EU Rebrands Pedophiles as ‘People with a Sexual Interest in Children’

The Scotland police recently referred to pedophiles as “minor attracted people.” Many expressed outrage over this attempt to normalize the abuse of children. Now comes this.

The West is sinking deeper and deeper into a Kafkaesque mix of socialism and depravity, while the Churches remain largely silent instead of protecting Judeo-Christian values and innocent children.

The “EU project’s use of the term Minor-Attracted People (MAPs) to describe paedophiles” is causing a huge backlash. Let’s hope that those who are dissenting succeed in stopping this abuse. The European Commission “is funding the Drag Queen Shows across Europe,” which means taxpayers are funding it, with no say in where their money is going.

“Horrible Propaganda” – EU Project Rebrands Paedophiles ‘People with a Sexual Interest in Children

by Peter Caddle, Breitbart, January 16, 2023:

A Member of the European Parliament (MEP) has accused the European Union of pushing “horrible propaganda” after a project described paedophiles as “people with a sexual interest in children”, accusing the bloc of seeking to rebrand them with a term that is both “more appealing and morally neutral”.

Cristian Terhes, a Romanian MEP who sits with the European Conservatives and Reformists group, has slammed the EU for allegedly pushing for the term “paedophile” to be replaced with something “more appealing and morally neutral”.

It comes after controversy surrounding an EU project’s use of the term Minor-Attracted People (MAPs) to describe paedophiles, despite the fact that the term is highly controversial, and seen by some as overly sympathetic towards predators.

However, despite the use of the term prompting huge backlash only last month, Terhes claims that the EU still seems to be trying to soften the language around paedophiles, with another EU project on child protection repeatedly referring to them as “people with a sexual interest in children”.

“I am shocked and appalled, in equal measure, that the European Commission was, until very recently… replacing the term ‘paedophile’ with the more appealing and morally neutral phrase of Minor Attracted Person,” Terhes alleged in comments to Breitbart Europe.

“They even intensified this horrible propaganda and are now talking of ‘people with a sexual interest in children’,” he continued.

“This attitude of the European Commission to soft soap an evil and criminal behaviour, like paedophilia, is dangerous and a threat to all children in Europe,” the public representative went on to say, calling for the project in question to be withdrawn by European Commission, currently led by Germany’s Ursula von der Leyen.

The Romanian MEP also took aim at the EU’s continued funding of drag queen shows for children, with the bloc giving financial support to drag projects in the likes of Germany, Spain, and Slovenia.

One project sponsored by the EU that took place in Berlin — titled ‘Drag It Up!’ — saw “38 young queer people” trained in the art of drag, with those involved being taught to put on makeup and wigs, walk in high heels, and implement “methods of blurring and exaggerating traditional binary gender roles”….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Perverts, pedophiles and pederasts in high offices

Harvard reverses course, reinstates fellowship for antisemitic activist after pressure from anti-Israel lobby

Germany: Turkish politicians vows to hunt down and ‘destroy’ those who ‘distort and Christianize the Muslim faith’

NYC’s Mayor Can Go To The Border, But He Can’t Say Build a Wall

Indiana: News reports on racist attack feature Hamas-linked CAIR, although no Muslims were involved

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Atheist Anti-Capitalists Miss the Point

If an economist sees the handiwork of God in the economy, does that invalidate his economic arguments from a secular perspective?

The great economist Ludwig von Mises, who himself was either atheist or agnostic, noted that:

“Many economists, among them Adam Smith and Bastiat, believed in God. Hence they admired in the facts they had discovered the providential care of ‘the great Director of Nature.’ Atheist critics blame them for this attitude.”

For instance, Adam Smith famously wrote of how producers in a market economy are “led by an invisible hand” to benefit the public even when they only seek private profit.

And Frédéric Bastiat warned humanity against “rejecting the order God has given it” in favor of the grand schemes of social reformers.

Leonard Read, in his essay “I, Pencil” wrote of how, in the market production of a pencil, “we find the Invisible Hand at work.” His pencil narrator concludes, “Since only God can make a tree, I insist that only God could make me.”

All three thinkers contributed mightily to the case for the free market. Anti-capitalist critics have tried to dismiss that case as relying on religious faith, citing the references to God and the invisible hand. Free-market defenders have countered that Smith, Bastiat, and Read were speaking figuratively, not literally.

However, even if they were speaking literally, and even if atheism is true, it still would not invalidate their arguments. That is because those arguments did not rely on a divine characterization of the economy.

The point being made by Smith, Bastiat, and Read in the relevant passages is that, in an economy consisting of acting human individuals, there is a perceivable order that emerges from the planned actions of those individuals but that transcends the plans of any single individual. In that sense, the market order is transcendent relative to the order created by any single market participant.

Smith, Bastiat, and Read demonstrated that transcendent order using economic reasoning and empirical observations about human nature. That demonstration did not rely at all on religious premises. This is plain to see in any honest reading of Smith’s Wealth of Nations, Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies, and Read’s “I, Pencil.” Whether those men saw in that transcendent order something literally divine has no bearing on the validity of their reasoned demonstration of that order.

A cross-discipline comparison may make this point easier to see.

Whereas Smith, Bastiat, and Read examined the economic order of society, Sir Isaac Newton studied the physical order of the material universe. And it is well-established that Newton, as Mises said of Smith and Bastiat, “admired in the facts [he] had discovered the providential care of ‘the great Director of Nature.’”

For instance, Newton wrote in his Optics, “Whence is it that Nature doth nothing in vain? And whence arises all that order and beauty which we see in the world?” “From God” was clearly Newton’s answer.

Would anti-capitalist atheists argue that that discredits Newton’s physics?

Surely not. They would acknowledge in this case what they refuse to acknowledge in the other: that Newton demonstrated the order of the physical universe using reason and evidence, and that whether he saw in that order something literally divine has no bearing on the validity of his reasoned demonstration.

Why the double-standard? It is probably due to the fact that the critics of Smith, Bastiat, and Read have an axe to grind against capitalism, but not physics. And they are particularly loath to concede that there is a transcendent order to the market, because such an order would put a crimp in their plans.

As Mises wrote, throughout most of history people assumed that “there was in the course of social events no such regularity and invariance of phenomena as had already been found in the operation of human reasoning and in the sequence of natural phenomena.”

In other words, people assumed there were no social equivalents to the laws of logic, math, and physics circumscribing human endeavors. Oblivious to any such restrictions, “Speculative minds drew ambitious plans for a thorough reform and reconstruction of society.” As Mises wrote:

“They did not search for the laws of social cooperation because they thought that man could organize society as he pleased. If social conditions did not fulfill the wishes of the reformers, if their Utopias proved unrealizable, the fault was seen in the moral failure of man. Social problems were considered ethical problems. What was needed in order to construct the ideal society, they thought, was good princes and virtuous citizens. With righteous men any Utopia might be realized.

The discovery of the inescapable interdependence of market phenomena overthrew this opinion.” (…)

“In the course of social events there prevails a regularity of phenomena to which man must adjust his actions if he wishes to succeed.”

In other words, economists discovered economic laws that, together, make up a transcendent, immutable order to the market society. And human beings ignore those laws and that order at their own peril.

As Dave Prychitko put it, “Economics is the art of putting parameters on our utopias.” Economic laws can be denied, but they cannot be defied, even by the grandest kings, the most ingenious lawgivers, the most brutal dictators, the most ambitious central planners, or the most self-righteous social reformers.

A president who thinks he can defy the law of supply and demand and impose price ceilings without incurring shortages will fail, just as he would if he thought he could defy the law of gravity by stepping off his presidential palace without falling.

And any bureaucrat who, in defiance of “the knowledge problem,” thinks he can outperform the free-market price system in coordinating the production of pencils will similarly fail, as Leonard Read’s “I, Pencil” makes plain.

Those who try to dismiss “I, Pencil” do not want to admit that they or their favorite social schemers cannot outsmart or outdo the transcendent order of the market. Those who sneer at the invisible hand want a free hand to remold society as they please.

But intellectually honest secular thinkers unburdened by such an agenda will not get hung up on any differences over religion they have with Smith, Bastiat, and Read. Like Mises, they will see the wisdom in acknowledging, respecting, and even wondering at the transcendent order of the market society, whether or not they attribute that order to God.

AUTHOR

Dan Sanchez

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in-chief of FEE.org. Follow him on Substack and Twitter.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Joe Biden: The Bull Connor of the Pro-Abortion Movement

For a man who ran for president to save the soul of America from racism, former segregationists’ buddy Joe Biden resembles few people more than the infamously abusive police chief Bull Connor. Both allowed domestic terrorists aligned with the Democratic Party to vandalize, bomb, and set fire to their opponents’ churches with impunity while using maximum force to arrest peaceful, Christian, protesters.

Sixty years later, little more than the names and faces have changed: Connor’s allies rallied behind the banner of white supremacy, while Biden’s supporters mobilize around “abortion on demand without apology.” The Biden administration’s refusal to protect pro-life Christians bears an eerie resemblance to Bull Connor’s collusion and selective prosecution. Imagine how civil rights protesters would have fared if George Wallace won the 1964 presidential election, and you get a sense of Biden’s treatment of peaceful, prayerful, pro-life advocates.

‘We’re Going to Allow You 15 Minutes….’

The Freedom Riders, who tested Southern segregation laws from Virginia to New Orleans, planned to stop in Birmingham on May 14, 1961. The Ku Klux Klan — and the Alabama lawman they helped elect Birmingham’s Commissioner of Public Safety, Theophilus Eugene “Bull” Connor — had other plans. The KKK plotted a series of coordinated strikes against the protesters spanning multiple cities. Klansmen knew the details of the demonstrators’ travel itinerary, because the Birmingham sheriff’s department told them — and the sheriff’s department knew, because the FBI told them. As the protesters departed Georgia, Martin Luther King Jr. warned the Freedom Riders, “You will never make it through Alabama.”

In the days leading up to their arrival, Bull Connor personally gave the Klan the green light to rough up Yankee “meddlers.” Connor’s right-hand man, Birmingham Police Department Sgt. Thomas H. Cook, arranged for a meeting with a man named Gary Thomas Rowe, a member of a violent chapter of the Klan — but also an FBI informant. Historian Raymond Arsenault recounts the scene:

Unaware that Rowe planned to relay his words to the Birmingham FBI office, Cook laid out an elaborate plot to bring the Freedom Ride to a halt in Birmingham. He assured Rowe that other members of the Birmingham Police Department, as well as officials of the Alabama Highway Patrol, were privy to the plan and could be counted on to cooperate. “You will work with me and I will work with you on the Freedom Riders,” he promised. “We’re going to allow you 15 minutes. …You can beat ‘em, bomb ‘em, maim ‘em, kill ‘em. I don’t give a s***. There will be absolutely no arrests. You can assure every Klansman in the country that no one will be arrested in Alabama for that fifteen minutes.”

“By God, if you’re going to do this thing,” Cook later told the Imperial Wizard of the Alabama Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Robert Shelton, “do it right.” Similarly, Bull Connor instructed the Klan to “make them look like a bulldog got a hold of them.”

The Klan didn’t have to be told twice; they planned to strike twice. They swarmed the first of the two vehicles, a Greyhound bus, when it arrived in nearby Anniston, breaking its windows and slashing its tires. Police escorted the protesters as far as the city limits … where the Klansmen were waiting. One Klansman threw an explosive device into the back of the bus and, as protesters scurried out of the door for their lives, the mob beat them savagely. “Then, God Almighty intervened,” remembered Hank Thomas: The bus’s gas tank exploded in two bursts, frightening the crowd away. “A miracle happened in Anniston.”

Klansmen posed as passengers of the Trailways bus carrying the other group of Freedom Riders. In Anniston, the Klan insisted the riders segregate the bus and pummeled several passengers — including Walter Bergman, then age 61 — to make their point. Although Bergman would remained partially paralyzed for the rest of his life and have to learn to feed himself again, a local policeman told his assailants, “Don’t worry about no lawsuits. I ain’t seen a thing.”

Unfortunately, the real violence awaited in Birmingham. Confident they would face no repercussions, the Klan invited CBS News reporter Howard K. Smith to witness the violence as the bloodied protesters descended the bus stairs to desegregate the terminal’s lunch counters. A mob of Klansmen (including the FBI informant, Rowe) and members of the National States Rights Party swarmed, sometimes beating protesters 12-on-one. The melee continued until one of Connor’s detectives, Red Self, told the Klansmen: “Get the boys out of here. I’m ready to give the signal for the police to move in.”

Faced with local intransigence, the FBI would soon arrest the four people responsible for firebombing the Greyhound, but it would be far from the last act of unpunished violence. A tragic 40 unsolved bombings over two decades earned the city the nickname “Bombingham.”

Not content to outsource his brutality to the Klan, Bull Connor ordered his police to use all means necessary to quash the message of Christian civil rights protesters.

Release the Guilty, Jail the Innocent

Bull Connor’s police proved more likely to arrest peaceful protesters than the Klansmen perpetrators. In April 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” courtesy of Connor’s constabulary. As King and his supporters went to jail for “parading without a permit” (holding unauthorized demonstrations), Connor said:

[W]e are not going to stand for this in Birmingham. And if necessary we will fill the jail full, and we don’t care whose toes we step on. I am saying now to these meddlers from out of our city, the best thing for them to do is stay out if they don’t want to get slapped in jail. … I’ve never seen anyone yet look for trouble who wasn’t able to find it.

Volunteers evaporated from the desegregation campaign. King’s group, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), responded with “The Children’s Crusade,” recruiting more than 1,000 schoolchildren to march through Birmingham on May 2 and 3, 1963. As the youngsters left the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church carrying signs with such messages as, “Segregation is a sin,” Connor’s men arrested 959 the first night. But they did not merely apprehend the marchers: Police blasted young children with high-powered firehoses, beat them with batons, and sicced police dogs on them.

The cruelty was the point. The pretense of law masked ruthless hatred, as segregationists used overwhelming force to discourage them from ever again publicly voicing views disfavored by the powerful.

As the French say, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.” The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Joe Biden Bull-ies the Pro-Life Movement

Fast forward 60 years, and violent hatemongers with powerful political allies have again received free rein to terrorize their nonviolent, Christian foes. But Jane’s Revenge has enjoyed more than a 15-minute reign of terror. Since the leak of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling last May 2, pro-abortion fanatics have launched a wave of arsons, vandalism, and death threats against at least 101 pro-life churches or pregnancy resource centers. Abortion activists firebombed pro-life pregnancy resource centers in the same way Bull Connor let the Klan firebomb Freedom Riders’ buses — with the same number of arrests: zero. Leftist extremists perpetrated 52 attacks before the FBI even announced its investigation.

This wave of violence, like most cowardly violence, targets the powerless — unborn babies, their desperate mothers, and the nonviolent Christian churches and nonprofits that serve them — but this wave also victimized the powerful with impunity. On June 13, two people threw a lit flare into the offices of Washington State Rep. Andy Barkis (R). Eight days later, vandals smashed the windows at the local office of U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.). Like the Klan in Alabama, pro-abortion fanatics feel confident enough to leave their calling card — often scrawling, “If abortion isn’t safe, neither are you” on pro-life women’s centers and churches — and to alert the media they will take “increasingly drastic measures.”

Biden’s nonfeasance embodies the administration’s defiant message that its ideological opponents enjoy no legal protection — a far cry from the promise Biden made the day after the media declared him winner of the 2020 election: “I will work as hard for those who didn’t vote for me as those who did.” The atmosphere of hatred has resulted in an 84-year-old pro-life woman being shot. (The male suspect said he shot her by accident.)

At least one congressman has connected the dots. The wave of anti-life terrorism represents “the death cult’s echo of the KKK’s burning cross — brazen, violent intimidation,” said Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.). “But the federal government responded to the KKK. Where is the Biden Justice Department amid this violent campaign of national scope?” The administration, and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), instead aim to “put a stop” to pro-life pregnancy resource centers.

“To my knowledge, no one — no one — has been prosecuted under the FACE Act,” noted Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) as House Republicans passed a resolution condemning violence against pregnancy resource centers on January 11. J. Edgar Hoover, who shared the racial views of his time, arrested the Anniston bombers in a matter of days. In a world of high-definition security cameras and facial recognition software, Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland have apparently arrested no one in eight months.

At least, no one who shares the administration’s extreme commitment to abortion. “But if you’re a pro-life activist, and you’re praying outside of an abortion clinic like Mark Houck, guess what happens to you?” asked Jordan. “The FBI kicks in your door, arrests you, puts you in handcuffs, and does it in front of your wife and seven children,” using dozens of heavily armed agents. Biden’s DOJ meted out similar treatment to Paul Vaughn, a 55-year-old father of 11. Just as black-and-white footage of Bull Connor unleashing his dogs on children inspired national revulsion of segregation, Biden’s overreach should inspire outrage at federal collusion with the abortion industry.

As pregnancy resource centers burned, in July Biden’s Justice Department established the Reproductive Rights Task Force to take “proactive and defensive legal action” to protect the abortion industry (and punish its foes) — and tapped as its leader Vanita Gupta, who as a “civil rights” officer in Obama’s DOJ tried to force all public schools to allow men to use women’s restrooms, showers, and overnight accommodations or lose all federal funding. She applied her ideological fervor equally well to abortion. Biden’s Justice Department arrested 26 pro-life advocates by last October, with more following, including:

  • Franciscan friar Fr. Fidelius Mocinski (whose birth name was Christopher), just as local New Jersey prosecutors dropped charges for conducting his “Red Rose Rescues”: entering abortion facilities and giving mothers red roses. In this case, he lay down in front of an abortion facility’s entrance, just as protesters in the ‘60s laid down in front of Lyndon Johnson’s presidential limousine. (“If any demonstrator ever lays down in front of my car,” cracked segregationist Governor George Wallace of Alabama (D) during the 1968 presidential campaign, “it’ll be the last car he’ll ever lay down in front of.”);
  • Nine defendants who entered a Washington, D.C., abortion facility and sang “let there be peace” (as a live-stream of the event shows) in October 2020. At least one of the women had participated in Rose Rescues;
  • Eleven defendants who entered an abortion facility in Tennessee in March 2021. If convicted, some of the defendants stand to serve up to 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and fines totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars;
  • Pastor Daniel Courney of Enfield, N.J., one month after it wrung an agreement out of him not to commit “future FACE Act violations” — which, out of fear, would effectively cause him to end his presence outside abortion facilities; and
  • Bevelyn Williams and Edmee Chavannes, who happen to be black women from the South, for allegedly violating the FACE Act as far back as June 2020. (Curiously, their indictment begins with peaceful pro-life activity in 2019.) In one alleged violation in the indictment, Chavannes told an abortion facility employee, “Do not touch me.”

The arrest total seems all the more lopsided, since pro-life women’s centers are 22 times more likely to be attacked than abortion facilities. Both Gupta and Garland touted their work prosecuting pro-life advocates at a civil rights assembly last December. Both invoked Martin Luther King Jr.

As noted, in many cases the Biden administration presses pro-life advocates to sign agreements not to protest any more — a similar tactic employed by the Obama-Biden administration. A federal judge questioned whether the Obama-Biden administration’s prosecution of Mary Susan Pine “was the product of a concerted effort between the Government and the [abortion provider], which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities.” (Ultimately, the DOJ paid Pine $120,000 in legal fees.) One could be forgiven for asking the same question of these cases.

A trial may conclude some of these acts violated the law, just as civil rights protesters violated the law of their day — the law their peaceful, prayerful actions aimed to change. But today’s prayerful pro-life advocates see their homes raided, not aided, by the federal government led by a vice president who raised bail money for the BLM’s “mostly peaceful” rioters. They face enormous legal bills, a criminal record, huge fines, and perhaps more than a decade in prison.

Despite these pressures, the pro-life movement has not buckled, as the terrorists and their federal government enablers wished. When bombed, they have rebuilt. When denied protection, they have secured their ministries of mercy. When denied justice, they hired their own private investigators. They have suffered long and done good. They have emerged from the fiery crucible of persecution with a stronger resolve to help the weak and save the innocent. The pro-life movement is “hard-pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed — always carrying about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body” … And, one day, manifested in our laws.

We shall overcome.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Social Determinants of Health: A Trojan Horse

Yesterday, I told you how government healthcare programs are getting bigger and how this is the wrong direction for the country.  I also mentioned a relatively new theory from the Left – social determinants of health [SDOH] – that is about to make government healthcare programs even bigger.

Social determinants of health is the idea that social factors like housing, income, and employment have more to do with a person’s health than do individual risk factors like behavior and genetics.  So, if you give poor people free housing, free food, free employment services, free education, free transportation, other free services, and guarantee their income, their health will get better.  This will reduce hospital admissions, as well as overall health spending, the theory goes.  At least that’s the cover story.  The real agenda is radical egalitarian redistribution of income.  But the theory sounds good.  It sounds right.  It sounds plausible.  However, there’s just one problem.  There’s very little evidence for this happy-face assertion.  Billions have already spent on the theory, but the track record of real-world results is not good.

Unfortunately, that hasn’t stopped the government from rushing pell-mell into social determinants of health and into the arms of the people pushing it.  The Biden administration recently announced it is giving states discretion to cover social services under their Medicaid programs.

No one is asking how much this is going to cost.  The federal deficit is already $421 billion for the current fiscal year which began in October.  Sorry, but Uncle Sugar doesn’t have unlimited pots of money.  If the true agenda is redistribution, how much more do you think there is to get with a deficit like that?   Would we even be talking about spending money on social determinants of health if we had to balance our budget?    Also, no one is asking about the downsides.  Nothing in life is perfect.  Shouldn’t lawmakers be informed of the negative consequences before being asked to vote on such a thing?  And speaking of Congress, this sounds like a major change that cannot be done by agency regulation alone under recent Supreme Court jurisprudence.  So where is Congress on this?  Are they falling down on the job again by not reining in agencies from committing us to huge new expenditures without congressional authorization?  Why am I the only one asking these questions?

Tax-exempt hospitals spent $2.5 billion on social determinants of health – housing, employment, education, and food security – from 2017 to 2019.  They are obligated to provide community benefit in exchange for their tax exemptions.  But their spending on social determinants initiatives has fallen off more recently because the evidence such initiatives are effective is limited, a study found.  Another study found social spending reduces unnecessary healthcare use but the costs outweigh the benefits.  Other researchers found no association between overall community benefit spending and hospital readmission rates.  These researchers concluded “the evidence for health outcome improvements from interventions focused on social determinants is thin…. This is very little evidence on which to base billions in investment….”  The study concluding the costs outweighed the benefits found $3.4 million in healthcare savings after $22.4 million was spent on a social determinants case management program.  Costs running seven times bigger than the savings – doesn’t sound like a smart investment to me.

This begs the question: if the evidence is so thin and even counter to what proponents claim, why proceed?  Why is the federal government itching to spend more money on social determinants of health?  Especially when social determinants theory has been criticized for ignoring the importance on health outcomes of personal choices and responsibility regarding alcohol, tobacco, junk food, drugs, and gambling.  Moreover, in a previous commentary, I criticized social determinants theory for ignoring the magnet effect of free stuff from the government drawing ever-larger numbers of people into government dependency.  Wrong direction.

The current administration has made no bones about working towards ‘equity’, ensuring equal outcomes, and redistribution.  Social determinants of health theory – which comes from the redistributionist World Health Organization – is tailor-made for the Biden administration’s goals, whether the theory makes any sense or not.

In making its announcement states can add social determinants to their Medicaid programs, the administration said it will require states to show their social outlays are cost-effective, something the research has failed to show convincingly, so far.  Whether the administration really means it is anybody’s guess, but Republicans on Capitol Hill need to police this to make sure the analysis is on the up and up and to shut the initiative down if it turns out it’s just another redistributionist boondoggle without any real benefit, aside from making redistributionists feel good about being so virtuous in giving away other people’s money.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED VIDEO: Woke ChatGPT could be your next doctor, crazy people want to put tampons in boy’s bathrooms, and Chrissy uncovers some masculinity on TikTok.

Where Has Kamala Harris Been For Seven Months?

Vice President Kamala Harris has apparently disappeared from leading any public events on migration — dodging one of the responsibilities bestowed upon her by the president — for over seven months, a Daily Caller analysis found.

The last time Harris led an event on migration was on June 7, 2022, when she announced nearly $2 billion in additional funding to address the “root causes” of migration. She has not led a migration event since and did not accompany President Joe Biden on his first trip to the border, according to a Daily Caller analysis of White House public statements.

In December, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said she didn’t have any updates on what Harris has been doing on migration. Harris’ office did not respond to an inquiry from the Daily Caller posing the question, “has she done anything on migration” since June?

Instead of Harris tackling illegal migration issues, White House public statements show her attention visibly shifted to abortion, diplomacy and diversity events in the second half of 2022.

A large part of Harris’ summer was spent pushing abortion rights after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in May and speaking to state leaders across the country about reproductive rights. Since her last migration related event, Harris had at least 28 meetings with various leaders about reproductive rights, including with Latina state legislators and disability rights leaders.

Harris’ abortion efforts were accompanied by meetings with foreign leaders. In the last seven months, she met with the presidents of Mexico, France, South Korea, South Africa and Moldova; traveled to South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines and Japan; spoke with leaders of the Pacific Islands, Nigeria, and the Caribbean, the president of Guyana, and the prime ministers of Canada, Australia, South Korea, Japan, Poland, Jamaica and Lithuania. She also participated in the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit.

She also participated in at least 10 events for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), held events as the chair of the National Space Council, and advertised the administration’s legislative agenda — like the Inflation Reduction Act — across the country. Other Harris events include those on climateLGBT rights, and a flurry of Democratic campaigning before the midterms.

Biden appointed Harris to lead the migration efforts of the administration in March of 2021, saying, “it’s not her full responsibility and job, but she’s leading the effort.”

“I’ve asked her, the VP, today — because she’s the most qualified person to do it — to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle and the countries that help — are going to need help in stemming the movement of so many folks, stemming the migration to our southern border,” Biden said at the time.

The Biden administration has experienced record numbers of illegal immigrant encounters, with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recording 250,000 encounters in December — the highest in history. Several CBP agents have committed suicide amid the record numbers, and the U.S. is undergoing a fentanyl epidemic due to the drug being smuggled across the border.

On Jan. 5, before Biden’s trip to the border, the president said he was “proud” of Harris for securing $3.2 billion in private sector funding for Central America. Harris did not participate in the remarks on the administration’s border strategy, and just jumped in to fill in for Biden’s gaffes.

AUTHOR

DIANA GLEBOVA

White House correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kamala Harris Was AWOL For Biden’s First Border Trip

EXCLUSIVE: Guatemalan President Lays Out How One Biden Policy Caused Migrants To Swarm The Border

After Solving The Border Crisis, The White House Is Deploying Kamala Harris To Save Abortion

NYC Mayor Says His City Has ‘No Room’ For Illegal Migrants During Border Visit

New York City Mayor Eric Adams Pressures Gov. Kathy Hochul To Push Migrants Upstate

Arizona Farmers Claim Migrant Crossings Contaminate Crops, Threaten American Food Security

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Wisconsin Special Counsel Finds Zuckerberg’s Election Money Violated State Bribery Laws

Here we are again, more election fraud, more election interference, and yet there is no redress, no recourse. No action. We are living a dystopian nightmare.

Wisconsin Special Counsel Finds Zuckerberg’s Election Money Violated State Bribery Laws | Facts Matter

The Epoch Times

The special counsel who was appointed to study the 2020 election in Wisconsin submitted his official report, in which he determined that the millions of dollars that Mark Zuckerberg spent on the Wisconsin election violated the state’s laws in regard to bribery.

That’s beside the multiple other issues the special counsel found, which included unconstitutional drop boxes, illegal directives from the elections commission in regard to nursing homes, as well as problems with the voter rolls themselves.

Watch here…..

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

AZ Court of Appeals to Hear Kari Lake’s Case 

Bye Bye Voting Machines In This Arkansas County 

East Texas Lawmaker Files Bill to Help Push Prosecution of Election Crimes 

George Soros Open Border ‘Shadow Organization’ Sues Fla Gov DeSantis Over Migrant Flights

Democrat Introduces Legislation to Make White People Criticizing Minorities a Federal Crime

NYC: Soros DA Alvin Bragg Offers Sweetheart Plea Deal to Muslim Who Brutally Attacked Random Jew, “If I Could Do It Again, I Would Do It Again”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Diversity, Inc.

I argued last Friday the craziness about calling everything ‘racist’ wouldn’t be happening without diversity advocates drowning in money and using race to get more.  It’s race hustlers and poverty pimps, 2.0.

Antiracist author Ibram X. Kendi got $25,000 for a speech to a nonprofit housing agency in 2021.  Like a trained seal, he gave the audience exactly what they wanted to hear:  He said America is “deeply racist” and must be torn down and replaced with something completely new.  He also called for reparations, forced redistribution in order to eliminate the ‘racial wealth gap’.

Don’t tell him, but 1619 Project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones got a lot more for a speech she gave at a library last year – $40,000.  Her whole deal is that America was founded solely to protect the right to own slaves, a thesis that has been widely criticized and debunked by serious historians.

But the big money is in the federal government.  The American Rescue Plan contained $130 billion in racial equity grants for cities and counties.  The NIH has bought into the whole ‘systemic racism’ trip and is spending big bucks on it – $400,000 to send texts to Latino men telling them to exercise, and a million dollars to support its belief racial discrimination is what causes poor sleep among blacks.  Critics have called out the Transportation Department for spending millions on diversity, equity, and inclusion instead of paying proper attention to ensure the nation’s air traffic control system doesn’t go down, as it did last week.  Diversity trainers are making a fortune off the federal government.

Left-wing foundations are also pouring millions into diversity and critical race theory.  The MacArthur Foundation awarded the 1619 Project’s Nikole Hannah-Jones a $625,000 grant, then donated $5 million to Howard University which then hired her.  Foundation money is also behind the National Equity Atlas, which facilitates the redistribution of taxpayer money to census tracts that have higher minority populations and lower income.  Other foundations have pledged to spend $150 million and $180 million for “racial justice”, $100 million for “justice and equity”, $100 million for “racial equity”, and $200 million for diversity, equity, and inclusion ‘investments’.

Corporate America is another huge payday.  Big companies were falling all over themselves to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at now-disgraced Black Lives Matter and other racial justice initiatives in the George Floyd era.  You might be surprised to learn that Coca-Cola paid the NAACP and other civil rights groups to paint Coke’s opponents as racists on such issues as sugar taxes and food stamp funding for soda pop.

I should also mention that one giant German publisher – Bertelsmann – is behind the appearance of Ibram X. Kendi’s How to Be an Antiracist and other books that are now staples of Woke literature.  Whatever sells.

Sorry, folks, but I can’t take the whole racism trip seriously, not when I know it’s bought-and-paid-for by mega-foundations, giant corporations and, the deepest pocket of all, the federal government.  I refuse to be tyrannized by the phony hypersensitivities of a small group of hired guns – professional activists, the professionally outraged Left.  If you want to have a constructive conversation about legitimate racial grievances, you will not find a more willing partner than me.  As for the rest of it, cut the malarkey and get a real job.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED TWEET:

Facebook is dead unless you post something that does not matter

The inane trumps all on Zuckerberg’s social network.


Since Elon Musk has taken over Twitter, it’s been quite a wild ride. Thousands of doctors and scientists have been unbanned and are now speaking. Same with journalists. Accounts that posted against Covid restrictions and mandates are now unthrottled. Brownstone’s account is now at 31K and my own personal reach is up some 175 percent.

Of course, this is also infuriating. When we needed these voices the most was during the biggest attacks on liberty in our lifetime. Now that the powers that be have been forced by public opinion to dial back their oppressions, these voices can speak again. It’s good that the truth is getting out there, but imagine the kind of difference it would have made for these 33 months if there had been no blocks on information from the start?

Subtle unease

It’s a creepy feeling to know based on disclosures so far that I was certainly throttled. It did not matter what I posted, it got no traction. The censors — meaning certainly the government — learned over time that there might be too much provocation associated with outright bans. Turning down the dial on reach was a better way.

Of course, during this entire period, the same platform also invited you to pay for reach. Throw them a few bucks and they will give you some eyeballs. When the money runs out, you are back to where you were. You couldn’t prove the throttling. You just sensed it in your bones, but when you complained about it, people would throw it back at you: you just fail to admit that your content is unworthy!

In any case, now we know. There were FBI agents embedded all over the platform. The White House and various deep-state actors were pushing Twitter to censor. After a while, it became the main job of the platform to block reach, rather than actually doing what they are supposed to do.

Twitter is quasi-free now, but what about the rest?

Thought control

For years, my Facebook account has been irrelevant to me. I don’t even know why I bother using it at all. We know for sure that Facebook has been subject to the same controls that once affected Twitter. Same goes for LinkedIn and Google, of course. No doubt about that. My typical post sits there with almost no reach at all.

What I’ve not known is whether I’m targeted directly or m,y account has long been restricted by virtue of keywords and content. As everyone knows, I shifted my life three years ago to post entirely about the invasions of life, liberty, and property that commenced in 2020.

I did this not because I wanted to abandon other research projects, but rather because Covid became a window into the nefarious works of the ruling class I had long opposed. Plus few others seemed willing to speak out. Most of my own ideological set was predisposed to “leave this subject to the experts” and thus went silent. I went the other direction.

That decision killed my reach on Facebook. There was nothing I could do about it, so I decided just to forget it. But this morning, a friend had a great idea. He suggested that I post a cute animal picture with no other comment, other than to say it is a test. I did this very thing and posted the following picture:

The results: an explosion of reach! Out of nowhere it was like the old Facebook, with comments and conversations and shares, plus many hundreds of likes. Absolutely amazing! At least for me, this test suggests something important. Zuckerberg is surely flagging accounts, but the main means of control is content. Say something that means something, and your post disappears from feeds. Post something stupid and irrelevant, and you can have all the views you want.

Of course, Facebook’s business is selling your content in order to sell ads. That’s it, nothing more. But as a tool of state control of the public mind plus surveillance, it is extremely useful to state actors. And in the last three years, it has served this purpose very well. The platform is not dead, contrary to what seemed true, but rather directed toward a particular purpose. It’s not just selling ads. It’s selling an anodyne impression of a neutered public mind.

To be sure, if some website offered a deal to users — you post pics of lunch, cats, and flowers, and we give you ads — and it worked, fine. That’s normal terms of use. That’s not what is going on. Via explicit and implicit pressure, combined with irresponsible management, Facebook turned over its entire business model to government to deploy on behalf of regime interests. The customers and stockholders were the victims.

Scant choice

What applies here is also true for YouTubeInstagram, and all the rest of the mainstream platforms, which constitute the vast swath of social media content in existence. I like the alternative platforms, but they are small players by comparison. The freedom and reach we get today on Twitter is beautiful, but how long can it last? Is this a brief window that is opened before it shuts again?

Nothing has changed on the rest of them, which means that nothing has changed with regard to the state-directed censorship that took over our lives three years ago. That’s a terrifying reality, and especially so for intellectuals and writers who imagined some years ago that these tools would be a gift for making a difference in the world.

I’m inclined to think that the Elon Musk takeover of Twitter is a fluke — a lucky one to be sure, but the strange exception. He should watch his back. The main drive to control the conversation and shape the public mind is still with us: bad actors working to limit criticism of themselves and their policies. It is just as intense now as it was at the height of the lockdowns and drive for universal vaccination.

We’ve never needed the First Amendment more than we do now. And just when it became most necessary, it failed. We should all hope for victory in the lawsuits going on against the government, but what does victory mean? Who or what is going to make sure this does not happen again? We still don’t have a clear answer to that, but it is the burning question, especially since it is all still happening right under our noses.

And many people are okay with that, and just want to believe that all anyone really cares about are cute pictures of animals.

This article has been republished from the Brownstone Institute under a Creative Commons licence.

AUTHOR

Jeffrey Tucker

Jeffrey Tucker is Director of Content for the Foundation for Economic Education. He is also Chief Liberty Officer and founder of Liberty.me, Distinguished Honorary Member of Mises Brazil, research fellow… More by Jeffrey Tucker.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why Heroes Matter—And Now More Than Ever

You can find heroes of character in every country’s history, but at times it seems that we’ve forgotten more of them than we’re producing. 


All over the world, conflict seems on the rise. Sometimes it shows up in armed violence. More frequently, it manifests itself in character assassination, cancel culture, and class warfare. We spend too much time fighting each other and too little time appreciating each other. Entire swaths of our culture, especially politics, are drenched in lies and deception and hostility.

None of this bodes well for our future or, most importantly, for our liberties. As I explained in Are We Good Enough for Liberty?, a free society depends on high standards of personal character.

We need a break from the nastiness, the polarization, the dirty business of accentuating faults in each other and claiming victimhood. We need a moral and spiritual lift. We need to feel good again, if even for a few moments, if we’re ever to regain confidence in ourselves and our future. We need to be inspired by the words and deeds of real people whose lives are worth celebrating, whose examples are inherently inspirational.

In my 2016 book, Real Heroes: Inspiring True Stories of Courage, Character and Conviction, I profiled dozens of such men and women, from Marcus Tullius Cicero of ancient Rome to Anne Hutchinson of colonial New England to Major League Baseball star Roberto Clemente. Each rose above circumstance to display admirable qualities, proving that one man or one woman can make the world a better place by speaking truth to power, adhering to sound principles against the winds of prevailing custom, or by simply being a good person who takes charge of his life and offers a sterling example to others.

In the First Century B.C., Cicero defended the old Roman republic as its core values were being undermined by a growing welfare-warfare state. He spurned opportunities for great personal power and denounced the demagogues like Julius Caesar and Mark Antony who sought to snuff out personal liberties and constitutional government. He paid for his principles with his life but bequeathed the world a treasure trove of insightful speeches and letters. Nearly two millennia after Cicero challenged the authoritarians of his day, US President John Adams proclaimed that “All the ages of the world have not produced a greater statesman and philosopher” than him.

As America’s first feminist, Anne Hutchinson rocked the despotic, 17th Century theocracy of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. She organized public discussion groups that criticized both political and religious leaders for their errors and intolerance. That earned her a conviction in court, excommunication from her church, and banishment from the Colony but it planted seeds of liberty that would help form a new nation a century later.

Roberto Clemente, Major League Baseball’s first black Latino superstar, played for the Pittsburgh Pirates for 18 seasons that included two World Series championships (in 1960 and 1971). Along the way, he fought racial discrimination. He devoted much of his spare time to teaching baseball to young, poor boys in his native Puerto Rico. To help relieve the suffering of Nicaraguans after the devastating 1972 earthquake, he donated planeloads of supplies and, sadly, went down with one of them in the Caribbean. He’s still loved today by millions who remember him as a great athlete and a fine man, all around.

Great movements, countries, moments and achievements are marked by heroic individuals. Their heroism appears in many forms and is not unique to any sex, race, region or occupation. If we lack heroes today in our political life, perhaps it’s because we no longer celebrate as we once did the values that make a hero—values like uncompromising honesty, boundless courage, unflinching responsibility, uncommon vision, steadfast self-discipline and compassion that springs from one’s own heart rather than from another person’s wallet.

Maybe we’ve allowed ourselves to be lured away from those bedrock values by the loud and flamboyant, the ephemeral and superficial. We seem more interested in the here-and-now and “what’s in it for me” than either the right, the good or the eternal.

No matter where you may be on the political spectrum—liberal, conservative, libertarian or something else—you probably say that you want men and women in government to be honest, humble, fair, wise, independent, responsible, incorruptible, mindful of the future and respectful of others. But those things are often in direct conflict with the sort of concentration of power and money that attracts the corruptible and the already-corrupted. We should be encouraging the pursuit of truth, personal initiative, independence, self-reliance and virtue. We should discourage lies, dependency, and the use of politics and force to run our lives.

If you look for them, you can find heroes of character in every country’s history, but at times it seems that we’ve forgotten more of them than we’re producing.

Who remembers Fanny Crosby, one of the most revered women in the world barely a century ago? Despite life-long, total blindness, she wrote more hymns than any person ever. She was so sought after for her character that she met and conversed with an astounding 21 US presidents. She rose above her handicap and left the world better than she found it.

On my website, www.lawrencewreed.com, I’ve posted numerous stories about the heroes all around us—entrepreneurs, homeschoolers, inventors, dissidents, etc., etc. Check it out for some daily inspiration.

Early in the period of tyranny and all-powerful emperors, the great Roman historian Livy lamented the decline of heroic values that once spawned and sustained the Roman republic.

“Rome is at the dark dawning of an age,” he wrote, “in which we can neither endure our vices nor face the remedies needed to cure them.” Recovering the greatness of Rome, Livy believed, required an understanding of history and its heroes. “At least,” he offered, “it can remind us of what we once were and show us the depths to which we are now sinking.”

And that’s as true today as it was 2,000 years ago.

Heroes, Character and Freedom: An Interview with Lawrence W. Reed

Heroic Wealth Creators: A Speech at the Heritage Foundation

Character is the Gift That Keeps on Giving by Lawrence W. Reed

(A version of this essay appeared in ElAmerican.com in 2021).

AUTHOR

Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. Reed is FEE’s President Emeritus, Humphreys Family Senior Fellow, and Ron Manners Global Ambassador for Liberty, having served for nearly 11 years as FEE’s president (2008-2019). He is author of the 2020 book, Was Jesus a Socialist? as well as Real Heroes: Incredible True Stories of Courage, Character, and Conviction and Excuse Me, Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism. Follow on LinkedIn and Like his public figure page on Facebook. His website is www.lawrencewreed.com.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Shot to the Heart: Moderna Launches Development of mRNA Injection for Heart Attacks

You’d have to be mad or suicidal to take a controversial RNA vaccine to correct the crippling side effects of its predecessor RNA ‘vaccine’.

Moderna begins trialing mRNA shot that is injected directly into the HEART to treat heart attack patients

  • The shot encodes for relaxin, a hormone which is known to improve blood flow
  • Patients have received the injection in a phase one trial looking at dosage levels
  • Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel told Sky News: ‘It’s like science fiction medicine’

By CAITLIN TILLEY, HEALTH REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

Moderna is developing an mRNA shot that is injected directly into the hearts of heart attack and heart failure patients.

The ‘vaccine’ uses the same technology as the company’s flagship Covid jab and is designed for people weeks or months after a heart attack to help them recover.

It works by instructing human heart cells to generate a hormone that is known to improve blood flow, helping restore damaged heart muscles.

During a heart attack, muscle cells can start to die and cannot be re-generated. Roughly one in five people who have had a heart attack will be readmitted to the hospital for a second one within five years.

READ MORE.

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEO: Judgment Day for Pfizer

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

But the Garage was Locked!

Good day Joe Kahn, Executive Editor of the iconic tabloid The New York Times. I’m sure you are quite busy at your desk these days, covering the installed administration of Harris-Biden. As usual, those right wing lunatics are on the attack again, accusing Joey and his cabal, sorry I mean administration of corruption and incompetence…the nerve! I think we need to examine some of these outrageous accusations Kahny.

Joe’s Latest Dilemma

Well, it seems Kahny, that classified documents seem to be popping up all over the place lately. First, boxes of said documents first appeared at Joey’s office he occupied while vice president. This is what has been referred to as the ‘Biden think tank’—many have referred to this as the ultimate oxymoron. Then, another treasure trove of classified documents showed up at Joey’s house in Wilmington, Delaware.

Conservatives point out there are many inconsistencies and nefarious acts being perpetrated by the installed administration as well as the DOJ. Outrageous……right Kahny? Well, let’s see what they are talking about.

How This All Started

It seems that the Inspector General of the national archives contacted the DOJ on November 8th 2022, stating: the White House contacted the national archive to say that classified documents had been found in the closet of the office (the aforementioned ‘think tank’) used by Joey Biden when he was vice president. Then, the FBI started their investigation into this matter on November 9, 2022. Why are these dates important Kahny—well, I’m glad you asked. That is because the mid-term elections were held on NOVEMBER 8th, 2022. Quite the coincidence, eh Kahny? Maybe the FBI were still busy investigating Melania Trump’s lingerie drawer. It reminds me of another election year—2020, when the crack addict/energy expert/now famous artists laptop that was suppressed or dismissed as Russian disinformation (spearheaded by the reputable Adam Schiff)—since debunked. You actually went with that narrative Joe Kahn, Executive Editor of Pravda, I mean The NY Times. Well done Kahny, we’ll done.

Then this ‘Discovery’

Now, just days ago here in mid-January, it was revealed that more classified documents where found in Beijing Biden’s home—more precisely his garage! Yep, right between the box marked x-mas ornaments and his weedwhacker. They were located right behind Joey’s prized FOSSIL Fuel guzzling Corvette…..carbon footprint be damned, as far as Joey is concerned apparently.

Jean-Pierre Clears Things up

Well, what does the White House have to say about these accusations? When they asked Karine Jean-‘Goebbels’ Pierre, she said: “the president did not know that there were classified documents in his closet or garage.” Seems like a tad of a stretch, don’t ya think Kahny. I mean these documents were misplaced when he was the vice president—so it’s been years. I mean can’t you just see “Dr.” Jill saying—“Joey grab the box of Christmas ornaments, they are in the garage, next to the box marked classified documents!” “Ok honey, soon as I’m done with my pudding and cartoons.”

Joey Sets Them Straight

Now it was Talibiden’s chance to set the record straight. When asked by a reporter, “classified documents next to your Corvette? What were you thinking?” Joey was having none of it, and replied “by the way, my Corvette is in a locked garage. It’s not like it’s sitting out on the street.” Ok, there you have it, it’s not like the documents were out by the recyclable can—they were in the locked garage behind his prized Corvette! That’s good enough for me Kahny, call off the investigation —alert AG Garland. I think these resources could be better allocated. I have heard through the grapevine that President Trump left a toilet seat up at Mar-a-lago, which obviously, reeks of misogyny —and hate crime charges need to be filed. I believe another early morning raid is in order to right this gross miscarriage of justice!

Additionally, we have reports that a video was captured of these documents being placed in Joey’s garage. Yep, you guessed it…President Trump was recorded entering the garage with said documents. As luck would have it Adam Schiff just happened to be passing Joey’s house, and was able to get video of the break in…talk about perfect timing. Though a bit distorted and grainy, it just has to be President Trump, has to be, even though those who examined the video said it looks like Paulie Pelosi with a blond wig. Some speculate that this was ordered by Chardonnay Pelosi, to make amends for Paulie’s recent dalliances in his car and home.

Points to Consider

Here are some points to consider, even for devout liberals like us Kahny.

  • Goebbels Pierre, has for days now said, “the president takes these classified documents, very, very seriously” Hewas not aware the documents were there.” Really Jean-Pierre
  • how seriously? So, we are supposed to believe that Joey walked by these boxes behind his prized gas guzzling Corvette for YEARS without noticing? Besides, Talibiden
  • himself said, what is the big deal, they were in a locked garage—but theN, I thought he didn’t know anything about them? I don’t think they are going to let Joey get in front of the microphone anytime soon.
  • so, what is worse, illegally taking said documents as the vice president—or being so clueless as not to know these documents are in your office or garage.
  • we keep talking about how presidents, and only presidents, are allowed to take limited classified information. So……..why did Bidenflation remove these items as VICE

PRESIDENT? Care to weigh in Kahny?

  • why did the DOJ hold back this information until after the mid-term elections—I think we all know the answer to that Mr. Executive Editor Kahn, no need to answer.

It Couldn’t be done without the Media

It seems most objective, unbiased people have a very low opinion of todays “journalists.” Well, as the White House is in overdrive to do damage control from the LATEST Biden disaster, we have to realize this would not be possible without the complicit reporting outlets and social media—minus Twitter now of course, for obvious reasons (freedom of speech). You’re right at the top of the list Joe Kahn. With you at the helm of The NY Times (Pravda) running cover for this corrupt installed puppet, he should have no problem with the latest debacle. Or CNN, who just today were saying conservatives are unfairly targeting Joey Robinette Biden while treating Donald Trump with kid gloves. Yes, this from the news outlet that has made President Trump their focal point of attack for 7 YEARS. Much like your ‘reporting’ style Kahny. The double standard and hypocrisy is beyond ridiculous at this point. It must be nice to have no conscience, I mean how on earth do you look yourself in the mirror Kahny? I guess you were absent in college the days they spoke of journalistic integrity. Remember you’re mantra over there at Pravda, “printing all the propaganda that is fit to print.”

AOC Strikes Again

It seems that Mensa member AOC has made the determination that gas stoves cause brain damage, and should be banned. I really thought that this was a real stretch Kahny, you know, I mean come on. Then I happened to read that AOC’s home uses a gas stove. Well, that sold me, it is obvious these demonic devices do indeed cause brain damage! I say when the FBI isn’t busy raiding Mar-a-Lago, or dragging parents out of school meetings for looking out for their child’s best interest; they should go around ripping out gas stoves……only from registered Republicans, I mean let’s not go crazy here.

Where’s Waldo?

On a final note has anyone seen Heels Up Harris? Last I saw, she was sent to the Philippines to greet and thank fishermen. They made sure there wasn’t a microphone in sight—due to her fantastic oratory skills. Well, we’ll just have to wait for the slightest connotation (usually fabricated) of racism or misogyny…then they will wheel her out. In the meantime check all the bakeries, there’s a good chance you’ll find her there. What an asset.

Sincerely,

Chris Cirino

©Christopher Cirino. All rights reserved.

The ‘Diversity’ Narrative Brings the Crazy

Diversity, equity, and inclusion advocates are out there saying the craziest things, and somebody needs to call them out on it.  So, I will:

‘Voter ID laws disproportionately affect trans people,’ as if trans people are incapable of keeping their IDs up to date with their new status.

Calling them scientific blind studies is ablest and derogatory towards blind people. Mothers and fathers should be called ‘supporters’ and boyfriends and girlfriends should be called ‘partners’.

Stop calling us Americans because the United States is only one of 42 countries in the Americas.

The terms ‘brave’ and ‘long time no see’ are insensitive to American Indians. 

Stop using the word field because slaves worked the fields.  I guess that means we should stop using the word ‘house’, too, because there were house slaves.

Exercise is a tool of white supremacy.

Telling black women to lose weight is racist.  Gee, I wonder if that makes Oprah racist for telling herself to go on diets. 

Harvard Medical School now has a course on LGBT healthcare for infants.  Huh?

The new House Committee on China, which will look into unfair subsidies and intellectual property theft, is racist because it promotes hate against Asian people.
 
White people should not talk about gangs because it stereotypes black people.

See if you can follow this one: black people have more heart disease because they don’t get enough sleep.  They don’t get enough sleep because of systemic racism which produces chronic stress which makes black people feel unsafe so they are more prone to sleep disturbances which causes lack of sleep which causes heart problems.  The problem with that is, a lot of things cause heart disease, so good luck with untangling that one.

Exceptionalism and perfectionism are too ‘white’.  Only whites can be exceptional?  I’m sorry, but that’s racist.  Anyone can pursue high standards and excellence.  It’s a destructive cultural script that’s running in black communities that any desire to succeed or get ahead in life is too ‘white’ and should, therefore, not be attempted.  Countless lives have been destroyed by black people listening to that garbage.   And it’s worth noting that the Smithsonian’s African American Museum backtracked when it was confronted with the craziness of what it was saying about hard work, self-reliance, and a stable family structure just being attributes of ‘whiteness’. 

Diversity advocates used to demand trigger warnings but now say the term is triggering. 

Wow, there’s just too much, I can’t keep up.

I wish I could take all this seriously, but I can’t.  That’s because I know it’s all a game, a product of people who make their living being professionally outraged and who get paid to sit around all day dreaming this stuff up.  You don’t think there’s big money behind this effort?  Come back Monday and I’ll give you an earful.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED ARTICLES:

THE THREE GREAT MYTHS: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion

The Diversity Narrative Is Against the Law

‘Dark Diversity’ in America’s Public Schools

The American Tribe: Lost, Strayed or Stolen?

Not so long ago most Americans felt they belonged to a proud tribe that held traditional American values as sacred. The tribal centerpiece was a sense of patriotism that transcended race, ethnic origins, and politics.  The popularity of the TV Series Band of Brothers, attests to an appetite on the part of many viewers to watch how a group of brave Americans in life-threatening circumstances could bond in a form of brotherly love that transcended race, ethnic origin, and politics. Also, the unusual familiarity of so many Americans with the speech by English King Henry V on the eve of the Battle of Agincourt (1415) bears further testimony to a popular desire for more brotherhood and less division.

To quote Shakespeare: “This story shall the good man teach his son; and Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by, from this day to the ending of the world, but we in it shall be remembered — We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; for he to-day that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother…”

The King even shot a barb from France back at those who stayed safe England: “And gentlemen in England now a-bed [snowflakes] shall think themselves accursed they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap [no testes] whiles any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.” Nota Bene: [Comments mine.]

In Vietnam, my monsoon-soaked airmobile infantry company was mostly White, with about 13 percent African-Americans, and about six percent Hispanics. Two platoon leaders were White. One was African-American. One was Hispanic and our First Sergeant had some Cherokee blood. Yours truly, on both sides, a Scot.

During those hectic, scary moments as we assembled on the pick-up zone (PZ) for, yet another, helicopter-borne combat air assault, we were all of one color: Jungle Fatigue Green. The crucible of actual combat creates an absolute meritocracy. When life is in the balance whoever can best do the job gets the job irrespective of race, ethnic origin, or politics. We had no need of Social-justice Commissars enforcing quotas and diversity.  We were simply a band of brothers. Or, in other words, a united tribe.

Regrettably, America is no longer a united tribe. We are divided by race, ethnic origins, and highly partisan politics. Our Ship of State is floundering on the stony shoals of Critical Race Theory, Cancel Culture, Transgenderism, Wokeism, Ballot Harvesting, a Puppet Press aligned with one political party, the FBI, and a rogue Intelligence Community using social media to censor free speech, and a military in which fewer and fewer macho males (the kind needed to win wars), want to serve.

To revive the American tribe, some speak of a second American Revolution. The problem with armed Revolutions is that they are destructive. We do not need more destruction like the BLM riots of 2020 that cost 35 lives, $2 billion in property damage, with hundreds of police injured. Forget MAGA, what we need is an American Restoration like what Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658) did (only without the violence) to restore order to an England fractured by a Civil War. But who and where is an Oliver Cromwell when America needs him?

Suggested reading: Tribe: On Homecoming and Belonging by Sebastian Junger, 2016. The Chronicle History of Henry the Fifth , and the Life of Henry the Fifthby William Shakespeare, 1600.

©2023. William Hamilton. All rights reserved.

Peace—A Dictatorial And Deceptive Word

By its reticence to engage in a decisive offensive against its despotic adversaries, Israel is continually backing away from conflicts that it can win, while risking backing itself into a conflict that it cannot.


If you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. —Winston S. Churchill, in “The Gathering Storm“.

…the proposition that democracies are generally at peace with each other is [so] strongly supported… [it] has led some scholars to claim that this finding is probably the closest thing that we have to a law in international politics—Profs. Zeev Maoz & Bruce Russett, in International Interactions, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1992,  pp. 245-6.

Events of the last year—such as the hastily concocted agreement by the recently ousted Lapid government (read “arrangement”) with Lebanon over the maritime boundary with Israel, allegedly to avert war; and the injudicious attempt to resurrect the two-state formula as a means of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—have once again stoked the discussion over the fabric of the relationship between the Jewish state and its still-belligerent Arab antagonists.

Antithetical types of “peace

Inevitably, this focuses attention on the notion of “peace”, its feasibility, its durability, and its elemental components.

To adequately contend with this question, it is crucial to realize that the word “peace” is one that is decidedly both dictatorial and deceptive.

It is “dictatorial” because, just as one cannot declare opposition to a dictator, one cannot oppose peace—certainly not if one wishes access to “polite company“. Indeed, much like a dictator, “peace” commands support from all

However, “peace” is also a “deceptive” word, because the same five letters can be used to describe two completely different—indeed, antithetical—political configurations.

On the one hand, peace can mean “mutual harmony” between parties; on the other, it can mean the “absence of violence maintained by deterrence”.

Vastly different sets of conditions make for the feasibility of these distinctly different kinds of peace.

In a political system comprised of democratically governed states–-such as in Western Europe or North America—with open borders, free exchange of ideas, and largely unhindered movement of people, mutual harmony is a feasible kind of peace.

However, in a political system comprised mainly of dictatorial regimes—as in the Arab and much of the wider Muslim world—such unregulated flows of ideas, funds, and people are clearly not the case—and are largely incompatible with the unchallenged rule of the incumbent dictator.

Deterrence vs harmony

Now in conditions of “mutual harmony”, peace (i.e. the absence of violence) is the natural equilibrium state of affairs, and when disputes arise, there will be a strong tendency for the system to revert to its former non-violent stability.

However, in the alternative case, where non-violence is sustained only by adequate deterrence, this is not true. Indeed, if deterrence wanes, violence between the parties will result. There will be no tendency to restore stability and the system will descend into belligerent conflict.

Clearly then, for peace-making/maintenance to be successful, it is imperative to correctly diagnose what political realities prevail. After all, if the conditions are those, in which only a “peace of deterrence” is feasible, adopting a peace-making/peace-maintaining policy, designed to attain a “peace of mutual harmony”, will not succeed.

Quite the opposite! It will make war more probable —by one side making conciliatory gestures that are likely to undermine its perceived deterrence.

This duality in the typology of “peace” is reflected in a related divergence in the structure of conflictual situations. Accordingly, there exist two archetypal and antithetical contexts of conflict: In the first, a policy of compromise and concession may well be appropriate in advancing a resolution; while in the second, such a course would be disastrously inappropriate.

Sign of goodwill…or weakness

So, on the one hand, a protagonist in a conflict may make an initial concession and the opposing protagonist may understand that this concession was made as a sign of goodwill—and therefore feels obliged to make a reciprocal concession.

Thus, via a process of concessions and counter-concessions, matters converge into some kind of consensual resolution.

However, there is another, equally feasible, situation, in which a protagonist is tempted into making an initial concession, but the opposing side sees this not as a sign of goodwill, but as a sign of weakness. Therefore, rather than inducing a process of reciprocal concessions, the initial concession induces demands for further and more far-reaching concessions. So, instead of converging toward some consensual resolution, the interaction diverges into a coercive or violent response.

Clearly, even the most pliable protagonist will, at some stage, reach the limit of the concessions that can be made. Accordingly, when such a limit is reached, he will find himself in a far weaker position than he was in, prior to his proffered concession(s).

“If you will not fight…”

For over a decade, I have warned repeatedly that, by its innate reticence to engage in a decisive large-scale offensive against its despotic adversaries, Israel is continually backing away from conflicts that it can win, while risking backing itself into a conflict that it cannot win—or win only at ruinous cost  See for example here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

This danger was eloquently described by Winston Churchill in the first volume of his seminal series on WWII: “…if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival.”

The futility of compromise

In the perennial conflict with its Arab neighbors, attempts at compromise by Israel have proven not only futile but counterproductive. Despite a series of gut-wrenching concessions, peace seems further away than ever. Every concession made was not followed by an offer of a counter-concession but by demands for further and more far-reaching concessions. Clearly, the only kind of peace that is feasible in relation to the Arab-Israeli conflict is a peace of deterrence – not a peace of mutual harmony. Indeed, it is a peace that concessions and compromises serve only to undermine.

Unless the Jews convey the unequivocal message that any challenge to their political independence and national sovereignty will be met with overwhelming lethal force, they will increasingly be the victims of such force at the hands of their Arab adversaries.

©Dr. Martin Sherman. All rights reserved.

Follow the Money, All the Way to Beijing

New details emerged about the House Oversight Committee’s new investigation into the Biden family’s business dealings for possible corruption.  The Committee chair James Comer asked the Treasury Department to produce bank Suspicious Activity Reports on Hunter Biden, James Biden, Biden family associates, and related companies.  Comer explained the purpose of the investigation this way: “For years, the Biden family peddled influence and access around the world for profit, often at the expense of our nation’s interests.  The American people must know the extent of Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s shady business deals and if these deals threaten national security and his decision-making as president.”  One subject under investigation is whether Joe Biden lied about not being involved in family member business.  At the end of the investigation, we should know for a fact whether or not there really was ‘ten percent for the Big Guy’.

We also learned yesterday that the University of Pennsylvania – which housed the Penn Biden Center where classified documents were found and which received $47.7 million from China in the years Joe Biden was associated with it – was part of the successful effort to end President Trump’s China Initiative.  The Initiative was a successful FBI and Justice Department program to root out Chinese influence and espionage at U.S. institutions of higher learning.  Penn faculty signed a letter criticizing the program for – get this – ‘racial profiling’ – and begged the feds to keep the Chinese gravy train rolling.

Wait, the swamp gets deeper.  Lobbyists for TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance visited the White House eight times between July 2021 and August 2022, White House visitor logs show.  Biden reversed Trump’s ban on TikTok operating in the U.S. in June of 2021.  Technically, it is unknown whether the lobbyists went to the White House on TikTok business or for other clients.  Two lobbyists clammed up when asked for comment and another denied the visits were on behalf of TikTok, but plenty of other things have happened recently that raise concerns about U.S. officials giving away the store to China, perhaps for personal gain.

A program started by President Bill Clinton placed Chinese military scientists in U.S. military research centers.  The crown jewels of our military biodefense program are in Ft. Detrick Maryland where Chinese scientists are employed to this day without scrutiny of their ties to the Chinese military.  What’s up with that?

Then we have the Biden administration approving Chinese purchases of land near U.S. air force bases.  National security experts warn such proximity could allow China to conduct espionage, disrupt military communications, and sabotage military operations.  The latest purchase approved by the Biden administration is in North Dakota, but another worrisome purchase is in Texas.  There was legislation in the last Congress to stop the practice, but it didn’t go anywhere.  Swamp rats strike again.

American hypersonic missile technology is ending up in the hands of the Chinese military, through straw purchases by nominally private Chinese companies in a scheme designed to evade U.S. export controls.  This includes technology based on Pentagon research grants funded by U.S. taxpayers.   I’m tempted to ask how stupid we can be, but I just read a thriller where a similar straw purchase involving a lobbyist put weaponry in the hands of jihadis in the Middle East.  [Jack Carr True Believer]

So the right question to ask in all these situations – missile technology, land sales, Chinese scientists inside the wire, TikTok getting to operate in the U.S. again, American universities on the Chinese dole, Hunter Biden’s Chinese business deals – is one I find myself asking more and more these days:  Who benefits?  Who is getting paid, under the table or otherwise?  Who is willing to sell out their country for a few renminbi?  Before the Republican investigation ends, I hope we found out just how much ‘ten percent for the Big Guy’ ended up being.  Hillary Clinton sold her office for $100 million, it is widely believed, so Joe Biden has some catching up to do.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED VIDEO:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Classified Documents Scandal: The China Connection

BLM — Made In China

National Security Adviser Blames China for Swift Spread of Wuhan Coronavirus

VIDEO: Survivor of Mao’s Communist China warns against Critical Race Theory