Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 31, 2023

Is the Middle East the future?

 ... like communist China, America and Europe are – let’s be honest – increasingly totalitarian societies, in which it is no longer enough even to refrain from speaking out against Big Sister; no, you must love and affirm Big Sister, and all her values and beliefs, and all her progressive works, and you must say so constantly and at high volume or be instantly suspected as a dangerous, hateful, reactionary threat not only to the regime but to all humanity.

But, unlike China, many Western “liberal-democratic” societies are despite this totalizing obsession also increasingly dysfunctional, dangerous, and awash with anarchic madness. No one is satisfied with this state of affairs. The globalist liberal presses for ever more centralized and supranational government power and tighter control over wrong-thinkers – erm, I mean “disinformation” – in order to crush the nationalist-populist opposition – erm, “threats to democracy” – whom they think are to blame for destabilizing the profitable liberal-progressive project. The conservative nationalist, having had quite enough of the top-down ideological crusades and the lawless chaos that has proliferated in their wake, is in revolt against globalist liberalism and dreams of a Hungarian-style “illiberal democracy” that could return power to the people of sovereign nation-states and allow for a restoration of public order and moral stability.

Now let’s say along comes a Sheikh who offers them both a compromise: all the material perks/degeneracy of global techno-liberal-capitalism, but the worst of it is kept pretty quiet, you don’t have to wave the Progress Pride Flag, and the streets aren’t covered in feces and crazy people. You just have to ditch the democracy and yield the government vast powers of digital surveillance and control – but it will be competent and subtle with its power and generally leave you alone if you don’t cross it. Instead of illiberal democracy or run-away liberal-progressive nightmare you can have a relatively stable liberal authoritarianism. How many on right and left alike would take this deal? At this point, I suspect a lot of people.

Tuesday, May 30, 2023

It Was Always Only About Power With the Left

 Why do so many liberal climate-activist grandees fly on private jets? Or why do those who profited from Black Lives Matter have a propensity for estate living? Or why do the community-activist Obamas prefer to live in not one, but three mansions? 

The answer is that calls for radical equity, “power for the people,” and mandated equality are usually mostly sloganeering for those who enjoy power and the lucre it brings, and their wish is to augment both for themselves. The result is that the issue du jour of mandated equality often becomes secondary if not irrelevant. There is neither fear of inconstancy nor hypocrisy, given the central theme that governs a leftist party line is political utility—or the ends of power always more than justify the hypocritical means used to obtain it. 

Read the whole thing. 

A job only teachers can do


Friday, May 26, 2023

Interesting Twitter video - Putin on the West

Corrupt FBI official eviscerated

Thursday, May 25, 2023

Covide-19 was Biological Warfare

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

My Son Hunter

Trump counters DeSantis announcement

The Distraction


Vaccine lies

Dealing With The Threat

This post is kind of a continuation of last week’s post, about the invasion of genetically male-claiming-to-be-gender-fluid into spaces formerly the preserve of genuinely, original-equipment-issue XX females … and no, I will not play the variable-gender game and use your favored pronouns. (Should you demand that of me, mine are ‘Your Highness’ and ‘My Lady’). I admit that yes, there are those very rare occurrences of people who are genuinely physically inter-sex from birth, and another small number who have fully undertaken to conduct their lives as the opposite sex of what they were observed to be at birth; this after careful consideration, with surgery, hormones, and the choice of suitable dressing/makeup. But it doesn’t really change anything at all, save the superficial impression. When in a thousand, two thousand, or five thousand years, a future archeologist excavates the bodies of one of those people, the skeletal features and residual DNA will read the remains as either male or female – no matter what they maintained an appearance/pretense of being in life.

Frankly, I otherwise wouldn’t much care about the kinks of other adults. I’ve always subscribed to the wisdom of the Edwardian-era actress and correspondent with GB Shaw, Mrs. Patrick Campbell, who famously remarked that she didn’t much care what people did in the bedroom, just that they weren’t doing it in the road and frightening the horses. My own metric was “consenting, adult, and private” which does admittedly leave open a wide range of sexual behaviors such as incest and polygamy. Really, I don’t care. Just don’t demand my rapturous approval. And don’t go about flaunting it in places where the rest of us just can’t look away, m’kay?

I wouldn’t care about transgender matters at all, if they weren’t so determined to strip off and wag the wing-wang in my face, or that of teenage girls and boys, elementary-school students, and apparently everyone else considering buying a cheap intercourse-inna-canoe-beer or a stretchy swimsuit modeled by a model who needs minimal stretch in the breast area, but plenty in the crotch. Or invade places like … hospital wards, prison units, sorority houses, leisure spas, locker rooms, changing rooms, bathrooms, and the like, under the handy guise of claiming to ‘identify as’ female. No matter how unconvincing the pretense, and it appears that many of those pretenses are extraordinarily unconvincing, the perverts and sexual predators are determined on indulging their kink, while male and female authority figures positively cheerlead for the program of invasion. They accrue woke points in the eyes of their peers, I surmise. And the perverts, predators and scammers get away with it. Or at least, they have gotten away with it so far, although this might be on the cusp of changing.

Why have ordinary women wavered on tolerating the invasion of their private spaces and sports competitions. Why would this be? Or as my late father would say – “How come?” While I am not a credentialed sociologist or specialist in human behavior – from what I have read and observed in my own life and gathered from others, women are generally much more vulnerable to social pressure from other women. Maybe it stems from having to be tight with the band of sisters and mothers when we were all part of a prehistoric hunter-gathering tribe, perhaps it’s from centuries of having to have solidarity with other women while living a very circumscribed life as a matter of survival – a dictatorship of petticoats as a 19th-century observer would have put it, in a tight circle of home-hearth-children-family. Whatever the basis for this might be – women in general have a notably much higher threshold for “This-is-crazy-y’all-are-nuts-I’m-outta-here!” then men. And teenage girls, going through the doubt and misery of going through puberty – with all which the confusion which that entails – seem to be most susceptible to destructive peer pressure, transient fads, social bullying, and the general madness of female crowds. There are exceptions to this, though – Sarah Hoyt calls them “Odds”; the freaks, non-conformists, outliers, eccentrics, and rebels; those of us who wander down a different path, pursuing a fascination in something other than what our peers are interested in. It could be a non-traditional sport or profession, or just defying the current convention by building a stable family and raising your children yourself. (It was noted that many of the women who regularly post comments at According to Hoyt are … military veterans. Which is curious in itself, as female veterans aren’t all that numerous in the general population.) It’s my feeling that it will be the non-conformist women, the “Odds” and the rebels who will not tolerate the trans madness and the invasion of female spaces, and who will take the lead in resisting the invasion of female spaces, and in bringing the trans-fad to a halt. Discuss as you wish.

Friday, May 19, 2023

Reject the Normalcy Bias


One of the most powerful tactics in the left’s arsenal is leveraging the reluctance of conservatives to accept that the foundational reality of our society has changed. We are not a free country in the sense we were just a decade ago – hell, the Durham Report just showed our ruling caste collectively framing a president they disliked and we all know there will be zero consequences. But part of the reason is human nature. The left exploits our normalcy bias, the tendency to assume that things right now are the same as they have always been. Yet, this is not normal. This whole political/cultural morass that America has fallen into is the opposite of normal. And some of us just can’t handle the truth. 

They will not accept that this is not the society we grew up in. Hell, it’s not even the society our kids grew up in. It is something wholly other, a society where the norms and rules and guidelines that we thought existed, and that had existed right up until the left took over all of the institutions, no longer exist at all. And the fact is that many conservatives refuse to acknowledge the obvious, because to acknowledge it will require them to take action – radical action, like what Ron DeSantis is doing in Florida to the howling horror of the commies. 

This normalcy bias, the assumption that things still work as they used to, is what allows the left to get away with its shenanigans. But nothing works like it used to. It is beyond reasonable argument that the left has infiltrated almost all of our major institutions. Like a virus infecting a healthy cell, leftism takes over our institutions and uses the institutions’ structure to manufacture even more leftism, and that spawn goes and infects more institutions. It has taken over Hollywood, the colleges, the big corporations, and much of the government. It’s got the military, the NFL and, of course, the regime media. The left has shamelessly politicized every single one of them. They now focus not just on their jobs, but on pumping out more leftism. Yet all these institutions still demand the respect that they had back when they were non-political and were dedicated to their actual purposes. The military was about fighting our enemies. The justice system was about prosecuting criminals. The NFL was about football. The beer companies were about providing refreshment to dudes who did not pretend to be chicks. 

But none of that is true now....It’s all a lie. It’s all a scam.  ...We have got to wake up and look at the world as it is. We have a normalcy bias, and that’s got to get fixed. This is abnormal. This is not right. And we totally need to admit that to ourselves, because it can’t get any better until we do.

Read the whole thing ...

Thursday, May 18, 2023

‘Russia case’ against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today

 In Agatha Christie’s “Murder on the Orient Express,” detective Hercule Poirot observes, “The impossible could not have happened, therefore the impossible must be possible in spite of appearances.”

That may be the best summary of the findings of special prosecutor John Durham in his 305-page report issued yesterday. 

Not only did the impossible happen, but they all did it: the Clinton campaign, the FBI, and the media. 

In hindsight, it would appear impossible.

A political campaign hatches a plot to create a false claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Making this even more implausible is that the CIA and FBI know about the plot.

FBI Whistelblower

FBI Whistelblower

Wednesday, May 17, 2023

All law is imposed morality

Covid lies are funny

Adam Schiff Lies

There must be accountability

Why is the media trying to silence Elon Musk?

"Damn, That's Thin," "I know," "It sucks": The Untold Story of the Trump-Russia Investigation

 The Durham Report shows that the FBI worked tirelessly with the cooperation of the Corporate Press to overturn the election of Donald Trump.

Susan Schmidt grabs eight key takeaways from Special Counsel John Durham's report

May 16, 2023

Special Counsel John Durham’s “Report on Matters Related to Intelligence Activities and Investigations Arising Out of the 2016 Presidential Campaigns” trickled out yesterday afternoon, hitting journalist inboxes just after 3:00 p.m. A quick read revealed the following key takeaways:

There was no valid predicate for the investigation, and the FBI knew it.

From the report:

It is the Office's assessment that the FBI discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia. Similarly, the FBI Inspection Division Report says that the investigators “repeatedly ignore[d] or explain[ed] away evidence contrary to the theory the Trump campaign... had conspired with Russia... It appeared... there was a pattern of assuming nefarious intent.” An objective and honest assessment of these strands of information should have caused the FBI to question not only the predication for Crossfire Hurricane, but also to reflect on whether the FBI was being manipulated for political or other purposes. Unfortunately, it did not.

The entirety of the evidence the FBI used to launch its investigation of the Trump campaign is contained in what came to be known as “Paragraph Five,” because it ended up in that spot in a FISA warrant application on Trump volunteer Carter Page. The information in Paragraph Five came from Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, and was derived from an interaction he had at a London wine bar with young Trump foreign policy volunteer George Papadopoulos, ostensibly concerning Russia.

Australian diplomats told Durham that the impetus for passing the Paragraph Five info to the U.S. government in late July 2016 was the release of hacked DNC emails by Wikileaks. The entire case came down to an abstract of a diplomatic cable, quoted here in full:

Mr. Papadopoulos was, unsurprisingly, confident that Mr. Trump could win the election. He commented that the Clintons had “a lot of baggage” and suggested the Trump team had plenty of material to use in its campaign. He also suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia that it could assist this process with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton and President Obama. It was unclear whether he or the Russians were referring to material acquired publicly of sic through other means. It was also unclear how Mr. Trump's team reacted to the offer.

On the strength of that tiny bit of information, the FBI opened full investigations into four Trump presidential campaign aides, seeking to determine whether they were “witting or and/or coordinating activities with the government of Russia.”

“There’s nothing to this, but we have to run it to ground.”

As soon as the FBI received Paragraph Five, Counterintelligence chief Peter Strzok and a supervisory agent rushed to London, where they met with an FBI legal attaché (UKALAT) and interviewed diplomats at the Australian High Commission. In a taxi on the way to the interviews, Strzok reportedly said, “There’s nothing to this, but we have to run it to ground,” as the attaché later told the FBI’s inspection division.

One of the Australian diplomats told the FBI team that “the Paragraph Five information was written in an intentionally vague way because of what Papadopoulos did and did not say,” and, because of their uncertainty about what to make of it. The report says Downer told the FBI that Papadopoulos “simply stated, ‘The Russians have information…’ He made no mention of Clinton emails, dirt or any specific approach by the Russian government to the Trump campaign team with an offer or suggestion of providing assistance.”

British intelligence officials, the FBI attaché said, “could not believe the Papadopoulos bar conversation was all there was.”

“It’s thin”; “There’s nothing to this.”

A message exchange on August 11, 2016 between the attaché and the supervisory agent shows the Americans were as skeptical as the British.

UKALAT-1: Dude, are we telling them [British Intelligence Service-I] everything we know, or is there more to this?

Supervisory Special Agent-1: That’s all we have.

Supervisory Special Agent-I: not holding anything back

UKALAT-1: Damn that’s thin

Supervisory Special Agent-I: I know

Supervisory Special Agent-I: it sucks

The Trump campaign investigation was premised on “raw, unanalyzed and uncorroborated intelligence,” and U.S. intel agencies possessed no “actual evidence of collusion” when the probe began

According to Durham, the senior FBI officials who ordered the probe did not look at the Bureau’s intelligence databases, or consult its experienced Russia analysts, who could have told them they had seen no information about Donald Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials.

Nor did they seek such information about Trump and Russia from the CIA, the NSA or the State Department.

“Neither US law enforcement nor the intelligence community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion” when the investigation began, the report said.

Further, the FBI opened a full-scale investigation “without ever having spoken to the persons who provided the information.”

Sensational stories published in the New York Times in February and March 2017 claiming Trump associates were in contact with Russian intelligence agents were false.

Declassified FBI documents from the period surrounding publication of two influential New York Times articles include Strzok’s annotated refutations of the Times stories, which cited as sources “four unnamed current and former U.S. intelligence officials.” Strzok wrote that there was no information “indicating that at any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with Russian intelligence officials.”

Durham’s report disputed the Times accounts that saying US law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted communications of Trump associates and campaign officials showing repeated contacts with “senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election”; that the intercepted communications had been captured by the NSA; and that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort had been heard on intercepted calls. The Times has repeatedly said it stands by those stories, including as recently as February of this year when former Times reporter Jeff Gerth wrote about Strzok’s rebuttal of that reporting in the Columbia Journalism Review.

FBI Director James Comey pushed heavily for an investigation of Carter Page, starting in April 2016 when Page was a government witness in an espionage investigation of Russian diplomats in New York.

Getting a bead on Page was “a top priority for the director,” one intelligence agent said. The attorney who prepared the first of four FISA applications on Page “recalled being constantly pressured to move forward by FBI management.” The report cites Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report in stating that McCabe and Comey were agitating for lawyers to complete the Page FISA. McCabe told interviewers that, “Comey repeatedly asked him ‘Where is the FISA, where is the FISA? What’s the status… with the Page FISA?”

The FISA was found by the IG to be deeply flawed, riddled with false information and errors. Comey declined to be interviewed by the Durham team.

At the direction of the FBI, confidential human source Stefan Halper recorded lengthy conversations with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, in which each denied the campaign had any involvement with Russian officials.

These tapes were in the possession of Crossfire Hurricane investigators, who discounted their denials and ignored exculpatory information they provided in seeking FISA warrants. From the report:

The FBI chose to adopt an interpretation of Papadopoulos's denials of any knowledge of the Trump campaign's involvement with the Russians in connection with the DNC computer intrusion and subsequent publication of certain DNC emails as being “weird,” “rote,” “canned,” and “rehearsed.”

The Bureau ignored assertions by Papadopoulos that assistance from the Russians would be “illegal,” and that “espionage is treason.” Agents were so determined to elicit incriminating comments from Papadopoulos that they pressed one of his friends into making 23 separate recordings of him, challenging him with “approximately 200 prompts or baited statements which elicited approximately 174 clearly exculpatory statements.” None of this information ever reached either the FISA court or the news media.

Durham was highly critical of the FBI’s “startling and inexplicable failure” to investigate the so-called “Clinton Intelligence Plan.”

In late July, 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies “obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis” alleging Hillary Clinton approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against Trump, by “tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee.”

Then-CIA Director John Brennan thought the information was important enough to brief the President, Vice President, Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI director  and other senior officials. On September 7, 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to Comey and Peter Strzok, but the two have said they don’t recall hearing about it. Numerous others at FBI were informed about it, the report said.

The report concludes the FBI:

Failed to act on what should have been—when combined with other incontrovertible facts—a clear warning sign that the FBI might then be the target of an effort to manipulate or influence the law enforcement process for political purposes during the 2016 presidential election.

The report notes in detail how false information intended to damage Trump – the Steele Dossier and the Alfa Bank claims – was provided to the FBI by people tied to the Clinton campaign. Had the FBI investigated what Durham termed the “Clinton intelligence plan” as it pursued its “Crossfire Hurricane” probe, it “would have increased the likelihood of alternative analytical hypotheses and reduced the risk of reputational damage both to the targets of the investigation as well as, ultimately, to the FBI.”

Durham added that if the FBI looked into the “Intelligence Plan,” it might at least have cast a critical eye on the phony evidence it was gathering in Crossfire Hurricane, and/or questioned whether it was “part of a political effort to smear a political opponent and to use the resources of the federal government's law enforcement and intelligence agencies in support of a political objective.”

Both Clinton campaign Chairperson, John Podesta and Senior Policy Advisor Jake Sullivan called the information “ridiculous,” but the failure to investigate it in real time had a lasting impact.

Tuesday, May 16, 2023

The "Fine People" Hoax and how the media lied.

Friday, May 12, 2023

Is Christopher Wray Covering up for the Biden Family or the FBI Itself?

 What is the FBI covering up and why?  I have assumed that they are covering up the Biden financial crimes at the direction of Biden himself.  But there may be an alternative explanation.

FBI Director Christopher Wray is the King of Cover-ups. He continues to stonewall investigators from the Congressional Oversight Committee, treating their subpoenas like the paper you’d put down for your dog. But the question of motive keeps coming up.

Why is Wray hiding information from congressional investigators? To a carpenter, everything looks like a nail, and to Washington, everything looks like politics. But is it?

What if Wray’s coverup isn’t based on politics? Really, is he so enamored with Shades Biden and the rat’s nest of dummy corporations his family members have set up? What is in it for him? What is in it for the FBI? What’s the motive for ignoring the pipeline of cash flowing in from foreign actors in sketchy countries to a troth for grifters?   ...

Wray certainly has the means to cover things up, and hats off to the FBI. They have been doing a manful job of hiding evidence from Congress. But what is the motive? ...

One that jumps out from the laptop is the strange case of former FBI Director Louis Freeh. One of the most bizarre aspects of this case is that we read on Hunter Biden’s laptop that the former top cop in the country made it a policy to give a $100,000 gift to two of President Biden’s grandchildren’s trust funds. Maybe you’ve been known to slip a few bucks to a friend or family member or have been on the receiving end. As in the famous Humphrey Bogart line translated by Bugs Bunny from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, “Pardon me, but could you help out a fellow American who is down on his luck?”

But what kind of hard luck story would inspire the former head of the FBI to slip $100K to the grandchildren of a multimillionaire like Joe Biden? Are current or former FBI folks in the habit of adopting members of Shades Biden’s family and showering them with money? Is Louis Freeh alone among FBI alums or active employees in these kinds of strange financial transactions with people in high places?

Are FBI Directors buying the job? 

No compromise

CIA Rigs the 2020 Election

Democrats giving statements doubting voting systems

Thursday, May 11, 2023

Walk Away

The Employment Number Games Continue–(Biden Department of Labor lies)

 Biden Department of Labor has found that payrolls exceeded expectations! And, of course, beating expectations is important to the stock market and the Fed. To say that the Biden administration’s current “winning” streak is unprecedented is an understatement:

 I have posted repeatedly about the Biden administration’s constant issuance of false initial employment-related numbers, followed by extensive downward revisions in succeeding months.  But since only the initial reports get any attention from the media, all the public sees are the initial lies, not the later corrections.  So we got the April report today from the Bureau of Laborious Lies and miracle of miracles, once again the number of new jobs exceeded expectations by about 50,000; 235,000 versus 185,000 expected.  Hmmm, but then March’s initial numbers were revised down by 61,000 jobs and February’s by 78,000.  January had already been revised downward.  You see the pattern.   So the revisions were far more than the supposed over-expectation number for April, which will inevitably be revised down in future months.

Also of interest is the exceptionally large confidence intervals for the two surveys used for the labor force report.  The business establishment report has a confidence interval of 130,000 jobs at typical statistical significance confidence levels, which is mammoth.  So April could be 105,000 jobs or 365,000 jobs.  Yet somehow the

Master Class

Weaponizing Death

 Recently, there has been a spate of horrific murders.

The killers, whether committing mass shootings or single homicides, are hard to stereotype.

They can be clearly either mentally ill or simply innately evil. They can kill for revenge, for ideological purposes, out of hatred, for notoriety -- or for no known reason at all.

They are probably left-wing and right-wing, white, Black, and brown, young, and old. While their weapons of choice are semi-automatic rifles, there are plenty of killers who favor handguns and even knives.

Unfortunately, these tragedies have increasingly become politicized.

Yet our media and politicians do not apply a common standard of reporting about either the victims, the killers, or the apparent motives and circumstances of the violence.

Instead, each horror is quickly analyzed for its political usefulness. Then its details are selectively downplayed or emphasized, depending upon the political agenda at work.

A sad example was the terrible murder spree at the private Christian Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee. A transgender male shot and killed six people, including three 9-year-old children.

Almost immediately, three media narratives emerged.

One, semi-automatic weapons, not the killer Audrey Hale, were mostly responsible for the massacre.

Two, the shooter's transgender identity profile played no role in the killing whatsoever.

Three, the public had no need to know of the contents of the shooter's "manifesto."


The media and authorities apparently assumed Hale's written rantings tried to justify the murders because of Christianity's supposed disapproval of transgenderism.

When Words Stop Meaning Anything

 It seems like the most racially diverse ideological concept out there is “white supremacy.” Talk about equal opportunity! Anybody can be a white supremacist these days – it doesn’t depend on his/her/xir color, ethnicity, being a Romney, or anything except what is useful to the left at any given moment. And it would be hilarious – it actually is kind of hilarious – if it wasn’t just the latest example of the pinkos’ rhetorical warfare being waged using the English language against normal people. These creeps know that if words don’t mean what they actually mean, they can mean anything. They are weaponizing language to make you into a serf, but you can stop it by refusing to play along.

The scuzz in Allen, Texas, was “Latinx,” whatever the hell that dumb non-word invented by commie morons means. We are informed by the people keeping that Nashville trans creature’s manifesto under wraps that she was supposedly a “white supremacist,” which is a bit confusing if you demand coherence and consistency. One day, “Latino” is a separate race but the next day it is a mere adjunct of people of pallor, who are the designated villains in this twisted morality play. And, of course, “racism” is bad, unless it’s against white people – again, a group that includes whoever the left needs to demonize today

Slow learners


Wednesday, May 10, 2023

The Biden Business

Saturday, May 06, 2023

‘Manufactured’ Media Lies Can End Democracy: Tucker Carlson Makes First In-Person Speech After Departing From Fox


Fox News host Tucker Carlson speaks in Washington, on March 29, 2019.

OXFORD, Alabama—In his first in-person speech after departing Fox News, Tucker Carlson did not hold back when speaking about what he sees are issues undermining America—lack of truth in the media landscape and a “manufactured” national division.

“I think I’m probably the first unemployed person who was ever invited to speak,” he opened his speech after a 15-second standing ovation by a full house at the 1,215-seat Oxford Performing Arts Centre on Thursday.

“When I accepted this speech … I didn’t realize how much free time I would have,” he joked.


During his hour-long speech, Tucker didn’t directly address the situation with Fox News but spoke about America’s political and social issues that he believes can lead to the “end of democracy” and the “enslavement” of the American people....

According to Carlson, what he witnessed at Rainbow Omega’s facility—people’s lives being materially improved—stood in stark contrast to his experiences with American politics and the media industry.

“American politics is supposed to be designed to improve people’s lives, but what is the point of it actually?” he said. “As we’re worried about these big abstract problems in faraway places, or claiming we can control the weather or whatever we’re claiming, there are kids with developmental disabilities who have aging parents, and the parents are legit terrified about what happens when they pass.”

But he said the ideas promulgated in the public sphere aren’t only irrelevant to Americans’ everyday concerns and designed to divide.

“I’m starting to really believe that the divisions that we see in our society are pretty much manufactured,” Carlson said, adding that one example of this is the idea of racism.

“Obama’s first term was how we were going to get past race. I didn’t vote for the guy, but everybody I knew was excited, and so was I,” Carlson said. “We elect some guy I disagree with, but we get to the point where we stop picking at the scab and move forward as one country. Why wouldn’t I be for that? As a Christian, I was totally for that.”

But that changed in Obama’s second term, he said: “Oh no, we’re not post-racial. All we’re going to talk about is race and make each other hate each other on the basis of race.”

“I don’t think most Americans hate each other on the basis of their ethnic differences,” he added. “I think a lot of that is just a lie, actually, designed to distract people.”

A cause of this division, Carlson lamented, is what he has observed to be “propaganda” published by the “overwhelming majority” of American media.

“Why are they not only not addressing the issues that matter? But they’re kind of going out of their way to ignore them?” Carlson wondered. “They have no idea that the economy is sagging, really? How could you not know that? We have no idea that we’re actively fighting Russia in a war?”

“I just think that’s at some point, you have to call it what it is—which is lying,” he said. “And lying with a very specific purpose, which is to avert your gaze, to pull your attention away from the things that matter. That’s not news coverage. That’s just classic propaganda.”

The democratic system cannot function with dishonesty dominating the public sphere, Carlson indicated.

“The first effect is to, kind of, end democracy,” he said. “The whole idea of democracy is based on the understanding that the people who vote will have some knowledge of what they’re voting on—what the real issues are–they’ll be informed citizens.”

But when the media industry is collectively excluding issues that matter, such as crime, immigration, and the economy, the population becomes uninformed, which undermines a fundamental part of democracy. The harm brought by the media industry is compounded by a lack of authenticity from the entire federal government, including politicians from both political parties, Carlson said.

“If they can’t even tell you the truth about a communicable disease that’s killing people, they’re actually lying to you about that,” he added. “You can’t believe anything. Well, that’s very bewildering. That’s actually a form of chaos, which is the one condition people can’t handle,” he said.

This chaos, he added, undermines Americans’ belief in the democratic process, sets the stage for further division, and leads to a sort of enslavement of the population, Carlson said.

“If you can control someone’s brain and get them to say, ‘I really need to wear a mask inside my car alone to protect myself—if you can get someone to that place where he gets in his Subaru and just instinctively puts on a mask with the windows up, then you’ve won,” Carlson said. “You’ve defeated them … in the enslavement of people, taking away their choice, and in so doing their dignity, really their humanity.

“That is the goal, obviously.”

Seeking Truth

The antidote to this, Carlson said in his speech, is to seek truth—echoing a statement he made in a video published on Twitter last week, days after his exit from Fox, that “truth will prevail.”

“Seek truth in your human relationships—always with humility—mindful that it’s pretty hard to get to the core truth of anything in this life,” he said. “And while we may never get to what is the deepest level of truth, we can move in that direction.”

He encouraged the audience to tell the truth and not partake in what he says are the lies propagated in society.

“We can begin by telling the truth ourselves,” Carlson said. “What we can control is what we do. And they can impose lies on us—it doesn’t mean we have to live them.”

“Because it robs you of the only thing that matters, which is your humanity, your God-given humanity, and it makes you something less than human.”

He then encouraged the audience to vote their conscience. He’s pro-life, he said, and votes Republican because of the party’s stance on this issue.

Finally, he proposed: “I would say just the obvious—try to help actual people.”

“In other words, whether it’s your charitable contributions, the checks that you write, or the services that you perform, the deeds that you do … knowing that there is a flesh and blood human being in need, whose life is being tangibly improved by what you do—that’s what charity actually is,” Carlson said.

"That ought to be the role of the federal government,” Carlson said on a side note.

His love for the state of Alabama aside, Carlson said, a primary reason that he came to speak was that he sincerely supports Rainbow Omega’s work, which he said is “helping people not in an abstract way, but in an actual way.”

Carlson recounted his experience earlier in the day when he toured a facility run by an organization in the region and met one of the participants of the nonprofit’s program.

“The thing that really—I won’t forget—that really lightened my heart was seeing so people who live there walking down the road … and there were a pair of twins. And this girl turned to me. Her face was so radiant. It made me emotional looking at her,” Carlson said. “I thought, you know, I don’t really understand a lot about God, but God’s on that person’s side—God thinks a lot more of her than he thinks of me.

“And I thought: ‘Wow, what a beautiful moment that was for me.’”

Tuesday, May 02, 2023

Another Progressive Fusillade Goes Awry


In his tireless battle against Critical Race Theory (CRT), the latest allotrope of vicious anti-white, polymorphously perverse Marxist ideology, Rufo has had signal success.

He has succeeded in bringing the truth about CRT to the public’s attention, and his work has inspired a significant backlash.

He has inspired legislation in more than a dozen states and even a presidential order (though not, of course, by the current president) to check this moral Trojan Horse.

The Empire always Strikes Back, however.

The woke watchmen at the citadels of orthodoxy have begun to sit up, take notice, and sound the alarm about this patient and methodical gadfly buzzing about their efforts to subvert the wholesome, race-blind canons of liberal education as traditionally conceived.

Rufo’s critics face two huge hurdles.

One, CRT and allied ideologies are every bit as toxic as Rufo says.

To describe CRT is to discredit it, and Rufo describes it in patient, if not exactly loving, detail.

Two, those attacking Rufo seem to believe that by saying he represents an assault on “progressive” sentiment they have landed a damaging blow.

They don’t understand that, like Br’er Rabbit, he glories in being tossed into the Briar Patch of anti-progressive reaction


Read the whole thing

Monday, May 01, 2023

See the Biden inauguration