Why Do The Woke Hate Clarence Thomas So Much?

Justice Clarence Thomas, being African American, is seen as a traitor to the woke cause.


After the overturning of Roe v Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas has been a particular target of venomous attack from the woke mob. Why do they hate him so much? One might be forgiven for thinking that it is due to his staunch anti-abortion views. But that explanation does not work.

Pope Francis has long expressed that opposing abortion is “closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right”, and yet, the Left is not obsessed with him (in fact, many even take a liking). At some point, even Joe Biden supported letting States overturn Roe v Wade, and again, the Left did not go ballistic on him.

Not behaving as expected

So, why the animus against Thomas? There can only be one explanation: race. In 1991, as he was accused of sexually harassing Anita Hill, Thomas countered that he was the victim of “a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.”

This was loose talk, as it trivialised the suffering of real lynching victims in America’s troubled history of race relations. But Thomas did have a point in arguing that in the United States, any black person who dares to deviate from the official narrative of how blacks are supposed to act, will face severe harassment.

In 1991, he anticipated a trend that would become mainstream in our times: if you are born with a particular skin colour, you are supposed to behave in a certain way, and uphold a specific ideology. If not, you are a race traitor. As Biden so neatly phrased it:

“[I]f you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Any competent scholar of the history of racism would immediately recognise this as race essentialism. As Angelo Corlett explains in his book Race, Racism and Reparations,
“proponents of race essentialism define human races by a set of genetic or cultural traits shared by all members of a ‘racial’ group.”

Who are the neo-Nazis now?

In the first half of the 20th Century, this view was popular amongst proponents of so-called “racial science”. They believed that racial biological traits determine how people behave. Hitler believed that no matter how much a person with Jewish ancestry tried to assimilate to German society (even converting to another religion), he or she would still be a dangerous Jew, because it was in his or her essence.

Race essentialism is abhorrent, and one might think that after 1945, the world learned a lesson. And yet, race essentialism is alive and kicking, but this time, under the guise of woke progressivism. As per today’s woke rules, if you are black, you must embrace the whole woke mindset.

White people (such as Pope Francis) may occasionally be forgiven for having anti-abortion views, but if you are black and you deviate from the woke line (such as Clarence Thomas), you are a race traitor, an Uncle Tom. Unsurprisingly, Thomas has been called “Uncle Clarence” multiple times.

If you are black, not only do you have to act a certain way, but you must also have a special sexual preference. The woke pay lip service to interracial relationships, but amongst them there is a sense of unease when they contemplate a successful black man marrying a white woman.

For example, when Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States, USA Today columnist Barbara Reynolds wrote: “Here’s a man who’s going to decide crucial issues for the country and he has already said no to blacks; he has already said if he can’t paint himself white he’ll think white and marry a white woman.” Russell Adams, chairman of African American studies at Howard University, said that Thomas “marrying a white woman is a sign of his rejection of the black community.”

Truly racist

Frantz Fanon is a figure beloved by the Left. In 1952, he published Black Skin, White Masks, a canonical text of wokeness. In that book, he also scorns black men who fall in love with white women. Fanon castigates himself for, at some point, having had these thoughts: “Out of the blackest part of my soul, across the zebra striping of my mind, surges this desire to be suddenly white. I wish to be acknowledged not as black but as white… I marry white culture, white beauty, white whiteness.” The implication of this passage is that loving a white woman is an act of racial treason.

Fanon felt disdain for black people who embraced Western values. He claimed they were wearing white masks, as if somehow, they were deviating from their real essence, and were therefore living an inauthentic life. Therefore — so Fanon believed — Western civilisation must be rejected entirely. As he explained in The Wretched of the Earth“When the colonized hear a speech on Western culture, they draw their machetes or at least check to see they are close to hand.” He who admires Western values is a sellout.

Ever since Fanon, racial essentialism in the name of progress has only grown worse. People of color are now encouraged not to honour punctuality, because being on time is part of whiteness. Black kids who are academically talented run the risk of being told they are “acting white”. Analysing things objectively is an act of white supremacy. And so on.

Consequently, Clarence Thomas is not allowed to have anti-abortion views. Nobody cares about his anti-abortion arguments, because he is not supposed to make them in the first place. Other jurists, philosophers or theologians will be allowed to oppose abortion, but only if they are white. Thomas is hated not because of his views, but because of his skin colour. He upsets the arbitrary racial classifications that the woke are so eager to embrace.

As per woke taxonomy, black people cannot be conservative, and if they are, they are only wearing a “white mask”. To paraphrase the late Christopher Hitchens, “identity politics poisons everything”. We can no longer have a meaningful discussion about anything as vital as the ontological status of a fetus, because the race of the discussants will determine who is allowed to uphold a particular view. It’s time to push back against this madness.

AUTHOR

Gabriel Andrade

Gabriel Andrade is a university professor originally from Venezuela. He writes about politics, philosophy, history, religion and psychology. More by Gabriel Andrade

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

BOMBSHELL: Google Intercepted 100% of RNC Donation Emails on Biggest Donation Days of Month

If the RNC’s claim is true, we’ve entered a new stage in Big Tech’s war against conservatives. Google must be made to pay a crippling price.

Bombshell Claim: Google Intercepted 100% of RNC Donation Emails on Biggest Donation Days of Month – for 7 Months Straight

By Richard Moorhead, Western Journal, June 30, 2022:

Big Tech’s bias against conservatives is well known.

And yet Google is taking its double standards and discrimination to a new level.

The Republican National Committee revealed that its email communications are being tactically labeled as “spam” by the Silicon Valley company, according to Axios.
Advertisement – story continues below

The “spam” label allows Google to filter the emails away from the sight of Gmail users, hidden in a spam inbox.

Google sent RNC emails to the spam inbox with regularity on important fundraising deadlines, according to RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel.

On some days, as many as 90 percent to 100 percent of RNC emails hit the main inbox.

Google has blacklisted and purged information that’s inconvenient to the left from search results for years.

This form of censorship is even more nefarious. It blocked communications between willing parties.

Individuals who are signed up to receive RNC emails can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: Communist Surveillance Tool: FCC Commissioner Asks Apple And Google To Remove TikTok App

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

Biden’s Handlers Alter Federal Laws to Make it Easier for Terrorists to Enter the United States

The Biden Admin Just Made It Easier for Terrorists To Enter the United States

by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, June 29, 2022:

The Biden administration altered federal law to make it easier for individuals who have worked with designated terrorist groups to legally enter the United States.

The State and Homeland Security Departments last week amended federal immigration laws to allow foreigners who provided “insignificant material support” to designated terror groups to receive “immigration benefits or other status,” according to the policy published in the Federal Register but not formally announced by the administration. Examples of individuals who would fall into the new category, according to the announcement, include individuals who provided “humanitarian assistance” or “routine commercial transactions” to terror groups.

The policy shift is fueling concerns that the Biden administration wants to make it easier for individuals who work with or for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), the country’s paramilitary fighting force that has killed hundreds of Americans, to enter the country. Notice of the change came several days before the Biden administration and hardline Iranian government resumed talks aimed at securing a revamped version of the 2015 nuclear deal.

A State Department spokesman said the law was amended to help vulnerable Afghans, who might have inadvertently worked with terror groups, gain refuge in the United States following the Biden administration’s bungled withdrawal that left the Taliban in power. Lawmakers and former U.S. officials, however, say the new regulations are so broadly written that they would apply to organizations like al Qaeda and the IRGC. The policy change is also raising red flags as U.S. officials, including former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, face credible death threats from Iran.

The rule does not specifically mention Afghanistan but is written to cover all U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as the IRGC and al Qaeda, experts told the Free Beacon. The Taliban is not designated as a foreign terrorist organization, leaving lawmakers and former U.S. officials concerned the changes extend far beyond vulnerable Afghans and cover those tied to some of the globe’s most violent terror groups.

Gabriel Noronha, a State Department special adviser for Iran during the Trump administration, said that “the Biden administration is claiming this regulation is all about Afghanistan, but they didn’t even mention Afghanistan once in their action, and have made no serious attempt to limit the scope to the situation there.”

“Instead,” said Noronha, who is a fellow with the Jewish Institute for National Security of America think tank, “this looks like a massive watering down of our immigration restrictions against members of terrorist organizations.”

The State Department says the changes are limited to Afghanistan, but would not say why the country is not mentioned once in the new order….

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEO: This Week In Jihad with David Wood and Robert Spencer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

County Officials In Texas To Declare Border Crisis An ‘Invasion’

Woke Student Claims Justice Clarence Thomas Teaching at GWU Makes Him ‘Unsafe’

Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s Favorite BDS Group Mourns an ISIS Terrorist

The Long Jihad against Syria’s Christians

UK decided not to deport Rochdale Muslim rape gang ring leader known as ‘the master’

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

​Virginia Delegate Tim Anderson Sues Barnes & Noble for Selling Obscenity to Minors

Here’s our recent episode of Shout Out Patriots: Virginia Delegate Tim Anderson sues Barnes & Noble for selling obscenity to minors

Do parents have a right to decide if their children see and read obscene material?

Some authors, politicians, and other outspoken members of the Left argue that the answer is no.

They want children to have access to books with obscene themes – such as Gender Queer – regardless of their parents’ wishes.

In this episode of Shout Out Patriots, find out what strides Virginia Delegate Tim Anderson is taking to give parents back the power they deserve.

Delegate Anderson is suing Barnes & Noble for obscene books that are for sale to children without restriction, as well as available in school libraries.

Gender Queer is a sex book about what it’s like to be a boy trapped in a girl’s body, but still boy crazy!

Sounds like a brain teaser, doesn’t it?

In a nutshell, Gender Queer is a graphic book that encourages girls to become boys even if they still want boyfriends.

But of course, that new boyfriend has to want a ‘boy’ that was a girl who transitioned into becoming a boy. Yeah, kids should read all about it.

If you say this is complete blathering nonsense, listen to this week’s podcast to learn more about the vulgar messages being promoted to children and what’s being done to stop it

Please share this email with your friends.

©Martin Mawyer. All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Blackburn To Introduce Legislation Backing National Guard Members Set To Be Fired Over COVID Vaccine Refusal

Republican Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn will introduce legislation Thursday that would ban federal funds from being used to implement any requirement that a National Guard member must receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

The legislation, first obtained by the Daily Caller, comes as up to 40,000 U.S. Army National Guard members are set to be fired Thursday for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Blackburn said she is introducing the legislation to protect the 40,000 guardsmen and said firing them would be a threat to U.S. national security.

“Our servicemembers are the bedrock of America,” Blackburn told the Daily Caller before introducing the legislation. “Firing 40,000 Guardsmen for refusing the COVID vaccine would be both a complete disgrace and a threat to our national security. I am honored to stand beside our National Guardsmen and women by introducing this legislation to protect them from President Biden’s forever pandemic.”

READ THE LEGISLATION HERE: 

(DAILY CALLER OBTAINED) — … by Henry Rodgers

“We’re going to give every soldier every opportunity to get vaccinated and continue their military career. Every soldier that is pending an exemption, we will continue to support them through their process,” Lt. Gen. Jon Jensen, director of the Army National Guard, said in an Associated Press interview regarding the vaccine mandate. “We’re not giving up on anybody until the separation paperwork is signed and completed. There’s still time.” A number of House Republicans have introduced legislation to put an end to vaccine and mask mandates. In late September, a group of House Republicans introduced a bill that would prohibit federal agencies from implementing vaccine mandates.

The Daily Caller contacted the Department of Defense (DOD) and the White House about this legislation and about the jobs of the 40,000 National Guardsmen who remain unvaccinated. White House Press Sec. Karine Jean-Pierre would not answer the questions and referred the Caller to the Army. The DOD did not immediately respond.

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Senior Congressional correspondent. Follow Henry Rodgers On Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Up to 40,000 Unvaccinated Army Guard Troops at Risk of Dismissal as Deadline for Vaccine Mandate Looms

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Clyde, House Republicans Introduce Legislation To Block Future OSHA Vaccine Mandates

EXCLUSIVE: House Republicans Introduce Bill That Would Prohibit Agencies That Received COVID Funds From Issuing Vaccine Mandates

Youngkin Urges Pentagon To Ease Up On Vax Mandate As Tens Of Thousands Of Troops Face Discharge

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

POLL: Inflation, Economy And Crime Still More Important Than Abortion To Voters Post-Dobbs

Voters still rank economic concerns and rising crime higher in importance than abortion even after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a Cygnal study released Wednesday found.

The most important issues to voters polled were the high cost of living/inflation, the economy in general and crime/violence. A full 62% of voters ranked these issues as the most important to them.

Only eight percent said abortion was the most important issue to them.

The study had a margin of error of 2.19%. Cygnal interviewed registered voters via online panel, and the poll was conducted through June 25 and 26 and surveyed over 2,000 voters. Cygnal has a B+ rating according to FiveThirtyEight and has predicted 95% of races correctly.

Among independents, high cost of living/inflation, economy in general and jobs were top concerns, with 60% of independent voters ranking them as the most important issues to them. Comparatively, 20% of independent voters ranked abortion as the most important issue to them.

According to the poll, voters seem to have a slight preference for Republicans candidates over Democrat candidates heading into the midterms. Of those surveyed, 48% said they would prefer a Republican candidate and 44% said they would prefer a Democratic candidate.

The polling also showed Republicans leading as the party most trusted to handle economic issues. Republicans are trusted to handle the high cost of living and inflation, for instance, at a rate of 51%, compared to 49% who trusted them in a January poll. The percentage of voters who trusted Democrats to handle those issues remained steady from January, at 39%.

“Friday’s decision did nothing to change the headwinds state Democrats will face this year as a result of a dismal national political environment,” the Republican State Leadership Committee said of the polling numbers.

AUTHOR

SARAH WEAVER

Staff writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

HART: Dems’ Dearth Of Ideas Spawns Weaponization Of Government Against Opponents

The Internet Drags Biden For Claim About The ‘Ultra-MAGA’ Agenda

AMERICAN PRIDE ON THE SLIDE: Record-Low 38% ‘Extremely Proud’ to Be American

Poll Shows How Much The Trimester Affects Support For Abortion

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

Here’s Why The Government Can’t Set Up Abortion Clinics On Federal Land

Despite demands from several prominent Democrats, the federal government is prohibited from using taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.

The Hyde Amendment, first included in federal appropriations bills in 1976, prohibits the federal government from funding abortions unless “the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.” Activists estimate that the Hyde Amendment prevents at least 60,000 abortions every year.

The amendment is named for Republican Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee who championed it.

Although support for the amendment was initially bipartisan, Democrats in recent years have attempted to pass federal budgets that do not include the provision. President Joe Biden flip-flopped on support for the amendment during his 2020 presidential campaign, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi attempted to jettison the provision for an early COVID-19 relief package. Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s demand that the Hyde Amendment be included in a social spending package was a key factor in the breakdown in Build Back Better negotiations.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, several Republican-controlled states instituted trigger laws limiting abortion. In response, prominent left-wing Democrats urged the Biden administration to take actions to protect abortion access in those states.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren both called on the federal government to make abortions available on federal lands like national parks, where state governments could not regulate the procedure.

Warren and Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith claimed in a New York Times op-ed that Biden could provide “federal resources for individuals seeking abortion care in other states” and use “federal property and resources to protect people seeking abortion services locally.” Warren also claimed that the administration could designate “federal lands as a place where abortions can occur.”

Ocasio-Cortez added that providing abortion services on federal lands is the “the babiest of the babiest of the baby steps” that the federal government can take.

Neither Warren nor Ocasio-Cortez responded to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on whether or not they believe that such actions would violate the Hyde Amendment.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rejected the congressional Democrats’ suggestion Monday, but two cabinet members did suggest that they would use their agencies to promote abortion access.

“Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a Friday statement shortly after the ruling. “I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force.”

“The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law,” he added.

When contacted for comment, a Department of Defense (DOD) spokesperson cited a memorandum released Tuesday by Undersecretary of Defense Gilbert Cisneros. The memorandum stressed that the DOD will comply with the conditions laid out by the Hyde Amendment, and “will continue to follow existing departmental policy.”

Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra promised to “increase access” to abortifacients, claiming that his agency has been planning for “every action necessary to protect women’s access to reproductive healthcare.”

A spokesperson for HHS did not respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on compliance with the Hyde Amendment.

AUTHOR

MICHAEL GINSBERG

Congressional reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: 48 Senate Republicans Tell Schumer They Will Block Any Bill Undermining Hyde Amendment

‘Simply Ignore’: Military Expert Sounds Alarm On Pentagon’s Abortion Stance

New York Attorney General Demands Google Scrub Crisis Pregnancy Centers From Search Results

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

Supreme Court Greenlights the Continuation of Biden’s Border Crisis

(June 30, 2022, Washington, D.C.) — The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) issued the following statement in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Biden administration’s improper termination of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program, also known as “Remain in Mexico.”

“When fully active under President Trump, MPP required many illegal border crossers to remain in Mexico while they waited for an immigration judge to consider the merits of their applications, many of which were dubious asylum claims. Thus, MPP effectively cut off the strongest pull-factor for illegal immigration – the near-guarantee of being released into the interior of the United States after apprehension by a border patrol officer. MPP was an obstacle to the Biden administration’s mass immigration agenda so they fought to end it.

“By ending MPP how and when they did, the Biden administration put the American public and migrants at risk, all while footing enormous bills to state and local taxpayers who must provide benefits to aliens released into their communities. The Court’s decision today, however, perpetuates this status quo and will allow the government to continue releasing inadmissible aliens into the United States, in direct violation of federal law.

“The Biden administration chose to terminate MPP knowing that their decision would allow them to violate other immigration laws. In the absence of a fully-operational MPP program, DHS unlawfully chooses to release thousands of inadmissible aliens into the United States resulting in further incentives that encourage mass illegal immigration across the Southern border.

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling highlights the need for Congressional action to mandate MPP and secure our southern border. Courts cannot be relied on to reign in the Biden administration’s relentless flouting of immigration laws. Congress must step forward with needed reforms to stop this historic border crisis.”

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR press release is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Roe Woe: Manchin and Collins Violate Their Oaths by Stressing Un-American Stare Decisis

In the wake of Roe being aborted, some liberal politicians, such as senators Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Susan Collins (R-Me.), are crying foul because they claim that SCOTUS justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch deceived them over stare decisis (respect for precedent) during confirmation hearings. What’s unsaid is that stare decisis is itself a deception. In fact, our Founders would be aghast at the standard. Why? It’s simple:

If a precedent clearly conforms to the Constitution, then regard for stare decisis is unnecessary for a precedent-aligned ruling; all a justice need do is reference the Constitution and he’ll vote incidentally in accordance with the precedent.

If the precedent doesn’t conform to the Constitution, it is then illegal and should be overturned, which a justice will vote to do if he, again, references the Constitution.

In other words, exalting stare decisis serves no legitimate purpose. The people doing so are generally individuals who dislike the Constitution’s dictates, but know they could never amend the document (get the people’s consent) in accordance with their wishes. So they instead uphold this notion that convenient “precedent” — i.e., the will of a handful of judges — should supersede the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. It’s no wonder Justice Clarence Thomas stated last month, “I always say that when someone uses stare decisis, that means they’re out of arguments.”

But here’s what hasn’t been said: In complaining they were deceived by Gorsuch and Kavanaugh,  Manchin and Collins are in glass houses with millimeter-thick walls.

For they are violating their oaths.

Upon assuming office, the senators took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

They did not take an oath to uphold precedent.

Yet when they make adherence to stare decisis a prerequisite for SCOTUS confirmation, they’re seeking to ensure that their chosen justices will place precedent before the Constitution. They are thus violating their oath of office by proxy.

(And, of course, our politicians routinely violate their oaths directly by supporting unconstitutional legislation.)

In reality, consulting precedent is only necessary for a judge if he’s sincerely unsure of what a constitutional provision dictates in a given case and wishes to benefit from past wisdom; in such an event, however, precedent is merely part of historical analysis and study, not a constraining stricture.

As for the near deification of precedent called stare decisis, it actually is a con (and some of its proponents are no doubt conning themselves; i.e., rationalizing). We’ll hear that Roe was unassailable “precedent” because it had been in place for 49 years, even though not having Roe and leaving abortion to the states was precedent for the better part of 200 years before then. What’s more, Plessy v. Ferguson (separate but equal opinion) was “precedent” for 58 years until Brown v. Board of Education. Should it have been respected and kept in place, senators Manchin and Collins?

It’s all the more laughable when considered thus: We can have a precedent such as marriage being a state matter for more than 200 years. Then, five long-in-the-tooth, black-robed lawyer zealots get caught up in sexual fashions, get into their heads that they should impose some perceived good, and completely violate this standard (i.e., Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015). And we’re supposed to respect their newly minted precedent over what preceded it…why?

The truth is that the Court has reversed its own precedents 145 times. So whence comes this regard for stare decisis?

Well, the Left wouldn’t have valued precedent ages ago because, with court rulings having been more “traditionalist,” it wouldn’t have served their ends. Now, after years of judicial activism having delivered an arsenal of decisions facilitating their agenda, we hear, “Oh, no! You can’t touch these judicial opinions. Stare decisis today, stare decisis tomorrow, stare decisis forever!” Yeah? Tell it to the judge.

In the final analysis, liberal senators will sanctimoniously give SCOTUS nominees the third degree about whether they as justices would uphold stare decisis, as if it’s some sacred legal principle. But the onus belongs on them. They’re demanding that judges become proxies for their constitutional trespass. This is shameful, and it alone should disqualify them from office.

Of course, politicians also like judicial activism on hot-button issues because they can then wash their hands of the matter and say “That’s it — the courts have ruled!” These politicians consequently won’t have to take a stand on the controversial issues and risk increased election-time voter ire.

But with Roe no mo‘, Manchin now may end up with a bill banning abortion on his desk. He’ll then have to sign it and incur the wrath of the Party of Death (formerly the Democrats), or veto it and explain to West Virginians why he’s governing like a Californian. But, hey, maybe he can just point to precedent — there have been, after all, plenty of phony politicians before him.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe, Gettr or Parler, or log on to SelwynDuke.com.

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

War on Parents: Hello Muddah, Hello Faddah, Here I Am At Camp Gender-Change-You-Oughta

UPDATE 7/7/2022: TODAY’S DEMOCRAT PARTY: Democrat RI Senator TWERKS In Campaign Ad


I told you about the War on Parents being waged in the schools.  It’s being waged on other fronts, as well.

Some summer camps are assigning kids to cabins based on gender identity, not biological sex, forcing children with parents dumb enough to send them to those camps to sleep and undress next to the opposite sex.

A Florida church jumped into LGBT advocacy with a Pride celebration and drag show for students as young as 12.

Disney is back at it with a same-sex kiss in ‘Lightyear’ which is banned in 14 countries.  Disney introduced a bisexual character in the Disney+ series Loki.  Disney sold rainbow-spangly shirts, backpacks, and other merchandise for Pride Month, leaving homosexuals everywhere to ask, ‘where’s my cut?’

Medical professionals are also hustling for dough.  A new book published by the American Academy of Pediatrics brainwashes kids into believing it’s perfectly fine for Olivia now to be Oliver who should be undressing in the boys locker room.   Assigning sex at birth is so unfair, and ‘have we got drugs and surgery to fix that – for a modest fee, of course.’  That’s the best advertising campaign for grooming new customers I’ve heard since Edward Bernays got women to smoke cigarettes so they could be independent from men.  The Transgender-Industrial Complex is lighting new ‘Torches of Freedom’ that are even more dangerous.

Your federal government, meanwhile, is all in.  The Secretary of Education is pushing to add ‘nonbinary’ as a sex characteristic in public schools, supports biological males in girls’ sports, and won’t say it’s bad for schools to keep student gender transitioning hidden from parents.  The Department of Education is now demanding schools collect student gender identity data.  This will take an estimated two million hours of effort and is being done set up lawsuits by the feds against school districts that fail to provide “equity” for students who identify or – get this – are perceived to be – nonbinary.  Perceived?  By who?  To what degree?  What a mess in the courts that’s going to be.

Attorney General Merrick Garland told Congress the Justice Department wasn’t using antiterrorism tools against parents who protest school board actions, but it turns out the FBI is.

Joe Biden’s new parents and families council has members from such far-left groups supporting critical race theory and transgender ideology as LULAC which has called for suppressing speech online, the National School Boards Association that kicked off the whole targeting of parents thing, and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network.  The latter specializes in shaking down corporations for big donations.

Kinda makes you want to vote Democrat in November, doesn’t it?

That’s all the news from Camp Biden. Oh, please don’t make me stay another day.

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

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NEA Teachers Union To Vote On Mandatory Masking, Enemies List, Rejecting Words ‘Mother’ And ‘Father’

Dem School Board Director Hosting Sex Class for Kids Ages 9-12 in Her Adult Toy Shop

America College of Pediatricians Says Encouraging Transgenderism is Child Abuse

MassResistance parent infiltrates “transgender” training session for elementary school teachers – asks presenters hard questions.

Frustrated Detectives Leaving ‘Insane’ NYPD En Masse, Have ‘Had Enough’

G-d help us. The Democrats are destroying our civilization, the basic social fabric of our life.

DiGiacomo, the Detectives Endowment Association president, said cops feel demoralized because of a lack of support from politicians.

“It’s simple,” he said. “Detectives are retiring in historic numbers because they have no support from politicians who care more about criminals than cops and the New Yorkers they protect.”

Frustrated detectives leaving ‘insane’ NYPD en masse, have ‘had enough’

By Tina Moore, NY Post, June 28, 2022:

More than 100 NYPD detectives have retired in June — and another 75 plan to put their papers in next month — as many become frustrated by revolving-door justice and rules that hamstring them in the Big Apple, officials and detectives told The Post.

“That’s going to have a major impact on investigating crimes,” Detectives Endowment Association president Paul DiGiacomo said. “The detective squads are down now as we speak and are investigating more cases. It’s going to have an impact on public safety.”

So far this year, 250 detectives have retired, leaving the total number at about 5,600, which is nearly 2,000 less than two decades ago.

There were 794 detective retirements during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 — and that number dropped down to 395 in 2021. Sources said 100 retirements in just one month is a large number for the NYPD.

The Post also reported earlier this month that cops in general were leaving the force in record numbers.

At his NYPD walkout ceremony at the 105th Precinct stationhouse Tuesday, Queens Detective Jason Caputo, 51, said he had “had enough.”

Detective Jay Caputo retired from the NYPD’s 105th Precinct after serving 25 years.

Detective Jay Caputo retired from the NYPD’s 105th Precinct after 18 years with the NYPD.

Daniel William McKnight

“To know me is to know I love the job in and out, but it’s not the same job I joined,” said Caputo, who is leaving after 18 years in the NYPD, and thus not getting his maximum pension, which kicks in after 20.

“The no-bail law was a big thing with me,” he said. “It’s not even really crimefighting anymore. You arrest somebody for assault 2 with a weapon and then the person is back at the precinct getting his property the next day. They’re not locking anyone up, even those with records. Pay your debt to society. You broke the law.”

Caputo said he also worried about making arrests and running into problems with city laws, such as the one prohibiting officers from putting pressure on a person’s diaphragm.

AUTHOR

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

2022 Is Lit: Army Private Sent Sensitive Military Info to White Supremacist Group to Facilitate Jihad Attack

The official propaganda line that the regime would have us believe, solemnly repeated by Old Joe Biden, Gestapo chief Merrick Garland, and others is that “white supremacists” constitute the greatest terror threat the nation faces today. The only problem with this scenario is that in the absence of a large number of white supremacist terror attacks, the narrative has had to be shored up by branding parents as terrorists for being angry about drag queen story hour in elementary schools. That is not to say, however, that there is no white supremacist terrorism at all. It’s just not a matter of MAGA hat-wearing rednecks descending on obscure gay black actors in sub-zero weather while declaring that Chicago is “MAGA country.” Reality, as always, is more complicated than the narrative, as a recent case illustrates.

On Friday, according to the Justice Department, a U.S. Army private named Ethan Phelan Melzer, who also went by the name Etil Reggad, “pled guilty to attempting to murder U.S. service members, providing and attempting to provide material support to terrorists, and illegally transmitting national defense information.” Melzer was involved with the Order of the Nine Angles (O9A), which the DOJ says is “an occult-based, neo-Nazi, and white supremacist group.” But no one is wearing MAGA hats in this crowd: “O9A espouses neo-Nazi, anti-Semitic, and Satanic beliefs, and promotes extreme violence to accelerate and cause the demise of Western civilization.  The group has expressed admiration both for Nazis, such as Adolf Hitler, and Islamic jihadists, such as Usama Bin Laden, the now-deceased former leader of al Qaeda.”

The group didn’t just admire bin Laden; it wanted to emulate him. Melzer, the DOJ explains, “planned a jihadist attack on his U.S. Army unit in the days leading up to a deployment to Turkey and sent sensitive details about the unit” to O9A. Underscoring the seriousness of this plot is the fact that this information included details of his unit’s “location, movements, and security.” This wouldn’t have been the first time O9A committed an act of terrorism: “Members and associates of O9A have also participated in acts of violence, including murders. O9A members are instructed to fulfill ‘sinister’ deeds, including ‘insight roles,’ where they attempt to infiltrate various organizations, including the military, to gain training and experience, commit acts of violence, identify like-minded individuals, and ultimately subvert those groups from within.”

That was why Melzer joined the Army in the first place: solely in order to set up this attack. No one initially suspected him, however, and so in October 2019 he went to Italy as part of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team. While he was there, however, Melzer “consumed propaganda from multiple extremist groups, including O9A and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, which is also known as ISIS.” He also “subscribed to encrypted online forums where he downloaded and accessed videos of jihadist attacks on U.S. troops and facilities and jihadist executions of civilians and soldiers, in addition to far-right, neo-Nazi, and other white supremacist propaganda.”

Then in May 2020, Melzer was reassigned to a different unit, and classified briefings as part of his training to deploy with it. He started passing on this information to O9A, and to “a sub-group of O9A known as the ‘RapeWaffen Division,’ providing details about his unit’s anticipated deployment including troop movements, relevant dates, locations, armaments, topography, and security, all in connection with the proposed attack on his unit and the Military Base.” Melzer himself and other O9A members referred to what they were planning a “jihadi attack” and envisioned it as a “mass casualty” event that would kill numerous U.S. service members. He also passed on this information to someone who represented himself as a member of al-Qaeda.

Melzer understood the gravity of what he was doing, telling other O9A members: “[y]ou just gotta understand that currently I am risking my literal free life to give you all this.” He said he was willing to die to pull off his attack, but “I would’ve died successfully…cause [] another 10 year war in the Middle East would definitely leave a mark.”

So the DOJ got its white supremacist terrorist, but he had nothing to do with pro-Trump conservatives, and turned out to be working hand-in-glove with the jihad terrorists that the Biden administration has consistently downplayed or ignored outright. Once again, the narrative of the political and media elites is shown to be false – not, of course, that they will take any notice of that, much less change course.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: White Supremacists Everywhere: Biden Tries to Link Jan. 6 with Buffalo Shooting

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

Just Days After Roe Reversal, Abortion Is Already Banned In Almost A Quarter Of America

Barely more than 72 hours after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, abortion is already illegal in roughly one-quarter of the states in America.

A number of Republican-controlled states have had “trigger” laws activated, which are laws put in place to impose restrictions on abortion in the event the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade. Others have moved to enact new abortion restrictions, with some banning the practice entirely.

Abortion is now outlawed in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Ohio, South Carolina, Texas and Tennessee have enacted six-week bans, and the others have fully banned abortion, according to NPR.

Other states are poised to follow suit in the near future. Republican North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley announced Tuesday that his office had certified the overturning of Roe, and the state’s abortion ban will go into effect July 28. Republican Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds is asking courts to lift an injunction holding up the state’s heartbeat abortion ban.

“Trigger” laws are currently pending in several more states, including Idaho, Mississippi and Wyoming, and Georgia’s six-week ban is currently subject to an injunction.

Analysts expect roughly half the states in America could ultimately ban abortion entirely, or come close to doing so, now that Roe has been overturned, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Democrats have been scrambling to find ways to maintain abortion access, and no blue states have so far implemented any new restrictions.

AUTHOR

DYLAN HOUSMAN

Healthcare reporter. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

White House Encourages Girls ‘15 Or Younger’ To Abort Without Their Parents’ Consent

These Companies Are Promising To Pay For Their Employees’ Abortions After SCOTUS Decision

Judge Blocks Texas Trigger Law From Going Into Effect, Rules Abortions Can Proceed

Army Chaplain Under Investigation For Sending Pro-Life Message To Troops

‘A Lot Cheaper To Get Rid Of Them’: Tucker Carlson Says Corporations Are Telling People They Can’t Have Children

SCOTUS ‘Assassination Challenge’ Pushed By Trans Creator Of ‘Gender Unicorn’ Graphic

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

WATCH: Arizona Gubernatorial Candidate Kari Lake Destroys CNN Reporter Right to Her Face

Brilliant. Kari Lake will be a fine governor for the state of Arizona. Trump, DeSantis, MTG, Lake and others are the future of the GOP. The useless GOP establishment will be phased out of the Republican Party in the years ahead.

Kari Lake Totally Destroys CNN Reporter Right to Her Face

By Town Hall, June 27, 2022

Hello, 911, I’d like to report a murder.

That’s really the only way you could describe this epic smackdown of a CNN reporter by Kari Lake, a Republican gubernatorial candidate for Arizona. She’s Trump endorsed. She’s the frontrunner. And she can deliver haymakers like the former president. Lake is lethal in this exchange with Kyung Lah.

Lah introduces herself to Lake, who asks where’s her mask that every liberal reporter has been wearing religiously for the past 18 months or so. Lake has spoken with Lah before when the latter was all masked up. Lah added that she wasn’t wearing at that moment because they were outside.

To learn more about Kari Lake please click here.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Michael Stenger, Senate security chief on Jan. 6, DIES one day before hearing

Biden Regime Cancels Federal Student Loans, Adding BILLIONS More To The National Debt, Increasing Inflation

Insurrection: Pro-Death Demonstrators Unleash Weekend Of Arson, Vandalism, And Insurrection After Rove v. Wade Ruling

HORROR: Texas-Mexico border chaos, At least 46 migrants found dead in San Antonio inside 18-wheeler, reports say

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

One More Blockbuster Supreme Court Decision: West Virginia v. EPA Could Still Be Coming

And it is potentially bigger than Roe v. Wade.

The court could begin to rein in the vast powers of the alphabet agencies in D.C. that run our lives and return it to legislators whom we elect to create.

One more blockbuster Supreme Court decision could still be coming even after Friday’s abortion ruling

Supreme Court’s abortion ruling rocked nation last week but West Virginia v. EPA could also be huge

By Liz Peek | Fox News

Believe it or not, overturning Roe v. Wade may not be the Supreme Court’s most dramatic decision this year. Instead, its ruling on West Virginia v. the Environmental Protection Agency could prove far more consequential. It could literally upend how our government works.

For the better.

West Virginia vs. EPA asks whether important policies that impact the lives of all Americans should be made by unelected D.C. bureaucrats or by Congress. This SCOTUS could well decide that ruling by executive agency fiat is no longer acceptable.

The case involves the Clean Power Plan, which was adopted under President Barack Obama to fight climate change; the program was estimated to cost as much as $33 billion per year and would have completely reordered our nation’s power grid. The state of West Virginia, joined by two coal companies and others, sued the EPA, arguing the plan was an abuse of power.

By deciding in favor of West Virginia, the court could begin to rein in the vast powers of the alphabet agencies in D.C. that run our lives and return it to legislators whom we elect to create…legislation. Just as the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade that abortion laws are more appropriately left up to the people’s elected representatives, it may decide in West Virginia vs. EPA that Congress, and not federal agencies, should write our laws.

A decision that puts Congress in charge would stall environmental rules intended to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy. Legislators, back in the driver’s seat, would have to debate and go public with the consequences – and costs — of regulations that are now adopted with little buy-in from the public.

To further their climate agenda, Democrats have been able to hide the full-in price tag of abandoning oil and gas as our main energy sources by creating tax subsidies for renewables. If consumers had to pay the real cost of wind and solar power, they might not be so enthusiastic about what President Joe Biden calls the great “transition.”

But the case goes beyond environmental regulations.

A ruling in favor of West Virginia would reverse a decades-long trend in which Congress has handed off to federal agencies decisions our legislators refuse or are unable to make. The usurping of authority by D.C. bureaucracies began with the New Deal in the 1930s, when an ambitious President Franklin D. Roosevelt led the way by creating the TVA, the WPA and a total of 69 other offices and executive branch agencies to do his bidding. The process occasioned Democrat Al Smith to complain that he was “submerged in a bowl of alphabet soup.”

Restricting the power of the alphabet soup authorities might require that our representatives and senators actually do their jobs, allowing less time for posturing and passing pointless dead-on-arrival bills. They might have to show up more than half the days in the year, for instance, which is the current norm.

It could, for sure, derail the ambitions of Joe Biden, who won no significant majority in Congress and appears incapable of “working across the aisle,” though as Candidate Biden, he argued that ability was one of his strongest credentials.

In addition to broad environmental rules that might come under new scrutiny, subsequent suits might challenge labor laws written by the NLRB, consumer protection edicts from the CFPB, and regulations put in place by the FDA, the CDC and the entire host of agencies that have immense – many would say excess – power over our lives.

But initially, the ruling would deep-six the Biden administration’s ambition to kill off the coal industry, which is why West Virginia, our nation’s second biggest coal-mining state after Wyoming, brought the suit, along with Westmoreland Mining Holdings, North American Coal Corporation and others.

Like Obama, Biden wants to effectively shut down our fossil fuel industries that provide cheap, plentiful and reliable energy and that are the envy of the world. His “Build Back Better” plan incorporated $550 billion in programs aimed at curtailing emissions, including significant portions of Bernie Sanders’ Green New Deal.

Obama’s approach was to reinterpret the 1970 Clean Air Act to allow a nationwide cap-and-trade regimen, requiring power plants to offset emissions by investing in other low-carbon facilities. Congress did not alter the Clean Air Act language to permit the Clean Power Plan; the Obama White House simply grabbed it as a way to further their climate ambitions.

The courts decided the CPP constituted executive overreach and put the plan on hold. Subsequently, the Trump White House rescinded the program.

This back-and-forth highlights an obvious problem with government by alphabet soup. Successive administrations can easily change the rules by which such agencies operate. Policymaking ; therefore, is erratic and inconsistent. Especially in the power arena, where new facilities can take years to build and the impact on the general population can be profound, this is a costly and inefficient way to govern.

Political parties rise and fall, to be sure, and can also change the nation’s direction. But matters of consequence should be argued in the public forum and not buried under the almost 100,000 pages of new rules and regulations published during Obama’s last year in office, for instance.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once wrote in a decision, “We expect Congress to speak clearly if it wishes to assign to an agency decisions of vast ‘economic and political significance.” That limiting guidance appears to have support from the conservative justices on the court today.

If the court launches a widespread curtailment of governing by executive agency, as it should, we will see more protests and renewed cries to “Pack the Court,” including from members of Congress. After all, they’ll have to get to work.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Reducing CO2 Hurts the Planet and Humanity: Time to Reconsider Massachusetts v. EPA

With West Virgina v. EPA, Supreme Court can restore state authority on energy

EPA Spends million from Biden’s Covid bill on climate change programs

EPA spent $7M in American Rescue Plan funds to replace diesel school buses with electric buses

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