Category: Scratch a Lib-Find a Tyrant

Who In the US Is Objectively Racist? The Left. As the Data Show Definitively.

Joe Biden and the Democrats keep gunning for your guns. Research like this is a major part of their argument. What it shows–definitively–is that it isn’t guns. It’s a particular social pathology enabled by a social psychosis that reached epidemic proportions in 2020. The data are irrefutable.

One graphic tells the tale:

The increase in gun homicides documented in the Emory University study is attributable almost exclusively to one factor: a nearly 60 percent increase in homicide fatalities among black men. Not over a period of many years–but in a little over one year.

And what year was that? 2020. And what happened in 2020? The death of George Floyd, and the subsequent revelation that black lives especially matter.

Yes, but not in the way intended. Not by a long shot. That death and revelation brought in its train myriad consequences. Defund the police. The war on cash bail and the release of numerous criminals. The demoralization of police, who were instructed explicitly and implicitly that arresting black male offenders was a career risk, and the subsequent surrender of the streets to the thugs. And on and on. (The release of many from jail because of COVID didn’t help either.)

This is as close to a natural experiment as can exist in social science. An exogenous shock–the death of one man–leads to a tectonic shift in law enforcement, especially with regards to a particular demographic. The result?: a hyperbolic increase in homicide rates in that demographic. (I note that the previous uptick observable in the chart in 2014 corresponds to the proto-Floyd event, the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO, which was the catalyst for Black Lives Matter.)

This is as close to a definitive proof of causation as is possible in observational social science.

This is not complicated. We sowed. We reaped. There is no other plausible explanation for the data.

It is sickly ironic–and mainly sick–that so many black lives have been sacrificed on the altar of Black Lives Matter.

But it gave an opportunity for Nancy Pelosi and the like to demonstrate their superiority over us plebs by taking a knee wearing kente cloth, so it was all for the best, right?

The whole ugly spectacle makes me literally nauseous. (And yes, I literally know what it means to say “literally.”) Hell is not hot enough to torture properly all those preening better-thans who have cost more black lives in a couple of years than the KKK did in its entire, horrid, sordid history (which dates to 1866).

But you are the problem you see. You and your icky guns.

No, the real problem is the social psychosis that is modern American leftism, which obsesses over race, and in the name of helping one race is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of that race.

So tell me: who are objectively the racists here? (See Orwell on “objectively pro-Fascist” if you don’t catch my point.)

If this does not make you incandescent with anger, some serious self-reflection is definitely in order. Unless you are a leftist, in which case that is something of which you are constitutionally incapable.

Cue the shocked meme…..

BREAKING: New Twitter Files Dump Exposes Blacklists, Secret Cabal Censoring High-Profile Conservatives.

Independent journalist Bari Weiss took to Twitter on Thursday night to unload a second trove of internal memos and documents exposing how Twitter officials silenced the voices of prominent conservatives on the platform. Radio host Dan Bongino, Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya, and activist Charlie Kirk were among those Twitter censored or blacklisted, along with the popular “Libs of TikTok” account.

“A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users,” Weiss, a former New York Times reporter, wrote. “The authors [of the Twitter Files] have broad and expanding access to Twitter’s files. The only condition we agreed to was that the material would first be published on Twitter.”

Continue reading “”

Are we slouching toward fascism? 
Andrew P. Napolitano

Fascism is a governmental system in which the means of economic production and delivery of services are privately owned but government-controlled. Throughout history — before even getting to its racism and wars — fascism has led to the glorification of the state and the destruction of personal liberty. It is happening here.

During the past few months, we have learned that the major credit card companies have begun to record transactions at gun shops so as to enable the feds to learn the identity of patrons. These are lawful gun shops selling lawful products to lawful purchasers. The credit card records do not reflect precisely what was purchased — it might have been $2,000 for a gun safe or for gun safety lessons — but they do record the purchase amount and the contact information of the purchaser.

The problem here comes about when the FBI and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives come calling with their so-called National Security Letters in order to find out who is purchasing what. The George W. Bush-championed Patriot Act of 2001 — the most horrific congressional assault on personal liberty since the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 criminalized dissent — permits federal agents to bypass the search warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment when they want private records that are in the hands of a custodian.

These NSLs are really nonjudicial search warrants in which one federal agent has authorized another to seek your records. Since the gun shop purchase consists of the exercise of the natural right to exchange value for a lawful product and since the product purchased is an extension of the natural right to self-defense, the former protected by the Fifth Amendment and the latter by the Second Amendment, there is no lawful reason for the feds to know who has made these purchases.

Prior to the Patriot Act, if the feds came calling upon the custodian of your records, the custodian informed you of the government’s interest in your records, and you had a reasonable time period to challenge the feds in court. Today — notwithstanding the free speech protections in the First Amendment — it is unlawful for a custodian to inform you that the feds have come calling.

Thus, the records held by your computer, telecom, financial, health care, utilities and credit card service providers, your physicians and lawyers, may all be accessed without search warrants and without notice to you.

Under the Constitution, where federal gun registries are not permitted, it is none of the federal government’s business who has purchased what from a gun shop.

Moreover, since the Supreme Court has characterized the right to self-defense as fundamental, akin to the freedom of speech, there is no more authority under the Constitution for the feds to learn the identity of gun shop patrons than there is for them to learn the identity of bookstore patrons.

The additional danger here is to the democratic process. These decisions to keep records of sales and make them available to federal agents were made by government bureaucrats and corporate bosses, not by Congress. This is a creeping deterioration of the right to keep and bear arms because the feds are notoriously anti-gun, no matter who is president and no matter what the Supreme Court rules the Second Amendment protects.

Add to this the new program concocted by Visa whereby it will keep records of credit card purchases in which it will rank the purchased products’ conformity with the green climate change agenda view of carbon emissions, and make those records available to the Treasury Department, and you see a further whittling away of personal privacy.

It gets worse.

Last week, Amazon announced a bizarre new partnership with the New York City Police Department whereby if you live in New York City and install Amazon’s Ring service at the front entrance to your apartment — and thus permit Amazon to record the audio and video of all who come and go at your entrance — the NYPD will have real-time access to the same audio and video.

This is yet another example of law enforcement intruding into private property — the home — without a search warrant, without probable cause of crime and without articulable suspicion.

The Amazon/NYPD partnership — just like the credit card/BATF partnership and the Visa/Treasury partnership — was never authorized by legislation. All these symbiotic relationships, just like the now well-known Big Tech/Department of Homeland Security partnership producing censorship of speech the government hates and fears, were born by bureaucrats using government carrots and sticks and the acquiescence of gutless corporate chieftains willing to please their government masters.

The government’s appetite for surveillance is insatiable. Yet, the dual purposes of the Fourth Amendment — by requiring judicial search warrants based on probable cause of crime and specifically describing the place to be searched and person or thing to be seized — are to keep the government off the peoples’ backs and to compel law enforcement to focus on crimes that have already been committed.

May the government lawfully engage in fishing expeditions? In a word: NO.

The secondary purposes of the Fourth Amendment are to prohibit general warrants — not based on probable cause of crime and not specifying the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized — and to require that before the government begins to gather any evidence of crime, it has articulable suspicion about the crime that has been committed and the person or place to be investigated.

Moreover, articulable suspicion alone — the threshold for commencing all criminal investigations — does not justify any search, seizure or non-public surveillance.

What we have here is the stealth use by government of private enterprise to do its unconstitutional dirty work, thus far untested in the courts but unconstitutional on its face. What secret favors is the government giving in return?

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court Judge, has published nine books on the U.S. Constitution.

“You Won’t Answer the Question” — Senator Rand Paul Confronts FBI on Scooping Up Online User Data

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) confronted FBI Director Christopher Wray about the collusion with social media companies and whether the FBI scoops up private information to identify users.


“Is  or any other social media company supplying private messages or data on American users that is not compelled by the government or the FBI?” Paul asked Wray. “No warrant, no subpoena, they’re just supplying you information on their users?”

“I don’t believe so, but I can’t sit here and be sure of that as I sit here,” Wray replied.

“Can you give us a yes or no by going back to your team and asking? Because it’s a very specific question. Because if they are, it’s against the law,” Paul said, invoking the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. “This was done to protect the privacy of people so we could feel like we can send an email or direct message to people without having that information given over. It’s a very specific question: Will you get with your team of lawyers and give us a specific answer? Because this is the law. If you’re doing it, then we need to go to court to prevent you from receiving this information.”

“Well, I can tell you that I’m quite confident that we’re following the law —, ” Wray started.

“Well, that’s not the answer, ” Paul responded.

“ — but what I will also follow up with you to make sure we get you more information; more detailed information,” Wray added.

“Is the FBI obtaining anonymous social media data and then using technical methods to pierce the anonymous nature of the data?” Paul questioned.

Wray paused before asking, “Anonymous social media data?”

“So you purchase data,” Paul said. “People purchase data all the time and we sort of tolerate it for advertising and things because it’s anonymous data. Are you purchasing what is said to be anonymous data through the marketplace and then piercing the anonymous nature to attach individual names to that data? Are you purchasing data and then piercing the anonymous nature of that data?”

“So the manner in which we use — we usually use the term commercial data — is probably longer than I can explain here. But again, let me —, ” Wray said appearing to dodge the question.

“So you will not answer the question of whether or not you’re attaching names to anonymous data,” Paul stated.

“I think it’s a more complicated answer than I can give here,” Wray responded.

“So, so far we’re 0 for 2 at getting you to answer this, but you’re pledging you will actually answer the question because you have to realize the frustration; we’ll write you a letter and your team of lawyers will write back with a 15-page letter that says nothing and you won’t answer the question. These are very specific. This is whether you’re obeying the law, whether we can have confidence. I want to have confidence,” Paul said.

“We are obeying the law,” Wray responded.

“Well, you’re saying that, but you won’t tell us the answer,” Paul stated. “You aren’t telling me the answer. And the answer is: Are you collecting data not compelled by a warrant? That would not be in compliance with the law. But you won’t answer that you’re not collecting that data.”

Eventually, Paul asked, “Are you getting tips and leads from social media companies?”

“We get tips and leads from companies, absolutely,” Wray acknowledged.

“You may think this is jolly well to get all this stuff without a warrant that people volunteer to you, but many of us are alarmed that you’re getting this information that are private communications between people because it is against the law – it’s against the law for Facebook or social media companies to give it to you, but it’s also against the law for you to receive it,” Paul ended.

The left’s newest stealth attack on free speech

America’s two most important rights are free speech and the right to bear arms. Without the first, no people are free; and without the second, there is no first. Totalitarians always go after both; that is, they silence and disarm them. For decades, the left has been open in its war on the Second Amendment. They’ve struggled more with the war on speech, but they may finally have come up with a new approach that will sneak around constitutional muster.

When it comes to speech that incites violence or is otherwise imminently threatening, the law has always been clear: The threat must be very explicit and imminent for the speech to lose its First Amendment protections. At the most simplistic level, saying, “I wish so-and-so were dead” is not an actionable opinion. However, saying, “I’m going to kill so-and-so this week” or “You all need to kill so-and-so; I’ve got a plan” is criminally actionable speech. (The standard is more sensitive when speech is directed at the president, of course.)

This constitutional limitation on making (conservatives’) political speech criminally actionable has long vexed the left. They’ve trained their young acolytes that speech is violence (so much so that almost half of college students say “hate speech” should get the death penalty) but, so far, courts haven’t fallen for that gambit. Unless speech creates an imminent threat, it gets a pass.

Lately, though, the left has come up with a new concept that seeks to say that any speech that opposes leftist policies is actual and imminent “terrorism.” Or as leftist academia calls it, “stochastic terrorism.”

Christopher Rufo discusses the concept in an important City Journal essay. He begins by revealing that he is being identified as someone who is directly responsible for the attack on Paul Pelosi:

Continue reading “”

Scratch a liberal, find a racist tyrant underneath

 

 

 

 

 

BLUF
COVID has been the tool that the Elites™ have used to bully Americans into complying with the most absurd rules, beating us into submission. It would be ironic indeed if we could turn the tables and use the likelihood that the United States helped fund the development of the virus that has literally plagued us as a tool to dismantle the bipartisan transnational clique who have been driving the West into the ground.

The COVID coverup begins to unravel.

UPDATE: Vanity Fair has a detailed story on the investigation into the COVID virus’ origin:

COVID likely started circulating in China is late 2019–now 3 years ago–and its effects have dominated our lives for 2 1/2 years.

Yet for much of that time the Establishment™ has been gaslighting us about its likely origins. You know that. The Establishment™ knows that you know. And now the Senate Republicans on the health committee are laying the facts out on the table. COVID almost certainly was released accidentally from a Chinese research lab.

It was remarkable how quickly the Narrative™ settled on the zoonotic origin of the virus, since warning signs that the virus didn’t originate naturally were everywhere. Even scientists who confidently declared in private their belief that the virus was engineered publicly stated the opposite–after having been directed to by Anthony Fauci, the keeper of the keys to the kingdom’s treasury when it comes to research dollars. Fauci in recent months has been backtracking on whether or not the virus could have been engineered, but he sure expended enormous effort maintaining the fiction that an animal origin was certain.

There is a simple reason for Fauci’s reluctance to consider a lab leak hypothesis–if it came from the Wuhan Institute for Virology, the US government likely funded the research. Obviously nobody wants that on their record, and Fauci has quite the pension to protect, as well as an unearned reputation as The Science™.

From the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON—The Covid-19 pandemic that has killed millions worldwide “was most likely the result of a research-related incident” in China, and not natural transmission of a virus from animal to human, a new report by Republicans on the Senate health committee concludes.

The study cites details about the early spread of the SARS-COV-2 virus, which causes Covid; the fact that no animal host has been identified nearly three years into the pandemic; and troubled biosafety procedures at labs in the Chinese city of Wuhan to buttress its conclusion.

The 35-page report by Republican committee staff acknowledges that definitive conclusions about the pandemic’s origins are impossible without more evidence. But, it says: “The hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy.”

The report is largely based on information already publicly available but is likely to bolster calls in Washington for further investigations into the origins of the virus. Republicans have vowed to launch more aggressive Covid-19 probes if they regain control of one or both chambers of Congress in the midterm elections.

Previous zoonotic disease outbreaks—in which a pathogen jumps from animals to man—have occurred in multiple locations as a virus circulates in animal populations, while the Covid virus is known to have emerged only in Wuhan, home to laboratories conducting research on coronaviruses, the report notes. In addition, it says, no animal has been identified as infected with the virus before the December 2019 pandemic outbreak.

I have always suspected, based upon the balance of the evidence I have access to, that the virus was accidentally leaked from a lab. But I freely admit that biological research is not in my wheelhouse.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Democrats,  Demoncraps, who have spent years delegitimizing the Supreme Court and rule of law, undermining legislative norms, cheering on unprecedented and blatant executive abuses, and using the DOJ to target their political enemies, among other “democracy”-destroying behaviors, do not occupy any high moral ground. And while “democracy” was once just a transparently silly euphemism for “stuff we want,” it has since evolved into a rhetorical device that denotes a decisively illiberal mindset.

DEMOCRATS Demoncraps: The Only Way To Save Democracy Is One-Party Rule.
‘Save Our Democracy’ is the new ‘Russia Collusion.’

At this point, it would save everyone time if Democrats could simply point to a policy agenda item that isn’t going to save democracy — if such a thing exists.

If Republicans vote, they are killing democracy. If they don’t vote, they are killing democracy. The only way to “save democracy,” writes The Washington Post’s Max Boot, is to empower one-party rule — a position that probably sounds counterintuitive to anyone with a middle-school education. “Now you need to vote to literally save democracy again,” contends President Joe Biden, or we will lose our “fundamental rights and freedoms like the right to choose, the right to privacy, the right to vote — our very democracy.”

Chilling stuff. But it doesn’t end there. You will remember that by failing to “reform” the filibuster, which would entail authorizing the thinnest of fleeting majorities to shove through massive generational “reforms” without any national consensus or debate, we are also killing democracy. This has been the position not only of left-wing pundits and the New York Times editorial board, but also senators tasked with defending their institution. I wonder if they will support this democracy-saving fix next session, as well?

Then again, if we don’t nationalize the economy to avert a climate crisis, we are also killing democracy. “We’ve got to save democracy in order to save our species,” Jamie Raskin explains. And if we don’t empty the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to temporarily keep gas prices low to help Democrats win in 2022, we are killing democracy. “We find ourselves in a situation, where keeping gas prices low is key to preserving and strengthening the future of our democracy,” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes says.

We must allow the president to unilaterally create trillion-dollar spending bills and break existing private sector contracts by fiat. For democracy. We must pack the court to “save democracy.” We must create a Ministry of Truth to help with “strengthening democratic institutions.” We must vote for a Pennsylvania candidate who can’t cobble two consecutive coherent sentences together because the “fate of our democracy” is at stake, says our former president.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
That’s why I don’t really care what 97Percent wants or claims to be about. They’re no different than Giffords, Brady, Everytown, and every other group that wants to annihilate our Second Amendment rights.

Don’t get too excited about “common ground” survey results

For many, the goal is to find common ground on issues relating to guns and gun control. It’s their hope that if they can find enough points of agreement, gun control laws can be passed.

Even if I accepted this premise, though, I know what will happen. Those laws will be passed, only we see no results (at best) so now they want to find “common ground” on still more regulations. Little by little, we’ll see our rights whittled away.

Yet the question remains, does the common ground exist?

According to a recent report, it does.

The majority of gun owners are concerned about gun violence and support policies to reduce gun-related injuries and deaths, according to new research from Tufts University and gun safety organization 97Percent.

Three-fourths of gun owners surveyed said they are concerned about the frequency of school shootings, and 71 percent said the same of mass shootings, according to the research released on Monday. Seventy percent said they also want to help find a way reduce gun-related injuries and deaths.

Most gun owners, including Republican ones, said they support several proposed laws to prevent people with a high risk of violence from accessing guns.

Gun safety organization 97Percent, which touts itself as a bipartisan group of both gun owners and non-gun owners, noted in its report on the research that this defies the current perception that there is an “intractable divide” over gun control in the U.S.

And since 97Percent paid for this study, it’s not surprising that the result was exactly what 97Percent wanted.

It’s part of why all such “studies” need to be questioned vigorously.

Continue reading “”

Harris on Hurricane Ian: Biden Admin Will Give ‘Resources Based on Equity’ and to ‘Communities of Color’
No, Vice President. It doesn’t work that way.

Vice President Kamala Harris wants the Biden admin to base Hurricane Ian funds and resources based on color.

That’s racist. This is not the time to run with your leftist agenda, Kamala. So disgusting. Just like Don Lemon. The agenda is more important that Ian impacted all communities regardless of wealth or race.

Pathetic and disgusting.

 

GOPPouncer

The idea that 1/6 was this rare instance of violence that was a unique threat against our Democracy is ridiculous, but the left has droned on and on about this unique political violence. Let me take you on a journey.

“The bomb completely destroyed the area it was placed in and could have caused untold harm to human life if it had gone off closer to where the people had been gathered.” 1983 bombing of the Senate

Sorry that didn’t count, it was leftist political violence. Let’s try again:

Oops my bad, that was a Republican that was shot by a leftists who thought Republicans voting against Obamacare would “kill people” That one doesn’t count either. 

Or how about the time that protestors stormed the supreme court and pounded on the doors to breach it, because they were mad at a SCOTUS nominee?

Continue reading “”

San Francisco’s Newly Passed Surveillance Plan Allows Police to Access Private Cameras Without Warrant

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday a plan that would allow police to access private security cameras without a warrant.

The board voted 7-4 to approve Democratic Mayor London Breed’s plan which allows police to access up to 24 hours of live outdoor video footage from private surveillance cameras without a warrant as long as the camera owner gives police permission, according to SF Gate. To access video footage without a warrant, police must be either responding to a life-threatening emergency, conducting a criminal investigation with written approval from a captain or higher-ranking official, or deciding how to deploy officers to a large public event, according to the report.

Breed said the legislation would allow police “to respond to the challenges presented by the organized criminal activity, homicides [and] gun violence,” according to The Associated Press. Breed introduced the proposal in 2021 to combat rampant theft, rioting and looting.

Board President Shamann Walton voted against the legislation, saying it’s a violation of civil liberties, according to AP.

“I know the thought process is, ‘Just trust us, just trust the police department.’ But the reality is people have been violating civil liberties since my ancestors were brought here from an entirely, completely different continent,” he reportedly said.

The ACLU of Northern California also voiced their opposition to the policy in February, with staff attorney Matt Cagle saying the policy would “give unchecked power to the police, and make San Francisco less safe.”

 STREISAND EFFECT: Angry Harpies Complain About Kids’ Football League’s Fundraiser Featuring an AR-15, Turn a Local Raffle Into a National Event.

North Carolina’s East Henderson Youth Football and Cheerleading League (EHYFC) poked a woke hornet’s next by offering an AR-15 as the grand prize in a fundraiser for kids sports.  Unsurprisingly, some easily-offended types turned their ire on the EHYFC for such an “insensitive” and “deplorable” choice of prizes.

But not only did the youth organization’s leadership not fold, they pushed back and the local raffle has now sold tickets nationwide. Congratulations gun-haters, you’ve discovered the meaning of the Streisand Effect!

It seems that nothing sells tickets quite like a fundraiser featuring America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15. They play well as prizes even in blue states like my Illinois. But in more freedom-loving states like North Carolina? Puh-leeze. Who doesn’t need another AR-15 in their safe? They’re like 10/22…every gun owner should have a few.

The FN-15 Freedom Stick. Courtesy of FN.

The EHYFC further triggered local Karens by having the effrontery to describe the rifle as a “freedom stick.”

From Breitbart . . .

People across the nation rallied for North Carolina’s East Henderson Youth Football and Cheerleading League (EHYFC) after the league faced backlash for raffling an AR-15 rifle to raise money for equipment and supplies.

On September 5 Breitbart News reported that the EHYFC was raffling an FN 15, and that an anonymous parent had criticized the decision to do so.

The New York Post noted that the parent told WLOS, “I was honestly shocked when I received the message that the children were going to be selling an assault rifle because of what’s going on at schools around the country. I thought it was in very bad taste for them to choose a weapon that is being used against children.”

What did the critics suggest the organization do instead to raise funds for the kids? I’m glad you asked! On Facebook, the trolls came out in force, like this guy . . .

Marshall Coleman — Freedom Stick???? WTF! Own up to the Freedom Stick being a killing apparatus. Try a bake sale next time. What a perverted message to send to the very youth you purportedly care so deeply about.

Try a bake sale next time?  Well, here’s the reply from the Youth Football team’s leadership.

EHYFC-Youth Football and Cheerleading Marshall Coleman that’s a great idea! We work, go to school, practice Mon, Tues, church Wed, practice Thurs, game days are from 2-9pm Sat, back to church on Sun. When and where can we meet you to pick up those baked goods? We’re gonna need a lot! Preferably sugar free, low carb, gluten free, dairy free, nut free, keto friendly, vegan, and organic. There’s just so many different allergies, sensitivies, and preferences out there.

EHYFC leadership isn’t bashful about pushing back against the harpies. As they told a reporter, they’re handing everything openly and within the law…

“We aren’t offering an assault rifle. We are offering an FN 15 Patrol Carbine,” a spokesperson for EHYFCL told Fox News Digital. “This is an ArmaLite 15-style rifle, not fully automatic, which by definition excludes it from being classified as an assault rifle. We are following all ATF guidelines. The item is being held at an FFL, the recipient must complete an ATF form 4473 and pass an NICS background check before taking possession of it.”

News of the giveaway — and the resulting outrage — spread the word and as a result, EHYFC is getting  corporate sponsorships and offers for professional help . . .

Keith Raynor — Just printed and sent in a corporate sponsorship form for the year. Please thank the “Karen” parent for me because without her I would not have known you were raising funds for the season. If you all need a pro-bono North Carolina CPA to file anything with the IRS because your gross receipts push you over the reporting limit, I am right here. I have clients in Henderson Co already.

The offended raised enough of a stink that news and story of the EHYFC’s fundraiser went national. Again from Breitbart . . .

The mother said, “We have far surpassed our goals, and now have the ability to pass those blessings on to others in need. We have read every message, transaction note and email that has come our way. The supportive messages are coming from both retired and active military personnel, law enforcement officers, firefighters, fellow youth organization leaders, teachers, lawyers, entrepreneurs and grandparents trying to save our backwards society.”

In other words, they didn’t go woke and now they’re far from broke. Kudos to them. Now, where can I get some of those tickets?

Is Fascism Left- or Right-Wing?

Copied from Facebook:

Is fascism a left or right-wing ideology?

“We know the name of the philosopher of capitalism: Adam Smith. We know the name of the philosopher of Marxism: Karl Marx. But who’s the philosopher of fascism?

“Yes—exactly. You don’t know.

“Don’t feel bad. Almost no one knows. This is not because he doesn’t exist, but because historians, most of whom are on the political left, had to erase him from history in order to avoid confronting fascism’s actual beliefs. So, let me introduce him to you. His name is Giovanni Gentile.

“Born in 1875, he was one of the world’s most influential philosophers in the first half of the twentieth century. Gentile believed that there were two “diametrically opposed” types of democracy. One is liberal democracy, such as that of the United States, which Gentile dismisses as individualistic—too centered on liberty and personal rights—and therefore selfish. The other, the one Gentile recommends, is “true democracy,” in which individuals willingly subordinate themselves to the state.

“Like his philosophical mentor, Karl Marx, Gentile wanted to create a community that resembles the family, a community where we are “all in this together.” It’s easy to see the attraction of this idea. Indeed, it remains a common rhetorical theme of the left.

“For example, at the 1984 convention of the Democratic Party, the governor of New York, Mario Cuomo, likened America to an extended family where, through the government, people all take care of each other.

“Nothing’s changed. Thirty years later, a slogan of the 2012 Democratic Party convention was, “The government is the only thing we all belong to.” They might as well have been quoting Gentile.

“Now, remember, Gentile was a man of the left. He was a committed socialist. For Gentile, fascism is a form of socialism—indeed, its most workable form. While the socialism of Marx mobilizes people on the basis of class, fascism mobilizes people by appealing to their national identity as well as their class. Fascists are socialists with a national identity. German Fascists in the 1930s were called Nazis—basically a contraction of the term “national socialist.”

“For Gentile, all private action should be oriented to serve society; there is no distinction between the private interest and the public interest. Correctly understood, the two are identical. And who is the administrative arm of the society? It’s none other than the state.

“Consequently, to submit to society is to submit to the state—not just in economic matters, but in all matters. Since everything is political, the state gets to tell everyone how to think and what to do.

“It was another Italian, Benito Mussolini, the fascist dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943, who turned Gentile’s words into action. In his Dottrina del Fascismo, one of the doctrinal statements of early fascism, Mussolini wrote, “All is in the state and nothing human exists or has value outside the state.” He was merely paraphrasing Gentile.

“The Italian philosopher is now lost in obscurity, but his philosophy could not be more relevant because it closely parallels that of the modern left. Gentile’s work speaks directly to progressives who champion the centralized state.

“Here in America, the left has vastly expanded state control over the private sector, from healthcare to banking; from education to energy. This state-directed capitalism is precisely what German and Italian fascists implemented in the 1930s.

Leftists can’t acknowledge their man, Gentile, because that would undermine their attempt to bind conservatism to fascism.

“Conservatism wants small government so that individual liberty can flourish. The left, like Gentile, wants the opposite: to place the resources of the individual and industry in the service of a centralized state. To acknowledge Gentile is to acknowledge that fascism bears a deep kinship to the ideology of today’s left. So, they will keep Gentile where they’ve got him: dead, buried, and forgotten.

“But we should remember, or the ghost of fascism will continue to haunt us.”

DOJ Admits Only 692 ‘Ghost Gun’-Related Homicide Cases in Last 6 Years

Buried in President Biden’s Department of Justice’s (DOJ) explanation of the new “ghost gun” rule is an admission that only 692 “ghost guns” were involved in homicide cases during the past six years.

The DOJ noted:

As the final rule explains, from January 2016 to December 2021, ATF received approximately 45,240 reports of suspected privately made firearms recovered by law enforcement, including in 692 homicide or attempted homicide investigations. The chart below demonstrates the total annual numbers of suspected PMFs recovered by law enforcement over the past six years.

When one considers that there are on average 12,000 to 14,000 homicides in the United States annually–sometimes a little higher, sometimes a little lower–692 “ghost gun”-related homicide cases are a mere fraction of all firearm-related homicides.

Take, for instance, the higher number–14,000 firearm homicides annually for six years. That is 84,000 firearm-related homicides during that time frame, while during that same time frame there were fewer than 700 “ghost gun”-related homicide cases.

Breitbart News pointed out that the DOJ’s “ghost gun” rule change was announced August 24, 2022. The rule classifies parts in a gun parts kit as firearms that require a background check to purchase, like the one required for “traditional firearms.”

Biden “on a war footing” to dehumanize “roughly half the population who voted against him”
My interview on Newsmax: “What we’re seeing come out is the real Joe Biden. Anybody who has followed his career knows that the 2020 portrayal of him by the media as kind grandfatherly Joe Biden is a fabrication. He was deemed the father of ‘Borking,’ the vicious attacks on judicial nominees dating back many decades ago. His entire career has been one of viciously attacking people.”

Joe Biden is still on the warpath against MAGA. First it was dehumanizing MAGA Republicans, in a September 1 speech that was widely panned as “one of the most menacing, bitter, angry and divisive speeches in modern US political history”:

Then Biden walked it back a bit, and said he wasn’t referring to “all” MAGA voters.

Now Biden has modified the message, perhaps in the realization that calling for a civil war was not the best strategy, so now Biden’s social media team is putting out tweets that what Biden is really criticizing is MAGA policies. Using the official presidential account (@Potus) instead of his personal account, Biden tweeted:

“MAGA proposals are a threat to the very soul of this country.”

Ah yes, like energy independence and securing the southern border, such a threat to the soul of Joe Biden’s America.

It would be easy to blame Biden’s Team Obama handlers for this, but I think Jesse Kelly had it right:

A lot has been made about Biden and how he’s a feeble old man and how it’s all his handlers. And a lot of that is true. Do keep this in mind though: Biden is a prick. A nasty, vindictive prick. This is well known in DC. And that speech, that was HIS idea. Little birdie told me.

That the campaign of demonization was Joe’s idea and obsession was confirmed in a Politico report. That’s not surprising, he’s a nasty piece of work and has been his entire career, as I previously pointed out:

“Biden has been a corrupt sleaze his entire career, he’s a malicious flame thrower who hides behind the facade of being ‘regular Joe’ and now kind elderly Joes. He’s the worst of our political system.”

I had a chance to pick up on this theme when I appeared on Wake Up America on Newsmax this morning to talk about the Biden strategy, with discussion of the Mar-a-Lago raid towards the end:

Well, I think they have developed a campaign strategy, which is to turn the country upside down. They don’t want to talk about inflation. They don’t want to talk about all the economic problems. They don’t want to talk about the border. What they want to talk about is Donald Trump and bad Republicans. So this is a deliberate campaign strategy. This is not by chance. And so that’s really what you’re seeing play out is the Democrats have decided the way they limit their losses in 2022, or maybe even hold the house or maybe even hold the Senate is to make the campaign about evil Republicans as opposed to the problems of the Biden administration….

What we’re seeing come out is the real Joe Biden. Anybody who has followed his career knows that the 2020 portrayal of him by the media as kind grandfatherly Joe Biden is a fabrication. He was deemed the father of Borking, the vicious attacks on judicial nominees dating back many decades ago. His entire career has been one of viciously attacking people.

We now know from the Hunter Biden laptop that he sold his office to enrich his family, and his campaign worked with the media to suppress that story. So what we’re seeing is the real Joe Biden, who you saw on that stage the other night is the real Joe Biden.

It is not an anomaly. And that’s very dangerous when you have a leader who has a career of attacking people, who embraced segregationists when it was convenient for him politically, who now is attacking people who love the country and support the country as if they are somehow the problem. It’s a really nasty vicious sort of thing he’s doing. And he needs to be called out on it….

I think he’s basically on a war footing and you’ve heard other Democrats say that, you’ve heard other TV commenters say that, that he’s on a war footing against roughly half the population who voted against him….

Top Biden Advisor’s Disgusting Rant Against Republican Voters Leads to a Key Question

Did you know that Keisha Lance Bottoms, once an abject failure of a mayor in Atlanta, is now working for the Biden administration? I didn’t either, but apparently, she’s serving as a top advisor because as I’ve said many times, failing up is a staple of Democrat politics.

On Sunday, Bottoms appeared on ABC News, no doubt friendly territory, to try to explain away Joe Biden’s grotesque national address where he essentially labeled half of the country a threat to the republic. When pressed on whether the president has “given up” on those tens of millions of Americans, she had no real answer.

But while Bottoms refused to answer the question directly, the rest of her commentary left little to the imagination. Here’s the transcript for those who can’t watch the video.

RADDATZ: All of us? He wasn’t calling out to the MAGA supporters certainly. He mentioned them more than a dozen times and — as a threat to democracy.

Has the president essentially given up on those MAGA Republicans, some 70 million people?

BOTTOMS: Well, what the president has done is said that he will continue to work with mainstream Republicans, that he will work with Democrats, that he will work with Independents, to get things done in our country.

But this MAGA Republican agenda, this hate-fueled agenda, this MAGA Republican agenda that we saw incite violence on our nation’s Capitol has no place in a democracy. And if we are not intentional about calling it out, which is what the president did, then our country — everything that our country is built upon is in danger.

Let me dissect this a bit. Notice Bottoms’ language about Biden working with “mainstream” Republicans. What that translates to is any Republican who is willing to do what the president wants. If you aren’t amicable to his demands, then you aren’t “mainstream.” Biden has made himself the arbiter of what is and isn’t acceptable in the opposition party, and the media just goes along with that standard as if it’s not ridiculous and hypocritical.

So if you are Mitt Romney and vote for Biden’s infrastructure boondoggle, then you are a “mainstream” Republican who can be spared. But if you oppose his destructive agenda and dare to have counter opinions to that of the far-left, then you are a “threat” to democracy and must be destroyed. Isn’t that nice? That’s only the kind of viewpoint that tin-pot dictators throughout history have held and abided by.

Past that, I’d love to ask Bottoms and the rest of the Biden administration one question. If “MAGA” Republicans are so horrible and dangerous, what exactly should be done about them? I’m hearing a lot of heated rhetoric and absurd proclamations, but what would Joseph R. Biden like to do with all these evil Republicans hanging about? Throw them in camps? Take away their rights? Not allow them to vote?

No reporter with access will ever be brave enough to ask that question, but it’s the big one at hand, isn’t it? If Democrats are going to go all in with not just opposing but “othering” their political opponents, where does that train end? They ought to be made to provide an answer to that, otherwise, they should stop their ridiculous ranting.