-elect Joe Biden, Greene tweeted out another incitement to violence.

“These Democrats are the enemies to the American people who are leading the impeachment witch hunt against President Trump,” Greene tweeted Wednesday. “AGAIN!”

Then, ominously, “They will be held accountable.”

Enemies to the American people who will be held accountable, huh? That sounds like a call to violence from a member of Congress who described Jan. 6 as a “1776 moment.” When you have spent months trying to overturn an election and then compared the day on which a violent attack on the Capitol was planned to the American Revolution, you don’t get the benefit of the doubt on “enemies of the people” who “will be held accountable.”

Marjorie Taylor Greene is dangerous and she’s reveling in it. She’s positioning herself as some kind of brave freedom fighter, but she’s standing on the sidelines, in a position of privilege, egging others on to do her dirty work. She’s joined Trump in spending months working to convince his followers that the election was stolen—every single fact to the contrary—and now she’s trying to use that belief to get people killed. To get elected Democrats killed in a larger coup attempt.

She needs to go before (more) people are killed, not after.

Most Republicans are Conservative, but this person is a right-wing extremist, the sort that can incite a civil war to overthrow our Constitutional democracy. She must go!

Donald Trump is banned from social media!

Posted on by

As much as I usually hate censorship, it is telling that Twitter, which was the platform most infamous for hosting Donald Trump’s political rants over the years, finally grew a spine and shut him down for good!

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/twitter-suspended-president-donald-trump-232702015.html

Twitter bans President Trump permanently

Twitter has suspended President Trump from its platform, the company said Friday evening.

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said.

“In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action.”

Twitter’s decision followed two tweets by Trump Friday afternoon that would end up being his last. The tweets violated the company’s policy against glorification of violence, Twitter said, and “these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks.”

The first tweet was about Trump’s supporters.

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

The second indicated Trump did not plan to attend Joe Biden’s inauguration.

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Twitter said the tweet concerning inauguration could be viewed as a further statement that the election was not legitimate. It also said that the tweet could be interpreted as Trump saying that the inauguration would be a “safe” target for violence because he would not be attending.

Trump’s other statement about American patriots suggested that “he plans to continue to support, empower, and shield those who believe he won the election,” Twitter said.

Twitter’s ban specifically addresses “the @realDonaldTrump account,” not Trump personally.

Twitter will enforce its policy against ban evasions to ensure that Trump does not circumvent his personal account’s suspension, the company told CNN.

“If it is clear that another account is being used for the purposes of evading a ban, it is also subject to suspension,” Twitter said in a statement. “For government accounts, such as @POTUS and @WhiteHouse, we will not suspend those accounts but will take action to limit their use. However, these accounts will be transitioned over to the new administration in due course and will not be suspended by Twitter unless absolutely necessary to alleviate real-world harm.”

Twitter’s policy would also prohibit Trump from directing a third party to operate a Twitter account on his behalf.

Trump sought to test Twitter’s ban evasion policy at roughly 8:30 pm ET Friday evening, when he or someone acting on his behalf published four tweets from the @POTUS account.

“As I have been saying for a long time, Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech, and tonight, Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me,” Trump tweeted.

The tweets disappeared almost instantly.

Twitter told CNN that the Trump campaign’s account has also been permanently banned. Before @TeamTrump was suspended, it had been seen sharing the same four-tweet thread that Trump had attempted to post from the @POTUS account.

After Twitter permanently banned the Trump campaign’s account, Mike Hahn, the campaign’s social media director, objected.

“We copied and pasted a White House pool report,” Hahn tweeted.

Earlier in the evening, a White House pool report was distributed that contained the exact language that Trump had attempted to share from the @POTUS Twitter account.

A Twitter spokesperson confirmed to CNN that what prompted @TeamTrump’s ban was its attempt to share the same language Trump tried to tweet earlier.

Hahn argued it is nonsensical for journalists to be allowed to share Trump’s words but that the Trump campaign is not.

“A serious question that needs to be asked by journalists: If you post exactly what the president said will you be suspended as well? Because that is all we did,” Hahn said.

Asked whether it saw a difference between journalists reporting Trump’s words and the Trump campaign repeating Trump’s words, Twitter told CNN that there was a distinction.

“There’s a difference between someone reporting on the President, and someone attempting to allow their account to be used by the president to essentially get around the ban,” a Twitter spokesperson said.

Civil rights leaders who have long criticized tech platforms for spreading hate speech and division welcomed Twitter’s decision.

Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, called it an “excellent step.”

“A fitting end to a legacy of spewing hate and vitriol,” Greenblatt said. “President Trump incited the violent riots at the Capitol using social media & paid the price.”

Eric Naing, a spokesman for Muslim Advocates, said Twitter “is showing real leadership.”

“As Twitter notes, letting Trump continue to post tweets, Facebook posts and YouTube videos for his white nationalist supporters risks ‘further incitement of violence,'” Naing said. “Now it is up to Facebook and Google/YouTube to follow Twitter’s lead.

Keep in mind that Trump was banned from a private company’s property. He will not and should not face jail time or any other legal punishment for merely exercising his right to free speech.

free_speech

Nevertheless, he does belong in prison for his blatant acts of corruption and abuse he is known for and should stand trial for these things once he finally leaves office on January 20.

Thomas Jefferson was a perfect embodiment of both sides of American Politics

Posted on by

Thomas Jefferson is known as one of America’s Founding Fathers. He helped write the Declaration of Independence in 1776, served in many positions in government, and finally was the third President of the United States.

Reference to him was made on this blog earlier here: The Louisiana “Purchase”

Note that this was a deal made between two white leaders, Thomas Jefferson (himself a slaveowner and rapist of at least one of his slaves) and Napoleon (a military dictator who would later wage war on a massive scale across Europe, just as Adolph Hitler would over a century later). The various Native American tribes who lived in the vast regions north of New Orleans were never consulted about the purchase and would most likely not have agreed to it had they been informed of it. What the hell was France doing even claiming so much land to begin with???

After his wife died, Jefferson began having sex with one of his slaves, perhaps justified in his mind by her also being a half-sister to his wife, but despite having several children with her, he never did the honorable thing by freeing and marrying her. So technically, he raped her.

And yet Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

ALL men? Weren’t the slaves he owned men? Weren’t the Native Americans whose land that he bought from France also men? Of course they were!

Since the USA was founded, liberals in American politics have sought to make our laws and policies live up to Jefferson’s idealistic WORDS, while conservatives have repeatedly made America reflect Jefferson’s DEEDS, making the USA a nation of hypocrites. Perhaps that explains why we have been so cursed over the centuries, so tolerant of bigotry. Among other things, we saw fit to elect to the Presidency an increasingly corrupt and bigoted line of men (Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr, and finally Trump) that have made us look dishonorable before the world. And Jefferson started the trend. Perhaps we should someday end it by tearing down his legacy completely and try to build a new order without reference to him at all. One with absolutely NO room for conservatives and the bigotries that motivate them from start to finish. One in which only “good” and “godly” people would ever be able to rule America.