Category: US Politics

Pardon my cynicism, folks, but Attorney General Barr’s declared determination to dig to the bottom of the purported Jeffrey Epstein suicide rings a bit hollow.  Had he said he was appointing an independent investigative team headed by an assistant attorney general on loan from one of our southern red states — say, Texas, Alabama or Georgia — where cultural sophistication doesn’t rise to the level of blasé acceptance of pedophilia found in blue, coastal urban enclaves, I might feel more confident.  Had he further announced an investigative team comprising veteran sleuths from state police departments from similar red states, with no federal presence other than scientific criminological support, I would be truly heartened.

But to tell this nation that the same federal investigative agency that, we have learned, and still are learning with every passing day, was thoroughly corrupted at its head, leading to deceptive cover-up investigations of powerful political figures, is to conduct an investigation that most of this country now believes may involve powerful political figures from those previous pretend probes is, to borrow A.G. Barr’s word describing the suicide itself, “appalling.”

I know, I know — many of you are going to tell me I should not distrust all the good, honest, hardworking rank-and-file members of the FBI who played no role in their leadership’s treachery.  After all, we’ve been fed that line endlessly by politicians and talking-heads.  However, it was those same pols and pundits who told us what a reliably trustworthy cop James Comey was when he was heading up the Hillary email inquiry, and that Robert Mueller was such a straight-arrow professional, one who could be relied on to conduct a fair inquest into Trump’s possible Russian collusion.  So much for their character-reading skills.

So, pardon the hell outta me when I tell you that I just have to wonder whether some of that political cancer in the head of our federal policing hasn’t metastasized down to other regions of that body, especially to such politically aquiver vital organs as the New York and South Florida offices, where most of the Epstein case is focused.  Believe me: I would like nothing better than to be able to believe in the complete integrity of our vaunted federal police agency, but sadly, like many, if not most of you, I’m beyond that.  My trust has been poisoned by their malignant leaders and my skepticism that their organization is now fully free of political malevolence, particularly in these urban power centers.

So we need a federal investigation?  What’s not federal about a federally appointed team made up of states in the federation?

Pardon my cynicism, folks, but Attorney General Barr’s declared determination to dig to the bottom of the purported Jeffrey Epstein suicide rings a bit hollow.  Had he said he was appointing an independent investigative team headed by an assistant attorney general on loan from one of our southern red states — say, Texas, Alabama or Georgia — where cultural sophistication doesn’t rise to the level of blasé acceptance of pedophilia found in blue, coastal urban enclaves, I might feel more confident.  Had he further announced an investigative team comprising veteran sleuths from state police departments from similar red states, with no federal presence other than scientific criminological support, I would be truly heartened.

But to tell this nation that the same federal investigative agency that, we have learned, and still are learning with every passing day, was thoroughly corrupted at its head, leading to deceptive cover-up investigations of powerful political figures, is to conduct an investigation that most of this country now believes may involve powerful political figures from those previous pretend probes is, to borrow A.G. Barr’s word describing the suicide itself, “appalling.”

I know, I know — many of you are going to tell me I should not distrust all the good, honest, hardworking rank-and-file members of the FBI who played no role in their leadership’s treachery.  After all, we’ve been fed that line endlessly by politicians and talking-heads.  However, it was those same pols and pundits who told us what a reliably trustworthy cop James Comey was when he was heading up the Hillary email inquiry, and that Robert Mueller was such a straight-arrow professional, one who could be relied on to conduct a fair inquest into Trump’s possible Russian collusion.  So much for their character-reading skills.

So, pardon the hell outta me when I tell you that I just have to wonder whether some of that political cancer in the head of our federal policing hasn’t metastasized down to other regions of that body, especially to such politically aquiver vital organs as the New York and South Florida offices, where most of the Epstein case is focused.  Believe me: I would like nothing better than to be able to believe in the complete integrity of our vaunted federal police agency, but sadly, like many, if not most of you, I’m beyond that.  My trust has been poisoned by their malignant leaders and my skepticism that their organization is now fully free of political malevolence, particularly in these urban power centers.

So we need a federal investigation?  What’s not federal about a federally appointed team made up of states in the federation?

Likely you’ve never heard of Noel Ignatiev, yet he’s been influential in much of what is going on in culture and politics today.  A left-wing Jewish American author and historian, Ignatiev has been one of the main voices in helping shape and direct what is commonly called “Whiteness Studies,” a subset of Critical Race Theory, which is itself a subset of Critical Theory (basically Marxism by another name).

Normally, when one sees the word “studies” attached to anything, it tends to make anyone not fully enamored of Progressive thought cringe, if not contemplate (metaphorically, at least) getting out the pitchforks and torches.  It means something steeped in a Marxist-tinged ideological understanding of the world, which casts victims and perpetrators within a power-play framework that suits its ultimate vision of a Heaven on Earth once the perpetrators are vanquished from the scene.

As one might guess, in this particular iteration of “studies,” it is the so-called “white” person who has been cast as the villain.  As Ignatiev has said, “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.  Until that task is accomplished, even partial reform will prove elusive, because white influence permeates every issue in U.S. society, whether domestic or foreign.”

Defenders of Ignatiev’s views argue that he was simply being metaphorical.  ”Whiteness” here is simply a social construct, not a reference to race or ethnicity.  This becomes harder to defend as one reads more quotes from Ignatiev and realizes that this isn’t just a social construct he has difficulty with; it’s actual flesh-and-blood human beings he sees as intrinsically evil and worthy of eradication.  When reading the following quotes, are you left with the conclusion he is merely speaking of a metaphorical, socially constructed system that he hopes to bring down, or is it something more than that?

“If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live.  You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world!”

“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists[.] … Keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed — not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed.”

“Whiteness is not a culture[.] … Whiteness has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with social position[.] … Without the privileges attached to it, the white race would not exist, and the white skin would have no more social significance than big feet.”

“Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.“

Replace the word “whiteness” with “blackness” — or, considering his background, “Jewishness” — would you write this off as nothing more than an academic speaking of a social construct’s need to be re-evaluated and deconstructed?  I highly doubt it.  I am sure Ignatiev would cry foul at such hateful anti-Semitism if you did that.  Yet he seems content to do it for “whites.”  Why is that, and why is that now deemed acceptable in society?  Does he not consider himself white, too?

What Ignatiev began teaching a short few decades ago has filtered down into the young minds of those coming out of our universities and filling many parts of our culture.  It has seeped into the various avenues and institutions that will become intrinsic to the next generation and the decision-making of the government.  All you are hearing today about the inherent evil of “whiteness” stems from people like Ignatiev, who was one of the most prominent behind it.

We should not idly accept this.  We should call out the Ignatievs of the world, shine a light on their dark corners, and ferret them out so they do not get away with their heinous belief systems.  Such people are not merely ivory-tower academics; they are aggressively calling to destroy a group of people, a civilization.  Why are we allowing them and their acolytes a pass?

Likely you’ve never heard of Noel Ignatiev, yet he’s been influential in much of what is going on in culture and politics today.  A left-wing Jewish American author and historian, Ignatiev has been one of the main voices in helping shape and direct what is commonly called “Whiteness Studies,” a subset of Critical Race Theory, which is itself a subset of Critical Theory (basically Marxism by another name).

Normally, when one sees the word “studies” attached to anything, it tends to make anyone not fully enamored of Progressive thought cringe, if not contemplate (metaphorically, at least) getting out the pitchforks and torches.  It means something steeped in a Marxist-tinged ideological understanding of the world, which casts victims and perpetrators within a power-play framework that suits its ultimate vision of a Heaven on Earth once the perpetrators are vanquished from the scene.

As one might guess, in this particular iteration of “studies,” it is the so-called “white” person who has been cast as the villain.  As Ignatiev has said, “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.  Until that task is accomplished, even partial reform will prove elusive, because white influence permeates every issue in U.S. society, whether domestic or foreign.”

Defenders of Ignatiev’s views argue that he was simply being metaphorical.  ”Whiteness” here is simply a social construct, not a reference to race or ethnicity.  This becomes harder to defend as one reads more quotes from Ignatiev and realizes that this isn’t just a social construct he has difficulty with; it’s actual flesh-and-blood human beings he sees as intrinsically evil and worthy of eradication.  When reading the following quotes, are you left with the conclusion he is merely speaking of a metaphorical, socially constructed system that he hopes to bring down, or is it something more than that?

“If you are a white male, you don’t deserve to live.  You are a cancer, you’re a disease, white males have never contributed anything positive to the world!”

“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists[.] … Keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed — not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed.”

“Whiteness is not a culture[.] … Whiteness has nothing to do with culture and everything to do with social position[.] … Without the privileges attached to it, the white race would not exist, and the white skin would have no more social significance than big feet.”

“Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.“

Replace the word “whiteness” with “blackness” — or, considering his background, “Jewishness” — would you write this off as nothing more than an academic speaking of a social construct’s need to be re-evaluated and deconstructed?  I highly doubt it.  I am sure Ignatiev would cry foul at such hateful anti-Semitism if you did that.  Yet he seems content to do it for “whites.”  Why is that, and why is that now deemed acceptable in society?  Does he not consider himself white, too?

What Ignatiev began teaching a short few decades ago has filtered down into the young minds of those coming out of our universities and filling many parts of our culture.  It has seeped into the various avenues and institutions that will become intrinsic to the next generation and the decision-making of the government.  All you are hearing today about the inherent evil of “whiteness” stems from people like Ignatiev, who was one of the most prominent behind it.

We should not idly accept this.  We should call out the Ignatievs of the world, shine a light on their dark corners, and ferret them out so they do not get away with their heinous belief systems.  Such people are not merely ivory-tower academics; they are aggressively calling to destroy a group of people, a civilization.  Why are we allowing them and their acolytes a pass?

I like to remind people that the enviros, top to bottom, side to side, are misanthropists; they consider the human race a cancer on the planet.  They hope to achieve a planetary wildlife park where the only humans allowed are the park rangers, who belong to their federation of environmental exclusives.

Here’s a good sampling of the attitudes of enviro fanatics, with the proviso that the current human population on planet earth is north of 5 billion and these statements are only a small sample of the larger environmentalist position on population and human habitation of the planet Earth:

David Brower, founder of the Sierra Club: ”Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

Club of Rome: ”…the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion.”

Susan Blakemore, a UK Guardian science journalist: ”For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed.”

Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: “The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery”.

Bill Gates, Microsoft billionaire, funder of enviro causes: ”The world today has 6.8 billion people…that’s headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent.”

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, architect of the new Germanic masterplan, the ‘Great Transformation’: ”When you imagine that if all these 9 billion people claim all these resources, then the earth will explode.”

Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity marine biologist, French scientist: ”In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.”

These doomsday proclamations are contradicted by reality; the quality of life on the planet has actually improved with an increase in population, as well established by studies of economic historian Julian Simon, who makes the case that a critical mass of humans is necessary for progress and creative development, as shown by the last two centuries of tremendous human development and improvements in quality of life across the planet. 

Is it possible these enviros are, like most on the left, people who claim to care about the human race but don’t really care about human beings—and are misanthropic to the core as an ideological mind set—concerned about an abstraction, the human collective, but unconcerned about real live humans?

Graphic credit: Pixabay

The author is a physician and inactive attorney in Brownwood, Texas.

I like to remind people that the enviros, top to bottom, side to side, are misanthropists; they consider the human race a cancer on the planet.  They hope to achieve a planetary wildlife park where the only humans allowed are the park rangers, who belong to their federation of environmental exclusives.

Here’s a good sampling of the attitudes of enviro fanatics, with the proviso that the current human population on planet earth is north of 5 billion and these statements are only a small sample of the larger environmentalist position on population and human habitation of the planet Earth:

David Brower, founder of the Sierra Club: ”Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

Club of Rome: ”…the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion.”

Susan Blakemore, a UK Guardian science journalist: ”For the planet’s sake, I hope we have bird flu or some other thing that will reduce the population, because otherwise we’re doomed.”

Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: “The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery”.

Bill Gates, Microsoft billionaire, funder of enviro causes: ”The world today has 6.8 billion people…that’s headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent.”

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, architect of the new Germanic masterplan, the ‘Great Transformation’: ”When you imagine that if all these 9 billion people claim all these resources, then the earth will explode.”

Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity marine biologist, French scientist: ”In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day.”

These doomsday proclamations are contradicted by reality; the quality of life on the planet has actually improved with an increase in population, as well established by studies of economic historian Julian Simon, who makes the case that a critical mass of humans is necessary for progress and creative development, as shown by the last two centuries of tremendous human development and improvements in quality of life across the planet. 

Is it possible these enviros are, like most on the left, people who claim to care about the human race but don’t really care about human beings—and are misanthropic to the core as an ideological mind set—concerned about an abstraction, the human collective, but unconcerned about real live humans?

Graphic credit: Pixabay

The author is a physician and inactive attorney in Brownwood, Texas.

With half of the country apparently completely unhinged (that includes all of the Democrat presidential candidates, a seemingly large portion of the Democrat Party more generally, the mainstream media, academia, and much of Hollywood) due to their psychologically sick abhorrence for the President of the United States, lies claiming that Donald Trump is a white supremacist, racist, and anti-Semitic bigot are rampant.

The veracity (and sanity) of such accusations is irrelevant.  When half of a nation suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome, surely an illness that  officially should become part of  psychiatry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, one begins to understand what Joe Biden meant when he said, “We choose truth over facts.” For Trump haters, the truth is in the eyes of the beholder, the facts be damned.  For Trump haters – like the folks at MSNBC who perpetuate these lies 24/7, Donald Trump is Adolf Hitler and Republicans are Nazis. Anyone who thinks there is even a modicum of truth in anything being discussed by these radical leftists, who have not told the truth since Trump won the nomination – from Russia collusion to the Charlottesville Lie,  clearly suffers from hate and ignorance.

But facts are stubborn things. Fox News contributor and NRO columnist Deroy Murdock compiled a list of quotes and videos that prove that Donald Trump has spent his presidency seeking to unite Americans, condemn hate, and heal the divide that the left insists on growing for political and ideological motives, the well-being of the country and its citizens be damned.  Deroy’s column, “Don’t Ignore Trump’s Unifying, Anti-Racist Rhetoric” can be read here, and the video montage (produced by Grabien Inc.) “Trump Condemns Racism, Hatred, & White Nationalism Throughout His First Term,” can be viewed below: 

These should be shared far and wide, as those of us who are sane, healthy, and patriotic must be the warriors who fight against the left’s real bigotry against and hatred of every American who has or will vote for Donald Trump.

“Where is the White House?” one friend, a veteran conservative activist wondered. “Where is the RNC? Where, for goodness sake, is Trump 2020? President Trump endured brutal fire from the minute the El Paso gunman was identified until — it hasn’t ended — with the ‘Trump = Hitler rhetoric gushing from the Left like a Gatling gun. If any of these well-paid and well-staffed organizations did anything to defend the president on this issue — which is their bloody job — it must have been with invisible ink and self-destructing video tape. Trump supporters have every right to feel frustrated and betrayed as those who work for him take this incoming fire and respond, at best, with spitballs.”

 As the War on Trump rages, the RNC, the White House, and the Trump 2020 campaign seem MIA in defending President Trump and his morality and values.  Thank you, Deroy, and the few passionate enough to dig up the truth and share it with the American public.

Image credit: Grabien screen grab

With half of the country apparently completely unhinged (that includes all of the Democrat presidential candidates, a seemingly large portion of the Democrat Party more generally, the mainstream media, academia, and much of Hollywood) due to their psychologically sick abhorrence for the President of the United States, lies claiming that Donald Trump is a white supremacist, racist, and anti-Semitic bigot are rampant.

The veracity (and sanity) of such accusations is irrelevant.  When half of a nation suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome, surely an illness that  officially should become part of  psychiatry’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, one begins to understand what Joe Biden meant when he said, “We choose truth over facts.” For Trump haters, the truth is in the eyes of the beholder, the facts be damned.  For Trump haters – like the folks at MSNBC who perpetuate these lies 24/7, Donald Trump is Adolf Hitler and Republicans are Nazis. Anyone who thinks there is even a modicum of truth in anything being discussed by these radical leftists, who have not told the truth since Trump won the nomination – from Russia collusion to the Charlottesville Lie,  clearly suffers from hate and ignorance.

But facts are stubborn things. Fox News contributor and NRO columnist Deroy Murdock compiled a list of quotes and videos that prove that Donald Trump has spent his presidency seeking to unite Americans, condemn hate, and heal the divide that the left insists on growing for political and ideological motives, the well-being of the country and its citizens be damned.  Deroy’s column, “Don’t Ignore Trump’s Unifying, Anti-Racist Rhetoric” can be read here, and the video montage (produced by Grabien Inc.) “Trump Condemns Racism, Hatred, & White Nationalism Throughout His First Term,” can be viewed below: 

These should be shared far and wide, as those of us who are sane, healthy, and patriotic must be the warriors who fight against the left’s real bigotry against and hatred of every American who has or will vote for Donald Trump.

“Where is the White House?” one friend, a veteran conservative activist wondered. “Where is the RNC? Where, for goodness sake, is Trump 2020? President Trump endured brutal fire from the minute the El Paso gunman was identified until — it hasn’t ended — with the ‘Trump = Hitler rhetoric gushing from the Left like a Gatling gun. If any of these well-paid and well-staffed organizations did anything to defend the president on this issue — which is their bloody job — it must have been with invisible ink and self-destructing video tape. Trump supporters have every right to feel frustrated and betrayed as those who work for him take this incoming fire and respond, at best, with spitballs.”

 As the War on Trump rages, the RNC, the White House, and the Trump 2020 campaign seem MIA in defending President Trump and his morality and values.  Thank you, Deroy, and the few passionate enough to dig up the truth and share it with the American public.

Image credit: Grabien screen grab

Iranians who gathered in Islam’s holy city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia over the weekend for the annual hajj pilgrimage called for Israel’s destruction and chanted “Death to America.”

Every year, millions of Muslims make the annual religious pilgrimage to Mecca, which began Friday.

At a “disavowal of polytheists” ceremony in Mecca, the reading of a message from Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reportedly prompted a crowd of Iranian hajj pilgrims to chant, “Death to America! Death to Israel! … America is the enemy of Allah! Israel is the enemy of Allah [and] should be erased from the face of the Earth!”