Monday, December 31, 2018

Happy New Year!

2018 was the wackiest year I can recall. It was one new absurdity after another, whole new categories of being offended (like "misgendering", otherwise known as calling men, men and women, women. This offense can cost you your social media account) and the continued degeneration of our culture into what could be called a cesspool, except that would be an insult to actual cesspools. It was a year where the crazier the deviancy, the more cultural power you wielded.

Thanks to the general ineptitude of the national GOP and a significant number of collaborators in the Vichy Republican party, the Republicans lost seats and the majority in the House while picking up seats in the Senate. In several cases what looked like outright cheating from Democrats was ignored by Republicans leaders. So we are only a few days from ungrateful former refugees and outright dimwits being sworn in as new Democrat Representatives and then the circus will be in full swing.

As crazy as 2018 was, I can only assume 2019 is going to be far worse. There is a real risk of some serious financial meltdown or a major war breaking out. So happy new year I guess and my recommendations for 2019 are as follows:

More From The Ingratitude Files

In July we were treated with the spectacle of an angry black woman, Therese Patricia Okoumou, clambering up the Statue of Liberty to protest ICE and "white supremacy" and stuff. It was like super woke and noble and powerful. Apparently she is mad that the nation that took her in after fleeing the nation she came from (the Congo) isn't more like her home. You know, the one she fled from. Anyway, I wrote about it here: The Gratitude Is Heartwarming

Now as the year ends we have a new article about the real media darling in the House Democratic freshmanperson class, Ilhan Omar. While dimwit and economic ignoramus Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gets most of the attention, the Left and their media lickspittles are far more excited about Omar. She is everything the Left could want, angry and endlessly yammering about "justice". She is an immigrant, born in Mogadishu, Somalia. She is black and Muslim and will be the force behind changing House rules to allow religious headwear so she can wear a hijab on the floor of the House of Representatives. Take that white patriarchy! Now if it were a conservative white Mennonite woman challenging the House rules so she could wear a headcover, the Left would be silent or oppose it but when it is a symbol of Islamic oppression of women, it suddenly becomes a sign of empowerment.

The media is just giddy over her but she seems even more dangerous than ignoramus Ocasio-Cortez, who has replaced Dan Quayle as the dumbest person ever elected to Congress. The New York Times ran a puff piece on her,  Glorified and Vilified, Representative-Elect Ilhan Omar Tells Critics: ‘Just Deal’, starting off with her being "bullied" as a 12 year old in a Virginia school (the only person to ever be bullied in middle school). What the media loves about her is that she seems eager to crap on the country that took her in.

Her arrival in this country was the first time, Ms. Omar has said, that she had confronted “my otherness” as both a black person and a Muslim. She became a citizen in 2000, when she was 17. After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she decided to wear the hijab, as an open declaration of her identity. But from “the first day we arrived in America,” she said, she concluded that it was not the golden land that she had heard about.

“I think back to the orientations I went through a little over 20 years ago in the process of coming to this country, and in those orientations they did not have people who were homeless. There was an America that extended liberty and justice to everyone. There was an America where prosperity was guaranteed regardless of where you were born and what you looked like and who you prayed to,” she said, adding, “I wasn’t comfortable with that hypocrisy.”

So America is full of imperfect people and has often failed to live up to our lofty goals. Wow, what a penetrating analysis! No one has ever noticed that before.

I am not saying you can't raise concerns about the way things are in America. I certainly do although my concerns and my solutions are mostly diametrically opposed to Ms. Omar. What I find a bit galling is the utter lack of any sense of gratitude. I recognize that America, for all of her faults and for the very real concern I have that things are going to collapse, is still the greatest country on earth and no one else is even close. That is why I am so angry about the way the country is being run into the ground, it is not fulfilling the promise but instead many people seem determined to reverse the promises of America of liberty, personal freedom and personal responsibility. Ms. Omar and Ms. Okoumou, among many others apparently lack even a shred of awareness of how much better they have it here and they should know better. Ms. Omar allegedly went from being a member of a well-to-do family to living in a refugee camp to fleeing to America to get away from Somalia. You would think that she would appreciate how much better it is here and by "better" I mean better in every single way possible.

On a list of GDP per capita, the U.S. comes in at around 11th with a per capita GDP of nearly $60,000 per person, far ahead of other similarly sized nations. Somalia is such a disaster it isn't even on most lists but neighboring nations like Eritrea and Ethiopia are, with per capita GDP near the bottom of the rankings, with per capita GDP of around $1500-2000. Now GDP isn't everything but look at an aerial satellite map of Mogadishu and you see miles of shacks. Look at the same map of Minneapolis where Ms. Omar now resides and you see a vibrant city. The Human Development Index ranks the U.S. 13th in the world. All of the countries above the U.S. and below in the top 30 are either East Asian or European/American. Again Somalia is such a trainwreck that it doesn't even show up in the rankings but is lumped in as a "Low Human Development" nation. Neighbors Eritrea (179 out of 189 ranked) and Ethiopia (173) don't fare well again although neighboring Kenya comes in at 142 out of 189. I won't bother going through any other indexes, I assume you get the point. The nations Ms. Omar and Ms. Okoumou fled from are what our President crassly but accurately labeled "shitholes".

To put it another way. They fled from their homes of Somalia and the Congo because those nations are full of Somalians and Congolese people. They fled to my nation because it is full of people of European descent and not full of Somalians and Congolese. My country took them in and gave them a home and now they show no sign of ever going back to their countries. They live in a nation that is better in every possible way than where they came from but instead of showing some level of gratitude, they seem hyper-critical and determined to undo everything that makes this nation unlike the nations that they came from. It sort of reminds me of people in places like Massachusetts moving to New Hampshire to get away from Massachusetts or moving from California to Colorado to get away from California and then promptly doing their very best to transfer the states they moved to into replicas of the states they moved from.

Our freedom of expression and speech of course extends to naturalized citizens, so they can crab and complain about the country that took them in, gave them shelter and a new home. It would just be nice if they could, every now and then, show some gratitude for their incredibly better situation that was created by the same people they constantly criticize.

Friday, December 28, 2018

Other Than That It Was Accurate

I was scrolling through Netflix looking, in vain, for something interesting when I came across this new offering:


Well there are a couple of issues here.

First, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is not an immigrant. She was born in Brooklyn. Her parents were immigrants but so were all of our ancestors at some point.

Second, the title "Out of many, one" is a long existing motto, appearing on our coins and the seal of the United States in the original Latin form "E pluribus unum". Here is an early sketch

The meaning of "Out of many, one" refers to the 13 colonies becoming one new nation. It is only recently that it has been retconned into referring to the "melting pot" and mass immigration.

So other than the image being deceptive and the title being completely historically inaccurate, it looks like a winner. The description at IMDb says:

The United States has long offered a promise of opportunity and safety to arriving immigrants - The American Dream. However, currently facing a time of deep political, social, and cultural divide, immigration has become a divisive issue.

That sounds great of course until you learn a little history. The United States was never a "melting pot" until fairly recently, except in the sense of having a bunch of different European immigrants. I am sure this is not just another Trump hit piece published by Netflix.

If I didn't know better I might think that the Left is trying to rewrite American history entirely.

If I didn't know better that is.

Thursday, December 27, 2018

Foreign Aid Foolishness

During Senator Rand Paul's Festivus Airing of Grievances, which was pretty funny and also very sad (see here for a nice summary of the highlights, including a study on the sex habits of quail high on cocaine), he made the following point:

This is very true and easy to verify, to the tune of $53,000,000. The U.S. government provides a website that shows where all of our "aid" dollars go, the Foreign Aid Explorer.  Here is a screenshot and every country in blue is getting aid from us, the darker the blue, the more money they get.

You might notice that there is an awful lot of blue on that map and in some places you might not expect.

Here are some of the third-world, downtrodden nations we send money to:

- Canada: $35 million

- France: $70,999

- Germany: $559,000

- The UK: $150,000

Yes, we send the United Kingdom $150,000 per year and France gets $70,999. Not $71,000. $70,999. How much did we spend to process a payment to France of $70,999? What is the point of sending money to Canada? Isn't providing them a defensive umbrella for decades enough?

Oh and here are some other nations that we think of as rivals or enemies. We are also sending them money:

- Russia: $167 million

- China: The aforementioned $53 million

- Iran: $477,000

Those are just the small figures. We also send enormous sums to Israel, over $3 billion; Afghanistan, over $5 billion; Iraq $3.7 billion; Egypt $1.4 billion. At least with Afghanistan and Iraq, we broke those countries so it probably behooves us to give them some money but Israel is a highly advanced economic power with a per-capita GDP greater than Japan and the U.K. so why is a nation $21 trillion in debt sending over $3 billion in "aid" to a nation that doesn't need it (for more on that topic, see here)?

You might say that these are minuscule amounts in the big picture. $150,000 out of a $4,000,000,000,000 budget isn't even a rounding error. You would be correct. But a $21 trillion national debt doesn't happen because we write a single check for $21,000,000,000,000. It happens one small line item of idiocy after another. Twenty-one trillion dollar debts come from a trillion in deficit spending at a time and a trillion dollar deficit is made up of hundreds of thousands of smaller expenditures, any one of which is just a few million, but when added together they come up to enormous amounts of money. That is the point of Senator Paul's Festivus grievance airing. It is funny and not at the same time but the stark reality is that apart from Thomas Massie, Justin Amash and Rand Paul there are very few elected Federal officials that give a crap about the enormous debt they are compiling, because they know they will never be forced to deal with the repercussions. Mitch McConnell is 76 and obscenely wealthy, and will pass on his wealth to his heirs when he dies. What does he care about the national debt? Most of the members of Congress and just as important most of the members of the Deep State in government, lobbying firms and corporate board rooms, are wealthy enough to afford to preserve their wealth. It is well established that the areas surrounding Washington D.C. are some of the wealthiest in the nation and they grew wealthier as the rest of the country stagnated during the last recession. They think they will be insulated from what is coming but when the hounds are unleashed, they are going to find otherwise.

The U.S. takes at least $50 billion and throws it around the world, getting nothing in return for it. Many of the nations we give money to hate our guts. Others seek to supplant the U.S. as the world's dominant superpower. Others like Mexico ($289 million),  Honduras ($180 million) and Guatemala ($257 million) actively send their citizens to America to earn higher wages that are then remitted back home. America is their piggy bank. While cutting aid here or there wouldn't make much difference, cutting all foreign aid to zero certainly would. Fifty billion is still real money. $50 billion is around $150 per person in the United States, or $600 for a family of four. I am sure most of us would rather keep that money in our own communities than spreading it around the world like pixie dust and thinking that it will magically cause liberal democracies to spring up (and when it doesn't sending in the Army to make them be free, whether they like it or not).

End all foreign aid. Stop invading the world and causing more places to need aid. No more "Invade the world, invite the world". That is what a truly America First foreign policy should look like.

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

All Roads Lead To George

As Western Europe continues to destroy itself in a misplaced orgy of self-hatred, with the U.S. racing to catch up, there is one name that keeps popping up. As an example, this article was making the rounds a few weeks ago: Kids from ‘right-wing’ families must be re-educated: German govt.-backed brochure.

The German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs has supported a brochure that aims at changing the behavior of preschool-aged children who are raised by what the brochure’s authors call “right-wing” parents who oppose “gender” theory, “sexual diversity,” the “sexualization” of children, and “immigration.”

The pamphlet has caused a stir among German families and is published by the Amadeu Antonio Foundation. So who is this "Amadeu Antonio Foundation"? They are a German "advocacy" group and this is what they do:

The Amadeu Antonio Stiftung is one of Germany's foremost, independent non-governmental organizations working to strengthen democratic civic society and eliminate neo-Nazism, right-wing extremism, and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry and hate in Germany. Since its founding in 1998, the Foundation has funded more than 1.200 projects and campaigns in pursuit of this goal. It brings direct support to victims of hate-based violence, and promotes alternative youth cultures and community networks to weaken the social structures that intolerance and racism need to survive.

You might think that is pretty much a word salad and also quite vague and you would be correct. From what I can tell they are just a clearing house, funds come in and they spread them around in their fight against "right-wing extremism". I assume they define that phrase like American leftists as being anyone to the right of John Kasich.

Where do their get their money for their valiant fight against neo-Nazism? Ah ha. I am glad you asked. Here is the webpage listing their "partners", i.e. who gives them money. A few turns of the mouse wheel and you come to this:

Open Society Foundations and Dreilinden

From New York to Hamburg, OSF and Dreilinden are major supporters of the Foundation's gender research. Without them, the crucial knowledge gained by exploring the role women play in the neo-Nazi subculture could not be carried out.

The role women play in the neo-Nazi subculture? Pretty critical work. Notice the first name. Open Societies Foundation. The link provided doesn't work but you can go to the main page and like magic there is that great humanitarian:

Ah George Soros, founder of the Open Societies Foundation which is a multibillion dollar organization designed for the sole purpose of spreading money around for George Soros to influence, or more accurately undermine, Western civilization. The mainstream media and the Left in general try to dismiss the very real and well documented ways that Soros tries to influence elections and instead focuses on Russian attempts to sway voters with absolutely awful memes.

To make it worse, Soros and his "Open Societies Foundation" receive a vast sum of money from U.S. taxpayers to undermine national sovereignty. Judicial Watch reported on this earlier in December, U.S. Subsidizes Soros Radical Leftist Agenda Worldwide, New Judicial Watch Special Report Shows. From the announcement:

In 2018 OSF projected expending more than $530 million to promote Soros’ radical globalist agenda in every corner of the world under the guise of supporting democratically elected governments, strengthening the rule of law and promoting fairness in political, legal and economic systems. The reality is far different, the report shows. Soros, with the help of American taxpayer dollars, bolsters a radical leftwing agenda that in the United States has included: promoting an open border with Mexico and fighting immigration enforcement efforts; fomenting racial disharmony by funding anti-capitalist racialist organizations; financing the Black Lives Matter movement and other organizations involved in the riots in Ferguson, Missouri; weakening the integrity of our electoral systems; promoting taxpayer funded abortion-on-demand; advocating a government-run health care system; opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts; promoting dubious transnational climate change agreements that threaten American sovereignty; and working to advance gun control and erode Second Amendment protections.

Half a billion dollars from U.S. taxpayers goes to an anti-American billionaire to work at odds with American interests. Ain't our government grand?

George Soros is an evil man and is obsessed with remaking the Western world order, the very world order that has allowed him to become one of the wealthiest men in the world. Pointing this out and how his tendrils are ubiquitous is not a conspiracy theory or antisemitic. It is simply fact. From fighting for open borders to undermining the Christian church (see my old post The Curious Case Of Russell Moore to see how Soros is infiltrating "progressive Christian" groups), Soros is determined to create a new world order where everyone is equally miserable and ruled by a handful of oligarchs, including himself and his sons.

I am a big believer in the saying: follow the money. Like the sun rising in the East, when you see someone or some group trying to undermine Western civilization, you can bet that the money trail leads to George Soros.

Monday, December 24, 2018

18 Years

On December 24th, in the year 2000, we welcomed a new baby boy into the world. He was our fifth child and third son, born on a very snowy day in Wisconsin. Nine months later in September he was a little red headed baby and we were living in Kentucky. One day that month the world changed and the World Trade Center towers came down. He had no idea why mom and dad were so upset, after all he was just a nine month old baby. The next month on October 7th, 2001 the United States invaded Afghanistan with the goal of finding Osama bin Laden and stamping out terrorist training sites.

Fast forward to today.

In our war in Afghanistan, over 2000 American troops have died. Over 20,000 have been wounded, many grievously including amputation of limbs. Many others silently carry mental scars that will never heal. Osama bin Laden has been dead for more than 7 years and there are no signs of achieving a "victory" in Afghanistan, mostly because we have no idea what that would even look like. Very few people in either party show any inclination to end this pointless occupation. Those that do are scorned by their peers. The announcement from President Trump recently that the U.S. would be pulling our troops from Syria and a significant number of forces, around half or 7000 men, from Afghanistan was met with howls of rage. Everyone knows what the end result is really going to be. At some point we will withdraw and the Taliban will move right back in, reestablishing an Islamist state and all of the blood we shed and the money we spent will have been for nothing. Just a week ago, the U.S. was holding talks with the Taliban to negotiate a peace settlement and when we finally reach one the Taliban will be back in Kabul running Afghanistan. You probably didn't see anything about this in the news.

Today my son turns 18 years old, and we now have more adult children than minor children.

Our son is 18 and now is old enough to fight in a war that started when he was this tiny baby.

The same war is still going on with no end in sight.

I recognize that as an American father of sons, there is that chance that someday our nation may call and need my sons to defend our country. But it will be over my dead body before any of my sons go off to kill and die in some pointless war cooked up by the sociopaths in the monolithic war cult that dominates both political parties. There is nothing noble or patriotic about dying for a foolish war.

So happy birthday son. I hope that I won't need to write a similar post about the endless war in Afghanistan in 2023 when our youngest son turns 18.

Thursday, December 20, 2018

Bill Kristol: A Modern Day Viserys Targaryen

Bill Kristol, the effete, insufferable, smug boob that ran the once venerable magazine The Weekly Standard into the ground in no small part due to his single-minded obsession with Trump, is one of the least self-aware and borderline delusional people in the political scene today. He regularly holds forth on Twitter declaring himself the savior of conservatism, but ironically the only people that seem to reply are a bunch of leftists that share his hatred for Trump, plus a smattering of conservatives mocking him. Well he posted yet another tweet yesterday that is utterly lacking in any reality....

What you have to realize is that Kristol thinks that a) the Republican party is going to abandon the strategy that won Trump the White House in favor of the strategy that lost the White House to an empty suit named Barack Obama, twice, and b) that what the Republican voting base really, really wants is a pompous windbag, that would prefer to replace them with "superior" foreign workers, to lead us.

I read this tweet yesterday and was just floored at how lacking in realism it is. It is akin to people like John Kasich and Jeff Flake, both despised within their own party, who keep hinting at challenging Trump for the nomination in 2020 and apparently waiting for the rank-and-file to beg them to do so. What appeal is there in a cowardly chickenhawk consumed with bloodlust that wants to send our sons and daughters to die in meaningless wars that he would never have deigned to fight in himself?

Then it struck me. Bill Kristol is the American political version of Viserys Targaryen from Game of Thrones (or more accurately the book series A Song of Ice and Fire). If you haven't read the books, Viserys is a spoiled and cruel boy, the last male heir (or so everyone thinks) of the Targaryen family that ruled the land of Westeros. They were known for taming dragons in the past but the last dragons had died long ago and the family is mostly corrupt. After his father the Mad King Aerys was overthrown, Viserys and his sister fled Westeros and went into exile. In the books and HBO adaptation, he is convinced that the peasants (the smallfolk) really love his family and are eagerly awaiting his return to take his rightful place. Viserys believes the story that the smallfolk pray for his health and that many loyal subjects back in Westeros are sewing dragon banners, his house sigil, waiting for his return when they will rise up and overthrow the new king, the Usurper. In the story it is clear that is not true at all, as Ser Jorah Mormont explains to the sister of Viserys, Daenerys Targaryen in this scene.

Just as the common people in Westeros are not secretly longing for Viserys Targaryen to return, the Republican party is not secretly longing for Bill Kristol to come and save them from the Usurper Donald Trump. They are not sewing banner with a chicken sigil in secret. Most didn't know who Bill Kristol was and of those that did, virtually no one wants him to "lead" us. Bill is as delusional as he is repugnant.

Now if only someone could find a Khal to deal with Bill Kristol in the same manner as his doppelgänger  Viserys Targaryen.....

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

Thanks For Giving Us Our Own Money Back!

These are the sorts of news stories that drive me crazy. From our local conservative radio station, WOWO in Fort Wayne:

Indiana gets $521K grant for statewide smoke detector push

I am in no way anti-smoke detector or part of some shadowy alt-houseburning group sharing memes of cartoon frogs burning down houses.
Now what gets me is this from the story:

Indiana has received more than a half-million dollars in federal funding to kick off a campaign to install 10,000 smoke detectors in homes around the state.

The State Fire Marshal’s office will use the $521,000 to install smoke detectors in the homes of high-risk populations to reduce injury and prevent fire deaths.

People always seem to get excited when their state or community gets "Federal funding". But where exactly does that Federal funding come from? Well it comes from the income taxes paid by working Americans. In other words at least a significant chunk of it comes from Indiana.

We are supposed to be grateful for getting money back that the Federal government took from us so we can buy a very common household item. If you were going to the store to buy a $10 smoke detector and someone robbed you of $30 but then gave you $10 back so you could buy the smoke detector you were planning on buying anyway, would you be grateful for that?

What is really irritating is that the half million being sent back did not start as a half-million. It probably started as a million or two. Then it sloshed around D.C. for a while, some overpaid bureuacrats did some studies that showed people in Indiana died in house fires, they did some conference calls and meetings with Powerpoint, someone in Indiana probably applied for a grant which took untold hours of paperwork explaining that people in Indiana die in house fires, that paperwork went through a different committee and finally it was approved to send back half a million dollars to buy smoke detectors which you can buy at most retail stores or at Amazon for less than ten bucks.

Federal funds don't come from a magic pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. They come from the states and then when our overlords deem it appropriate we are allowed to have some of those funds back, provided we jump through the hoops the Feds require. I can't overemphasize this point:

"Federal funds" is just a euphemism for giving us our own money back.

A smoke detector from Amazon costs less than $10 but let's round that up to $10 because math is hard. The goal is to install 10,000 regular smoke detectors and 1,000 "shaking bed"/strobe alarms for the deaf and hearing impaired. 10,000 regular smoke detectors cost about $100,000. A strobe smoke detector is around $65-80 so let's go with $80. That is another $80,000 for a total of $180,000 which leaves $341,000. So where does the other $341 grand go? It goes to administer the program and pay for installation. In other words only around 35% of the funds are even used for smoke detectors, the rest is administrative. That is quite an efficient program!

Maybe, and I am just spitballing here, maybe we could leave more money in Indiana and Idaho and Georgia and let the people of Indiana, Idaho and Georgia decide how best to spend those funds instead of sending the funds to D.C. where some bureaucrat gets to decide. We have smoke detectors in our house and didn't even have to get free money from the government. We just allocated some of our cash to purchase a simple, widely available and inexpensive lifesaving device.

Everyday people across America make purchasing decisions without asking the government to draw up a shopping list. I think we can be trusted to buy our own smoke detectors too.

Saturday, December 15, 2018

The Media IS The Enemy Of The People

The American media lies. Not occasionally or some of the time. All of the time. I am not saying everything they report is a lie but their mission is mostly to lie to us. They lie by omission, they lie by emphasizing some stories instead of others, they lie by quoting anonymous "sources" that later turn out to be completely bogus. They lie for political reasons and they almost all share the same left-wing elitist political philosophy. There are obviously independent voices still out there but increasingly they are found outside of the media and are often targeted for harassment and censorship by the media's allies in technology.

The cable news isn't even news anymore. No one under the age of 60 turns on the cable news to see what it is happening, we get the news in real time. Thirty seconds on my computer and phone tells me if anything significant is happening in the world. Cable news, CNN and MSNBC and yes even Fox, exist to provide opinion and commentary on the news, and in the case of the two former, to talk incessantly about Trump 24 hours a day. The top rated shows are all opinion shows. On Fox people tune in to watch Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and while they do cover the news, people are watching because they want to hear their spin on the news.

Because we live in an era of real time news, people don't read articles much anymore. They mostly just read the headlines and this is a great way to manipulate the news. Yesterday provided an informative and infuriating example. The basic story is this: a 7 year old girl named Jakelin Caal Maquin, accompanied by her father (which may or may not be true), died after an illegal border crossing and being picked up by the Border Patrol. I first saw it on Facebook in a news story on my timeline from the Detroit News.

The obvious question for me was: Why would the Detroit News be reporting the death of a 7 year old in New Mexico? It is very sad but kids die all the time. I am sure at least one 7 year old probably died Thursday in Michigan or a bordering state but that doesn't make the news. This girl's death does because this death can be used to push a narrative, especially since most people only see the headline. The narrative here:


Again, based on the comments I saw from a lot of people on Facebook, all that they read was the headline, at which point they immediately leaped to accusing Trump of causing her death. Of course when you dig into the story you see that she died of dehydration and shock. You also read this:

"In a statement, Customs and Border Protection said the girl had not eaten or consumed water in several days."

So she was in border patrol custody for 8 hours but died of dehydration. That didn't happen in 8 hours, and besides it seems that she was provided food and water by the Border Patrol. Her father apparently killed her by dragging her across a desert in a bid to illegally enter the United States. That sounds harsh but it is the truth. The border patrol is already swamped by people trying to enter illegally but now apparently we need to provide full medical services, at tax payer expense, and even that didn't save this girl. Perhaps we should provide way-stations that provide food and water along the way through Mexico so those seeking to enter the U.S. illegally are refreshed when they arrive at our border?

Also worth considering. If her father was an American citizen and took his 7 year old on a thousand mile hike without adequate food and water, and she subsequently died of dehydration, the media would be (rightly) calling for his head for child abuse and murder. But instead her death is being used as a political prop. Disgusting.

Other media outlets jumped on this story.

The replies were what you would expect from people that hadn't read the actual story, with a handful of people pointing out that she hadn't eaten or drank anything for days and that her father was actually to blame for her death. Later in the day, the Washington Post (Democracy Dies In Darkness!) doubled down with this:

Why would the White House take responsibility for the death of a little girl that died from dehydration as the result of days of being without food and water before she even got to the U.S. border? If anyone dies anywhere in the world, is the Trump administration culpable? It is sort of the equivalent of the old gotcha question "When did you stop beating your wife?".

Re-imagine the story with some changes to the circumstances. A 7 year old boy in Chicago is caught in the crossfire of a gun battle between two rival gangs and suffers a serious gunshot wound. He is taken to the hospital where medical care is provided. Sadly he succumbs to the wounds that he suffered before he arrived at the hospital. Would any sensible person try to pin blame for the death of the 7 year old on the hospital administration? Of course not. Unless of course Trump was the hospital administrator.

Then the crocodile tears come out. This one was at the top of the landing page at Fake News HQ, aka CNN, this morning: A refugee child's death, a heartbreaking echo at Christmas penned by the repugnant Paul Begala. You probably don't even need to read it to know where this is going. Begala even points out the pertinent facts: she hadn't had food or water in days, she was given food and water when taken into custody and was airlifted to El Paso (at tax payer expense) to try to save her life but she died anyway as a result of shock and dehydration. That doesn't dissuade Begala from immediately making a ridiculous connection between this girl and her father, almost certainly an economic migrant, and, you guessed it, Jesus and Mary and Joseph.

Those of us who believe in the divinity of Christ - and the majority of Christians voted for Donald Trump--have a special duty. We need to connect the pain of that panicked Judean family 20 centuries ago to the pain of this panicked Guatemalan family today.

Joseph and Mary did not wait in line for visas during the flight to Egypt.

They did not concern themselves with the niceties and complexities of immigration law. They were refugees, seeking safety from harm.

Notice the random insertion of the line about the majority of Christians voting for Trump.

Begala makes a big deal of touting his Catholic credentials in this ridiculous essay but he is a Catholic-of-convenience. When he can rewrite and pervert the flight of Jesus, Mary and Joseph to Egypt in an era without border laws and while remaining within the bounds of the Roman empire, he is Captain Catholic. When he is helping to elect Democrats that have made infanticide an unholy sacrament, well his Catholicism gets set aside.

A little girl is dead and that is awful. I can't imagine the anguish of her parents. But she is not dead because of Donald Trump or Republicans. She is dead because her father chose to bring her along on what everyone knows is a very arduous and dangerous trek across Mexico with insufficient food and water and as a result she died from neglect. He was more than likely seeking better economic prospects in America, which I understand, but the way he chose to seek them has left his little girl dead. America must secure the border and remove the incentives that lure people into making a foolish, immoral and dangerous journey to illegally enter the United States. Build the wall, tax remittances back to foreign nations to pay for it and jail those Americans who exploit illegal labor. Do that and the problem will quickly take care of itself and people in South and Central America can be encouraged to make their own nations livable instead of literally dying to go somewhere else.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Alex Jones. Gavin McInnes. James Fields. The Message Is Clear.

You probably know who Alex Jones is. He is best known for slightly unhinged rants on Youtube about chemicals turning frogs gay and other stuff but he also shed light on topics that the powers that be prefer not be exposed to light. He was perhaps the highest profile person on the right to be deplatformed on social media. He was easy, a trial balloon to soften up resistance, because so many establishment "conservative" members of Conservatism Inc. wouldn't speak up for fear of losing their precious "respectability". If you are a respectable conservative you get to keep your social media access, you get invited onto TV shows and you get to keep selling your books. If you become slightly less than properly respectable, well you go away and get tossed from the gravy train. So establishment "conservatives" kept quiet or even praised his deplatforming. Alex is still ranting away at Bitchute however, which is a big reason why Bitchute is in the crosshairs of the Left.

You might not know who Gavin McInnes is. He is kind of a clownish provocateur and the founder of a group with the rather silly name "Proud Boys". Earlier in the year he was booted from Twitter and then it all started to snowball. Some of the members of his group got into a fight with some anitfa and kicked the crap out of them. The antifa attack people for political reasons all the time and usually get away with it but when the Proud Boys slapped around some antifa, the wheels came off. The news media, which never misreports the news for partisan reasons, said that the FBI had classified the Proud Boys as a "white nationalist" group, although they were nothing of the sort. Gavin stepped down from the Proud Boys, allegedly to help some of the members of his group that had been arrested after the fight. As a side note, it was easy to identify the Proud Boys as they were not wearing masks but the police regularly allow antifa to show up and commit mayhem while wearing masks. Shortly after stepping down, it came out that the FBI had not after all labeled the entire Proud Boys organization as "white nationalists". Oops! The original erroneous report got widespread, coordinated coverage, the retraction not so much. Shocker. Then Blaze, the media arm of lunatic controlled opposition figure Glenn Beck, "merged" with CRTV where Gavin had his show and within short order fired Gavin (other figures like Michelle Malkin wisely quit CRTV rather than fall under the control of Beck). Then Youtube banned Gavin from his channel which had over 200,000 subscribers and with that Gavin was deplatformed and memory holed. Gavin was a clown who did some kind of gross stunts and also went out of his way to distance himself from the alt-right but that doesn't stop the Left from calling him names. A search of his name on DuckDuckGo brings up a number of results with blurbs referring to him as an "alt-right commentator", several instances of "far right" and one predictably over the top description from the Huffington Post as "the founder of the violent neo-fascist gang the Proud Boys". Gavin learned too late that once you get targeted, no amount of oblation will save you.

Then came this tweet from Prager U., the Youtube channel of Dennis Prager:

Prager has been in the crosshairs for some time for his naughty speak criticizing socialism and other protected political positions. This sort of warning shot from Google is the lead up to shutting this platform down. That will be quite an escalation when it happens as Prager has almost 2 million subscribers and has over half a billion views. I assume both those numbers have been tinkered with as well so the real numbers are probably much higher. I would expect to see Prager get the Alex Jones treatment as soon as Youtube thinks it can get away with it. The thing is, Prager is pretty mild stuff, very entry level from a conservative standpoint but that doesn't matter. Heck even pewdiepie is being targeted and he has the most subscribers of any channel on Youtube.

All of that stuff is just the lead up to the 2020 election. The Left learned a harsh but valuable lesson: they cannot allow the free exchange of ideas if they want to game the election process. That is where the "Russian collusion" nonsense comes from and the "fake news" rhetoric which was quickly turned around and used against them, something that makes them even more furious because it mocks them and that is the worst thing you can do to a self-righteous (but I repeat myself) Leftist. It is also the source of the obvious coordination between the media groups to keep presenting the same narrative over and over, while at the same time the social media giants collude with the media to shut down opposing points of view. There were lots of election shenanigans going on that flipped Republican wins to Democrat wins, and that is also a precursor of what is going to happen in 2020. Silencing and shutting down anyone that might speak up about it is key to making sure that the Democrats retain the House and defeat Trump. Remember Stalin saying that who counts the votes being the only important one also requires that no one tattles on the vote counters. In a free and fair election, I think Trump wins. I expect 2020 to be anything but a free and fair election.

That brings us to James Fields. You can be forgiven for not knowing his name but I have been watching this fairly closely. James Fields is the young man who crashed his car at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville last August. The crash resulted in the death of a young woman, Heather Heyer, and caused a cascade of events. James Fields is from Maumee, Ohio which is the town next to the one I grew up in. My first job was in Maumee and we used to go there all the time because it had the closest stores and restaurants. I have been keeping an eye on this case and it finally went to trial recently. Mr. Fields was found guilty on all charges including the big one, first-degree murder. I am not a lawyer and don't pretend to be one but first-degree murder requires intent and premeditation. To prove this charge the prosecution had to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, not that the car crash resulted in the death of Ms. Heyer which is not in dispute but that Mr. Fields intended to do so. Watching the case from afar it seemed like there were a lot of questions that could and should have been raised and hammered hard by the court appointed defender but were not. Again, I didn't watch the trial in person but it certainly smacked of a pre-ordained outcome. Did he intend to drive his car into the crowd with the intent to commit murder? I don't know but I have serious doubts.

James Fields is a pretty effective bad guy, an easy guy to dislike, almost a cartoonish figure out of central casting. He looks and acted like kind of a loner, the sort of lonely, angry and aimless young men that are frustrated but don't know how to constructively deal with it. He has a dorky version of the "fashy haircut" favored by some alt-right figures. He seemed to have some sort of fascination with Hitler (although having a similar fascination with other mass murderers like Che, Mao or Stalin doesn't carry the same baggage). He just looks like a prototypical basement dweller. He now faces life in prison although I assume there will be multiple appeals which, again not a lawyer, it would seem he has a decent chance of winning, at least on the first degree murder charge. But this is far from over and that is why I am linking him with Alex Jones and Gavin McInnes even though neither of them are "white supremacists" or "white nationalists".

Vice ran a story just yesterday lamenting how difficult it would be to prove "hate crime" charges against James Fields, Why it will be hard to convict neo-Nazi James Alex Fields of hate crimes. Of course Vice is not a serious news or opinion journal (ironically Gavin was one of the founders of Vice although now the website just lists the other two co-founders, as if he never existed) but they are talking about the very issue I am driving at. According to the article, there is a meeting at the end of next month to discuss the charging of Fields with 29 Federal hate crimes, which apparently could carry the death penalty. There will be a lot of pressure to proceed with the hate crimes charges, even though he already faces a pretty certain sentence of life in prison. The reason is not to put him to death, it is to send a message:

Dual prosecutions are less unusual in cases of national significance though. For example, Dylann Roof — the self-avowed white supremacist who opened fire on a church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015 and killed nine black parishioners — faced both state murder charges and federal hate crime charges.

But even the symbolic value of hate crimes charges can matter.

“I have argued in some of my writings that symbolism is very important. But it can’t just be symbolism because it has to be vigorously enforced,” Chavis said. “You want to deter someone from perpetrating crimes against people because of their membership in a protected class.”

Hate crimes laws are mostly about symbolism, as well as an opportunity to retry or try with more serious charges individuals when they draw sufficient attention. This goes back to the "civil rights" trial of the officers in the Rodney King incident, where police officers were acquitted by a jury of their peers so the Feds came in to charge them with civil rights violations for the same crime, which is a way to sidestep double-jeopardy and give the government another shot at convicting someone. This message from the first Fields trial and almost certain subsequent hate crimes trial will be to discourage people from showing up at any rally that can be labeled "far right", which causes a chilling effect on political speech. Why would you go to a political rally when you know that violent leftists will certainly show up and the cops, as they did in Charlottesville, will stand aside and let them attack you and that if you fight back and hurt someone you could find yourself facing not just local charges but also Federal hate crimes charges? It just isn't worth it, until things become so intolerable that it does and at that point all bets are off. There is a breaking point where the risk of being arrested won't be enough to stop people and that will result in something bad.

Again, since I run the risk of being accused of being sympathetic to Fields and his beliefs: he was clearly a disturbed and angry young man and he should go to jail for running into a crowd of people, whether he intended to harm anyone or not. A car is a dangerous piece of equipment and you are responsible for using it responsibly. I don't support his specific views, presuming he is an actual "Neo-Nazi" or "white supremacist". But I also see the state jumping on him with both feet while antifa commit violent acts and largely get away with it. The message is clear. Stay away from public gathering because if you show up and something happens, you are going to get the full force of the government coming after you. The vast majority of people along the political Right spectrum have jobs and homes and families, and being too public about your politics runs some real risks so it is just easier to stay home and get angry in private. If you don't think that is a very dangerous situation, you don't understand human nature.

Many conservatives and sundry people on the Right try to steer clear of this controversy. The Left picked Alex Jones and Gavin McInnes for a reason, they are on the fringes and "respectable", lovable losers, "muh principles!" conservatives are not going to defend them on free speech grounds for fear of getting lumped in with them. Even a whiff of controversy can jeopardize your social media accounts, book deals and talk show appearance gravy train and let's be honest, for many of these "conservatives" that is what this whole thing is about. Nobody in their right mind other than a handful of people, mostly on the alt-right, are openly questioning whether the James Fields conviction was a just verdict or not.

This is the strategy I liken to conservatives angling to be on the last train to the gulag. But there is a fundamental flaw in that strategy:

A strategy of being on the last train to the gulag still ends up at the gulag.

There is no place anywhere on the Right where you can stand and be safe. Today it is Alex Jones and James Fields, conspiracy theories and Nazi fetishism turned violent. Tomorrow it will be something else. Your church teaches that homosexuality is sinful and worse you teach that to your children, contra the school system? Hate crime and possibly child abuse. You reject the "scientific consensus" on global warming climate change? Hate crime. You question the wisdom of flooding the country with tens of millions of low skill, low education migrants that don't speak English, refuse to assimilate and send their earnings back home? Hate crime, bigotry and xenophobia. You hold to the quaint ThoughtCrime that children are born either male or female and the gender you are born with is the gender you will die with, mutilation notwithstanding? Hate crime.

Do you think I am exaggerating? A kid in a New York college hung up posters, on the same places countless other people hang up posters that no doubt praise Communism or promote really crappy bands. These posters feature a picture of Hitler and say "Don't be stupid, be a smarty! Come and join the Nazi party!", a direct reference to a line from The Producers sung by Mel Brooks (who happens to be Jewish). His stupid stunt drew the attention of the governor of New York, the reprehensible Andrew Cuomo, and now this kid is facing felony "hate crime" charges. Read that again. He put up posters, that is it, and he is being charged with a felony. Taken in isolation this is just prosecutorial overreach but looking at the bigger picture this is part of a pattern of speech suppression. Again, today it is a kid putting up posters of Hitler being charged with a hate crime but if that stands (and I don't think it will at this stage), then it is only a short hop to you saying homosexuality is a sin also being a hate crime.

"But muh First Amendment will protect me!"

Think again. The First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution is only as good as the court hearing the case. The Left recognizes that the greatest impediment to implementing their plans fully is the legal structure of the United States and is already attacking the validity of the Constitution as outdated, written by old white men, not sufficient for a modern state, etc. Right now any Federal judge anywhere can undo a law for no reason other than not liking it. The puppet-masters of the Left aren't as dumb as their followers and street thugs, they know the way to undermine the Constitution is not by outright amending it but just chipping away at it until it becomes a meaningless historical footnote. Heads up to those that think we will somehow get back to being a Constitutional Republic. It is never going to happen and that is due in large part to the betrayal of our elected "leaders".

The next two years leading up to the 2020 elections are going to be a time of unprecedented political turmoil. The mainstream media, social media and tech giants and the "entertainment" world are going to be in open opposition to the President and even if he survives to the election, it will be unimaginably difficult for him to get a fair hearing in the public square. Expect to see more voices banned, more avenues of expression closed, more aspects of the financial system off-limits and even more open use of the power of the government to suppress speech via arrests of dissident voices. Trump became President thanks to winning very small margins in a few states and with four years of additional demographic change and open warfare from the media, it will be very difficult for him to be re-elected. If Trump loses re-election in 2020, expect to see an orgy of retaliation and vengeance from the Left.

We are entering the end stage of the American experiment and the state enforced suppression of dissent is a critical component of finishing the progressive jihad.

First they came for the gay frog conspiracy theorists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a gay frog conspiracy theorist.

Then they came for the neo-Nazis, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a neo-Nazi.

Then they came for the paleoconservatives, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a paleoconservative.

Then they came for the evangelical homseschoolers, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not an evangelical homeschooler.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Thursday, December 13, 2018

They Don't See Genuine Sorrow, They See Weakness To Be Exploited

The entire culture war, which was functionally lost decades ago, has been marked by the Left taking a long view, working on big strategic moves, while "conservatism", riddled as it is with controlled opposition and grifters that are only concerned with maintaining their own income, has been putting out one brush fires at a time while a dozen new ones spring up. The result is that much of middle America, which if we are being honest is mostly synonymous with white middle and working class America, suddenly finds itself in a nation that has been transformed right under their noses while they were distracted with saving for the kid's college, school activities, sports and the latest baubles peddled by global corporations that are cheer-leading their replacement. Most conservatives thought listening to Rush and showing up to vote in November would be enough to preserve their country but they never seemed to grasp that their opposition was more zealously invested in their religious jihad than they could imagine. To the Left this jihad was not a once-a-year exercise in voting, it was and is an all-consuming religious that occupied their every waking moment.

A major component of this has been "The long march through the institutions". This is a strategy inspired by Antonio Gramsci and championed by Rudi Dutschke. Herbert Marcuse wrote:

To extend the base of the student movement, Rudi Dutschke has proposed the strategy of the long march through the institutions: working against the established institutions while working within them, but not simply by 'boring from within', rather by 'doing the job', learning (how to program and read computers, how to teach at all levels of education, how to use the mass media, how to organize production, how to recognize and eschew planned obsolescence, how to design, et cetera), and at the same time preserving one's own consciousness in working with others.

Marcuse wrote this around the same time I was born and the strategy marks a shift away from simply hippies protesting to one of active infiltration and co-opting. Look at what he identified: "all levels of education" and "mass media". Where are the weaponized noxious ideologies of the Left being cooked up and spread? On college campuses and in the media. It is not hyperbole to say that the "education" system at every level, the mass media and the entertainment world are completely controlled by Leftist partisans. Look at the hostility toward private schools and homeschooling or mildly conservative entertainers or the vitirol spewed at Fox News. These are examples of lonely parts of the institutions that are not (completely yet) under the control of the Left. But one major cultural institution stands out as having been, mostly, immune from the long march: the evangelical church. That is very changing very rapidly.

From the mass exodus of former Reformed black theologians like Thabiti Anybwile and Anthony Bradley away from traditional evangelical/Reformed thinking and into the "woke" racialist religious movement to the sudden shift of groups like the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, headed by Russell Moore, and The Gospel Coalition toward echoing much the "social justice" rhetoric, at the elite levels of evangelicalism the focus is shifting away from evangelism and preserving orthodoxy towards the murky world of "social justice". What is startling to me is not that this is happening, but just how quickly it is happening. In the last 18 months things have accelerated at breakneck speed. As an example, once stalwart defender of orthodoxy Albert Mohler, president of Southern Seminary, released a report that shockingly reveals that Southerners used to own slaves! The article linked starts out with this statement in bold print:

The document, commissioned by President R. Albert Mohler Jr., laments ‘a sinful absence of historical curiosity’

A lack of "historical curiosity" is now a sin? I wonder how one would glean that from the New Testament? Anyway, the report (I have not read nor do I plan on spending the time to do so) looks back at what I assumed was common knowledge, that the flagship seminary founded in the Southern Baptist Convention, itself formed by many slave-owners, would also include slave owners in it's founding. That was not shocking or scandalous to me, as slavery has been illegal in the U.S. for a century and a half and as such has nothing to do with the quality of a seminary or the level of faithfulness of said seminary. Is Southern or any teacher there or Al Mohler somehow tainted by the century old history of SBTS? Of course not. Should he on behalf of SBTS apologize to people that were never slaves on behalf of people that never owned slaves? Of course not. Mohler writes:

“We must repent of our own sins; we cannot repent for the dead. We must, however, offer full lament for a legacy we inherit, and a story that is now ours.”

What exactly is he lamenting? That the people that came before him 150 years ago owned slaves, as did people all across the American South and it is worth pointing out as people did in cultures all around the world, including Africans? That 100 years ago many Southern Christians supported segregation? How is that at all relevant to the Southern Seminary of today or the last 50 years? It isn't. The mission of Southern Seminary is:

Under the Lordship of Jesus Christ, the mission of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is to be totally committed to the Bible as the Word of God, to the Great Commission as our mandate, and to be a servant of the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention by training, educating, and preparing ministers of the gospel for more faithful service.

So why get caught up in a fresh round of guilt-by-association? How is that serving the church or spreading the gospel? It isn't. It also gave the greenlight to the new generation of hucksters in the mold of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to roll out their favorite demand: reparations.

Nothing says "Sorry!" quite like giving away money! The racial grievance industrial-complex loves it when you make their job of fleecing the naive and gullible easier!

The racialist SJW Left, the hucksters and swindlers cashing in on the misery of their own people and the gullible misplaced guilt of whites, don't see acknowledgement of widely known historical facts as repentance or genuine sorrow or "an institution-wide 'honest lament' for the sins of its forebears". They see it as weakness. The respond to it like sharks to blood in the water. This was a great analogy made on Twitter:

Of course this is just a ploy, an opening gambit in negotiations ("a good first step"). A common negotiating tactic is to stake out an obviously unreasonable position and then negotiate back to what you really want. What I assume they really want are a ton of "scholarships" for "people of color", in other words not white students; endowed chairs in racial grievance studies or some other nonsense that shockingly they themselves will fill; and of course faculty and staff positions in "diversity", the less actual teaching they do the better. Look at the malarkey being demanded here. Student loan debt cancellation for black students that attended SBTS? So Southern Baptists are supposed to divert money that could go toward evangelism and mission work to pay for people that have no tangible connection to slavery to have a free ride at SBTS based on nothing other than their race?

The goal also seems to be to attract the sort of "woke Christians" that would accept a free ride based on past injustices. The people pulling the strings here don't really care about reparations or having the church be more faithful. They simply see evangelicalism as a bastion of resistance to their religious jihad and as such are bent on crushing it. Why do people still claim that the only way to save Christian denominations is to embrace women as pastors and normalize homosexuality when that has actual destroyed every "mainline" denomination where it was tried? Because the goal is eliminate resistance. The evangelical church is an outlier, the one institution that has not fallen under the complete control of the Left. It must be destroyed and based on what I am seeing it is well on the way. Some of the responses from Southern students are disheartening, to say the least. The past generations of graduates from Southern seemed like solid, orthodox ministers. The future generations look to be a much lesser breed of men.

Evangelicalism is full of men, men that I used to read faithfully all the time, who are cloistered eggheads, reading obscure works of theology in their offices, surrounded by books, and occasionally coming forth to deliver a sermon or visit someone in the hospital. They are completely disengaged from the real world. Many of them are just as disengaged from their own churches. How close are these celebrity pastor-theologians to the average member of their church? They want to read their books and write their books and give the same talk over and over at big conferences but when they are confronted with accusations of racism or sexism, they are largely at a loss. How much time and money was expended by Southern Seminary over the course of a year to produce a report that details what anyone with access to Google and Wikipedia could have figured out in twenty minutes of research? Southern Baptists used to own slaves? What a shocking revelation!

The lesson here for anyone paying attention is that trying to placate people that hate you is only going to encourage them.

Sunday, December 9, 2018

More Twitter Hypocrisy

Last month I mentioned I had been suspended from Twitter for using the hate-speech word "bimbo". As an experiment I reported a racialist bigot, "Bishop" Talbert Swan who called white women that voted for Republicans "pure trash". The tweet remained up and I checked again today and sure enough it is still there. Then came news that the newest Heisman Trophy winner, Kyler Murphy of the Oklahoma Sooners, had used "homophobic" language on Twitter. When he was 15. When I was 15, almost every guy called other guys queers or faggots on a regular basis because we weren't a bunch of snowflakes that were raised on political correctness and we also recognized in our own primitive way that homosexual behavior is inherently disordered and gross. Calling another guy a queer was an insult because being queer is a bad thing. Still is, even if we aren't allowed to say it. Good thing we didn't have twitter back in the 80's, none of us would be able to get a job now. So the homo-mafia gets another scalp and increases the reign of terror where a tiny group of effeminate homosexuals and angry lesbians controls what anyone is allowed to say.

Meanwhile, on Twitter. Arch-leftist "comedienne" Sarah Silverman, who was last seen being funny in Greg The Bunny (one of the most underappreciated TV shows ever), posted back in 2010, the year she turned 40, the following tweet (I took the screenshot myself from this tweet) :

So for fun I reported her tweet as it pretty clearly seemed to violate all sorts of twitter rules and just a few hours later Twitter reviewed my report....and did nothing. She wasn't a 15 year old kid, she was a middle-aged adult. The tweet is still up. Her account is not suspended.

Again if you are keeping track at home:

- A right-wing white guy without a blue checkmark calls a liberal blue checkmark woman a bimbo and gets suspended and has to delete his tweet to get access back.

- A left-wing woman with a blue checkmark refers to someone on a TV show as a faggot and Twitter doesn't do anything about it. Blue checkmark intact, twitter account still fine, still tweeting away.

It would seem that using "homophobic" or "racist" or "misogynistic" language isn't really the issue after all, it is just an excuse to censor people on the right and create a chilling effect on free speech.

I assume that doesn't surprise anyone that has been paying any attention.

The Riots In Paris: Coming Soon To An America City Near You!

Saturday there were mass demonstrations in France yet again as a whole host of resentments continues to cause the people of France to boil over in anger. Widely reported by the U.S. mainstream "media" as protests against a new gas tax, the reality on the ground is much different. This quote from a BBC report, France fuel protests: Tear gas fired in clashes in Paris, struck me as especially important:

The numbers were small, just a few thousand. But across the country the cause is extremely popular. They say - quite proudly - that they are the "sans-dents", the great unwashed, the forgotten majority from the sticks. And they've had enough.

The unwashed is a term I have used in jest to describe how our overlords view the mass of the American people, those who sneer at regular Americans in Oklahoma and Alabama that shop at Wal-Mart and watch football on Sunday instead of the political talk shows. But the language also sounds a little like another term used recently in politics: deplorables. Here is the actual quote from Hillary Clinton:

"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of those folks, they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.

It was a typically arrogant, ugly comment from a woman who is herself grossly arrogant and ugly as a person can be. Even at the time many liberals were worried about her comment backfiring. NPR's Domenico Montanaro writing in September of 2016 said this:

Clinton's remarks, like Obama's in 2008, smacked of liberal elitism — liberals talking to liberals about a group of people they don't really know or hang out with, but feel free to opine about when talking to each other.

Exactly. Trump tweeted out about it right afterward saying: Wow, Hillary Clinton was SO INSULTING to my supporters, millions of amazing, hard working people. I think it will cost her at the Polls!

Most people probably laughed that off at the time, assuming Hillary would win in a landslide but I think her comment likely helped cost her the election. The states that cost her the election, Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, are full of regular people that people like Hillary Clinton despise and they knew it. Obama made a similar comment with his "bitter clingers" comment but it didn't hurt him as badly. When Hillary rolled around and started in on the same theme, it woke people up. Many people voted for Trump because they genuinely were enthusiastic about him but many more voted for him to give the middle finger to people like Hillary Clinton that live lives of opulent luxury off the backs of the same people she called deplorables. The rest is history as the white working and middle class embraced the name deplorable, made it a badge of honor and sent Hillary Clinton into the trash-heap of history along with other Presidential losers.

I see some of the same language in the Paris protests. People are just trying to live their lives but dealing with the endless interference from an arrogant ruling class, raising taxes, importing migrants by the millions, all while telling the unwashed "sans-dents" that it is for their own good. They finally get fed up and all of the anger and resentment they have been bottling up for years breaks free. What happens when that occurs here in the United States?

France is a largely disarmed nation of 67 million people. America is a nation of over 330 million people and much of that population is heavily armed. Not just with hunting rifles or shotguns but semi-automatic rifles with 30 round magazines and handguns. Tens of millions of them. Gun control is such a hot button issue for the Left not because of gun crime, which is overwhelmingly concentrated in minority communities, but because the same "deplorables" that they hate and don't understand also own a crap-ton of guns and ammo. For right now the American middle and working class is under the illusion that they still live in a Constitutional Republic and their votes still count but that illusion might be shattered soon. As elections that are won at the ballot box are overturned by elections officials and courts and potentially the lawfully elected President of the United States getting impeached by the crowd of dolts and bartenders newly elected as Democrats in the House, the notion that most Americans are free, self-governing people will disappear. Then what will happen?

There was an interesting juxtaposition in the media this week for me. The local news channel ran a story about a sheriff in Lake County, Indiana pushing to buy an armored vehicle for his local police department. The sheriff claims he needs it to "protect" the people:

Lake County Sheriff Oscar Martinez Jr. says the Bearcat would protect people during mass shootings, terrorist attacks and natural disasters. He says the sheriff's department and county communities "face a number of significant threats."

I am not sure what sort of "natural disaster" would require an armored vehicle to deal with, and there has never been a terrorist attack in Lake County that I am aware of. However the militarization of American police departments has been an ongoing issue. It was only a few years ago that the riots in Ferguson, Missouri were met with police dressed up in military garb and riding around in armored vehicles, pointing guns at protesters and rioters alike. While the "hands up, don't shoot" narrative was shown to be a lie, the police response was still deeply troubling and images like these filled the news.

Ferguson helped to start a national conversation about the militarized police. For example this post from generally pro-police Fox News, Tanks? Grenade launchers? Police stocking up on military's gear giveaway. From the article:

From California to Connecticut and several states in between, local police departments have been steadily arming themselves over the years with billions of dollars' worth of military-grade equipment -- including grenade launchers, helicopters and machine guns.

The materiel comes from a U.S. military program that, until this week, received little public attention. But after St. Louis police used heavy-duty equipment in putting down riots and protests following the shooting death of an unarmed teen, new questions have been raised about where this gear is coming from.

The flood of equipment being funneled from the Department of Defense to local police departments traces back to a program created in the 1990s. The excess property program, known as 1033, was initially created to help state and local authorities in the war against drugs, and help unused military equipment find a home -- as opposed to being needlessly destroyed.

Local police with armored vehicles, grenade launchers and other military gear. Cops ditching the standard blue uniform for military style garb. Not to fight "terrorism" or help people in a natural disaster but to threaten and cow the American people. Long gone are the days of Sheriff Andy in Mayberry. These armed vehicles are not "protecting the people", they are used to intimidate the people and to protect the oligarchy.

Fast forward to 2018 and the streets of Paris. You see something similar going on.

Not nearly as many guns are shown but then again the French people don't have many guns either but still lots of armored cars, militarized police (and actual military police), tear gas and water cannons. Weird that when the globalist regime of Macron uses tear gas against French people in France, no one seems to care but when Hondurans rush the U.S. border and try to enter illegally while throwing rocks, the use of tear gas is considered on par with a violation of the chemical weapons treaty violation.

Back to my original point. I think we are much closer to mass unrest than most people realize. What will happen when a heavily armed civilian population runs into a militarized police force? I don't think we want to find out but that time is probably coming. We are running headlong toward a conflict. There are few if any voices of moderation and reason on the left and using inflammatory and violent rhetoric is now not only excused but encouraged. A sitting Congressman, Eric Swalwell, openly suggested that resistance to the government is futile because after all any conflict would be short as the government has all the nuclear weapons. Yes, a member of Congress seemed perfectly OK with nuclear strikes on Americans that fail to get on board with gun confiscation. Not to be outdone, soon to be Congress-Chick Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, fresh off six years of serving drinks and flirting with men for tips, threatened the son of the President with a subpoena because she was mad that he was trolling her with socialism memes. She might be the first person to be investigated for an ethics violation before she is even sworn in. The incoming Democrats are a clown car of Muslim women that married their brothers to swindle the immigration system to dimwit bimbos like Ocasio-Corttez but they are uniformly unhinged and about to take power. I almost pity decrepit old Nancy Pelosi who will try to keep herding these cats until the 2020 election so she can be speaker for more than two years.

As people on the right continue to get deplatformed, the rhetoric is also getting more ominous. Not just from the "alt-right" but even at mainstream publications like Townhall where Kurt Schlichter wonders How Much Blood Would Leftists Be Willing To Shed To Disarm Patriotic Americans? Collaborator publications like The Weekly Standard are shutting down, leaving America's Marshal Pétain, Bill Kristol, with only Twitter to vent his rage against the peasantry. Even the grand-daddy of all controlled opposition publications, National Review, is starting to have some second thoughts about all of this. Waving a copy of the Constitution around and shouting about "muh principles!" while your country disintegrates is no longer terribly appealing. Beltway "conservatism" has long been acting as a buffer between the majority of the population and actual radicalism. Listening to Rush Limbaugh and watching Fox News gave frustrated Americans a way to channel their outrage without actually doing anything to stop it. It just isn't enough anymore. Listening to Limbaugh used to seem subversive when there were no other outlets but now his shtick is just tired and outdated. People are tearing down the barriers erected by the Respectable-Right to keep them penned up and away from any significant action.

Watch carefully what is happening in Paris. The backlash from the unwashed and the deplorables and whatever other names they go by is just getting warmed up.

Wednesday, December 5, 2018

Why Are We Sending Foreign Aid To Other Nations? Especially Wealthy Nations?

The United States is a debtor nation, and making matters worse much of our government and our economy depends on debt based spending. Our current total national debt is well over $20 trillion dollars and when you add in the looming insolvency of Social Security, Medicare and many state pension plans, we are in very dangerous fiscal shape. Every year we spend close to a trillion dollars more than we bring in and I suspect the real number is probably higher. We are a nation that is looking more and more like the person strung out on credit card debt that ignores the phone calls and warning letters from debt collectors, using cash advances from one credit card to pay the minimum due for another credit card. Of course one big difference is that in the case of the U.S. our currency is the lifeblood of international commerce and we have thousands of nuclear weapons.

In light of our own bleak, debt-based fiscal mess, why would the U.S. be sending foreign aid to other nations? Or for that matter paying a wildly disproportionate amount of the budget of the UN?

News came out recently that the U.S. is cutting aid to the Palstinians by $200 billion. Then shortly afterward the news was that we were reducing our aid by $300 million to some random UN refugee agency.

The Trump administration announced Friday that it is cutting nearly $300 million in planned funding for a United Nations agency that aids Palestinian refugees after finding the operation “irredeemably flawed.”

The State Department said in a statement that after contributing $60 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East in January, “the United States was no longer willing to shoulder the very disproportionate share."

The U.S. gives some $364 million each year to the agency which provides health care, loans and other social services to Palestinian refugees in in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. The U.S., which supplies nearly 30 percent of the total budget, is the largest contributor to the organization.

Neocons cheered because the Palestinians are the enemy of Israel, "God's chosen people™". The people who live in the various Palestinian territories and zones are generally speaking pretty poor, thanks to a combination of the incompetence and greed of their own leaders and the policies of the state of Israel. Then news came out that the U.S. was "suspending" $300 million in military aid to Pakistan. That is starting to add up, just think of how many miles of wall we could build with that!

"Conservatives" love to denounce foreign aid, just not 100% of the time. Just recently there was some news, although it is kind of hard to find, that the U.S. Senate approved a new bill, Senate Bill 2497, sponsored by Senator Marco Rubio, called the "United States-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act of 2018". It can be kind of hard to dig out the actual amounts involved but there are little things like amending the agreement to provide money to Israel by "(A) by striking “equal to—” and inserting “not less than $3,300,000,000.”;" which in essence means that $3.3 billion annually is the absolute minimum we can send to Israel. According to USAID, Israel has pretty consistently received between $2.4 and $3.7 billion in aid from the U.S. since at least 2001, even though Israel is considered a "high income" nation, in the top of four possible categories. Just for some perspective, there are around 9 million people in Israel so $3.8 billion works out to around $400 for every man, woman and child in Israel paid for by the citizens of the United States to the tune of around $11 from every citizen of the U.S. Or another way of looking at it is that this amounts to around $23,000 per Jewish family in Israel. $23,000 per family being sent to an already wealthy nation, paid for by current and future tax-payers in America.

But that begs the question. Why are we sending aid, and not a small amount of aid, to Israel, a nation that has a gross domestic product around $350 billion with a population of only around 9 million people which gives it a per capita GDP higher than France, Japan and the U.K.? Israel is a highly developed nation, with a strong economy and a powerful military that has nuclear weapons. We even have a permanent military base in Israel to serve as a "trip-wire" in case some other nation attacks Israel. How does it make sense for a nation $21 trillion in debt to send $3 billion to Israel, a sum which is less than 1% of their GDP?

We can cheer about cutting aid to Pakistan and the Palestinians, and I am all in favor of that. In fact I am strongly in favor of cutting all aid to every nation by 100%, including Israel. But not only do we not cut aid to Israel, we are actually increasing our aid. You will have to look pretty hard to find a "fiscal conservative" that would even suggest reducing our aid to Israel. Criticism of Israel is verboten among "conservatives". Any questioning of our support for Israel automatically gets one labeled an "anti-Semite". Of all of the sacred cows of American conservatism, none is so secure as unquestioning support for our Greatest Friend™ and Closest Ally™ Israel. Recently Senator Rand Paul has held up the bill formalizing the "aid" package to Israel, not because he is "anti-Israel" but because he objects rightly to foreign aid in general. Needless to say some people are very angry about it and the various Israeli lobbying groups are trying to get him to back down. I have it on good authority that ads are running on the radio in Kentucky attacking Paul for this.

There are a lot of reasons for this, some which border on conspiracy theories, but a lot of it has to do with confused eschatology among American evangelicals and the very powerful Israeli lobbying machine. Many Christians are saturated in stuff like this:

You might wonder what Malachi 3:10 has to do with U.S. foreign aid to Israel in 2018. Well it doesn't have anything to do with it but that doesn't matter because in the pop culture eschatology that dominates American generic evangelicalism, there is no distinction between the Old Covenant theocracy of Israel and the reconstituted secular Jewish ethnostate called Israel. Therefore foreign aid paid for by the tax-payers of America is the same thing as ancient Jews bringing their tithe to the storehouse. See how that works? If you are a Christian you can pay your "tithe" in a sense by voting to use the secular government of the United States to forcibly collect taxes/tithes and send them to Israel, even though virtually everyone in Israel vehemently rejects Jesus Christ. Social media is full of websites proclaiming Christian-Jewish solidarity while the reality is far different. However that is rarely challenged thanks to the dominance of dispensational theology and the fears of seeming anti-Semitic. This is what happens when your get your theology from the Left Behind series instead of the New Testament.  For more on the reasoning behind why American Christians are not theologically obligated to side in every dispute with the national of Israel, start with this post on my old blog: Repost: Israel, Gaza and the Gospel

The other reason that Israel, a highly developed nation with one of the finest and most technologically advanced armed forces in the world, receives enormous amounts of "aid" annually is the power of the Israeli lobbying army. It strains credulity to suggest otherwise. If you are running for office as a Republican, you better appear before AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. You had better talk the talk about Israel as our greatest ally and friend. It is not a coincidence that Marco Rubio, who has obvious Presidential aspirations, is the Senator sponsoring a bill to codify into law a bare minimum donation to Israel. AIPAC is widely considered to be one of the most powerful interest groups in America, and unlike the NRA or industry groups it represents the interests of a foreign government. The New Yorker ran a piece about AIPAC, Friends of Israel, and this quote is pretty powerful (emphasis mine):

AIPAC is prideful about its influence. Its promotional literature points out that a reception during its annual policy conference, in Washington, “will be attended by more members of Congress than almost any other event, except for a joint session of Congress or a State of the Union address.” A former AIPAC executive, Steven Rosen, was fond of telling people that he could take out a napkin at any Senate hangout and get signatures of support for one issue or another from scores of senators. AIPAC has more than a hundred thousand members, a network of seventeen regional offices, and a vast pool of donors. The lobby does not raise funds directly. Its members do, and the amount of money they channel to political candidates is difficult to track. But everybody in Congress recognizes its influence in elections, and the effect is evident. In 2011, when the Palestinians announced that they would petition the U.N. for statehood, AIPAC helped persuade four hundred and forty-six members of Congress to co-sponsor resolutions opposing the idea.

By any measure, the lobbying forces representing Israel's interest before the U.S. government are incredibly powerful especially when you consider what a small percentage of Americans are Jewish and the Jewish-Americans that we do have vote overwhelmingly Democrat. What is just as telling is that the Israel lobby is considered by most to be above reproach. The media and Congress can rail all day about the influence of Russia or Saudi Arabia but no one utters a peep about Israel. Two men, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, wrote a paper that became a book on the Israel Lobby and the response was borderline hysterical.

What makes criticism of Israel so fraught with peril is that any criticism of the state of Israel is automatically conflated with antisemitism. You can be critical of Russia without being accused of being anti-Russian, you can be critical of China without being accused of being anti-Asian. But any criticism of Israel is automatically met with accusations of being anti-semitic. Maybe I am uniquely flexible mentally but I can question the wisdom of giving of $3 billion a year in aid to a secular nation without also hating the people that make up that nation because of their ethnicity and religion.

The bottom line is that the United States, a debtor nation drowning in debt and soon to be dealing with a fiscal crisis in our programs for seniors, has no business giving money to any nation, and that includes Israel. Americans are under no obligation, geopolitically, theologically or historically, to continue to fund any nation and certainly not a prosperous, independent and stable nation like Israel. Yes, Israel is surrounded by enemies and yes some of that is the result of how Israel was created. The United States can and does guarantee Israel's security. If Iran, which is incapable of doing so, or some other nation were to attack Israel, America would respond with overwhelming force. I understand that in the grand scheme of the trillions of dollars U.S. "budget", a mere $3 billion isn't a big deal but a $21 trillion debt is made up of hundreds of thousands of little spending line items that by themselves are not all that big of a deal. Israel doesn't need our money and we can't afford to keep paying them $3 billion a year. Good for Rand Paul for standing up against the slings and arrows of the Israel lobby to seek an end to the practice of a nation drowning in debt giving money to other nations.