It is always delightful to see the Left going after people on their own side for one asinine reason or another.
In a piece titled “Justin Fields And The Double Standard Of Black Quarterback Prospects”, ESPN’s Martenzie Johnson alleges that the main reason as to why Justin Fields’ draft stock is falling is because of his race.
“When it comes to black quarterbacks in particular,” Johnson writes, “the NFL has long gone out of its way to keep the position as white as the painted yard lines on the field.”
Now, this might be the point where one would expect me to defend the NFL from this nonsensical “racism” attack, but I won’t do that.
The simple reason is that I have no reason or intention to defend the NFL, which invests heavily in the woke kneeling crap and the blatant disrespecting of the United States. It does everything it can to appeal to the Left, submitting to people who either couldn’t care less about football or only want to see the league be destroyed because it’s “barbaric” or because, at one point at least, it appealed to conservatives. That is the reason I even titled this article the way that I did: ESPN, a blue, Leftist sports “news” organization is attacking the NFL, a now-blue, Leftist sports league that cares more about “social justice” that never pans out over delivering a good on-the-field product.
At any rate, Johnson continued with his racism allegations, writing: “We can leave the draft evaluating to the experts, but with zero explanation, two white quarterbacks with comparable or lesser resumes than Fields were suddenly can’t-miss picks. Whether that is true is irrelevant; it’s more about what happened to Fields since he declared for the draft that exposes the draft process – and the entire football-industrial complex – for the, let’s say, racial institution that it is.”
“Quarterbacks are expected to be smart, rational decision-makers who command a team and act as the de facto coach on the field. Accuracy and strong arms are a plus, but it mostly comes down to what’s between your ears rather than any other physical attribute. As the authors of The Bell Curve would have you believe, few Black men possess those attributes.”
While I have zero intention of defending the NFL, I will at least point out why the racism allegation is baseless in this case and give a possible explanation as to why Fields’ draft stock is dropping (not that it’s all that relevant for the purposes of this article, but I feel like I should cover this).
First of all, there are plenty of black quarterbacks in the NFL who are superstars. The highest paid QB in league history is Patrick Mahomes, a black quarterback for the Kansas City Chiefs. The second-highest paid QB in league history is Dak Prescott, a black quarterback for the Dallas Cowboys. Apart from them, a number of black quarterbacks are starters in the NFL: Cam Newton, Teddy Bridgewater, Russel Wilson, Lamar Jackson, Deshaun Watson, Kyler Murray, and others.
A lot of those QBs were taken later in the draft, but for a number of reasons.
Mahomes and Deshaun Watson were taken with the 10th and 12th picks respectively, not because people thought they were bad (people generally don’t think a first-round pick is bad), but because there were few relative QBs of this caliber in this draft. The only other QB taken ahead of them, at the second spot, was Mitch Trubisky, who is white but also pretty good (not as good as Mahomes, but still good, outside of injuries).
Furthermore, the NFL draft has 7 rounds, naturally with a lot of players being taken in those rounds. Sometimes, good QBs, like Russell Wilson, fly under the radar and get drafted in later rounds, and then turn out to be great prospects. This is the case not just for black QBs but also for white QBs, as is the case for one of the best QBs of all time, Tom Brady, who was drafted in the 6th round at the 199th spot. 198 people were taken ahead of Brady, though only six were QBs, which brings me to another reason for talented QBs to be taken later:
Teams often draft based on need, as opposed to talent. If a team has a good or great QB, they have less reason to draft one, even a great one (unless they believe the young QB would be better for them) and would look to fill a different position.
As far as Fields goes, one reason for his stock to fall is that teams are looking deeper at what he does on the field, and they notice that he tends to hold the ball for a little too long because his offensive line is very good and allows him time and room to breathe, which not all NFL teams are capable of doing. The bad teams tend to be the ones who draft higher, and they tend to have turnstile offensive lines, incapable of protecting their QB. Andrew Luck was a prime example of what can happen to a great QB who is left unprotected by their line.
But outside of the on-the-field reasons as to why Fields might be taken lower or why other, white QBs might be taken higher, my overall concern here is not to defend the NFL or even the teams in and of themselves. I delight in the fact that ESPN is attacking people on its own side, or at least, people who submit to the Leftist, woke mob rule.
It demonstrates that there is absolutely zero reason to capitulate to such people, because in their eyes, one can never be woke enough. Like the devil, they point to mistakes and stains in people’s past, and accentuate them and pretend as though that is still the case in the present.
Much like their insistence that this country is “racist” because of its tainted past regarding segregation and slavery (as if this is the only country in the world which practiced that vile thing and as though their Leftist ancestors weren’t the ones DEFENDING those very things), they insist that the NFL itself is racist because it has few black quarterbacks overall. Further, they insist that the reason for that is the league attempting some sort of miniature slave-owning practice, whereby the leader of a team, the QB, is the white master of the mostly black people that make up the rest of the team.
The Left is so fixated on the slave plantations they were forced to give up that they attack the NFL as having a slave owners’ mentality because that is the very mentality they still possess.
They project their own desires onto other people and claim them to be putrid, but it is precisely what they want for themselves.
They accuse others of racism to masquerade their own racist behaviors, both past and present, and to exculpate any future racist behaviors. For example, that very ESPN article. By claiming that the only reason Justin Fields’ draft stock is going down is because of his skin color, the author alludes to the idea that white QBs slated to go ahead of Fields are only up there because of their own skin color and not because of their skill and talent. Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if Johnson were to admit this himself, as they tend to not care about anti-white racism at best and seek to perpetrate it at worst.
In the 2021 draft, there are three QBs who are slated to go ahead of Fields: Trevor Lawrence, one of the best prospects in the draft and shown to likely go 1st overall, Zach Wilson, and Trey Lance. Of these, only Lawrence and Wilson are white, with Lance being black, and apart from Lawrence, Fields is close to the other QB prospects.
Where he actually goes will be up to the team that drafts him, of course, but to allude to the idea that Fields’ stock is going down because of nothing other than his race, when there is ANOTHER BLACK QB SHOWN TO BE AHEAD OF HIM, is utter nonsense.
Again, don’t really care as far as the NFL is concerned because I refuse to defend them. Sure, they are racist, what does it matter to me whether or not that’s true? They have been trying, for years, to capitulate to a woke Leftist mob that seeks to destroy them no matter what they do. A smart league would recognize that it shouldn’t be trying to submit to a mob that seeks to devour them whole and would begin to fight back against it, but I can’t expect the NFL, at this point, to be all that intelligent.
ESPN can write all the allegations and accusations that they want, baseless or not, against the league and I wouldn’t really care one wit, not just because I never really cared for football to begin with, either. The NFL is bleeding when it comes to audience, both in TV ratings and in stadium attendance (the latter having been a big problem even BEFORE the lockdowns).
If the Left wants the NFL to crash and burn, so be it. A league unwilling to defend itself against its aggressors hardly deserves to be afloat to begin with.
2 Corinthians 2:11
“So that we would not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his designs.”
It is no secret that the Left is filled with absolute morons at best and horrible tyrants at worst who prioritize wielding their punitive power over others above people’s safety, as evidenced by their hysterical demand that people wear masks basically everywhere (sometimes, two masks) and get multiple shots (Pfizer’s CEO recommends three shots, no points for guessing why). Insanity is the law of the land and this story perfectly exemplifies that.
Last week, Summit High School in Bend, Oregon, held its first track and field meet in two years. However, the Oregon Health Authority mandates that athletes must wear masks while competing, a proposal which is asinine and insane by normal people’s standards but is par for the course for the insane radical Left.
Naturally, because of the fact she was forced to wear a mask while competing, runner Maggie Williams began to collapse as she was approaching the finish line.
“I was pushing so hard and everything went blurry and I just fell,” Williams told the Bend Bulletin. “But luckily I fell at the right spot and crossed the line with my head.” The girl was running in the girls’ 800 meters competition while on her way to breaking a school record.
Her coach, Dave Turnbull, correctly points out that the cause of her collapse was the asinine mask-wearing rule.
“I am concerned with the mask rule,” Turnbull told the Bulletin. “This is what I am worried about, and I said this at the beginning of the season. You get a kid running the 800 with a mask on, it is actually dangerous. They don’t get the oxygen that they need. This rule needs to change.”
He continued: “I’ve been doing this for 31 years, I’ve never seen anybody basically lose consciousness. I’ve never seen that in the way it happened with Maggie.”
John Canzano of The Oregonian depicted his disgust at the state’s inability to see reason with the implementation of that mandate in an article he titled: “State leadership fails to see finish line with high school running mask rule.”
He wrote: “Distance runners are being required to wear masks while competing. Most of them are fine wearing them while warming up. But once they’re on the track, outdoors, competing in open air, the science just doesn’t support the necessity. In fact, the mandate is now raising questions about athlete safety and oxygen depletion.”
“Maggie Williams was cruising toward that school record on Thursday. Her first lap was a thing of beauty,” continued Canzano. “The second one should have ended with her breaking the finish line on her feet, gasping but with a smile. Instead, she ran out of oxygen. Her brain shut down. Her lungs quit. She landed on her forehead. Couldn’t hear. Couldn’t see. Her body crashed across the finish line. I wonder if state leaders will notice.”
And there is absolutely no reason at all for this mandate to exist to begin with. First of all, according to Canzano, Oregon is the ONLY state that requires high school runners wear masks. If even far-Left California, New York, Washington, etc. don’t require this, what is the scientific basis for Oregon to be doing it? Am I to believe that only Oregon is “following the science” while the other far-Left states, which also demand people “follow the science”, do not actually “follow the science”?
So even by Leftists states’ own standards, this is ridiculous and asinine. But here is another reason as to why that mandate is absolutely stupid: Professional athletes are not required to wear masks while competing in their respective sports.
For example, here is tennis player Novak Djokovic at the 2021 ATP cup taking a selfie with a bunch of people. Granted, the competition seems to be over by this point, as one of them is holding what appears to be a trophy, but note how NONE of them is wearing a mask in this picture:
Another example, here is an NBA bubble game from last season, when the league was attempting to continue with the 2019/20 NBA season. Note how NONE of the players on the court currently playing, or COMPETING, as one could put it, is wearing a mask:
Yet another example, here is a picture of two NFL players in a game during the pandemic. You can’t see the face of the Seahawks player, the man with the name “Wright” on his back, but you can see the Patriots player, Cam Newton, visibly without a mask, leading one to believe Wright is also not wearing a mask here. They are in the middle of a game, or competition, and neither of them is wearing a mask, in almost all certainty:
And for my final example, here are some NHL players in the middle of a game, three of them to be exact, and not one of them is wearing a mask:
So if tennis players don’t have to wear a mask, basketball players don’t have to wear a mask, football players don’t have to wear a mask and hockey players don’t have to wear a mask while competing, why in the HELL does a high school girl have to wear a mask while RUNNING TRACK?!
Am I to believe that a high school girl has better lung capacity to withstand wearing a mask during a competition than PROFESSIONAL ATHLETES? Not only that, am I expected to believe that a high school girl has better lung capacity than MALE PROFESSIONAL ATHLETES?
Does a high school girl running in a track, largely by herself, pose more of a risk of spreading the Chinese coronavirus than basketball, football and hockey players who often have to make physical contact with one another to play their respective sports properly and have to travel not only across the country but also, sometimes, to Canada (at least for NBA and NHL teams)? Or than tennis players who have to travel around the world for their competitions?
What, then, is the scientific basis for mandating high school girls running track and field wear masks WHILE COMPETING, when no professional athlete is forced to wear masks and when no other state, even the far-Left ones, make such a mandate?
That’s the thing about all this: it’s not about science. It never was about science. “Science” is what the Left claims is factual and true. “Science” says that man created climate change. “Science” says that there is systemic racism and people have unconscious biases. “Science” says that men can be women and women can be men, or even a third option such as a lizard, a dragon, a tow truck, an alien, a pop corn kernel or whatever else. “Science” to the Left is merely a deity whom all must obey, not unlike the pagans and zealots of the past thousands of years.
There is simply no actual scientific basis for such a mandate, but no such scientific basis is even required. This pandemic has allowed already tyrant-like people to basically go over the edge and go full-Stalin on their constituents. A Polish preacher in Alberta, Canada keeps being harassed by Canadian police and he RIGHTLY compares them to the Gestapo and communists.
This mandate even existing at all, despite the scientific uselessness of it and even despite the fact that other far-Left states don’t have this mandate, is just further proof of at least SOME people being a little too happy to play Stalin.
I can only hope and pray that one day, some modicum of sanity will return soon.
“Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey!”
Ironically, on the day of Derek Chauvin’s “trial” (it was not a fair trial given all the intervention and threats by Maxine Waters, Joe Biden, etc.), a black 16-year-old was killed by a police officer because she was visibly trying to stab another black girl following a police call.
Released body-cam footage depicted what happened, and clearly shows Ma’Khia Bryant wielding a knife and in the process of beginning to stab another girl on the scene. However, before she was able to do so, she was shot by a police officer at the scene and later pronounced dead.
Because the officer was white and the girl was black, initially, Leftists around the country raised the same bullcrap hell they tend to do with these situations, assuming that this was the result of racism (the officer visibly saved the life of one or more black people at the scene) and just “another” example of police brutality in America.
NBA star LeBron James even tweeted “YOU’RE NEXT #ACCOUNTABILITY” with a picture of the officer of this case, before he received serious backlash and took it down (he has yet to apologize and has tried to play the victim, like the little b-word that he is).
And with the release of the body-cam footage, ABC’s “60 Minutes”, which is infamous for editing and distorting videos to fit their narrative, did exactly that and tried to edit out the knife from Bryant’s hand, attempting to make it look like a totally unjustified police killing.
However, others were less quick to judge the situation. CNN’s Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo surprisingly admitted that the killing, while tragic (which it is), was justified.
“We have to be fair about what happens when police arrive at scenes. It is tragic that it’s a 16-year-old girl. Just as it is tragic that it’s a 13-year-old in Chicago (referencing Adam Toledo, who was an armed individual shot by police). When police are chasing people, they don’t know how old they are. And they don’t run and say, ‘How old are you?’ ‘Oh, I’m 13.’ You don’t know that. Or, ‘I’m 16’.”
“When they roll up on the scene, they see people tussling around. Someone has a knife. And their job is to protect and serve. Every life on that scene. And if they see someone who is in the process of taking a life, what is that decision, what decision do they have to make?”
They even went so far as to defend the use of a lethal weapon as opposed to a taser: “Tasers, they don’t always connect. So, you’ve got to get two prongs or what have you, and it has to connect to whatever. I see it, if the woman in the pink (the potential victim of stabbing) was my sister, niece, wife, whatever, you have to make a decision. Is one life on that scene more valuable than another? And if someone is trying to take a life, on that scene, do you protect the life of the person trying to take the life, or do you protect the life of the person whose life is in imminent danger at that point?”
Cuomo said: “I feel for the officer. You can hear it in his voice. When he said – the man on the side was saying, ‘You shot my baby, you shot my baby.’ And he said, ‘She had a knife. She went right at her.’ You know, this is something that he’s going to have to live with also… The analysis is only of the instant circumstances. I’m saying, if you want to have this contextual conversation that people seem to want to have about ‘what else we can do, people fight with knives all the time, do we really need cops? The answer is no, learn how to control your kids, and don’t be so violent and we won’t need cops.’ But that’s not our reality. And cops get called to our lives all the time for the worst situations.”
When the guy who said that “God doesn’t judge gay people” and the guy that pretended to have the Chinese coronavirus for sympathy while he went out partying in New York come to the agreement that the officer did the RIGHT thing, you know that there is really little reason for Leftists to be attacking the officer.
Because, as one can see from the footage, Bryant tried to stab someone. She tried to stab, and in all likelihood kill, another person.
It is a bit more understandable to be irritated before the facts come out about what happened in this case, but it is an absolute moron and degenerate who would still defend the girl knowing what we know about this case.
Bryant was a would-be murderer. Everyone trying to defend her, which at this point is LeBron James and the Biden administration, is trying to defend Bryant’s attempt to kill another person.
Which, unfortunately, is not all that surprising, to be honest. These people, who pretend to care so, so much about black lives, NEVER bring up black-on-black crime. When talking about someone like Secoriea Turner, who was killed by BLM terrorists who took over a burned down Wendy’s, she is only talked about in reference to gun crime as a whole to attempt to disarm Americans, not as a victim of THE LEFT’S OWN CHAOS AND DISCORD.
And this is without even mentioning someone like Robert Howard, who was kidnapped and executed by a police officer, but his story was not told and his name was not encouraged to be remembered because the cop that killed him was black himself.
And even recently, a 7-year-old black girl was killed in a McDonald’s drive-thru in Chicago, and her father was in critical condition as well. Jaslyn Adams was killed in gun-control heavy Chicago, likely by black shooters (admittedly, the identities of the shooters are unknown, but a 7-year-old girl killed in Chicago ought to spark the same sort of outrage from people like LeBron as the justified shooting of a would-be killer, at least. It’s still a black life that was lost). Yet, her name is largely unknown and no one is attempting to make it known, at least on the Left.
The only kind of situation that gives way for a Leftist narrative is when a white police officer is involved with the death of a black person. It doesn’t matter if that person is visibly and clearly a threat to the life of either the officer or another person (even if that other person was black themselves). Apparently, if it’s a white officer pulling the trigger against a white would-be killer, it’s unjust and a sign of racism.
To their credit, Lemon and Cuomo recognized that this was a justified shooting and that the officer did the right thing in prioritizing the life of the would-be victim over the life of Bryant, so I have nothing bad to say about them in this instance (a rare occurrence), but other Leftists like ABC News’ “60 Minutes” and celebrities like LeBron James are being stupid at best and degenerates at worst.
Because, like I said earlier, they are attempting to defend and justify the stabbing of one black person by another black person. “Let the teenager stab the other one” is what they are basically saying.
I have asked this before in prior articles, but it bears repeating: Does it sound like these people think that black lives actually matter? Or does it sound like they only matter when they are taken, justifiably or not, by a white officer? And if that’s the case, one can hardly say that they believe their life mattered.
George Floyd’s life didn’t matter to BLM. His death did. Ma’Khia Bryant’s life didn’t matter to BLM. Her death did. Michael Brown’s life didn’t matter to the Left. His death did. Freddy Gray’s life didn’t matter to the Left. His death did.
And by contrast, Robert Howard’s life, which was taken by a ghoulish cop, didn’t matter to BLM and even his death didn’t matter because his life was taken by a black cop. The wrong kind of cop, in their minds. Secoriea Turner’s life didn’t matter to BLM (evidenced by the fact it was taken by BLM), and her death didn’t matter to them either, only insofar as the Left could try and use it to attack legal gun ownership. Jaslyn Adams’ life didn’t matter to BLM and her death doesn’t matter to them either because it’s not a white cop that took her life, but likely, fellow black people. Even if it was white people who killed her, it won’t matter as much as if it had been white officers.
But in any case, this episode goes to show why waiting on the facts of a case is crucial. Facts matter, and the facts of this case are clear enough for even DON LEMON AND CHRIS CUOMO to agree that the officer did the right thing. For those who jump the gun and make assumptions, or even stupefyingly double-down, they get egg on their face about the assumptions they had made. Even if LeBron is acting like a b-word, the facts of the matter still got him to take down the original tweet which, frankly, painted a target on the officer’s back.
He won’t apologize because entitled people believe they are infallible or are above apologizing when they genuinely messed up (he demands accountability for this case, but makes no similar demand to the CCP which is keeping millions of Uyghurs and Christians in concentration camps), but he at least had enough wherewithal to recognize that he should at least take that original post down (after suffering enough backlash, at least).
Waiting for the facts is infinitely more important than initial emotional reactions to things.
“A hot-tempered man stirs up strife, but he who is slow to anger quiets contention.”
I’ve already detailed many instances of Leftists breaking their own Chinese coronavirus rules and guidelines in a previous article, but that article is already a few months old and obviously, the hypocrisy of the Left has only continued since then.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (henceforth known as “Whitler” for her Nazi style of governance) has often broken her own Chinese coronavirus rules and guidelines (and her husband is also guilty of this), but this instance in particular is especially juicy to me.
You see, Whitler’s spokesman confirmed on Monday that the governor had flown to Florida about a month ago. “In the past six months, she has left the state three times, once for the inauguration, once to assist her elderly father who is battling a chronic illness, and once to visit with Michigan’s National Guard troops,” said Bobby Leddy, Whitler’s press secretary. “All trips were very brief, two full days or less, closely followed public health guidelines, and were made when Michigan’s daily positivity rate was in the low single digits.”
“Closely followed public health guidelines”? Are you kidding me? She long ago instituted travel guidelines to keep people from leaving the state as much as possible and she broke those guidelines for her own reasons. I can understand wanting to be close to her father when he was sick and maybe traveling to visit the National Guard (which I imagine was sent to D.C. following the Capitol riot), but she generally did not have to attend Biden’s inauguration, especially as D.C. was put into lockdown and no regular civilian was allowed to attend it. She willingly broke her own guidelines, Leddy.
At any rate, Breitbart News also reported that a top Whitler aide had traveled to Florida for spring break and her trip was extensively documented on her Facebook. And like I said, Whitler also went to the sunshine state recently, though the reasons were not specified due to “ongoing security concerns” aka she went there to party for spring break.
Well, I can’t say that for certain, as I have no proof of that, but hey, the Left has no issue with accusing people with zero evidence, so they shouldn’t be surprised when their own tactics are used against them. Until proven wrong, I will allege that she went to Florida for spring break, after telling people not to leave Michigan.
But do you want to know what makes this particularly funny to me? Back on April 3rd, presumably after she herself had gone to Florida, Whitler instructed Michiganders to not travel to Florida, blaming it for a rise in MICHIGAN’S cases. Whitler told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd: “Michigan and Florida are not next to each other. But this is the time of the year that snowbirds come home from Florida, where people are going on spring break, and all of these things can contribute to spread.”
This is a similar argument to the one Leftists make to “argue” why their gun-control heavy cities are so riddled by gun violence: “It’s the other cities and states, with less gun control restrictions, that bring in the guns and allow people to kill each other.” It’s an idiotic argument because it begs the question: “If that’s the case, why aren’t those neighboring cities and states riddled by more gun violence than the gun-control heavy city?” If anything, that’s an argument that showcases how ineffective gun control is, if the neighboring cities and states, with fewer gun control measures, are less violent than the gun-control heavy cities and states.
Likewise, this kind of argument showcases how ineffective lockdowns are. If Florida is the reason MICHIGAN’S Chinese coronavirus cases are going up, why isn’t Florida a hotspot of the virus? Why isn’t the open state absolutely riddled by the virus? And if Florida is to blame for Michigan’s cases going up, then why did Whitler go to Florida for any given reason?
I mean, if the sunshine state is THIS bad for the state of Michigan, and those who go to Florida and return to Michigan are risking their fellow Michiganders, then why did Whitler go to Florida? Why is she willing to risk the health and safety of her own citizens and constituents by traveling to the, apparently, virus-riddled state?
This is the kind of logical trouble these Leftists often get into when they are utterly hypocritical about what they say and do. Either they show that they aren’t nearly as afraid of the virus as they pretend to be or as they want their constituents to be (as a scared populace is easy to control) or they are subject to the very kind of punishment they wish to deliver upon deviants, with all the accusations of “endangering their fellow Americans” and whatever else.
The only unfortunate aspect is that hypocrisy doesn’t tend to stick with them, as the fake news media runs cover for them and will always either support them in what they do or outright ignore them and their hypocrisy, as they are doing with this and many other cases. Even the most notorious of these cases, Nancy Pelosi’s insistence of getting a hair-cut, was largely run to the ground because she knows how to order the media around to get them to not cover her blatantly hypocritical (and, frankly, elitist) actions.
But regardless of the media’s actions, people still take notice. For example, Lisa Hanlin, a Polish restaurant owner in Milford, Michigan, has taken note of the tyrannical and hypocritical actions of Whitler. Being a restaurant owner, she was obviously ordered to close down due to the lockdown. She told The Federalist that people are “tired of the lies and manipulation” from Whitler.
Whether or not this, and her other actions, will lead to anything substantial and meaningful like her impeachment or a defeat at the polls is uncertain. However, one can hope and pray that these evil bastards (let’s not forget that Whitler joins Cuomo and other Leftist governors in killing their elderly populations in nursing homes) will face the justice that they deserve within their and our lifetimes.
“When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.”
The only thing I would add to that idea in the title is that BLM, apart from being a fraud organization that doesn’t care even a little bit about black people, is also a terrorist organization, given how often they incite riots which often lead to someone’s death. Blacks lives do not matter to the organization which calls itself “Black Lives Matter”. This has been obvious for a long time, but now, even a victim’s mother is acknowledging this in no unclear terms.
Breonna Taylor is a relatively well-known name, as she was the victim of her ex-boyfriend’s idiotic firefight with Louisville Police, and was made a martyr for opportunistic Leftists who wish to exploit her death for political gain.
BLM was seemingly supposed to have raised money for Taylor’s family, but Taylor’s mother, Tamika Palmer, has called them out for having “never done a damn thing for us,” calling the organization a fraud and money-grabbers.
“I have never personally dealt with BLM Louisville and personally have found them to be fraud, Attica Scott another fraud,” Palmer wrote in a now-removed Facebook post. “I could walk in a room full of people who claim to be here for Breonna’s family who don’t even know who I am, I’ve watched y’all raise money on behalf of Breonna’s family who has never done a damn thing for us nor have we needed it or asked so talk about fraud.” She also continued, claiming that BLM has “lost focus” of what they are trying to accomplish.
I personally have to disagree with that last sentiment, as BLM has not “lost focus” of what they are trying to accomplish. What they are trying to accomplish is simply something different than what they advertise. Supposedly, they want to end police brutality, help black people, etc., etc., but that’s just a front. As I have pointed out multiple times in the past, their “About Us” page used to contain nothing but far-Left Marxist garbage that had NOTHING to do with keeping black people safe or creating a more equal and just culture. It was just pushing LGBT crap down people’s throats, particularly transgender crap, which the VAST majority of black people are generally against, and overall pushing Marxist class-warfare crap as well.
BLM is a self-admittedly (given many of its leaders) Marxist organization which seeks to profit off of discourse.
One example of this is Patrisse Khan-Cullors, one of BLM’s co-founders, who recently bought four luxurious homes for $3.2 million, which are in predominantly white neighborhoods.
This, rightly, leads people to question the validity of the entire movement, as the actions of its leaders often reflect the attitude and culture of the entire organization. Cullors bought FOUR luxury homes, likely from the money she has raised through her organization. She is a self-described Marxist and it shows: Marxists tend to demand others make sacrifices that they themselves would be unwilling to make.
As I have said many times in the past, under communism, the 1% FLOURISHES. It is under communism that the gap between the rich and the poor is the widest. Those who are either in the government (specifically, high places in the government) or in high places in companies under the government or allied with the government are the ONLY ones who get to enjoy comfort and wealth.
There are only two kinds of communists out there: Those who are in it to profit (which is considerably ironic), such as Cullors, Kaepernick, etc., and those who are too stupid to profit from it and genuinely believe in the edicts, teachings, beliefs, etc.
The former are always the ones who take advantage of the latter, because the latter are so easy to take advantage of. They are the “useful idiots” of the Lenin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Obama, Cullors-types, who go out and create chaos, pushing for the crap that is nothing but fake and idiotic, and help raise funds for those who are controlling them.
They are little more than those trained monkeys who dance on the street, and even that is arguable, as the dancing monkeys don’t go around causing billions of dollars-worth of damage to private and public property.
So for Palmer to be calling them out as frauds is entirely correct. They ARE frauds. At least, if you believe they are trying to do what they claim they are trying to do. If you believe BLM cares about black lives and is doing whatever it can to help black people, then yes, you would believe they are frauds, because they do not accomplish what you believe they set out to do.
The charge that they are a money-grabbing organization is true, no matter how you look at it. If you believe BLM is genuinely trying to improve black lives and protect black lives, you still see them being money-grabbers and the leaders profiting off of the anguish and anger of people who believe(d) in them. If you understand that BLM is nothing but a Marxist terrorist organization that seeks to exploit situations and outright lie about them (much like the rest of the Left does), you still see them as a money-grabbing organization exploiting the people who support them for their own personal gain.
Now, I feel it’s necessary to point out that not everyone in BLM-related organizations is seeking to make a profit from this. Those would, of course, be the latter kind of communists – those who are too stupid to profit from the grift that is communism and actually believe in what it claims.
One such person is Hawk Newsome, whom I have previously talked about when he went on Martha MacCallum’s show and presented himself as a faux-Christian, arguing that Jesus was a “black radical revolutionary”, and who recently called for an internal investigation of Cullors for her real estate purchases.
He said: “If you go around calling yourself a socialist, you have to ask how much of her own personal money is going to charitable causes. It’s really sad because it makes people doubt the validity of the movement and overlook the fact that it’s the people that carry this movement.”
First, socialists aren’t charitable. Like, at all. They claim they do this and that to help this person or these people, but they always give a MINISCULE amount of their income to charity. For example, there is Bernie Sanders, who, as I wrote in a 2019 article, only gave LESS THAN ONE PERCENT of his income to charity. He had made over a million dollars in 2018, and reportedly gave just a little over $10k to charity, or less than one percent of his income. For a self-avowed socialist, he sure cares pathetically little about charity, so no one tell me that socialists and charity go hand-in-hand.
Second, this is not the only thing that leads people to doubt the validity of the movement. The fact that BLM terrorists (alongside ANTIFA, another Marxist terrorist organization) destroyed largely black-owned businesses in black neighborhoods throughout last year’s riots showcases how little they care about the lives of black people.
Black business owners saw their businesses, which were already struggling mightily because of the idiotic lockdowns, being physically looted, burned, or generally destroyed. How, exactly, does this demonstrate that black lives matter to BLM?
Matter of fact, it’s precisely BECAUSE OF THIS CRAP that I began to call them simply by their initials “BLM” because they don’t even deserve to call themselves “Black Lives Matter”. They don’t care about black lives, so to call them that only spreads falsehoods and lies.
Third, and finally, it might be “the people” who carry the movement, but those people are the useful idiots I talked about earlier, and the second type of communist: those who are too stupid to profit from the grift and who genuinely believe in what they are calling for. That doesn’t make the movement any better, because it’s simply the exploitation of the ignorant and misinformed. It’s what all communist organizations have done since the ideology was created.
Tamika Palmer is 100% correct in her assessment that BLM is fraudulent. Again, they certainly are to those who believe or have believed that they in any way cared about black people. They are profiteers and exploiters. They are everything they claim capitalist companies and organizations are: for-profit, selfish, and oppressors of the lower classes.
“Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”
I’m a little bit late to the party in talking about the latest cop-related shooting death of a suspect, but I feel like being late to these circumstances is actually beneficial to getting all the important information that is out there and understanding the situation as best as possible.
First, to give context for those who are fairly unfamiliar with this story, Daunte Wright, 20, was shot and killed at around 2 p.m. on Sunday after resisting arrest and attempting to flee officers. He was originally pulled over for expired tags on his plate and was asked to step out of the car and arrested due to an outstanding warrant regarding an illegal possession of a firearm and fleeing from police.
There is a narrative out there that he was stopped because of air freshener in his vehicle, which is ridiculous and unsubstantiated.
Initial reports seemed to indicate that Wright had gotten in his vehicle, at which point officers began to open fire on him, eventually striking him and killing him, but recently released bodycam footage (below) depicts a different story entirely.
Police bodycam footage shows three police officers at the scene, two male officers and a female officer, whose bodycam footage is being used. In the minute-long video, we see Wright being asked to step out of the vehicle, which he did, and a male officer beginning to place him in cuffs. What is strange about this is that the male officer appears to be having some sort of difficulty with placing Wright in cuffs. Typical police procedure for an arrest is that an officer will search the suspect before placing them in cuffs, so as to ensure that the suspect does not have anything that could poke, stick, hurt or otherwise inconvenience the arresting officer.
I mention this because, from the looks of it, the male officer was in the process of placing Wright in cuffs and sort of hesitated, possibly because he was asking about what Wright was carrying. I say “possibly” because the video doesn’t have good audio quality, so it’s very difficult to understand what people are saying. I could only really make out one thing that was said later on by the female officer, but that’s because she shouted it, while the rest was spoken in a normal tone of voice.
At any rate, at one point, the female officer begins to approach Wright, possibly to try and keep Wright from performing motions and actions that would be a threat to the officers, and seemingly reaches into something that was on Wright’s back. From the angle of the camera, I can’t tell what exactly it is that she was doing, and appears to hold something on her left hand which looks like some sort of business card, though, again, I can’t really tell what it was.
It was at that point, when the female officer was reaching for something behind Wright, that Wright had managed to free himself from the officers’ grasp (for the most part), and attempted to get in his vehicle and flee the scene. He was still somewhat being held by the male officer, who was trying to pull him out of the vehicle with little success, while the female officer repeatedly warned Wright that she would tase him.
At that point, the female officer pulled out her gun, seemingly believing it to have been her taser, and shouted “Taser! Taser!” as officers tend to do when they are about to taser someone, and only realized that it was her lethal pistol once she had discharged it.
Now, again, the audio quality is bad, which brings me to an issue I have: It kind of sounds like multiple shots (no more than two or three) were fired. It could just be the reverberation of the audio waves that makes it sound like it’s more than one shot, but it does sound like it’s more than one. Given how I don’t know for sure, I won’t hard accuse the female officer of actually having tried to kill Wright, but allow me to at least say this: It becomes a LOT more difficult to claim it was an accident and that she thought it was a taser if she fired multiple times.
Tase guns use prongs that deliver a shock of electricity to immobilize a suspect. They can only be fired once, and if an officer misses, they have to reload the thing. If she, indeed, pulled the trigger more than once, she likely knew it was her gun and not her taser.
However, like I said, the audio quality is bad and I can’t definitively tell if it was one shot or a maximum of three. We will have to wait for an autopsy report to see if there is more than one bullet hole on Wright’s body (entry holes, that is) to see what exactly happened.
Now, with that being said, it’s hard to say that the fault doesn’t lie in both parties present.
Daunte Wright had an outstanding warrant and he was about to be arrested. If he was intending on fleeing from the police, why did he step out of his car in the first place? Even from a criminal’s perspective, what he did made no sense. And from a civilian’s perspective, it makes no sense that he would try to flee. He shouldn’t have attempted to escape police because that only leads to further problems.
So the fault definitely lies on Wright for his idiotic, at best, actions.
But the fault also lies with the female officer. Let’s assume that she did, indeed, think her gun was her taser and it was all accidental, as appears to be the case from the evidence we have. How, exactly, did she think her gun was her taser?
I get that, in the heat of the moment, things can be a bit of a blur, which can facilitate accidents like this one appears to be. But a police officer, especially as senior an officer as the female cop is reported to be, should be able to tell very quickly if she is holding her gun or her taser. A loaded firearm and a taser gun do NOT weigh the same and definitely don’t look the same. Even arguing that she might have been paying more attention to the suspect than what she was holding, so she might not have seen that what she was holding was a black pistol and not the usual yellow taser gun that cops tend to have, she still should’ve been able to tell that what she was holding FELT DIFFERENT from a taser.
An article on Daily Kos puts this well: “[A] taser weighs about eight ounces. Eight ounces is a large bag of chips… In physical terms, picking up a weapon that weighs eight ounces, would take 3.57 newtons of force. A standard police issue 9mm semi-automatic pistol with a full magazine, weighs about 2.6 pounds. A loaded Glock .22 about the same. This takes 11.57 newtons, or a bit over three times the amount of force.”
In other words, a taser gun is FAR lighter than a loaded standard issue police pistol and a pistol takes more force to draw and aim. This matters because officers ought to be knowledgeable of things like these, as they are TRAINED to use their guns and their tasers, so they know best how they feel in drawing and aiming, especially as the female officer was aiming her gun with a single hand, which would make the weight of the pistol more noticeable.
So there is little real excuse for the officer to not have known she was using her pistol as opposed to her taser, especially for someone who, again, reports say is pretty senior.
Daunte Wright was an idiot for doing what he did, but he should still be alive. In jail, absolutely, but alive. That he isn’t is partly his fault but more so the fault of the female officer, who should have known better than almost everyone how a pistol feels in her hand as opposed to her taser.
Now, again, I won’t hard accuse the female officer of having tried to kill Wright. It is entirely possible that this really was just an accident. However, there is also evidence that suggests it wasn’t, which is HORRIBLE. At best she made a MASSIVE mistake which should cost her her job (She has resigned, which I think is good) and at worst she sought the opportunity to kill someone who shouldn’t have been killed.
Again, Wright was an idiot for resisting arrest and attempting to flee, but unless he was a physical threat to any of the officers, he didn’t deserve to get shot and killed.
I generally prefer to defend the officers in these situations either because the circumstances clearly show they are innocent or at least because they deserve due process and presumption of innocence, but when a cop messes up, they have to be called out on it. No one can tell me that the female officer didn’t make a mistake or that she did everything right. She messed up, accidental or intentional. Accountability for her actions, either way, is necessary.
At the same time, it’s even more idiotic for people to go out on the streets and loot and riot, but Leftist pawns will do as their masters tell them, so that’s a different topic in itself.
But both Wright and the female officer are at fault for what transpired. Had Wright not blatantly broken the law and resisted arrest and tried to flee from the scene, he would still be alive. Had the female officer not been at the very least highly incompetent and been able to tell the difference in weight between a taser gun and a lethal gun, Wright would also still be alive and she wouldn’t have been placed on administrative leave with her job on the line.
The fault lies with both of them. Maybe to different extents, and one can argue one way or the other for both, but both definitely are at fault here.
“To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.”
In my last article, I briefly mentioned two big red flags surrounding the Chinese coronavirus vaccines that ought to worry anyone with a functioning brain: Namely that people insist one has to get more than just one dose of the vaccine (literally all other vaccines require a single dose, unless it’s the seasonal flu shot, which is suspect in itself) and that people still have to wear a mask (or two, insanely enough) and social distance even after getting two doses of the vaccine.
As if those things in themselves weren’t enough to get people to at least question the effectiveness of the vaccines (as well as the fact that these are experimental vaccines, further bringing its effectiveness into question), there is a new study from Tel Aviv University which found that a South African variant of the Chinese coronavirus affects people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine more than it affects those who are unvaccinated.
According to the study, this South African variant was found eight times more frequently in people who were vaccinated as opposed to those who were unvaccinated (5.4% against 0.7%).
Adi Stern of Tel Aviv University said: “We found a disproportionately higher rate of the South African variant among people vaccinated with a second dose, compared to the unvaccinated group. This means that the South African variant is able, to some extent, to break through the vaccine’s protection.”
The Epoch Times reports: “The study looked at 400 people who received at least one shot of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and had contracted the COVID-19 variant and compared them to the same number of people who were infected and unvaccinated. Moderna’s vaccine is also used in Israel, but it was not included in the study.”
Stern told the Times of Israel: “Based on patterns in the general population, we would have expected just one case of the South African variant, but we saw eight. Obviously, this result didn’t make me happy. Even if the South African variant does break through the vaccine’s protection, it has not spread widely enough through the population.”
So not only is there reason to distrust the effectiveness of the vaccines due to the apparent need to get more than one dose of it, and due to the apparent need to still wear masks and social distance as though the vaccine was not administered to oneself, but there is also reason to distrust because, at least when it comes to the South African variant, one of the vaccines (which is reportedly 91% effective, so not a small number) does not appear to help in any way and actually seemingly puts people at greater risk to get the disease.
And it’s not like this is a small deal by any stretch of the imagination. Though there are few cases of the South African variant in Israel, there are A LOT of such cases in the U.S. According to a map by NBC News (so take it with a grain of salt) which tracks the Chinese coronavirus variants in the U.S., 35 states have the South African variant of the virus.
While I don’t know the exact number of cases of the South African variant in the United States, the fact that it has been found in no less than 35 states means that it’s at least decently spread out in the country, and if people have that variant and get the Pfizer vaccine, the vaccine won’t work. And if people get the Pfizer vaccine before they had the virus, it seemingly makes them around eight times more likely to get the South African variant, thereby negating the vaccine’s very reason for existing.
So then, what is the reason for getting the vaccine in the first place? Sure, this study was just the Pfizer vaccine, but given it’s supposed to be 91% effective and Moderna is 94% effective (statistically much better, but not worlds apart), the South African variant seems to be able to bypass the vaccine’s protection. And if it was just that, that would be bad enough. It would just require Pfizer to revise their vaccine and seek to make it effective against this variant. But no, it’s also the fact that, statistically speaking, one is more likely to get the South African variant if one gets the Pfizer vaccine than if they don’t get the vaccine whatsoever.
How backwards is that? The vaccine straight up puts people at greater risk of getting this variant of the virus (seemingly a stronger and worse one, if the vaccines can’t do anything against it, which is definitely bad), and yet, we are still advised to get it despite how relatively widespread this variant is in the States.
Even the CDC and FDA recommended a pause of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine because six people got blood clots after taking them, so if the bar is that low for the J&J vaccine, why would there not be similar disclaimers surrounding the Pfizer vaccine, particularly as it is more likely to make people sick with the South African variant than for those who don’t get the vaccine?
Not to mention that, as I have written previously, miscarriages in the U.K. skyrocketed some 366% as a result of the vaccine, and no disclaimers or warnings really came out of that.
So there is precedent for these health organizations to find a problem with a vaccine and begin advising against using that vaccine (admittedly, the J&J vaccine is not as effective as the other ones, so that likely had an effect in the making of that decision), which should lead one to believe that problems like skyrocketing miscarriages and increased likelihood of getting a seemingly worse and stronger variant of the Chinese coronavirus would lead these organizations to try and give warnings about it.
Well, that would likely be the case in a sane world, but there are those who seek to benefit from experimenting with people using these vaccines, so it’s unlikely that a whole lot of noise will be created as a result to news like these.
Still, for those who have the ability to not get these vaccines, it’s perfectly obvious that one should not get them. There are far too many red flags surrounding these things for it to be worthwhile, considering there is a 99.9% survivability rate for most people.
“In peace I will both lie down and sleep; for you alone, O Lord, make me dwell in safety.”
The fake news media is altogether biased and only operates within the bounds of their established Leftist agenda. I don’t think I really need to repeat that, but the MSM continues proving this day after day with report after report, regardless of subject.
Recently, with many states having made the logical decision to reopen (after having made the originally illogical decision to lock down) and seeing Chinese coronavirus cases dropping, NBC News has tried to cast doubt on how good reopening states is as an idea, attempting to credit anything apart from the basic reopening to why the number of cases dropping in such states (and also trying to explain away why states that continue lockdowns are seeing rising cases).
Nothing but dishonesty abounds, but this is the fake news media, so it’s to be expected, unfortunately. We do not have an honest, unbiased media in this country, so we have to discern the truth of reality from what quackery these deceivers try to sell us.
NBC News reporter Sam Brock began by declaring, “Call it a COVID conundrum. In states with the strictest measures in the country, like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and much of New England, cases are on the rise, while in the South, states like Arkansas and Texas that have reopened businesses and ripped away mask mandates are seeing their numbers drop.”
“So what might explain the apparent contradiction? One theory: differences in testing rates. Alabama has experienced one of the biggest dips in infections, more than 52% in two weeks. But it’s also dead last in the U.S. for COVID testing.”
“How much does the lack of adequate testing have to do with the numbers we’re seeing right now?” Brock eventually asked an NBC guest, who is a doctor at Florida International University, whom replied: “When you don’t test you’re blind, and when you’re not testing you have a false sense of what the real problem is in your community.”
There is plenty of information now available about the Chinese coronavirus that it makes no sense for people to make these kinds of assertions or theories, especially as we have seen that over-testing can result in false positives. For example, we know that the virus has a higher rate of infection when indoors. That was actually one excuse given when states were locking down and unconstitutionally and illegally shutting down businesses. However, we also now know that the virus has an extremely high rate of survivability for most people.
Back early in the pandemic, we heard of survival rates around 97%. Still decently high, but considerably lower than things like the flu. There was at least some reason to be wary of this virus back then because we knew so little about it. But now we know a lot more, such as the fact that the survival rate is 99.9%+ for most people. What’s more, one idiotic thing this country did (and all countries which went with lockdowns, really) was that we decided to lock down people who were HEALTHY as opposed to quarantining those who were sick.
Remember phrases like “flatten the curve” and “slow the spread”? The original purpose of those things was to allow hospitals to not be overwhelmed by cases, since that would lead to catastrophe. Well, we flattened the curve and we slowed the spread as much as we could, with almost everyone in the country routinely wearing masks where they needed to, but bad-faith actors with PhD’s, as well as members of the fake news media, moved the goal posts.
The original purpose of taking a lot of these safety measures was to not overwhelm the hospital systems with virus cases and with normal, daily problems hospitals have to deal with. But at no point did the hospitals even come close to being overwhelmed, so much so that when Trump sent a Navy hospital ship to house patients in New York (back then, the epicenter of the pandemic in the U.S.), it was hardly used.
And now, we have states like Florida, one of the most populous states in the country with a notoriously old population (being a retirement spot and all), which reopened back in the late summer of last year and NOTHING catastrophic has happened since. Cases varied, but at this point, like NBC reported, they are going down, as are cases in Texas.
Speaking of Texas, Brock persisted with another theory: COVID fatigue. “Michigan, where people are just coming out of lockdown for the first time in months, cases are up more than 100% as demographics shift. Texas, on the other hand, began opening its doors months ago and just jammed 40,000 people into the (Texas) Rangers’ ballpark, many without masks.”
Dr. Neil Gandhi of Houston Medical Hospital posited that “A lot of individuals in the southern U.S. and especially here in Texas have already been exposed to the coronavirus, so many individuals already have coronavirus antibodies.”
While that is a sound and reasonable argument from Gandhi, he then proceeded to negate that with a very stupid argument, which I will get to in a second.
First, some context for that stupid argument. Brock eventually stated: “That leads us to the risky behavior that we’ve seen in places like Miami Beach, Florida, where numbers have only increased slightly. Theory number three: where young people are acting as carriers, as doctors are saying they’re returning to other states carrying the virus with them.” A dumb argument in itself, seeing as they’d be infecting other people in Florida along the way to their home states, yet Florida is not seeing cases skyrocketing.
In any case, he eventually said: “Bottom line: health experts say the falling figures in the South might be giving a false sense of security. Do medical experts worry this is emboldening those leaders who said this is a good idea to loosen restrictions?”
Which is when Gandhi gave his stupid argument: “We worry about if there’s a perfect storm brewing. If we remember, this virus always takes 10 to 14 to 21 days to develop. We might just be seeing the early effects of that right now.”
This is a stupid argument because Texas lifted its mask mandate and began to reopen more than 40 days ago, well past the point where one would see this virus act up and develop.
Not to mention that, again, FLORIDA HAS BEEN OPEN FOR MORE THAN HALF A YEAR! And, of course, this is completely ignoring the fact that there are states which NEVER closed, like South Dakota, and there are COUNTRIES which also never closed, like Sweden. And none of them are on the verge of collapse at any capacity – if anything, reopening/never closing ended up HELPING those places.
In any case, it was clear that the people at NBC News were throwing whatever they could at the wall to see what sticks, offering no less than three theories as to why locked down states are seeing surges in cases and why reopening states are seeing drops in cases. Anything to not give credit to the idea that reopening is the best option for ALL states.
Even if one wants to argue that reopening isn’t what’s leading to drops in cases, the fact of the matter is that locked down states have seen surges in cases. The prevailing reasoning behind lockdowns is that they help to slow the spread, flatten the curve, and prevent more and more people from getting sick. And that clearly hasn’t worked.
All lockdowns have achieved is financial and economic strain, mental health issues, surges in child suicide and depression, and a myriad of other problems that wouldn’t be there without lockdowns. And the ONE thing lockdowns are put into place to do – slow the spread of the Chinese coronavirus – they haven’t been able to do. It is evidently clear that lockdowns offer a false sense of security at best (not surprising that commies are trying to say that reopening states are the ones offering a false sense of security, since projection is a commie trait) and crippling, devastating, and often utterly fatal problems at worst, including potentially making the spread of the virus even worse.
Immunity is what people are hoping for, and locking things down only prolongs the issues. Not to mention that I have zero trust that the vaccine is in any way effective in fighting the Chinese coronavirus. That people say you have to get MULTIPLE vaccines is already a red flag. That Fauci has insisted that people who get BOTH vaccines still have to wear masks and social distance is another red flag.
If the vaccines actually worked, surely only one dose would be enough, and we wouldn’t have to continue wearing masks and social distancing since we would be immune.
“Oh, but the vaccine and the masks/social distancing is to protect other people, not ourselves,” liberals might argue. Bull. A vaccine is meant to protect the person GETTING IT. A mask is supposed to protect the person WEARING IT. The idea that they are supposed to protect other people is communist bullcrap meant to coerce people into submission. After all, “you’re doing something good for other people.” That is the appeal that these Leftists use to get people to wear masks and get vaccinated. At no point since the beginning of modern medicine have masks and vaccines been created and used for the purposes of protecting people apart from the person wearing/getting them, apart from surgeons performing surgery on someone with an open wound.
When one gets a tetanus shot, it’s to prevent one getting tetanus and being sick by it. When one gets a hepatitis shot, it’s to prevent one from getting any variant of hepatitis. When one gets ANY shot, it’s for the sake of the person getting it. Seemingly, except for the Chinese coronavirus vaccine, conveniently enough.
And even accepting the premise that those things are, indeed, meant to protect other people, how does it make sense for those WITHOUT THE VIRUS to adhere to this? Someone without the virus can’t spread the virus, and you can tell when someone has it because they will show symptoms. It has been shown that there is no asymptomatic spread of the virus, so why would PERFECTLY HEALTHY PEOPLE have to either wear a mask or get the vaccine if the purposes of those things are for protecting OTHER people from getting sick and not themselves?
If masks are meant to protect others, wouldn’t it make more sense for those who have the virus in their system to have to wear them? But no, it’s the healthy people as well as the sick people that have to wear them.
It’s this contradictory bullcrap that infuriates me about this entire situation, particularly as many insist that what doesn’t make sense actually does make sense and that the measures put into place which clearly haven’t worked are argued to have worked and to continue to work, or at least that getting rid of them would only make things worse when the evidence points to the contrary.
We are told to defer to the “health experts” who hide behind their degrees and pretend as though they are nearly infallible and any challenge to their illogic is nothing but a conspiracy theory created by someone who doesn’t have a prestigious medical degree (though that excuse doesn’t hold up when people with such prestigious medical degrees make similar challenges).
We are told to “follow the science”, as though science was Jesus, by people who, themselves, do not follow scientific reasoning or data. We can EVIDENTLY SEE that lockdowns don’t work, and this has been clear for nearly a YEAR. And yet, these people insist that what “science” tells us is the opposite of what reality and empirical evidence tells us.
Either these people are utterly incompetent morons or have a malicious and nefarious agenda to push, and we can only hope that it’s the former.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Two supposedly “conservative” governors have recently shown their pathetic, cowardly true colors for all to see when they both vetoed legislation which would protect children from sexual predators and pedophiles who seek to destroy their bodies for their own sexual and social pleasure and satisfaction.
Kristi Noem and Asa Hutchinson are the two pathetic and cowardly “conservative” governors who have failed to perform government’s first job.
But while there are plenty of stories out there about Noem, and since Hutchinson is the more recent example, I would like to talk about him as opposed to Noem.
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed the Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act, which would make it the first state to ban doctors from administering hormone treatment and puberty blockers to children (other similar legislation will soon be passed and signed into law in other states). Thankfully, the Republican-led state House of Representatives overrode his veto on Tuesday, so the bill will become law. But that Hutchinson vetoed it is still a travesty. Even more so that he went on Tucker Carlson’s show and DOUBLED DOWN on his veto, claiming his reason was that the bill was “government overreach.”
The guy even went so far as to claim that William Buckley and Ronald Reagan would both support his decision: “I go back to William Buckley, I go back to Ronald Reagan, to principles of our party, which believes in a limited role of government. Are we as a party abandoning a limited role of government and saying we’re going to invoke the government’s decision-making over and above physicians, over and above health care, over and above parents?”
This is nothing more than an asinine appeal to conservatives, invoking the name of Buckley and Reagan, and pretending as though this is a conservative, libertarian value. It’s bullcrap and he knows it.
First, neither Buckley nor Reagan would EVER support child genital mutilation, unlike Hutchinson. Both believed in limited, but not absent, government. Buckley, in his 1990 book “Gratitude”, put forth the idea of “national service” for children to serve American interests. In other words, he believed in the idea that government ought to be used to protect moral civic institutions to the best of its ability, provided that it can be, itself, a moral and just government. And Reagan is pretty famous for saying: “Government’s first job is to protect the people, not run their lives.”
I even mentioned that both Hutchinson and Noem failed to do government’s first job because I recalled REAGAN when using that term. So the idea that either Buckley or Reagan would support this moral decadence is a flat out lie.
Second, Hutchinson’s line of thinking could be taken to its logical conclusion that NO crime ought to be punishable and no action ought to be barred.
According to his line of thinking, people ought to be allowed to kill one another, rape one another, steal from one another, and do insidious other things to one another. After all, these are the blessings of liberty, right? For a government to use its decision-making power over and above a free people who wish to annihilate one another and perform cruelties and evil against one another would be overreach, right?
If a physician wants to abort a baby, are we to invoke government’s decision-making power over them? That’s Hutchinson’s argument, almost verbatim. If healthcare workers want to physically abuse and kill their patients, are we to invoke the government’s decision-making power over them and get them to stop? If parents want to physically and/or sexually abuse their children, are we to invoke the government’s decision-making power over them?
Somehow, Hutchinson believes the answer to those questions is “no,” which is a ghoulish response that I would expect from the Left, but not from someone who claims to be a conservative and even attempts to justify that through a conservative lens.
Limited government doesn’t mean absence of government. It means getting out of people’s way of living the life they want to live so long as that life is not an obstruction on the life of another. It means protecting the people both from foreign and domestic threats. It means protecting and CONSERVING moral institutions which we know come from God.
Hutchinson’s view of “liberty” is the same kind of liberty that Satan adheres to. “Do what you want, whenever you want, no matter how immoral and how evil.” The freedom to do evil is not a freedom people ought to have. The freedom to do evil is not a freedom conservatives ought to be defending.
We have prisons for those who break the law. We have court systems to judge those who have broken the law. And for the most part, while this isn’t necessarily always the case, law tends to protect what is right and just. Again, not always, as abortion is legal and as child genital mutilation is legal in most states and as slavery and segregation were once legal. But the point that conservatives like Buckley and Reagan were trying to make is that a moral and just government will protect civic institutions which are moral and just. We don’t exactly have a moral and just government, and arguably never have, but to argue that that means everything that is evil ought to be permissible is arriving to the worst possible conclusion.
For anyone on the Right to assert that government has no place in the protection of children is absolutely insane. Hutchinson even went so far as to tell Carlson that “conservatives” ought to retreat from this kind of cultural battlefield so as to “not invoke ourselves in every societal position out there.”
If conservatives do retreat in any area (and we ashamedly have), that means the Left gets to take more and more. If one societal position is not worth defending, we will find ourselves defending absolutely nothing. And then, what’d be the point of being a conservative? What’d be the point of fighting back against the Left? What would we even be fighting back against if they have taken everything?
If defending children from sexual predators, even if those predators are their own parents, is a social and civil position that conservatives ought to retreat from, then burn the entire ideology to the ground, for it is utterly worthless.
But no true conservative will give even an INCH on this matter. Children shouldn’t be subjected to life-altering and life-destroying surgeries and hormone “therapy”. Any conservative that won’t defend children in an area where they ought MOST be defended is not worth their GOP membership; any conservative politician who won’t defend children against an evil and predatory Left in this culture war is not worth people’s vote; and any government which won’t defend and protect children from those who will cause them irreparable harm is not worth existing at all and should be torn down.
Again, thankfully, the Republicans in Arkansas’ House of Representatives have considerably more compassion for children and overrode Hutchinson’s veto, but the governor himself ought to be impeached and removed for this betrayal of Arkansas’ youth.
Trump taught GOP politicians how to win. Noem and Hutchinson are not Trump GOP politicians, clearly. That assertion that conservatives ought to “retreat” is indicative of the Bush, McCain, Romney GOP, which has conserved nothing, started endless wars and have utterly betrayed the founding principles of not only the party but the country, as well as betrayed the people of this country in general.
The Bush GOP is self-serving, elitist, Washington Establishment crap which has largely been thrown into the trash. Post-Trump, seemingly, some are rearing to go back to those dark ages when the only thing we could hope for in a Republican presidency is a decent tax cut, while society crumbles around us. No more. Any Republican who stands in the way ought to be rid of, for they are worthless and useless at best and a total liability at worst.
Thank God that Republicans hold a super-majority in the Arkansas House of Representatives, with 76 seats out of 100. Were the gap between Democrats and Republicans far closer, it is possible that Hutchinson’s veto would have remained, dooming the youth of Arkansas until the next elections (likely, the 2022 midterms, at least). Someone like Hutchinson, for such an action, ought to be removed entirely and replaced with a true conservative who wouldn’t even THINK, let alone argue, that we ought to retreat on any social position.
I hate useless Republicans and traitors. So does any sane and patriotic American who has had enough of the Left’s decadence of our society.
“And give no opportunity to the devil.”
Allow me to share with you something relatively personal about myself: Ever since it became clear that the Left had succeeded in illegally and unconstitutionally stealing the presidency away from Trump, I have asked God through prayer that He would curse the Left and the Washington Establishment, and that He would foil their wicked schemes.
With them in illegitimate power and with the desire to utterly ruin this country, I believe such a prayer is called for. And the good Lord listens to our prayers and delivers what He knows to be best. Sometimes, that means we don’t get what we want, but other times, it means we do get what we want, at least to an extent. That is, in some way, what He has done recently, as there are reports that the Biden administration will look to continue constructing, and likely ultimately finishing, President Trump’s border wall as they attempt to curve their own manufactured border crisis.
Biden DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a conversation with ICE employees last week that the administration would consider finishing “gaps in the wall.”
“It’s not a single answer to a single question. There are different projects that the chief of the Border Patrol has presented and the acting commissioner of CBP presented to me. The president has communicated quite clearly his decision that the emergency that triggered the devotion of DOD funds to the construction of the border wall is ended. But that leaves room to make decisions as the administration, as part of the administration, in particular areas of the wall that need renovation, particular projects that need to be finished.”
The Washington Times reported that Mayorkas specifically mentioned that those “particular projects” included “gaps,” “gates,” and areas “where the wall has been completed but the technology has not been implemented.”
There was a time, a little over five years ago, when even Democrats at least talked about the need for border security and often talked about fencing and even walls, as well.
“The bill before us will certainly do some good… [it would provide] better fences and better security along our borders [and] help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.” This is what then-Senator Barack Obama said of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, a bill which saw support from 26 Democrat senators including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Chuck Schumer.
“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in, and I do think that you have to control your borders,” Hillary Clinton said at a town hall in New Hampshire back in November of 2015 (so well after Trump first began to talk about building a wall).
But with President Trump’s insistence that we build a wall to keep out people who wish to break the law to enter our country, the very idea of securing our borders in general became reprehensible to the Left. There is even an article on southernborder.org, a site run by The Southern Border Communities Coalition which is an umbrella organization for 60 other organizations regarding the southern border, that the Biden-Harris administration ought to tear the wall down, but they express hesitance that Biden would do it, as even he and Barack Obama had “built more than 100 miles of new wall along the southwest border.”
And what’s more, during an NPR interview, Biden said that “not another foot” of the wall would be built. That is particularly delicious for me to hear, given the aforementioned report of “closing the gaps” in the wall.
Whether or not one interprets Majorkas’ comments to mean that they are finishing the wall, the fact of the matter remains that that means several more feet of the border wall would be built, which is a clear breaking of that promise that Biden made in that NPR interview.
The wall has, to the Left, come to symbolize idiotic things like “racism” and “oppression” and whatever asinine charge they can throw at it to sway public opinion (which hasn’t even worked, as 53% of Americans support construction of the border wall). And while Biden would never likely come right out and say “we’re finishing the wall” and any questions from the media (unlikely to be brought up by the fake news media anyway since Biden takes pre-approved questions) would be answered with unequivocal denial of such a thing happening, the truth is that they at the very least are considering finishing the wall where it’s needed (and there are few places it needs to be finished).
There are only a few miles left of the wall to be built, and if Biden is going to allow construction companies to “fill in the gaps”, that would likely mean that the wall would be completed. Which would, of course, be a big blow to the Left.
Granted, the damage from Biden’s promises to open up our borders has been done, and his catch-and-release policies are not going to make the situation at the border much better (the wall can’t do everything, after all), but finishing the wall would at least get us closer towards a secure border with Mexico.
Would I praise Biden for doing this? Ordinarily, I would. But we don’t live in an ordinary world, do we? Had Biden become the legitimate POTUS and had the fake news media not attacked Trump for absolutely everything that he did, whether or not they would have considered those things to be generally good, then I would offer Biden praise for this (and then, only if he actually does it. Talk is cheap).
But because Biden is an illegitimate president and because the Left spent the last four years attacking Trump for everything and pretending everything he did was bad, why should I give Biden any sort of praise or grace for this? If he finishes the wall, it will be a good thing, certainly. That’s what I want. But I won’t give Biden any credit for it. I won’t praise Biden for finishing the wall. If anything, I would take the same kind of tone that I did in this article: one in which I mock and ridicule and laugh at the Left because ONE OF THEIR OWN finished the same border wall which they have tried to malign for four years.
I hope that Biden finishes the border wall not only because it would at least help regarding the border crisis (which he created) but also because I could hardly contain my laughter if it happens. Trump or not, the wall would have gotten built, and that would demoralize Biden voters so much.
“The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways.”
We bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...