The illegitimate Biden DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel recently wrote an opinion detailing that they have no intention to prosecute any states or businesses for mandating vaccinations.
They write: “As access to the COVID-19 vaccines has become widespread, numerous educational institutions, employers, and other entities across the United States have announced that they will require individuals to be vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment, enrollment, participation, or some other benefit, service, relationship, or access. For instance, certain schools will require vaccination in order for students to attend class in person, and certain employers will require vaccination as a condition of employment.”
Generally speaking, the DOJ has decided, like I said earlier, to not prosecute the entities which mandate vaccinations for their employees or other people in general. That is the extent of their power, but for some reason, there are those who believe this means the Biden DOJ has “ruled” that vaccine mandates are “legal.”
For example, though they are largely conservative sources, both TrendingPolitics and The Gateway Pundit have the following headlines: “BREAKING: Department of Justice Declares That All Vaccine Mandates are *Legal*,” (Trending Politics). “Breaking: Biden DOJ Declares COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Legal,” (The GP).
Despite those brow-raising and perhaps blood-boiling headlines, the matter of fact is that the Biden DOJ, nor any DOJ for that matter, can “rule” anything as “legal.”
The DOJ is part of the executive branch. They prosecute, investigate, etc., but they can’t create laws nor can they rule anything as legal or illegal. Now, I can understand that when a Democrat is in the White House (legitimately or not), things like that tend to sort of go by the wayside, such as when Obama signed the DACA executive order and everyone, including judges and the SCOTUS, pretended as though that was a law.
However, the Biden DOJ “declaring” or “ruling” vaccine mandates as “legal” has as much legitimacy as if they were to “rule” murder, kidnapping or rape “legal.” All it means is that the federal Department of Injustice won’t prosecute, in this case, states and businesses which mandate people get vaccinated. It doesn’t mean that vaccine mandates are legal or constitutional – such rulings can only be done by the Supreme Court.
So if you are at all fearful that this means states and businesses have the “green light” to mandate vaccinations, like TrendingPolitics suggested, then don’t be. The federal DOJ might not prosecute such entities but both state AGs and private citizens have the ability to do so.
In other words, not a damn thing changes with this “ruling.” I don’t think anyone alive expected the Biden DOJ to prosecute states and businesses for mandating vaccines. So let’s not pretend as though this means that the DOJ can take the place of the SCOTUS or Congress. Vaccine mandates are still illegal and certainly unconstitutional and just because the federal DOJ won’t prosecute it doesn’t make it legal.
If the DOJ were to stop prosecuting federal marijuana cases, that wouldn’t mean that weed would all of a sudden become legal across the country.
So why is anyone pretending as though vaccine mandates are now something which we can hardly fight against? Nothing, realistically, has changed. Hell, I doubt even the Trump DOJ would have prosecuted vaccine mandates (in part because the Trump DOJ was largely a rogue entity and went against the President’s wishes a lot of the time, but I also doubt Trump himself would have ordered such prosecutions, seeing as he is inexplicably supporting the vaccines even if he doesn’t think there ought to be mandates). So effectively, nothing at all has changed with this declaration from the DOJ, and that’s all that it is: a declaration.
Again, they aren’t the Supreme Court. They can’t “rule” that something is legal or not legal. So let’s not spread the idea that that’s what’s happening here.
While there are other reasons for concern regarding tyrannical actions from both state and federal governments, this simply isn’t one of them and conservatives shouldn’t be all “doom and gloom” over something like this. It’s not necessarily a good thing and I would far rather the DOJ prosecute vaccine mandates, as that would make it a lot easier to defeat it, but it’s not like we are screwed and out of options here.
Again, state AGs can still sue businesses which mandate vaccines and private citizens can both sue businesses and their own states if they mandate vaccines. Whether or not such lawsuits would get that far is another matter entirely, but it is utterly unnecessary and frankly shameful for conservative news sites like TrendingPolitics and The Gateway Pundit to fearmonger people on their own side.
There are still tools available to us to fight against tyranny in this country, and one such tool is information. Understanding what the enemy is capable of is of utmost importance, but it’s also important to not be misled about what they can do.
This whole ordeal reminds me of the story of the 12 spies in the Book of Numbers.
The thirteenth chapter of the Book of Numbers talks about how the Lord told Moses to send men to explore Canaan, “which I’m giving to the Israelites,” as God specifically said.
These 12 were leaders from each of the tribes of Israel, among them being Hoshea (who Moses named Joshua) and Caleb.
The 12 explored Canaan and 40 days later returned with their report. They explained to Moses and the people of Israel that Canaan was a great place with fertile land, flowing with milk and honey, and generally was great. However, they also explained “… the people who live there are strong, and the cities have walls and are very large. We even saw the descendants of Anak there,” Numbers 13:28.
Despite that, Caleb, one of the 12 spies, said “Let’s go now and take possession of the land. We should be more than able to conquer it.”
Numbers 13:31-33 then explains the protestations and even deception of the other spies (apart from Joshua, of course): “But the men who had gone with him said, ‘We can’t attack those people! They’re too strong for us!’ So they began to spread lies among the Israelites about the land they had explored. They said, ‘The land we explored is one that devours those who live there. All the people we saw there are very tall. We saw Nephilim there. (The descendants of Anak are Nephilim.) We felt as small as grasshoppers, and that’s how we must have looked to them.’”
Perhaps not to the same extent, this is what TrendingPolitics and The Gateway Pundit are doing. Yes, the Biden DOJ declared they wouldn’t prosecute states and businesses for implementing vaccine mandates, but to treat that as a “ruling” equal to what the Supreme Court does is disingenuous. Give people the information that they need without making it seem as though we are facing giants.
Even if we are, do you want to know what the ten spies forgot and which many of us often forget? At the beginning of the chapter, God specifically said: “… Canaan, which I’m giving to the Israelites.”
The spies were so concerned with the size of the enemy that they forgot all about the size of their God. He had already promised and declared that He would be giving Canaan to the Israelites, and yet, the spies did not believe they would be capable of taking it from the giants which they saw. Even worse, they began to spread lies about what they saw to discourage other Israelites from action.
This is what people do sometimes and make things worse for themselves, even on our side. Let’s not pretend that what we are fighting are unbeatable giants who would crush us were we to engage them. Let’s not pretend as though the DOJ declaring they won’t prosecute states and businesses for vaccine mandates means such mandates are legal, constitutional and unbeatable.
And let’s not pretend as though the tyranny of Man can stand against the Might of the Lord. He gave Canaan to the Israelites, despite the apparent gap in size and power between the Israelites and Canaanites. He led Gideon to victory against the Midianites with an army as small as 300 soldiers (the real story of the 300). He led Saul to defeat thousands and David tens of thousands.
God is the God of victory. He triumphs over all who stand against Him, always. So why would we ever be afraid of what the Biden DOJ declares? Why would we pretend as though it has as much legitimacy as a Supreme Court ruling (particularly from an illegitimate DOJ)?
Fight lies with truth, not more lies. That is my message to TrendingPolitics and The GP. You’re not like CNN or the NYT – you’re not fake news – so don’t act like it. Point out the real tyrannies of the illegitimate Biden administration, not make up other ones.
“For the Lord your God is he who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies, to give you the victory.”
For decades, the Left has made the argument that abortion was “safe” and meant to be “rare” and that those who perform the abortion were “kind and understanding” people who cared about the patients. It is no surprise, really, that the Left lies about this as much as anything else, and horror stories from a Texas PP abortion clinic will show that.
As with other businesses (which begs the question as to why PP is tax-funded, since they get paid by their customers like any other business), Planned Parenthood abortion facilities get reviewed online by customers who had some sort of comment to make about their experience. Today, we will read the stories of four customers who have had horrible experiences at this particular slaughterhouse, and will check out how this facility stacked up when reviewed by health inspectors.
First, the horror stories.
One woman, who will of course remain nameless, posted the following lengthy review (which I will cut a bit to save time):
“I had a pregnancy that I knew I couldn’t go through for financial reasons… and if I [could afford it] I would not have had an abortion… The decision I made was hard for me and I needed someone who understood. When I got there I waited for hours alone. They brought me in to give me packets on adoption agencies, took my money and sent me back out. Then a few hours later I was herded into waiting room #2 which was smaller for a couple more hours. When I got in to visit the doctor he described the abortion process so fast it was difficult to understand, because, for him it was obviously just a script. Very little heart went into what was being said. I was so confused and had a difficult time processing the information that was being said because of the speed and lack of emotional connection… When I came in for the abortion I became emotional, yet, I had to wait for hours in a packed waiting room, 8 to be exact. I was herded from place to place and everyone who spoke to me recited a script as fast as they could so they could get the next person in. I was just a number. When I finally went in, there was a large bio waste bucket overflowing with the materials used to perform abortions which was not comforting. The procedure itself was incredibly painful and I was on the strongest medication they had. I weighed only 92 lbs. during this procedure and had a very hard time staying awake after it was finished. They seemed frustrated with me for being out of it. I started throwing up as soon as the medicine wore off and after THAT whole experience, the hours of waiting, knowing if I could have my baby I would have… I broke down, and they WOULDN’T let me leave until I stopped crying. I understand that emotions in the waiting room are delicate but they didn’t seem to care through the rest of the procedure.”
This woman then goes on to say that she is, unsurprisingly, pro-abortion and even pro-PP, but an experience like this really ought to get someone to rethink some stuff. Like I said in the beginning of the article, for decades, we have been told that abortion was “safe” and “rare” and that those who “take care” of the women going through such procedures are “kind and compassionate” individuals who understand the women’s situation. All a load of bullcrap, of course. There is nothing safe or rare about abortion, as one can see from just this review alone.
That the murderers were speaking as fast as they could was an indication of two things, one of which the woman writing this review kind of hints at: 1) they WANT it to be confusing so that the women leave the ultimate choice up to the abortionists themselves because they wouldn’t be able to make the best decision themselves (going against the whole “pro-choice” idea) and 2) they herd women through so they can perform as many abortions as they can. It’s that second thing which demonstrates the bullcrap nature of that whole “rare” argument.
No Leftist wants abortion to be rare. To the contrary, they want it to be COMMON and PREVALENT. After all, they make PLENTY of money off of it, with the b.s. lobbying in Congress and other donations made by PP to Leftist politicians. All at the tax-payers’ expense, of course.
The idea that these people are “kind and considerate” is, frankly, a bit oxymoronic (and generally moronic). A murderer isn’t “kind and considerate”. At best, they only pretend to be. They are evil and, like the devil, entice people to commit horrid actions against their benefit.
The woman leaving a review did NOT have to get an abortion. She said she did it for financial reasons, but that’s not a good enough reason (and there is no good enough reason for abortion, ever). If she was worried she couldn’t raise her child, why not give them up for adoption or leave them in the hands of trusted family and/or friends? Why is murder the go-to option here? For anyone? Even for someone who is pro-abortion?
In any case, let’s move on to the other stories, which for the sake of time, I will further edit down and offer less commentary until I feel the need to speak.
“A nurse was making insensitive remarks and yelling at my ear saying I have no reason to be crying while I was on the table getting my procedure done… I was under pressure while this woman aggressively asking why am I crying and saying that they know it doesn’t hurt me that bad… In recovery she also stated that they should close the curtain because no one wants to see me crying…. I was so frustrated at that difficult moment I just feel like some sort of action should be taken… Meanwhile in recovery I was still crying and a diff nurse said that if I didn’t stop crying they would remove me and take me to the hospital… they were yelling at me and it made me cry harder… I paid money so they could do their job this is one experience I would never forget those two women or this experience bad enough I was forced on this abortion but to have those women speak to me the way they did was very unprofessional…”
Not the best grammar, but from what I can tell, it seems this woman was FORCED to get an abortion in some form or fashion, likely pressure from someone she knows. Again, what’s pro-choice about this? Where is the choice? And again, she had to pay money for people to do this. Why does PP, a for-profit business, get funds from tax payers?
Next woman: “Dr. Jordan and his staff are entirely incompetent. My counselor I was supposed to talk to barely said two words to me and when I began to cry… his staff kept telling me that I needed to just grow up and that it wouldn’t be that bad. Two months ago I was raped and they offered no compassion or understanding… When I entered the room for the sonogram, Dr. Jordan told me I was not being compliant because I was crying, mind you he hadn’t given me any instruction or said anything to me before that. When the sonogram was over, I wasn’t offered anything to clean the medical lubricant off of myself with nor was I given a panty liner… I was made to wait more than 15 minutes in a tiny… waiting room by myself, no counselor at all, and when I had an anxiety attack in that small room, they took me back to the lobby and told me that I needed to take my business elsewhere.”
Thankfully, this woman wound up not getting an abortion (at least at this facility) but still.
And lastly, the fourth woman: “The surgery here hurt like hell, the medicine they give you does not soften your cervix in time for surgery so he will literally crack it open… After having my surgery here I went home for 4 nights I bled tremendously to the point I slept with 2 large towels to protect my bed.”
But it’s not just customer experiences that indicate how awful of a place this PP facility is.
According to a report by Check My Clinic, which makes health inspections for abortion facilities, they failed in a number of aspects:
As well as 13 other health violations including clean linens being stored on the floor and other things which created risk for infection.
So not only is the staff at the PP facility filled with blatantly uncaring and uncompassionate individuals (I imagine at least other facilities have people who pretend to care) but the place itself is practically a pigsty and an utterly unsafe environment for anything which could be insultingly called “healthcare.”
Again, the whole “safe” and “compassionate” argument is a complete farce. The Left doesn’t care about women or their health and safety. PP is a piggy bank for them and something which works towards their desired ends of destroying all sense of morality in the world.
May God severely punish this and all PP facilities which are houses of murder, all Leftists who support this immoral crap, and that He guide all the women who are scared and confused and easily manipulated into potentially doing something so egregious away from choosing this ultimate evil.
“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.’”
It really says something when in a secular and fairly Leftist society like the one found in the United Kingdom, the demographic most likely to be in support of Leftist crap refuses to allow for a totalitarian scheme to be successful.
According to a poll recently published by YouGov, 52% of young British people have downloaded the NHS’s Chinese coronavirus tracing app and then either deleted it, turned it off, or just avoided checking in with it. And that’s just of the ones who chose to download the app in the first place.
For a bit of context, the NHS’s Chinese coronavirus tracing app uses Bluetooth technology “to log whether you have come in contact with someone else with the same app who has been diagnosed with coronavirus and sends alerts that can include recommendations to self-isolate. The app can also be used to check into venues, which was a mandatory requirement for service in restaurants and pubs before July 19th’s ‘Freedom Day,’” according to Breitbart News.
How it can know when someone has been diagnosed with the virus, I don’t quite know (probably the app asks someone, but if that’s the case, I imagine a decent amount of people would lie about it), but generally speaking, it’s an app meant to be able to track people who have COVID and encourages people to try and maintain their distance from them.
However, as I mentioned earlier, even young Brits aren’t exactly too keen on its use and purpose. According to that same YouGov poll, a full 40% of Brits never even downloaded the app to begin with, despite it basically having been a “requirement” from the government.
And of those who did download it, only 22% said they were using it correctly, with 24% saying they either switched off the contact tracing and/or avoided checking in at venues, while another 10% deleted it completely.
Keep in mind, also, that this is a poll and not an official statistic, so that 22% of people saying they use it correctly might not even be all that accurate. After all, if someone asks you if you use the NHS app correctly, you might fear some amount of persecution or judgment if you were to say “no”, even if that were the truth, so you’d be more inclined to lie and say “yes.” So it’s entirely possible that there are more people who actually misuse it than correctly use it than the poll would suggest.
Furthermore, according to the poll, the highest proportion of those who have outright deleted the app are those aged 18 to 24, with that same age bracket being the likeliest to intentionally misuse the app in some form or fashion, such as turning off contact tracing (15%), avoiding checking in at venues even though it was required (10%) or have done both (10%). That demographic is also the least likely to use the app correctly.
Again, it’s just a poll and not official figures, but according to Breitbart, “it matches recent reporting of a ‘rising number’ of people deleting the app, including NHS staff.”
So not only are young Brits deleting the app in droves, but even people working at the NHS itself have reportedly been deleting the app as well.
That, to me, sounds like one hell of a totalitarian fail. They hoped that they’d be able to keep tabs on people with such a tracing app, but they could hardly enforce its use. For one, it’s not an outright legal requirement to follow the app’s instructions, as government officials have recently noted, but even if it were, it’d still be rather difficult to enforce it.
Much like enforcing a complete gun confiscation law would be impossible to do in the United States, enforcing the use of an app is also pretty impossible pretty much anywhere. Law enforcement would have to check in with every single person in the country to see if they are using the app correctly, and that is a logistical impossibility due to the limited personnel and resources of the police, not to mention the fact that they have to tend to other crimes, such as a mean guy on the internet calling a homosexual man a “f*ggot”, apparently.
But the fact that the demographic which one would think would be most likely to follow along the “let’s work together to end this pandemic” nonsense is the MOST likely to either misuse the app or outright delete it is a great indication of how far from their goals communists are, even in an already fairly far-Left country like the U.K.
Even NHS staff have come to delete the app, for crying out loud.
Despite things like these, PM Boris Johnson has threatened to introduce mandatory COVID passports for entry into large venues like nightclubs, “in a bid to pressure younger people into getting vaccinated,” according to Breitbart.
Apart from the fact that that is utterly disappointing to see BoZo do, it also would not really work. Why? Because even Germany isn’t mandating vaccines. According to the DW (not Daily Wire), Angela Merkel says they have no plans to mandate vaccinations, saying that such a thing would “endanger public trust.”
Now, one might think that COVID passports and vaccinations are different things, but not really. If your country is mandating COVID passports, it is essentially mandating vaccination, albeit in a bit of a roundabout way. It’s not offering a choice, but an ultimatum: “You can not vaccinate, if you want, but then you’ll be barred from going to all these places which require you to have it. And such places could eventually become your place of work or even your home if you don’t own it yourself.”
So if Germany, which is the leading economic power in Europe, isn’t mandating vaccinations, then no other country really can either, including the U.K. So enforcing COVID passports would be just as much, if not more, of a failure as the tracing app.
And again, we are talking about the demographic most likely to support such totalitarian measures, at least vocally.
The U.K. and much of Europe might never have had as terrible conditions as places like Cuba, South Africa and Iran during this pandemic, but everywhere in the world, there is only so much people will take of authoritarians and their rule. This may not be an outright and loud protest like in the aforementioned countries, but it is a more silent form of protest. The young Brits are seemingly fed up with the nonsense their idiotic government has spewed.
They may not necessarily come right out and say it, but their actions are such an indication.
“A ruler who lacks understanding is a cruel oppressor, but he who hates unjust gain will prolong his days.”
Remember how I mentioned last week that, surprisingly, the Cuban people have begun to protest against the communist Cuban regime for its authoritarianism which restricts the liberties of the Cuban people, and likely also for its inability to properly handle the Chinese coronavirus pandemic? Seemingly, the people of Iran are also taking to the streets due to the regime’s inability to properly manage water and electricity.
According to The Daily Wire, for the past several weeks, “Iran has experienced worsening energy and water shortages,” which the regime claims are the result of “reduced rainfall” and people using air conditioning units to stave off the summer heat. However, according to the BBC, “many locals say the problem is mismanagement and corruption.”
Considering we’re talking about the world sponsor of terrorism, I’d be more inclined to believe the words of the Iranian people as opposed to the government.
Now, one might argue that the biggest reason for these protests is that very mismanagement and inability to produce adequate amounts of water and electricity. That would be correct only in a small way. Thing about that is that there has to be a reason for such an inability and that reason is, as the locals said, mismanagement and corruption. According to videos on social media, there are protesters who can be heard chanting “Death to the dictator” and “Death to Khamenei”.
They’re not “Death to the poor management which would be solved with more government regulation” chants. They are chants of open defiance against the Islamic regime. Doesn’t necessarily mean the Iranian people are done with being Muslims, but it does mean that they are standing against their government, not merely because of the issues presented by the media.
The BBC reported last weekend: “The water crisis has devastated agriculture and livestock farming and led to electricity blackouts. Earlier this month, protests broke out in a number of cities across the country. The authorities blame reduced rainfall for the situation, saying many hydroelectric power plants are not operating and electricity consumption has surged as people use air conditioning to cope with the intense summer heat.”
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani acknowledged this, saying: “I apologize to our dear people who have faced problems and suffering in the past few days and I urge them to cooperate [with cutting back electricity use]. People complain about power outages and they are right.”
Despite this seemingly humble response from Rouhani, police forces in the nation have been far harsher and more tyrannical than what this response would suggest.
Masih Alinejad, an Iranian-American journalist who was once nearly kidnapped by the Iranian government while on American soil, reported on the protests, also calling them “anti-regime demonstrations.”
“Anti-regime demonstrations are still underway in Iran’s #Khuzestan province. This video is from #Susangerd where security forces are seen shooting at innocent protesters asking for water. Khuzestan doesn’t have water and the regime is to blame for wrong water policies,” Alinejad tweeted alongside a minute-long video depicting exactly what she described.
Reportedly, at least one protester has been killed.
But this, as I mentioned earlier, is another massive protest against an authoritarian regime. To my count, three countries seem to be either protesting their authoritarian regimes or heading towards outright civil war: South Africa, Cuba and Iran. The one closest to an actual civil war, and might actually be in the beginning stages of one, is South Africa where two entire provinces, Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal, have been hit so hard as to resemble warzones. There, the government has already sent 25,000 troops to try and quell the violence which has come as a result of extended lockdowns and other authoritarian actions.
Are these protests/riots/potential civil wars an indication as to where the world is headed? Can’t say for certain at this point, but one thing is for sure: these are not the socialist/communist revolutions Marxists and Leninists would hope that they are.
One reason is that at least one of those countries has already gone through one such revolution and is currently facing backlash from its citizens after 60 years of a communist dictatorship. So what we are witnessing, if they lead to anything at all, would be the opposite of what the communists would desire.
Of course, there could be those who would incite a revolution in one of these places for the purposes of replacing the communist/authoritarian governments with their own communist/authoritarian government, but things could also go the opposite direction from that, towards something more akin to an actual liberation like the American Revolution.
Granted, such a revolution is historically rare, as most other revolutions only led to a new tyrannical regime replacing the prior one (Tsar to Bolshevism, King Louis XVI to Robespierre and then Napoleon, etc.). However, there is some reason for optimism at the very least because of the situation in Cuba.
People are fed up with authoritarians taking away their rights and freedoms at the drop of a hat. The lockdowns have exacerbated, in a lot of places, the tyrannical rule which was already present.
As I said in the previous article, if you think lockdowns were bad in the United States, they pale in comparison to other actually communist nations which operate under central governments. The advantage of federalism was present in America, since some states chose to not lockdown at all, others locked down for a short while, and others took their time but eventually recognized the need to open back up.
And while there are some states which are stupid, such as California which is now reinstituting mask mandates for indoors, plenty other states have seen the light and recognize the futility of such efforts in handling the pandemic. As I have written over a multitude of articles, many, most or all of these measures either didn’t work at best and were outright detrimental to people at worst on a number of levels, pathetically including health and safety.
The point is, the world locked down and experienced some of the worst tyranny they had seen, for many for the very first time. And such near absolute power in the hands of a few became too much for those who have seen some of the worst of it. South Africa was already rather dictatorial, what with white farmers literally being stripped of their land; Iran has been a radical Islamic cesspool since the 70’s and Cuba is, well, Cuba. They have already had to witness a lot tyranny in their lifetimes, and the lockdowns, particularly as long-lasting and severe as they have been, might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back for some of them.
They are people with little to nothing to lose by doing this, with plenty to gain if successful. They are willing to take their chances because they can’t stand the bullcrap they currently have to go through.
I hope that many other countries come to understand that they have to fight authoritarianism wherever it pops up and do so to the greatest of their abilities.
“It is an abomination for kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness.”
In most cases, the Left is perfectly content with bringing in people from other countries for just about any cockamamie reason. However, if such people are fleeing communism and generally tend to identify more with the GOP than the Democrat Party, all of a sudden, the Left discourages such migration.
With the recent protests in Cuba almost certainly leading to extreme and harsh punishments from the communist regime, it’s not surprising that there might be Cubans seeking to flee the commie craphole and heading towards the closest beacon of hope they would have: the free state of Florida. However, DHS Chief Alejandro Mayorkas, who is ashamedly a Cuban himself, discouraged Cubans from making their way to the U.S. through the sea.
Mayorkas said on Wednesday: “The time is never right to attempt migration by sea. To those who risk their lives doing so, this risk is not worth taking. Allow me to be clear: if you take to the sea, you will not come to the United States.”
“If individuals make, establish a well-founded fear of persecution or torture, they are referred to third countries for resettlement. They will not enter the United States.”
This coming from the administration which is overseeing the worst influx of illegal immigration at the southern border and couldn’t be bothered to even pretend that it’s a problem.
Now, a liberal might try to make the argument that it’s purely because of safety reasons that they discourage Cubans fleeing the island nation to the States via sea. I call bullcrap on that one. The desert that illegals have to cross in the southern border to get into states like Texas, Arizona, etc. are just as dangerous a trek to make as escaping Cuba via the sea. The extremely high temperatures give them heat stroke, coupled with the fact that they have to practically constantly be moving, as well as the fact that they won’t always be the best prepared for the weather. Not to mention the likelihood that any one of them could be trafficked, willingly or unwillingly, and be the closest thing to slaves in the modern West, which itself carries a multitude of risks.
It’s not the safety of the Cubans that Leftists care about here, it’s the fact that, according to Pew, 58% of Cubans identify more closely to the GOP than the Democrat Party, which is a surprise to exactly no one because the Democrat Party is extremely similar to the communist party that they just fled. Why would they want to support the crap that they just escaped from?
In just about any other circumstance, the Left would argue that such a dangerous trek even through the sea would be worth it so long as they can actually make it here and, likely, vote Democrat. But because Cubans tend to not like Democrats, they get treated differently as migrants.
They seemingly have an “issue” with Cubans making a dangerous trek to escape communism, but don’t have any such issues with illegals crossing the dangerous desert to illegally enter this country.
It’s yet another example of utter Leftist hypocrisy, not that anyone needed to be informed anymore that Leftists are hypocrites.
Cubans are currently fighting against the communist regime, likely in part because of the lockdowns, but mostly because many of them probably figure that they have nothing to lose by doing so. They live under such harsh and terrible conditions due to communism that they think it’s worth it to lose their lives to fight against it, in all likelihood because the lives they currently have could hardly be called “living.”
When people’s backs are against the wall in such a manner, it’s expected that they will begin to fight back, little chance as they might have at success. But not all of them will want to fight. If possible, they will want to flee and escape not only communism but the violence that might come from such altercations, namely from the extreme punishments doled out by the regime. Such people will seek refuge, but ashamedly, the illegitimate Biden DHS is denying them entry.
They have no issues whatsoever with illegals who simply seek to take advantage of the economic opportunities in the States to make very little money mowing Democrats’ lawns (the Dems did always want their slaves back and this is the closest they can get to that) and then sending some of that money back to their families (assuming that that happens at all, which could just be another Leftist lie). They have no issues at all with illegals who end up committing major crimes against Americans, such as Kathryn Steinle, who was killed by an illegal immigrant on July 1st, 2015 and whose killer escaped prosecution and the justice that was owed him because California sucks.
They have no issues with such illegal immigrants so long as they can use them at some capacity. But when it comes to ACTUAL humanitarian crises like refugees of communism? No humanity, no sympathy and no heart.
The Left is evil and they prove this each and every day.
“’There is no peace,’ says the Lord, ‘for the wicked.’”
For over 60 years, the people of Cuba have been subjugated under a communist regime which enslaves them and dehumanizes them. They have had to drive the same cars from 60 years ago, if not longer, and have little freedom when it comes to internet access, with the communist regime getting to censor and dictate what people see online.
Any act of seeming dissent against the regime is taken as a threat to the existence of the regime itself and is met with extreme hostility and harsh punishment. The people who protested Sunday put themselves at significant risk, as they could be arrested and face a firing squad because of their actions, despite how peaceful their protests were. This is just how communist countries treat their people when the people protest tyranny.
Despite the great bravery of these people, and immense risk they put themselves in, the American Left has sought, unsurprisingly, to not make this about the ideology which has ruined the island nation, since that is the very ideology the Left espouses, but rather to make it about rising Chinese coronavirus cases and deaths.
Julie Chung, Acting Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, tweeted: “Peaceful protests are growing in #Cuba as the Cuban people exercise their right to peaceful assembly to express concern about rising COVID cases/deaths & medicine shortages. We commend the numerous efforts of the Cuban people mobilizing donations to help neighbors in need."
Can you see the two things she was most wrong about?
First of all, the Cuban people can’t exercise their right to peaceful assembly because they have no such right. Like I said, they face great risk in protesting in this manner, peaceful as it is, because they risk arrest and execution at the hands of firing squads. No people who face such a risk are people who have a right to peaceful assembly. Chung is treating Cuba as though it’s as free as the U.S. and has the same constitutional rights that America has.
It doesn’t. The constitution which Cuba has includes no specific rights or freedoms of the Cuban people, just vague statements about how “Cuba is a free and democratic socialist state” which is a bunch of bullcrap which is typical for any communist country. Furthermore, they place particular importance on the protection of not the people or even the country itself but the socialist system it employs.
Article 4 of the Cuban Constitution (2019) says: “The defense of our socialist homeland is the greatest honor and the supreme duty of every Cuban. Treason is the most serious of crimes, whoever should commit treason will be subject to the most severe sanctions. The socialist system that this Constitution supports is irrevocable. Citizens have the right to combat through any means, including armed combat when other means are not available, against any that intend to topple the political, social, and economic order established by this Constitution.”
As with any other communist regime, its greatest priority is its own survival, not as a country or people, but as a system. They explicitly state that treason is the most serious crime which carries the heaviest sentence, meaning that the protestors on Sunday, because they were calling for “Libertad”, or “Liberty”, protesting the Marxist regime and even waving American flags, could face charges of treason. And to top it all off, the first specific right that the Cuban constitution affords to the Cuban people is in reference to the PRESERVATION OF THE COMMUNIST REGIME.
Cubans don’t have the right to peacefully assemble, to free speech, to freedom of religion, to freedom of the press. These are the first explicit and specific rights detailed in the American constitution, under the First Amendment. But for Cubans, the first right afforded to them specified in their constitution is the right to protect the communist system of government, social norms and economic system which suffocates the people.
So let no one fool you into believing that the Cuban people are, at any capacity, free in their own country.
The second thing Chung was wrong about was the purpose of the protests. She said it was about COVID, medicine, cases and deaths. Generally, that the Cuban people demanded better care from the communist regime against the Chinese coronavirus.
Like I said earlier, they were calling for liberty, freedom, and were not unclear about the reason for their protests. They are fed up with the communist regime destroying them and their lives.
Now, one might raise a fair question: “Why now, after 60 years of communist crap? We haven’t heard of other similar protests of this scale in years, so why now?” Again, that’s a fair question. The answer is that, frankly, I don’t think the Left is ENTIRELY wrong about the purposes of the protest. Don’t misunderstand, this is specifically about freedom and liberty from the Marxist communist regime, not about demanding better care or raising awareness about cases and deaths. But the reason for this protest might not be entirely divorced from the Chinese coronavirus.
Like other communist states and nations, Cuba locked down to “fight” against the pandemic and they are still locked down for the most part, with some restrictions having been lifted. Assuming that cases and deaths really are going up, it’s likely that the communist regime will want to lock things down again in full. And if you think the lockdowns were painful for Americans, imagine how devastating they are/were for people living in third-world countries which experience 10 times what America went through at the height of the pandemic on a DAILY basis.
Remember when store shelves were empty towards the beginning of the pandemic? That’s a regular Tuesday in Cuba. Remember when people feared toilet paper shortages? Cuba routinely experiences actual shortages of far more than just toilet paper. Remember when the economy was in freefall when we locked down? Cuba’s economy avoided such a freefall if only because it was practically already on the ground.
Put citizens of a communist nation through extreme lockdowns like that and you are bound to get some amount of pushback. And keep in mind, the Cuban people have gone through 60 years of indoctrination and brainwashing in order to be obedient slaves of the communist state. Americans protested because, at least for many of us, we still understand and have a sense and yearning for freedom and can see the tyranny that lockdowns impose on people. But Cubans? They will flee, sure, much as they can, but outright protest and demand freedom and liberty?
Only under extreme circumstances might you see that, and the fact that there were pro-freedom protests on Sunday is an indication that such extreme circumstances are at play here. This has nothing to do with the Chinese coronavirus’ cases or deaths or vaccines or medicine in the country, but it’s not divorced from the general subject of the virus, in my opinion.
Though, again, do not misunderstand what I am saying. They are protesting the communist regime, which is why the Left wants to make this about the Chinese coronavirus. They espouse the very communism which is suffocating Cuba, so they can’t go along with the whole “this is about freedom from tyranny” angle. They SIDE WITH THE TYRANTS the protesters are against. They won’t come right out and say that, of course, but they don’t have to tell the truth on this matter either.
They will pretend to be on the side of the protesters when in fact they sully the protesters’ intent.
They aren’t liars because they lie. They lie because they are liars.
“The righteous hates falsehood, but the wicked brings shame and disgrace.”
Cancel culture is a tool of the communist intended to purge and punish any action seen as undesirable and any wrong-think as unfitting of humanity. So color me surprised when I see two Leftists, one in particularly who I took to be (and still do, for the most part) communist himself, denouncing cancel culture.
In a July 5th episode of Conan O’Brien’s podcast, “Conan O’Brien Needs a Friend,” the retired late night host asked fellow Leftist actor Sean Penn about the habit of destroying careers because of previous “wrong” actions.
O’Brien said: “Empathy is a very important word and also forgiveness. We found that someone did something in 1979 that is now not appropriate. They’re dead to us.” O’Brien then went on to describe cancel culture as “very Soviet”, adding, “People can also be forgiven. If they even need forgiving. What happened to that?”
And, surprisingly, I have nothing to disagree with the Leftist host. Empathy and forgiveness are certainly important. Matthew 18:21-22 says: “Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, ‘Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother who sins against me? Up to seven times?’ Jesus answered, ‘I tell you, not just seven times, but seventy-seven times!”
Some translations say “Seventy times seven” but the general point that Jesus was making was that Christians ought to forgive their brothers and sisters in faith every time they sin against them, so long as said sinner is repentant of that sin. It is because this is how God acts towards His Children, who continuously sin against Him, wittingly or not, and must ask for forgiveness for said sins.
Now, that’s specifically about Christian brothers and sisters. People in general, or those who we might call “neighbors” do not have to be forgiven for all their sins against us, even if they ask for forgiveness, because mercy is never owed. So the situation O’Brien is describing is a bit different from the example I gave with that Bible verse, but the point remains that it is good to forgive others. When it comes to those who are not Christians, a Christian is not obligated to accept an apology, but may do so at his or her own leisure. Personally, I tend to forgive anyone who has wronged me if they asked for forgiveness (depending on how serious the situation is, of course, as a great wrong might not be easily forgiven and I may not want to restore a relationship with someone I don't trust), regardless of their own faith.
But this act of forgiveness is something O’Brien basically points out that proponents of cancel culture never really do. They will cancel someone and ruin their lives, whether or not such people apologize to the mob. Now, I don’t think anyone should ever apologize to the mob, since apologizing to them only gives them more credence and more authority, which they do not have nor deserve. But that the mob never even accepts such apologies indicates the little empathy they have in their hearts, if any is present at all.
Rush Limbaugh once apologized for calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” because she wanted free birth control pills and the only reason she would want that is because she is a slut, which he was completely right about and had no reason at all to apologize (particularly since the Left calls us far worse things literally ALL the time), and Fluke didn’t accept his apology. I remember thinking “well, what’s the point in apologizing, then, if you wouldn’t even be forgiven? At that point, might as well double-down.” Such an attitude, I believe, is what a lot of conservatives share and why, among other reasons, we like Trump so much.
But getting back to the actual conversation, Penn also agreed with O’Brien, calling cancel culture “ludicrous.”
He brought up the example of Alexi McCammond, who was editor-in-chief of Teen Vogue but was fired after a few weeks on the job because of anti-Asian comments she had tweeted as a teenager. Generally, not a good idea to make bigoted comments about any particular race, unless the comments are only considered “bigoted” because they are actually factual statements (for example, the higher likelihood of a police officer being killed by a black man than the other way around would be considered “racist” despite its statistical truth), but it can be more easily forgiven if we are talking about a teenager.
Teenagers are immature, angsty, and sometimes try too hard to be “edgy” or to fit in to a certain group they wish to belong to, and so would do and say things which run contrary to their usual behavior. I won’t outright defend McCammond since she likely is a Leftist (working at such a high level on Teen Vogue, which spreads Marxist crap to teenagers probably makes her a Leftist) but generally speaking, it is illogical that anyone would be fired for actions committed when they were teenagers, so long as such actions weren’t explicitly and horrifyingly illegal. Since she is likely a Leftist, I don’t actually mind that cancel culture destroyed her, but not because I support cancel culture, rather because this is a Leftist tool being used against a Leftist.
Often times, people have to live by rules set by the Left and the Left doesn’t have to live by such rules, so it’s good to see, sometimes, that they get targeted by some of the same vile crap that they support and implement.
Penn, regarding the example of McCammond, said: “When we’re destroying careers like that, what are we really achieving? What are we doing?”
The two then went on to talk about how cancel culture affected their own particular genres of show biz, with Penn pointing out how “representation” has gone so far that he, a straight, white male, would no longer be considered for parts which don’t align with his own label. Namely, that he wouldn’t be able to play the part of gay activist Harvey Milk, which he did in 2008, were that movie to be made today because he isn’t gay himself.
“Today, almost certainly I would not be permitted to be cast in that role. We’re living in a time when, if you’re playing a gay lead character, you’d have to be a gay man or a trans character. And there have been these casting issues.”
He continued: “When you have a period of evolution that certainly has an opportunity for people who have had less opportunities to move forward, that has to be supported, and yet in this pendulum swing society that we’re in, you wonder at some point if only Danish Princes can play Hamlet. It is, I believe, too restrictive. People are looking for gotcha moments and to criticize.”
Ironically, the only times when casting staffs have no issue with not getting a label-appropriate actor for a label-appropriate lead is when casting for traditionally white and male characters. For example, there are people who have argued that a woman ought to play James Bond in a future film, which would practically change the entire character for the sake of “wokeness” because one of his most recognizable traits is, apart from being a man, he is a womanizer who often sleeps with the hot female lead. Unless they plan to also make female Bond gay, which isn’t exactly past them, that aspect of his character would be eliminated. Either way, what you have is not Bond, but a bastardization of Bond. And this is coming from someone who has never seen a Bond film in its entirety and really doesn’t care too much about the franchise.
Not to mention that they are actually and actively trying to make the next Bond film be led by a black James Bond. While I don’t really care about the color of Bond’s skin (again, not exactly a big fan, though it might be different if I were), it’s still an example of Leftists in Hollywood not only hypocritically not caring about the restrictiveness that Penn was talking about when it comes to something they want to change, but also of actively wanting to change the base character for agenda reasons.
Were you to make a film today about, say, Miles Morales (black Spider-Man) and a white actor were to play him, that would be an outrage to the Left. But were you to make a film today about Peter Parker (original Spider-Man) and hired a black actor to play him, they would have absolutely no issues with that, despite the fact that Peter Parker is white.
It’s nothing but hypocrisy, not that this is a rarity for the Left.
At any rate, it is surprising to see such notorious Leftists, particularly Sean Penn, talk so disparagingly about a Leftist tool of censorship and suppression. It’s good to see infighting within the Left, particularly if some of them actually stand on the side of sanity.
Here’s hoping that we see more of this and there is a real, concerted effort to push back against the insanity we are witnessing.
“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven.”
In recent time, some Democrats have attempted to gaslight the nation as to who was supporting efforts to defund the police. Even though throughout the summer and as recently as just a few months ago they were the ones loudly calling for the defunding of the police, some have attempted to gaslight people into believing it was Republicans, not Democrats, who want to defund the police.
An effort which will very obviously not work out in their favor, but hey, they’re trying. They are attempting to return to the side of sanity, to an extent, but instead of accepting responsibility for their dangerous and deadly rhetoric which has resulted in huge crime spikes across Democrat-run cities, they are trying to gaslight people into thinking that Republicans were actually the ones who were defunding the police.
Biden advisor Cedric Richmond started off this ridiculous attempt when he went on “Fox News Sunday” and claimed that Republicans voted against an emergency relief plan which would allow for state and local governments “to replenish their police departments and do the other things that are needed,” claimed Richmond. Jen Psaki parroted his talking point as well.
A simple fact-check found that the American Rescue Plan which they are talking about did not specifically include funding to hire more police officers.
Oh, look, Democrats lying their asses off. What are the odds?
One doesn’t even need to look at what Richmond was arguing to find his accusation utterly baseless. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, back in June of 2020, cut $1 billion from the NYPD budget. The Philadelphia City Council approved a $33 million cut to their police department and the city is “on pace to have one of its deadliest years on record,” according to NBC10 Philadelphia. Washington, D.C. lawmakers promised to cut $15 million from the police budget in June of 2020, and as of May of this year, the WaPo has reported that homicides increased 38% compared to the same time last year.
In Baltimore, their city council voted to cut $22 million in police budget. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti cut $150 million from the police budget last year, which Quemala Harris (my new name for her, thank you protesters at the border) said “I applaud Eric Garcetti” because of his actions and said “we have to reimagine public safety”.
In Minneapolis, back on June 12, 2020, the city council unanimously pledged to disband their police department, leading to gunshot victims more than doubling this past year, with an increase of 81% in homicide rate. The Seattle City Council approved proposals last August to reduce their police department by as many as 100 officers.
And in Portland, Oregon, likely the one place which trumps even California as a total hellhole, the city commissioners cut almost $16 million from their police department back in June of 2020.
And that’s just in the actual actions of Democrats in their own individual cities. There are also examples of Democrat after Democrat repeating the rhetoric of defunding the police, everyone from Occupier Biden to his associate and assistant AG’s, his Secretary of Labor, and a number of Democrat legislators, council members and Minnesota AG Keith Ellison expressing their desire to defund the police and reduce their responsibilities and effectiveness.
Even to this day, some particularly Leftist Democrats like AOC and Ayanna Pressley continue to support their “defund the police” movement, with AOC dismissing the crime waves as simple “hysteria”. And hypocritically, Rep. Jamaal Brown continues to support defunding the police while simultaneously requesting additional police protection at his New York home.
All of this leads to anyone with even a single IQ point, not even necessarily a single-digit IQ, to recognize that it’s the Democrats, not the Republicans, who are pushing and working to defund the police.
But this does lead to the question of why some Democrats like Richmond and Psaki would contradict all these other Democrats and baselessly claim that Republicans are defunding the police. It’s very simple: the “defund the police” movement is rotten filth that the VAST majority of Americans disapprove of.
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 52% of American voters believe that we should spend MORE on police, with 23% saying the current amount is fine and 18% saying we should spend less. That’s a 75-18 split on maintaining or adding to the police budget versus defunding them. The Left is in the clear minority here.
Furthermore, 66% of voters agree with the following statement: “The radical and reckless decisions by some jurisdictions to defund their police forces have had a real and devastating effect on American communities.”
According to the poll, “That’s a quote from a letter that Republican Reps. Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland this month.” Just 24% of voters disagreed while 11% were not sure.
Along racial demographics, 65% of whites, 62% of blacks and 70% of other minorities also agreed with that quote.
This is far from the only poll which indicates a huge lack of support for the Left’s “defund the police” movement, and it seems some on the Left have realized their mistake. Only, instead of admitting their mistake like mature, responsible adults do, they lie through their teeth and accuse other people of doing what they have been doing, much like a child shifting the blame for breaking a vase on to his infant sibling.
And so, they attempt to gaslight the country into believing that, because Republicans didn’t vote on a trillion-dollar “rescue” plan which would only further destroy this country economically, they claim that Republicans didn’t vote to fund police, even though that wasn’t a specific item on that bill.
Not an unsurprising act, of course, as deceivers will deceive. However, it is reaching for the bottom of the barrel in terms of blaming Republicans for crap. They made massive showings of wanting to defund the police all summer of last year, and often supported the deadly riots that followed Floyd’s death. That is, they supported those riots until polls came out that, surprise, surprise, people weren’t fond of their cities burning.
Similarly, they support the “defund the police” movement until, once again, surprise, surprise, people aren’t fond of violent crime turning their cities into real-life Grand Theft Auto.
Ironically, a largely police-free society could be possible and positive, but the Left would have to give up practically everything they believe in. A society which values the sanctity of life is far less likely to see it be taken. A society which values personal freedom is far less likely to oppress it. And a society which values self-defense and gun ownership is far less likely to see others malignantly using them against others.
Put these things together and you hardly even need a police force other than for helping out with accidents or medical emergencies which might take firefighters and medics longer to respond. However, the Left doesn’t want that because 1) like I said, this would require them to give up everything they believe in and 2) that’s not a society they actually want to see exist. They don’t actually want a police-free world. They want to CONTROL the police so that they have more control over people. So why would they want to do away with them?
All this “defund the police” crap isn’t even what they actually want, even though some have attempted to go forth with it. Even then, a lot of the places which defunded or somewhat cut police funding backtracked on that and gave their police departments MORE funding, such as New York, L.A. and Minneapolis, to name a few.
Virtue signaling is the name of the game that the Left is playing. Some of them might actually mean what they say, such as AOC, but that is a relative insane few, even among the Left. This isn’t to absolve them of their crimes against Americans, of course. Because of their rhetoric and actions, whether or not they mean them or later went on to backtrack, they still led to huge surges in crime in the cities which they run. More people are dead because of them. More families separated. More lives ruined. And this is JUST when talking about their soft approach to crime.
The Left has killed many, many people, virtue signal or not. And now, some of them want to return to the side of sanity by gaslighting everyone into believing that the Republicans are responsible for the suffering that THEY have brought onto millions of people.
They are a garbage people. Unsurprising, then, that they spew what they are.
“For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naïve.”
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...