I was overwhelmed by the majesty of the film “Run The Race.” The film reminds us that we are all in a race. The question is: What are we running to?
Watch the trailer:
The primary characters in “Run The Race” are the Truett brothers, Evan and Tanner. Both are gifted athletes. Athletes with gifts of strength, agility and a passion to become someone better. Their goal is to leave the life they are living, poor, fatherless, and motherless. They dream of a better future, one where they can use their athletic skills to contribute.
The Reality
The reality is that their mother died of cancer at a young age. Their father becomes an alcoholic and abandons the brothers. The person who gave them hope is their the god mother.
It is a film about how God challenges us and how we respond to those challenges. Mankind can choose to follow Him or not. This is the theme of the movie. Evan suffered a head injury while playing high school football and has seizures. This injury ended his dream of getting an athletic scholarship at the University of Florida.
Tanner becomes the new hope for both brothers to leave their current situation and have new lives. Then Tanner is injured, which puts the burden back on Evan to have a “plan” to get them out of their current situation.
Evan has accepted his injury by embracing God and His Son Jesus. Truett is a doubter. How this comes out is both tragic and inspiring.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/run-the-race.jpg399600Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-02-24 16:54:022019-02-24 16:54:56MOVIE REVIEW: “Run The Race!” A Story About the Brotherhood of God
Martina Navratilova, the most dominant women’s tennis player of all time, has been removed from the advisory board of Athlete Ally, an activist group for LGBT athletes.
Her offense? Penning this op-ed that claims men who change their gender and compete in women’s sports have an unfair advantage based in biology.
Navratilova, who is a lesbian, wrote:
To put the argument at its most basic: a man can decide to be female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organisation is concerned, win everything in sight and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to making babies if he so desires. It’s insane and it’s cheating. I am happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her. It would not be fair.
Simply reducing hormone levels — the prescription most sports have adopted — does not solve the problem. A man builds up muscle and bone density, as well as a greater number of oxygen-carrying red blood cells, from childhood. Training increases the discrepancy. Indeed, if a male were to change gender in such a way as to eliminate any accumulated advantage, he would have to begin hormone treatment before puberty. For me, that is unthinkable.
Apparently, recognizing the innate physical differences between men and women is blasphemy under the left’s transgender ideology dogma. Athlete Ally released this statement on Navratilova’s excommunication:
Athlete Ally unequivocally stands on the side of trans athletes and their right to access and compete in sport free from discrimination. Martina Navratilova’s recent comments on trans athletes are transphobic, based on a false understanding of science and data, and perpetuate dangerous myths that lead to the ongoing targeting of trans people through discriminatory laws, hateful stereotypes and disproportionate violence.
As an organisation dedicated to addressing root causes of homophobia and transphobia in and through sport, we will only affiliate with those committed to the same goal, and not those who further misinformation or discrimination in any way.
Now, it comes as no surprise to see leftist groups like Athlete Ally turn on their own. However, it is a surprise to see many major corporations funding this group’s radical position. These corporate sponsors, through their donations, are essentially endorsing an ideology that says not only can men become women by simply feeling that way, but women should also be forced to compete directly against men on an uneven athletic playing field.
Does “toxic masculinity” include stealing women’s places in sports?
EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by Shutterstock.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/shutterstock_559169392-990x556-e1550953578896.jpg3596402ndvote .comhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png2ndvote .com2019-02-23 15:28:502019-02-23 15:28:51Tennis Great Navratilova Excommunicated from LGBT Group for Defending Basic Biology
I can’t even pretend to know what CNN is really thinking by hiring as political editor for their 2020 election coverage Sarah Isgur Flores, a former spokeswoman for the Trump Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions and campaign operative for Carly Fiorina and Ted Cruz.
Of course, the DoJ has been one of the leakier Deep State departments undermining Trump. There is that. So for the conspiracists, she might already have a close relationship there. And if you like your conspiracies really toasty warm, you might suspect that she’s told CNN that she just has a lot of dirt from her time in connection with the Mueller investigation and knows how to get information out of the DoJ.
But I can say that if the media were serious about actually fixing itself, it would be doing a lot more hiring of conservatives. A LOT.
While recently seeing some modest increases, CNN suffered serious, almost debilitating ratings declines in the two years following President Trump’s election. They fell well behind known liberal network MSNBC and out-of-sight behind well-known conservative network Fox News. They had long wanted themselves to be seen as the most trusted name in news, but consistently ranked below Fox News and sometimes behind MSNBC.
Of course, they jettisoned all that talk of being trusted in the age of Trump and went full-bore partisan hack, often sprinting over to outright propaganda machine.
But if they really want to regain broad-based trust, CNN like every other mainstream media organization, needs to trash diversity based on skin color and gender — which leads to a rainbow of RightThink liberals and horribly partisan content — and seek a diversity of worldview.
Here’s how it could work.
First and foremost, approach it at the start like an addiction — in this case, an addiction to one worldview that supposes it is the one really true truth and all others are fake news.
Admit you have a problem.
Between 85-90 percent of the working media admit to being registered Democrat. I suspect the number of left-of-center journalists is actually higher than based on my own 25 years of experience in newspaper newsrooms.
Admit that because of human nature, that reality causes a deep leftist bias in the resulting product. No waving around the magic wand of “we’re professionals” makes that bias go away. Everyone has these biases, which is why diversity of worldview is critical.
Admit also that since Trump’s presidency, the bias has become blatant and damaging to credibility and driven many Americans to turn off the media for good.
In President Trump’s recent State of the Union speech, there was an amazing diversity of coverage and headlines — but one hundred percent predictable if you align them with worldviews and politics. Here are a few next day headlines of the speech that garnered 76 percent positive response from those who watched it:
(conservative reporters) Washington Examiner: With pitch for unity, Trump urges Congress to ‘choose greatness’
(conservative reporters) NY Post: Congresswomen clad in ‘suffragette white’ give Trump a standing ovation
(“mainstream” reporters) Washington Post: In dissonant speech, Trump seeks unity while depicting ruin
(“mainstream reporters) New York Times head: Trump Presses Hard Line on Immigration in State of the Union Speech
So the mainstream media, filled with leftists reporters and editors puts out leftist content and everyone not a leftist distrusts them — and they think it is because they get facts wrong, or conservatives just don’t like the truth. This is what they tell themselves.
This is not a new development under Trump; it’s been going on for decades. CNN was referred to as the Clinton News Network in the 1990s because of course its reporters were sympathetic to the Democrat President — because virtually all of them voted for him and supported his agenda.
That completely explains what opened the door for Fox News, which when it launched tapped into the biases obvious by the 1990s. Fox News started with the slogan Fair and Balanced and then moved on to We Report You Decide. Now it runs with Most Watched, Most Trusted — because it is both in many polls.
Meanwhile, oblivious to what they were openly communicating 64 million American who voted Trump into office and saw hope for a brighter America without the Clinton corruption machine in power again, the Washington Post changed their slogan to the dark, ominous and utterly self-absorbed “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”
Well, they are totally in the dark about their problems, sitting right there in their newsroom. About 90 percent of all news coverage regarding President Trump has been negative. No wonder they are mostly only getting anti-Trump and liberal consumers — and losing everyone else.
But WaPo and CNN are simply representative of virtually all newspapers aside from a few small, newer conservative ones, and all networks except Fox News.
If the media actually wants to reform itself, it must admit to the problem and the solution: fill newsrooms with reporters and editors that mirror the worldview of Americans. This is easily the biggest key to their trustworthiness is journalists, and why so many of us don’t trust them.
They cannot have every shade of only one worldview and expect balance and fairness — or expect that Americans will turn back to them. They will remain discredited and end up just being shrunken leftist silo media organs while the right has its own silo of media organs.
It might be too late. I’ve been blowing this horn for decades to no avail. But it might not be. And if it is not, then what CNN has done by hiring the conservative Flores — not just as a commentator people can ignore but as a news decision-maker — is the only way out of the silo.
It just needs to be repeated dozens, and then hundreds of times, until there is balance among those creating the content.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/brand-2625249_640-e1550866272173.png403640Rod Thomsonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRod Thomson2019-02-22 15:12:072019-03-07 10:42:56How The Media Can Fix Itself. And…CNN Is?
It was the 1 AM phone call that nobody wants. Mama cell.
From a dead sleep to my greeting of what’s wrong, the reason for the
call was the most bizarre thing we could have ever imagined. My sister’s house
was burning down.
Just hours before, I had arrived from visiting my Mama three
hours away and my bags were not yet unpacked. It was an ordinary night with
close friends. There was no reason to ever imagine the potential horror of what
I would learn in the next few hours.
My friends surrounded me in the middle of the night as I
conversed with my baby sister four hours away. Everyone got out of the burning
house unharmed with the exception of the family hunting dog Mae who became
cornered and perished in the fire. Hearing her say that there was nothing else
in the house that mattered gave me great comfort as my heart pounded and I
wondered what my next steps should be.
Had it not been for a chance sighting of the fire by a neighbor,
my brother-in-law and sister would have perished within the walls of their
master bedroom, leaving their three monogrammed princesses asleep and likely
trapped upstairs.
“I think your house is on fire,” said the neighbor when she called, as her husband called 9-1-1. When my sister opened her bedroom door, the entire living room was orange. She ran upstairs where the girls’ room was lit up with orange light from the flames outside their window, calmly waking them. “There is a fire, we need to leave.”
Annie’s bedroom after the fire. Photo: Brandi Chambless.
Carrying the baby while walking the older girls down the stairs,
there was no time for coats or shoes in the middle of winter. As she approached
the front door she paused to disarm the security system out of habit, then
remembering the house burning around her, she flung the door wide open as the
alarm sounded. The neighbor was motioning, enticing her to move swiftly as if
to say, “Come on. come on.”
As the family of five exited the burning house, the wheels on my
sister’s SUV began to explode and another brand new Lexus SUV that was
purchased two days prior melted in the driveway. Before too long, the entire
master bedroom was consumed. Unbeknownst to my sister, this moment would be the
beginning of days of red tape and phone calls to initiate a recovery process
that seems endless and offered no instruction manual.
After some time, the neighbor asked my sister if she would like a
pair of pants. “We don’t mind, but would you like a pair of pants?” when my
sister realized that she had been walking around in her neighborhood braless in
only a strappy little shirt and underwear with a phone on one ear and a baby on
the opposite hip.
The fact that a fireman emerged from the house with my sister’s
wedding ring was an unforeseen blessing since she had lost her original ring
while tossing a football in a local river a few years prior.
Once the fire was made public on the local news, the entire
community surrounded my family with love by sending gift cards, meals, and
purchasing immediate needs. I threw my bags back in the car and drove all night
to get to my sister. I asked her if she had cried a lot and she gave the
strongest, most beautiful response I could have imagined.
“It’s not about what we lost, it’s about what we saved.”
I couldn’t say that the rest of us didn’t have our fair share of
private tears, first and foremost, seeing the wreckage once we could
investigate the wrath of this particular fire. But mainly, because the world we
lost in that fire was one where we spent many of our holidays and other family
celebrations. It was the setting for a cocoon in which my little sister
transformed from a college student to a wife, mother, and a career woman. It
was never about one single photo or wedding dress never to be seen or touched
ever again.
The event we would forevermore refer to as “the fire” had been no
respecter of persons. It didn’t know whether my sister was rich or poor, black
or white. She emerged wearing only her pajamas into a new life without one
material possession, but she showed me a heart that knows what it is to have
nothing yet possess everything.
None of us will ever forget the call of the fire. Neither shall we forget the smiles on the girls’ faces when we took them to what they now call the “burn house”. “Look, I think that’s my old bike and over there is your scooter!….Cool.” My sister has done her job quite well, for even in their young ages, the girls knew they already had all they ever needed.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by the author.
Cuba has made less progress in health care and life expectancy than most of Latin America in recent years due to its decrepit health care system.
It has never been a safer world in which to be a child. According to the UN, in 1950, most of the world had a child death rate (by age five) of over 20 percent, while only a few countries, such as the United States, Cuba, Canada, England, Australia, and New Zealand had child death rates of below 5 percent. By 2015, most of the world had a child death rate of below 5 percent, and every country on Earth had a child death rate below 20 percent (even war-torn Yemen, whose child death rate fell from 50 percent in 1950 to 4.8 percent in 2015, the first year of its current civil war).
For many developed countries, the child mortality rate is now below 1 percent. It’s less than 1 percent in the United States; all but two countries in the European Union; Japan, Korea, and Malaysia; Canada, Australia, and New Zealand; and parts of Arabia. (See “Child Mortality in 1800, 1950 and 2015,” three maps from Our World in Data).
And world hunger and poverty have diminished enormously. As the Cato Institute’s Marian Tupy pointed out, in 1981, “44.3 percent of the world lived in extreme poverty.” But in 2015, only “9.6 percent” did. The last 40 years have seen a “massive and historically unprecedented decline in global poverty.”
Castro Took Credit for Capitalism’s Successes
Cuba in 1950 had a lower child mortality rate than all but a handful of the world’s countries—lower than Canada and on par with the United States. That was long before the Communists took over in Cuba in 1959. The Communists did not give Cuba its unusually good world health ranking. Cuba had already achieved it long before the Marxist dictator Fidel Castro seized power.
Yet Castro’s regime took credit for the prior achievement of his non-communist predecessors, and many progressives have gullibly swallowed that propaganda. In 2016, The Washington Post’s fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, debunked such claims. He gave “three Pinocchios” to Canadian Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for claiming that Castro made “significant improvements to the education and healthcare of his island nation.” He pointed to data about how Cuba already had well-developed health and education systems by world standards.
But similar claims have been made by many other gullible progressive politicians. They depict the dictator Castro as the savior of Cuba. Bernie Sanders claimed it was Castro who “educated their kids, gave their kids healthcare.” Jimmy Carter claimed that Castro gave Cuba “superb systems of health care and universal education.” Obama also promoted the myth of excellent Cuban health care, saying, “The United States recognizes progress that Cuba has made as a nation, its enormous achievements in education and in health care.”
In reality, Cuba has made less progress in health care and life expectancy than most of Latin America in recent years due to its decrepit health care system. “Hospitals in the island’s capital are literally falling apart.” Sometimes, patients “have to bring everything with them, because the hospital provides nothing. Pillows, sheets, medicine: everything.”
As Townhallnotes, in 1958, the year before the Communists took over Cuba:
Cuba ranked 13th from the top, worldwide with the lowest infant-mortality rate. This meant that robustly capitalist and immigrant-swamped pre-Castro Cuba had the 13th lowest infant-mortality rate in the world. This put her not only at the top in Latin America but atop most of Western Europe, ahead of France, Belgium, West Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Today all of these countries leave Communist Cuba in the dust, with much lower infant mortality rates.
Today Cuba is ravaged by diseases that had been long-eradicated in pre-Castro Cuba (dengue, cholera, for a few examples.) And of Cuba’s “doctors” fortunate enough to escape their indentured servitude to the Castro-Family-Plantation, the overwhelmingly majority flunk the exam given in the U.S. for licensing as doctor’s assistants.
And even plummeting from 13th (Capitalist) to 49th (Communist), Cuba’s “impressive” infant mortality rate is kept artificially low by Communist chicanery with statistics and by an appalling abortion rate of 0.71 abortions per live birth. This is the hemisphere’s highest, by far. Any Cuban pregnancy that even hints at trouble gets “terminated.”
A few years ago Dr. Juan Felipe García, MD, of Jacksonville, Fla., interviewed several recent doctor defectors from Cuba. Based on what he heard, he reported the following:
“The official Cuban infant-mortality figure is a farce. Cuban pediatricians constantly falsify figures for the regime. If an infant dies during its first year, the doctors often report he was older. Otherwise, such lapses could cost him severe penalties and his job.”
It should be noted that the official Cuban infant mortality rate is still quite low compared to most of the world. But relatively speaking, it has lost ground, especially compared to capitalist countries in Asia like South Korea.
Cuba also lost the big edge in life expectancy it once enjoyed. Prior to communism, it led virtually all countries in Latin America in life expectancy. But by 2012, Chileans and Costa Ricans lived slightly longer than Cubans. Back in 1960, Chileans had a life span seven years shorter than Cubans, and Costa Ricans lived more than two years less than Cubans on average. In 1960, Mexicans lived seven years shorter than Cubans; by 2012, the gap had shrunk to just two years.
In celebrating Communist Cuba’s non-existent achievements, progressive politicians don’t even listen to fellow progressives who have actually studied Cuba’s record under communism, to their chagrin. As the progressive economist Brad DeLong points out (he calls it “hideously depressing”):
Cuba in 1957—was a developed country. Cuba in 1957 had lower infant mortality than France, Belgium, West Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had doctors and nurses: as many doctors and nurses per capita as the Netherlands, and more than Britain or Finland. Cuba in 1957 had as many vehicles per capita as Uruguay, Italy, or Portugal. Cuba in 1957 had 45 TVs per 1000 people—fifth highest in the world …Today? Today the UN puts Cuba’s HDI [Human Development indicators] in the range of … Mexico. (And Carmelo Mesa-Lago thinks the UN’s calculations are seriously flawed: that Cuba’s right HDI peers today are places like China, Tunisia, Iran, and South Africa.) Thus I don’t understand lefties who talk about the achievements of the Cuban Revolution: “…to have better health care, housing, education.”
Communism Destroyed Education
Cuba’s outmoded Marxist education system also does not deserve praise. Obama mistakenly called Cuba’s “system of education” an “extraordinary resource” that “values every boy and every girl.”
But there’s nothing “extraordinary” about Cuba’s educational system. Children are taught by poorly paid teachers in dilapidated schools. Cuba has made less educational progress than most Latin American countries over the last 60 years. According to UNESCO, Cuba had about the same literacy rate as Costa Rica and Chile in 1950 (close to 80 percent) before Cuba was taken over by the communists. And it has almost the same literacy rate as they do today (close to 100 percent).
Meanwhile, Latin American countries that were largely illiterate in 1950—such as Peru, Brazil, El Salvador, and the Dominican Republic—are largely literate today, closing much of the gap with Cuba. El Salvador had a less than 40 percent literacy rate in 1950 but has an 88 percent literacy rate today. Brazil and Peru had a less than 50 percent literacy rate in 1950, but today, Peru has a 94.5 percent literacy rate, and Brazil a 92.6 percent literacy rate. The Dominican Republic’s rate rose from a little over 40 percent to 91.8 percent. While Cuba made substantial progress in reducing illiteracy in Castro’s first years in power, its educational system has stagnated since, even as much of Latin America improved.
The child mortality statistics above are from the United States Population Division (2017) for 1950 and 2015 and Gapminder for 1800. The maps depicting that data are by Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser. The child death rate discussed above refers to the percentage of kids dying by age 5, not just in the first year of their life.
Hans Bader practices law in Washington, D.C. After studying economics and history at the University of Virginia and law at Harvard, he practiced civil-rights, international-trade, and constitutional law.
EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by joffi on Pixabay Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/baby-2387661_1280-e1550794687865.jpg425640Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2019-02-21 19:18:302019-03-07 10:52:23How Cuba’s Infant Mortality Rank Fell from 13th to 49th in the World
I first discovered this as a graduate student studying the Soviet Union and left-wing ideologies at the Russian Institute of Columbia University School of International Affairs. Everything I have learned since has confirmed this view.
Individuals on both the left and right lie. Individuals on both the left and right tell the truth. And liberalism, unlike leftism, does value truth. But the further left one goes, the more one enters the world of the lie.
Why does the left lie?
There are two main reasons.
One is that leftists deem their goals more important than telling the truth. For example, every honest economist knows women do not earn 20 percent less money than men for the same work done for the same amount of hours under the same conditions. Yet leftists repeat the lie that women earn 78 cents for every dollar men earn.
Why any employers would hire men when they could hire women and get the same amount of work done at the same level of excellence for the same number of hours while saving 20 cents on the dollar is a question only God or the sphinx could answer.
So, when New York Times columnists write this nonsense, do they believe it? The answer is they don’t ask themselves, “Is it true?” They ask themselves, “Does the claim help promote the left-wing doctrine that women are oppressed?”
Whatever serves that end is morally justified.
The second reason is leftism is rooted in feelings, not reason or truth. From Karl Marx to Bernie Sanders, left-wing preference for socialism over capitalism is entirely rooted in emotion. Only capitalism creates wealth. Socialism merely spends what capitalism creates.
Do leftists not know this? Even if they know it, the emotional pull of socialism prevails.
Do leftists believe there are more than two sexes? Of course not. That’s why they renamed “sex” “gender”—and then redefined “gender” to mean whatever one wants it to mean.
So then, on the left, truth is subservient to two higher values: doctrine and emotion.
This leads to the question of this column: Do those on the left believe their lies?
Do leftists believe global warming will destroy the world as we know it in 12 years, as recently suggested by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.? I don’t know. They seem to talk themselves into believing their hysterias. But they don’t act on them.
Here’s a simple proof that the left is lying about the imminent threat of global warming to civilization: Leftists don’t support nuclear power. It is simply not possible to believe fossil fuel emissions will destroy the world and, at the same time, oppose nuclear power. Nuclear power is clean and safe. Sweden, a model country for leftists, meets 40 percent of its energy needs with nuclear power.
If you were certain you were terminally ill yet decline a medicine that is guaranteed to cure you, the rest of us would have every reason to assume you didn’t really believe you were terminally ill.
Here’s more evidence the left doesn’t believe its global warming hysteria: How many leftists with beachfront property anywhere in the world have sold it? If leftists really believe global warming will cause the oceans to rise and soon inundate the world’s coastal areas, why would any leftist not sell his beachfront home while he could not only make all his money back but make a profit as well?
Another example of left-wing rhetoric leftists don’t act on: The left tells us that colleges are permeated by a “rape culture,” yet virtually all left-wing parents send their daughters to college. If you were to believe any place has a culture of rape, where 1 in 4 or 5 women is raped or otherwise sexually assaulted, would you send your 18-year-old daughter there? Of course not.
So how do any left-wing mothers or fathers send their daughters to college? The answer would seem to be they know it’s a lie—but that doesn’t matter, since the left views telling the truth as incomparably less significant than combating sexism, sexual assault, misogyny, toxic masculinity, and patriarchy.
One more example: “Walls don’t work.”
It is inconceivable that people who say this—especially those with walls around their home—believe it. Yet leftists say it with the same degree of ease Stalin labeled Trotsky a fascist, even though Trotsky and Lenin were the fathers of the Bolshevik Revolution.
The question is not whether truth is a left-wing value. The only question is whether leftists believe their lies. And, believe it or not, I still don’t know.
So, conduct the following tests and decide for yourself:
Ask anyone you know who says global warming will destroy most life on Earth in 12 years why they don’t advocate nuclear power. If they tell you it’s too dangerous, you know they are hysterics, not followers of science.
Ask anyone you know who believes the global warming threat is an existential one and owns beachfront property why they aren’t selling their beachfront property.
Ask anyone who believes colleges have rape culture why they sent (or are sending) their daughter to college.
It is possible to love truth and be liberal, conservative, libertarian, an atheist, a believer, a Jew, a Christian, a Muslim, or a Hindu. But you cannot be a leftist.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/emoticons-150528_640.jpg361640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2019-02-21 16:50:112019-03-07 11:02:24Liberals See Truth as Subservient to Doctrine, Feelings
At the risk of losing the punch line in the translation, let me start with a Russian joke:
“We’re sorry, but you’re no longer welcome in our house.” “Why is that?” “The last time you visited, one of our spoons went missing.” “What nonsense, why would I steal your silverware?” “We’re not saying you did, we found it a day later, but the resentment still remains.”
While the stain on this poor fellow’s reputation was accidental, we are now finding that such stains can be engineered, especially if the media is on your side. Consider the Trump-Russia collusion scenario. None of the claims against Trump have proven to be true, but “the resentment remains.”
All of the examples of hate and violence by Trump supporters have also proven to be hoaxes, and yet the response usually is, “even if this one’s a hoax, you can’t deny that Trump has created an atmosphere of resentment, and so many hate crimes in the news can’t all be hoaxes.”
This is a projection. Simple reverse engineering suggests that by trying to plant resentment against Trump with endless unproven tales, the Democrats have legitimized hoaxes and thus created an atmosphere in which the jussie smolletts of this world are getting inspired to conjure their own little tales of deceit in order to stain and damage “Trump’s America.” They’ve also legitimized sociopathy, empowering scores of manipulative “victims” to satisfy their pathological craving for sympathy.
What these hoax enthusiasts tend to forget is that such high-end political technologies require skill and calculation, while their own low-end intellect will likely cause them to get caught. Their opponents will gloat and say, “If Trump’s America is so violent and hateful, why do the Democrats need hoaxes in order to prove it?”
To the Democrat leaders these amateurs are what suicide bombers are to the leaders of ISIS: disposable human material and acceptable losses in a war for power. Smollett’s life may now be in pieces, but he has left a lasting resentful stain in the public square, having earned gratitude from 72 progressive self-identified virgins.
Smollett’s name will now be forever tied to all the past, present, and future political hoaxes, immortalized in the Party-approved Pull-a-Smollett game, in which young and old progressives compete in who can better stain reputations, divide people, and generate resentment at the cost of their own lives and careers.
Have you pulled a Smollett lately? If so, tell us your story. It may be added as another game card to our stack.
In the meantime, here’s a list of previous winners and their inspirational stories, courtesy of The Daily Caller.
Anti-Muslim Hate Crime In Michigan Turns Out To Be A Hoax (Nov. 2016)
Bisexual Student Fakes Trump-Inspired Hate Crime (Nov. 2016)
Gas Station Racism Goes Viral – Then Police Debunk It (Nov. 2016)
White Men Rob Muslim Woman Of Her Hijab And Wallet – Except It Never Happened (Nov. 2016)
Church Organist Vandalizes Own Church (Nov. 2016)
“Drunk White Men” Attack Muslim Woman In Story That Also Never Happened (Dec. 2016)
White Guy Sets His Own Car On Fire, Paints Racial Slur On His Own Garage (Dec. 2016)
Prankster Tricks Liberal Journalist Into Spreading Anti-Trump Hoax (Dec. 2016)
Student Writes Anti-Muslim Graffiti On His Own Door (Feb. 2017)
Israeli Man Behind Anti-Semitic Bomb Threats In The U.S. (April 2017)
Hoax At St. Olaf (May 2017)
Fake Hate At Air Force Academy Goes Viral (Sept. 2017)
K-State Fake Hate Crime (Nov. 2017)
Racist Graffiti Carried Out By Non-White Student (Nov. 2017)
Waiter Fakes Note Calling Himself A Terrorist (July 2018)
Waitress Fakes Racist Note, Blames Law Enforcement (July 2018)
New York Woman’s Hate Crime That Wasn’t (Sept. 2018)
Student Faked Racist Notes (Dec. 2018)
The Covington Catastrophe (Jan. 2019)
Bonus: Anti-Semitic Vandal Exposed As Democratic Activist (Nov. 2018)
Bonus II: Trump-Inspired Racist Blaze At Black Church Was Carried Out By Black Churchgoer (Nov. 2016)
EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column with images by Red Square originally appeared on The Peoples Cube. It is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/smollett.jpg401640The Peoples Cubehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Peoples Cube2019-02-20 18:12:042021-10-08 01:46:19How to play Pull-a-Smollett: The Game of Social Engineering
Alita – Battle Angel is a visually stunning film with a heavy Christian theme. While Alita is a cyborg she is on a mission to confront evil wherever she may find it. Alita has unique abilities programmed in her that the Zalems and their agents will stop at nothing to destroy. These unique abilities include: a moral sense of right and wrong, kindness, a willingness to fight and die for the oppressed and of course great fighting skills. Alita is a human being. The Zalems want to stop Alita from becoming what she was ordained to be.
Theatrical release poster from Wikipedia
The world in which Alita must live, Iron City, is filled with evil. Iron City looks much like some areas of Detroit, Los Angeles or Chicago. Floating above Iron City is Zalem, the last of the aptly called “Sky cities.” Iron City is made up of oppressed factory workers who provide Zalem with goods made from the waste that falls from Sky City. Alita is part of that waste, an outcast, but a special outcast. Zalem is populated with a mysterious, but evil, ruling class who use the people of Iron City to do their bidding.
Zalem is the perfect socialist society. As Ayn Rand wrote it in her 1946 monograph Textbook of Americanism,
Collectivism holds that man has no rights; that his work, his body and his personality belong to the group; that the group can do with him as it pleases, in any manner it pleases, for the sake of whatever it decides to be its own welfare. Therefore, each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.
The citizens of Iron City are ruled by the collectivists on Zalem (the group) and their Iron City agents led by Vector. Vector is an evil and satanic man who is Alita’s nemesis.
Happily, ALITA: BATTLE ANGEL has a strong Christian worldview that evokes many allegorical messages. For example, the movie’s references to “the fall” stress the corruption of power and sin. At one point, Alita says, “I will not stand by in the presence of evil.” At another point, she and Hugo hide in an abandoned church and find protection. Also, in one scene, the villain, Vector, says, “I’d rather rule in Hell than serve in Heaven.” His comment echoes Satan’s comment in John Milton’s classic Christian poem PARADISE LOST. ALITA also touches on the idea of indulgences or buying your way into heaven. For example, in the story, different characters are trying to buy their way into Zalem, the sky city. Eventually, Dr. Ido’s wife sees the error of her greed and desires to be different.
During the movie Alita takes a sword away from one of her protagonists named Zapan. She tells him that he is not worthy of such a sword. The sword becomes part of Alita and she wields it with great skill. This may also be a Biblical reference as the word sword appears 406 times in the Bible. The sword represents both a weapon used to defend oneself and as the Word of God. Genesis 27:40 reads:
“You will live by the sword and you will serve your brother. But when you grow restless, you will throw his yoke from off your neck.”
Alita appears destined to throw the yoke form the necks of the people of Iron City. She is serving her brothers and sisters. Zalem is not heaven, at least not in a spiritual sense. Iron City is, on the other hand, hell on earth in a materialistic post modern Nietzsche/Darwin way. It’s dog eat dog or rather cyborg killing cyborg.
Iron City reminds us of Ecclesiastics:
Man’s fate is like that of animals; the same fate awaits them both. As one dies so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust and to the dust all return (3:19-20)
There is not a righteous man on earth, who does what is right and never sins (7:20) … one sinner destroys much good. (9:18).
At the end of the movie Alita enters a large arena filled with people from Iron City. She defiantly stands on a platform and points her flaming sword directly at Zalem as Zapan looks down upon her. Is judgement day coming to Zalem?
Let us see if Alita – Battle Angel can continue to do what is right and defeat the sinners in Sky City in the sequel. Alita has the power and the will. Does she have a Godly purpose? Or will the sequel devolve into a paradise lost with stunning animation but no moral message?
Over the last few months, the subject of plastic straws has become a political football, brought about by Democrats who contend they are not ecologically friendly. Not surprising, California was the first state to bring it to our attention. Since then, the subject has surfaced in a handful of cities here in Florida, most notably St. Petersburg, a stronghold for the Democrats. Last December, the St. Pete City Council passed a bill banning plastic straws, not the voters. This is related to their ban on Styrofoam which is commonly used by restaurants to save leftovers. As of this moment, you can only get a plastic straw in St. Pete if you ask for one, but the straws will be totally banned by 2020, and replaced by paper straws.
In my youth, I remember paper straws wouldn’t last any longer than a small carton of milk. As to soft drinks, twelve ounces and up, forget it, they’re useless. People would rather drink a soft drink directly out of a can, bottle or glass than using a paper straw.
The big question though, is the plastic straw a genuine problem? St. Petersburg is respectable in size and is listed as the fifth most populous city in Florida. During the winter months the city probably doubles in size due to the influx of “snowbird” tourists who enjoy the beaches and warm weather. St. Pete is also home to the Tampa Bay Rays, our MLB franchise. As such, there is a multitude of dining facilities in the area, large and small, all presumably providing straws to patrons.
The St. Pete council believes the plastic straw is an ecological threat to the beaches, but there is little, if any, proof that this is true. This begs the question, is this a political fad or is there any legitimate science behind it? So far, the answer appears to be “No.” It is reminiscent of Obamacare and the “Green New Deal” legislation introduced by Democrat-Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) which is a laundry list of items to create a Socialist Utopia, but lacking specifics, such as the costs to implement her program and precisely how it will improve the environment.
Because of this, the plastic straw has become an iconic symbol of Democrats pushing their agenda without any science behind it. Such lunacy would not play well in corporate America where you must quantify the return on investment of a proposal. In other words, the Democrats are weak on doing their homework and are acting on impulse as opposed to fact. Instead, they package their ideas and allow the news media to carry the pitch to the public. Even more disturbing is the public is not truly being consulted on this issue which is commonly used by everyone.
Fortunately, cooler heads are prevailing at the state level in Florida where the legislature is drafting bills to prevent cities from outlawing plastic straws. If passed, this will supersede the authority of the municipal level.
This rhubarb over something as simple as a plastic straw is much ado about nothing. The Democrats have simply not made their case and makes me wonder, don’t we have better things to do? It also disturbs me our government officials will entertain any hairbrain idea that comes along, particularly when it is not thought through and articulated properly. They could probably be more productive by counting the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
We could save a lot of time, money and effort if legislators could learn to draft bills more intelligently, such as how businesses write feasibility studies, but I guess that is too much to ask.
To help in this regard, my next column will be, “The Elements of a Good Feasibility Study,” which is intended to provide insight in the preparation of an intelligible proposal. Until then…
Keep the Faith!
EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce Is Right column with images is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies. The featured image is by Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/beautiful-1867178_640.jpg426640Tim Brycehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngTim Bryce2019-02-20 08:26:122019-02-20 08:26:14The Brouhaha Over Plastic Straws
If you are wondering why the leadership in the Democrat Party have given Ilhan Omar and Rashids Tlaib important committee assignments in the House of Representatives; or why all of the Democrats running for president are silent in the face of the Antisemitic and even anti American statements of these two Congresswomen; or why they continue to hold their seats in important Congressional committees and will retain them, read the illuminating article below by Caroline Glick.
If you are a moderate Democrat it will bring you to tears.
Rep. Ilhan Omar is an antisemite and, as the actions of the congressional Democratic leadership last week made clear, hating Jews is a perfectly acceptable position in today’s Democratic Party.
Consider the chronology of events. Last month, Rep. Steven King (R-IA) was stripped of his committee assignments following a statement he made to the New York Times where he seemed to legitimize white supremacism. (King insists his remark was deliberately taken out of context).
Last week, Rep. Omar tweeted another statement that was inarguably antisemitic. Omar argued that the only reason that Congressional Republicans seek to censure her and her colleague Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) for their anti-Jewish bigotry is because Jewish money dictates their actions.
That is, she defended herself against allegations of antisemitism by proving, yet again, that she is an antisemite.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/stop-1001138_640.jpg360640Robert Hellerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRobert Heller2019-02-20 06:42:432019-02-20 10:45:41IIhan Omar & Co. Were Elected Because of Their Racism, Not In Spite Of It.
Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, got a big raise with her election to Congress, a job that comes with a $174,000 annual salary. She told the New York Times she was concerned about how she would get an apartment before that salary kicked in.
She ended up moving into a luxury apartment building with a wide array of amenities where rent for even a studio apartment exceeds $2,000 a month. The Washington Free Beacon is not disclosing the exact building Ocasio-Cortez lives in due to safety concerns expressed by her office.
Her office pushed back against the notion that it was hypocritical for Ocasio-Cortez, who has made housing affordability one of her top policy concerns, to move into a luxury building. A spokesman pointed out that her office also uses a car with an “internal combustion engine that runs on fossil fuels,” even though she thinks their use should be eliminated.
EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by Evil Smiley with images originally appeared on The Peoples Cube. It is wonkingly republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/maba.jpg360640The Peoples Cubehttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Peoples Cube2019-02-20 05:36:362021-10-08 01:46:19MABA! A new movement
If liberals wanted to sue over the border wall, they’re about 13 years too late. Congress already gave its blessing back in 2006 when it passed the Secure Fence Act. The same goes for the president’s decision to move the U.S. embassy in Israel. The House and Senate have been on board since 1995 when they authorized it. If the Left’s being honest, its problem isn’t that the president is moving forward with the wall. Its problem is that the president is Donald Trump.
Back in 2014, the Washington Examiner’s Eddie Scarry points out, the media had no problem calling it a “border crisis.” Neither did Barack Obama, who stood in the same Rose Garden as Donald Trump did on Friday, and insisted, “We now have an actual humanitarian crisis on the border that only underscores the need to drop the politics and fix our immigration system once and for all.” Five years, one administration, and who-knows-how-many caravans later, and suddenly, this president is doing something “immoral” by addressing the situation. That’s not because the dilemma changed. It’s because the occupant of the Oval Office did.
Take columnists like Karen Tumulty. In 2014, Scarry explains, she had no problem writing about the “current crisis on the Southwest border.” Well, it must have magically fixed itself, because last month, she accused the president of “manufacturing an emergency.” California, New York, and 14 other states want you to think that Donald Trump was acting outside of his constitutional authority when he used his executive power to finish the job Congress gave the green light to over a dozen years ago. But, as Ken Klukowski told me last night on Washington Watch, nothing could be farther from the truth.
“It’s critical for everyone to understand: the president is not invoking any of his inherent constitutional powers — none of his Article 2 powers, like commander-in-chief authority. In this case, you have a president who is only acting under a specific act of Congress, a federal statute called the National Emergencies Act of 1976. It’s been used 59 times before. This is just number 60. In fact, the 59th time was earlier this month — also by President Trump — regarding U.S. relations with Venezuela, because of course the turmoil going on over there. Maybe I missed the press release, but I didn’t hear the sky fall [when he declared that emergency]. I didn’t hear a news story from the National Archives that the Constitution burst into flames. One would almost think that this is just part of the rule of law. And that’s exactly what’s going on here.”
President Trump’s request is simple. He wants to move money that’s already been approved by Congress from one bank account to another. This president hasn’t “conjured funding from thin air (the military construction and Army Corps funding has already been appropriated),” the Federalist argues, “nor is he using funds for purposes explicitly prohibited by Congress (to the contrary, Congress explicitly authorized the construction of a border wall).”
In other words, there’s no constitutional crisis here. The only reason these leftist states are suing Trump is because he wants to protect American sovereignty and security. Juxtapose that with 2012. When conservative states took Barack Obama to court over his health care mandate, it was for the exact opposite reason. Unlike Trump, Obama wasn’t in the business of protecting freedom — he was in the business of undermining it. Obviously, after eight years of Obama, a lot of people are out of practice when it comes to operating within the limits of presidential authority. But in this instance, the contrast between the two parties has never been clearer.
None of this, unfortunately, is a surprise to President Trump. “… I’ll sign the final papers as soon as I get into the Oval Office. And we will have a national emergency, and we will then be sued. and they will sue us in the Ninth Circuit even though it shouldn’t be there, and we will possibly get a bad ruling — and then we’ll get another bad ruling — and then we’ll end up in the Supreme Court, and hopefully we’ll get a fair shake. And we’ll win in the Supreme Court just like the [travel] ban.”
As Ken joked, “We can’t get through our morning coffee without the Left filing a new lawsuit against President Trump — even when he’s just doing things that President Obama or previous presidents have done. Somehow it all becomes illegal when President Trump does it.” But if there’s one thing the other side should have learned by now, it’s that this president isn’t deterred — not by them, not by lawsuits, and certainly not when it comes to doing what’s right.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
EDITORS NOTE: This FRC column with images is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/021919_wall_770x400-e1550656757357.jpg381640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2019-02-20 05:00:032019-02-20 05:00:05Dems to Trump: Quit Wall You’re Ahead
The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez phenomenon in the Democratic Party is both scrumptious and terrifying to watch because it either destroys the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future or it cripples America for good.
It cannot be emphasized enough up front: The media has created the pretty AOC monster with endless lavish and uncritical cover stories, Sunday morning interviews and daily coverage verging on adoration. Talk about a Messiah complex — not AOC’s, but the media and sycophantic Democratic Presidential candidates, which are really the problems.
The Amazon fiasco, which I talked about a week ago on my Salem radio show, displays both her inordinately outsized influence, power, destruction and ongoing, astonishing ignorance. It’s important to keep writing and reminding about her train wrecks of bad ideas because again, you virtually cannot find her almost daily knuckle-headed comments in the MSM. Covering as per usual.
So Amazon pulls out of its New York City deal along with its 25,000 pretty good jobs and all the surrounding development and rollover effect, because of the AOC-led charge opposing giant giveaways to corporations. I’m pretty sympathetic to that in principle. But you have to have a modicum of understanding of how these deals are typically structured nowadays (as opposed to the outright gifts given to, say, major league sports teams. That’s not how Amazon or others work.)
In this case, the generally superficial reporting on Amazon said that NYC was providing $3 billion in “incentives.” Apparently, AOC took that to mean the city was giving Amazon $3 billion from the city’s coffers. Now the projections were that Amazon would have created about $26 billion of economic impact and the taxed portion of that would have more than paid back the incentives in just a few years.
But even that was not the deal. These were only tax breaks provided once Amazon had created those 25,000 jobs. So this was tax revenue — and tax break — that would only be realized if Amazon relocated and if they create all 25,000 jobs. But AOC, in her junior high way, thinks that money is just sitting somewhere. Here’s what she said while virtually dancing a jig in the halls of Congress at the news that Amazon will take their development and 25,000 jobs elsewhere, in response to a reporter’s question:
“The district is now going to lose thousands of jobs that would have come there,” a reporter quietly noted in the middle of Ocasio-Cortez’s celebratory dance. “Well one of those things is, A) we were subsidizing those jobs,” she said. “The city was paying for those jobs so frankly if we were willing to give Amazon, so if we were willing to give away $3 billion for this deal, we could invest those $3 billion in our district ourselves if we wanted to. We could hire out more teachers, we can fix our subways, we can put a lot of people to work for that money if we wanted to.”
Good golly Miss Molly. The money does not exist without Amazon moving to New York City. Those taxes are not being paid by others. It would have been the taxes due because Amazon was there. Ignorance really does kill — in this case, good jobs and economic development for her own district — but she’s going to totally remake the American economy. Riiiight. She does this almost daily. I won’t regale you with the litany. They are everywhere in the non-MSM sphere, where again her daily ignorance is largely swept away.
But the terrifying part is that because she has been propped up as the fresh new face of the Democratic Party and its future by the utterly compromised, irresponsible and untrustworthy American media, she is dragging the Party in her ignorant, socialist direction. (She is a self-proclaimed Socialist Democrat.)
Her Green New Deal is embarrassingly junior high in its thinking and reality, but it had 60 Democratic members of Congress sign on and most of the front-runners in the Democratic presidential campaign also jumped onboard. Sure it was craven politics without probably vetting it first, but that is part of the problem. There really is no substance in the Democratic Party, and far from enough in the Republican Party.
She cannot just be mocked, easy and fun as that is. See, it’s not just that she released a plan to eliminate all fossil fuel use in 10 years, eliminate all air travel and originally cow emissions. It’s that because of her now gigantic platform — a monstrous creation of the media — she has lured a lot of wet-finger Democrats to her. It’s not just that she led the charge against Amazon with the envy card (rich corporation!) it’s that she managed to destroy a demonstrable increase in prosperity for that part of New York through sheer ignorance.
What she did for New York, she would like to do for the country.
If this is the direction of the Democratic Party, if she is the future, the Party is either doomed to self-immolation, leaving us with one-party rule for a season that will go badly, or the Party is actually successful in taking power with this radical agenda, the nation itself is under grave threat of self-immolation.
You see, there is virtually no check. With craven Democrats and dishonest media colluding against Republicans and President Trump, willing to build up AOC and other radicals in Congress while covering up their idiocy and bigotry (Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib) the American people can be too easily misled.
That makes the threat real.
EDITORS NOTE: This The Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/capitol-2028412_1280-e1550610234417.jpg387640Rod Thomsonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRod Thomson2019-02-19 16:04:112019-02-19 16:05:46It’s Really Not AOC, Amazon Or The Green New Deal; It’s Democrats And Their Media
After much media hype and online snippets the prime time CBS News interview of Andrew McCabe finally aired last night 2.17.19. It was a well-choreographed editorial hit-piece masquerading as journalism worthy of study by any legitimate journalism school if any still exist.
60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley interviewed McCabe for the show. Pelley handled McCabe with the deference, tenderness, and soulfulness of a dance partner, completely inappropriate for interviewing the disgraced former acting head of the FBI involved in an unprecedented coup attempt against President Donald J. Trump. CBS entertained America with their well-rehearsed dance sequence.
The stage is set for two. Pelley’s gentle voice leads McCabe as they tango around the political dance floor justifying motivations for removing the president. A dip here, a dramatic pause there.
McCabe, dressed in his best red white and blue dance costume takes the lead and reveals that he ordered an investigation into whether President Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI director James Comey. Dancing McCabe’s Tango Walks naturally curve to the left as he claims he initiated the probe to safeguard and document the ongoing investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election so they could “not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace.”
Pelley turns and moves his partner in a different direction. McCabe follows for a Reverse Slip Pivot and in a staggering admission that has gone viral on the Internet but being virtually ignored by the mainstream media, McCabe describes how the Justice Department considered enacting the 25th amendment to remove President Trump from office. Britain’s online newspaper The Independent reported on the admission in its stunning 2.15.19 article titled, “Trump 25th amendment: Justice Department considered attempt to remove president after Comey firing, former FBI chief reveals.”
Section four of the 25th amendment allows the removal of a sitting US president if the vice-president and a majority of the Cabinet declare him unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. There was actually DOJ speculation regarding which tango dancers would sign up for the program and how it could be accomplished.
Pelley slows McCabe in the slow, slow, quick, quick, slow tango pattern and McCabe responds. “Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort.” McCabe quickens and leans in close to Pelley for an Outside Swivel and reveals that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein, another gifted tango dancer, even offered to wear a wire into the White House to record potentially incriminating conversations with the president. WHAT??? There are rules in tango!
Rod Rosenstein should be disqualified.
Law professor and competition judge Alan Dershowitz mocked the DOJ suggesting they must be watching the TV drama “House of Cards” instead of reading the Constitution. On 2.15.19 Dershowitz speaks unequivocally about the 25th amendment to Fox News:
“The Constitution is clear as can be. The 25th amendment is applicable only if you’re incapacitated. It’s not a substitute for impeachment, it’s not suitable for an election and if Rod Rosenstein actually thought about and suggested wiring the president, invoking the 25th amendment, he should be fired before he has the opportunity to resign. He should be disgraced.”
But there is a problem.
The Tango Championships are sponsored by the Deep State and their media outlets CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and MSNBC so the dancing continues on mainstream media. The Pelley/McCabe tango partnership is now competing in the finals of the Worldwide Tango Championships and must be seen in context. Other dancers include James Comey, Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Chris Wray, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and senior tango dancers competing in the elder division James Clapper and John Brennan who have been with the Tango Association since its inception.
The Grand Prize winners receive lifetime achievement awards in political tango for planning and pulling off the most seditious plot in American history – the coup against a sitting president. The key to the coup and the cover-up is its context.
The foundation of the Russian investigation was the infamous 2016 Steele dossier. Christopher Steele, a British tango dancer and former head of the Russia desk for British Intelligence MI6, wrote the dossier for the private investigative firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was opposition research bought by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee for the purpose of smearing and delegitimizing candidate Trump.
The Steele dossier was never legitimate intelligence but it was deceitfully used to acquire the FISA warrants required to spy on the Trump campaign. Robert Mueller, another world-class tango dancer, is now using it to cover-up and legitimize the seditious coup attempt against President Trump.
Spygate is the political dance routine of world champion tango partners Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton first used in 2016 to delegitimize candidate Trump and now being used in the coup attempt against President Trump. Scott Pelley’s tango dance with McCabe was just more steps in the dance.
EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission. The featured image is from Pixabay.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/octopus-1220817_640.png441640Linda Goudsmithttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLinda Goudsmit2019-02-18 21:00:122019-02-18 21:11:39Coups, Cover-ups and Context
On Facebook there is a meme (right) based upon what President Donald J. Trump said at his “Choose Greatness” 2019 State of the Union. President Trump said:
America was founded on liberty and independence, and not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free and we will stay free.
Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.
Coveting
When I saw this meme I posted this:
Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV – “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”
A Facebook friend Randy Rioux asked, “What is that for?”
I responded to Randy with, “Communism and Socialism is based upon the core belief of coveting other peoples things. It is a violation of the Tenth Commandment. At some point Communists and Socialists run out of other peoples things.” Randy replied, “Thanks for clarifying.” I believe Randy got it.
Merriam Webster defines coveting as, “to desire (what belongs to another) inordinately or culpably.”
Ayn Rand’s 1946 monograph “Textbook of Americanism” explains in the simplest terms possible what made America unique and great.
Rand opens with an explanation of two starkly contrasting ideas.
What Is the Basic Issue in the World Today?
The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism. Individualism holds that man has inalienable rights which cannot be taken away from him by any other man, nor by any number, group or collective of other men. Therefore, each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
Collectivism holds that man has no rights; that his work, his body and his personality belong to the group; that the group can do with him as it pleases, in any manner it pleases, for the sake of whatever it decides to be its own welfare. Therefore, each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.
These two principles are the roots of two opposite social systems. The basic issue of the world today is between these two systems.
President Trump clearly threw the gauntlet down against the “collective” when he said, “America was founded on liberty and independence, and not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free and we will stay free.”
2020 Presidential Primary
This is what every America should be alert for as we enter the 2020 Presidential primaries. There will be dozens of debates as both political parties field candidates at the national, state and local levels.
The defining issue in 2020 will be coveting.
Coveting takes on many forms. Here are some core coveting issues to watch out for:
Coveting other peoples freedom of speech. There are those politicians who hunger for the power to limit free speech. Many social media giants have become gate keepers and salivate over denying some freedom of expression.
Coveting other peoples ability to defend themselves. This ongoing battle will heat up as politicians use tragedies to yearn for the day that all Americans are disarmed and unable to defend themselves from thieves, criminals and the government.
Coveting other peoples religious beliefs. Some politicians will use hatred of Jews to promote their political agenda.
Coveting other peoples wealth. Taxes is the tool of politicians at every level to take what is not theirs and redistribute it as they wish.
Coveting other peoples individualism. The great battle since the beginning of mankind is the struggle between the individual and the collective (government).
Coveting other peoples children. This is perhaps the most dangerous form of coveting. This form of coveting takes on many forms: the brainwashing of children to turn on their parents, the sexual assaults on children to feed a craving (pedophilia and pederasty) and the using of children for personal gain (human trafficking and prostitution).
Coveting another persons life. The law recently passed in New York and the law proposed in Virginia are the definition of infanticide.
All of these forms of coveting, and many more, will be on full display during the 2020 Presidential primaries.
Coveting leads to worshiping false images (the earth), disrespecting your parents, adultery, stealing, lying (bearing false witness) and even murder.
Watch for them. Beware of them. Vote to end coveting.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/stealing-3937735_640.jpg465640Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-02-18 08:12:392019-02-18 09:53:01Beware of Politicians who Covet Your Stuff!
