Thank you Governor DeSantis. What does the Biden Administration have to say about the rise of anti-American Marxists leaders, who are rapidly gaining power in countries throughout Latin America?
Marxist governments in Latin America are a serious threat to the United States, because they are neighbors who will align with our adversaries. Just like Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. Governor DeSantis understands this threat. The Biden Administration clearly does not.
Leftism (communism, socialism) is the most destructive, evil, irrational, blind, anti-real force in human history, It should have been dead and buried after Hitler and Stalin, and yet here we are with even America, the greatest experiment in self governance, being subsumed by this terrible evil.
“The Communists’ chief purpose is to destroy every form of independence—independent work, independent action, independent property, independent thought, an independent mind, or an independent man. Conformity, alikeness, servility, submission and obedience are necessary to establish a Communist slave-state.”
“There is no difference between the principles, policies and practical results of socialism—and those of any historical or prehistorical tyranny.” (Ayn Rand)
The election in Colombia of a former narco-terrorist Marxist is troubling and disappointing. The spread of left-wing totalitarian ideology in the Western Hemisphere is a growing threat. Florida stands with Colombian Americans on the side of freedom. pic.twitter.com/0O7UVccH6M
Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) spoke out against newly elected leftist Colombian President Gustavo Petro on Monday, predicting the leader would be “disastrous.”
DeSantis shared a video of his comments regarding Petro on Twitter.
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-06-22 07:43:102022-06-22 07:49:58DeSantis Speaks Out Against Newly Elected ‘Marxist’ Colombian President
The NY Sun reports, “The drama of these hearings revolves not around the events of a year and a half ago, but around the possibility of criminal charges in the future. The gravity of such a development has precipitated tension between members of the committee itself, and between the committee and the Justice Department. Officially, today’s hearing, the fourth, will focus on President Trump’s efforts to pressure state officials — particularly in Georgia and Arizona — to overturn the results of the presidential election. Representative Adam Schiff, who managed Mr. Trump’s first impeachment trial, is expected to quarterback the session.”
On Monday, June 13, the first crack appeared in the otherwise cohesive wall of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol. The fissure opened when committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) told reporters after that day’s hearing that the committee would not be making any criminal referrals to the Justice Department of former President Donald J. Trump or anyone else.
Almost immediately, Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) tweeted that the committee “has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals,” and will do so “at an appropriate time.” Another committee member, Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) issued her own conclusion that “if criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ.” Other committee members, taken aback by the chairman’s comments, were stumbling to respond, but most chose to keep their powder dry until the committee could talk it over privately.
Meantime, a committee spokesperson released a statement to CNN the following day which attempted to clarify the chairman’s comments — sort of a sideways walk-back: “The committee has no authority to prosecute individuals but is rather tasked with developing facts….” Two sentences later, the spokesperson said the committee would gather “all relevant information, offer recommendations, and, if warranted, make criminal referrals.”
It is doubtful the chairman’s remarks on referrals were an inadvertent slip of the tongue. There have certainly been private and even public surmises as to whether criminal referrals are advisable, perhaps even some guidance from above. Ranking committee Democrat Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), who is close to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said publicly in March that a criminal referral would be “unproductive” because “it carries no legal weight.”
That same month, the Justice Department announced it would not be prosecuting former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows and social media director Dan Scavino on House-approved contempt of Congress charges for defying committee subpoenas to appear. No reason was given. That same day, however, the department announced it was proceeding against former Trump White House trade adviser Peter Navarro on the same charges. It was an obvious muscle-flexing demonstration of prosecutorial discretion.
Unlike contempt of Congress citations, criminal referrals have no formal status in law or in Congress’s rules. Any citizen can make them. There are three good reasons why the committee would avoid making criminal referrals on Trump or anyone else. First, as Lofgren mentioned, such referrals from Congress have no legal status at DOJ. Most of such referrals from Congress, usually made by committee chairmen, have died on the department’s doorstep. Justice is very sensitive about being perceived as doing Congress’s political bidding, and prides itself on its independence and non-partisanship.
The second reason for not filing a criminal referral is a matter of optics. One of the main criticisms House Republicans level at the select committee is that its investigation is simply a smokescreen for a public show trial – a “kangaroo court.” Making a criminal referral to DOJ would only feed and confirm that accusation. Most of the public media’s focus would be on whether the committee finds Trump criminally culpable for the Jan. 6 riot and would overshadow any other findings and recommendations the committee will presumably make.
A third reason a criminal referral would be resisted is that Trump’s role in claiming the election was stolen from him and whether he incited the violence that ensued is not necessarily a slam-dunk case. For Trump to be convicted requires proof of criminal intent on his part. Did he knowingly intend to break the law? Judging from much of the testimony already aired, it is not clear he was purposely acting illegally. As former Attorney General Bill Barr testified, at times the president seemed “detached from reality” and prone to believe the many “fantastical” conspiracy theories presented to him. Someone’s mental state is difficult enough to discern, let alone prove.
Last Thursday, the school board at Fairfax County School Public Schools (FCPS) voted 8-4 to increase penalties for students who misgender or “dead-name” transgender-identifying students. This will now be classified as “discriminatory harassment,” which means offenders “could face weeks-long suspensions and referrals to local law enforcement,” according to the Washington Examiner.
The most charitable interpretation anyone could make of this move is that the school board is trying to cultivate a kinder environment by removing hateful language and attitudes from campuses. This would allow transgender students and their allies to feel safer and happier while those who oppose transgenderism have an opportunity to reflect on their intolerance and make better choices.
However, like most leftist gimmicks in education, all of this is based on false premises and will only create more dysfunction in an already dysfunctional school system. Specifically, there are three major problems with this new policy, two of them concern the idea behind it while the third has to do with its implementation.
Not an Expression of Hate
The first problem is that the school board conflates the refusal to accommodate a transgender student with an expression of hate. However, the two things are completely different. In the case of accommodating transgender classmates, a student is refusing to betray his own senses and reason to conform to the classmate’s fabricated reality; in the case of expressing hate, a student is actively seeking to harm and demean a classmate with hateful language.
Of course, the usual rebuttal to this is asking what the big deal is. After all, if objective reality (otherwise known as truth) is as relative and meaningless as transgender activists suggest, then why not humor people who live by a different truth? Professor Patrick Grzanka’s defensive interview with Matt Walsh in “What Is a Woman?” reflects this sentiment perfectly, as he asserts, “You keep invoking the word ‘truth,’ which is condescending and rude.”
On the contrary, it’s the exact opposite. Forcing someone to abide by another person’s arbitrary truth is “condescending and rude.” Empowered by the school faculty, trans-identifying students in FCPS can force every other student to lie and go along with the delusion. This isn’t much different from a big kid putting a smaller kid in a headlock and asking him to say “uncle,” and if he doesn’t — in this case, he will face severe consequences from a school administrator.
Is Transgender Identity on Par with Race and Sex?
This brings up another more fundamental problem with FCPS’s new policy: how should one properly view transgenderism? Is it really fair or accurate to say that transgender identity is on par with one’s race or sex? Shouldn’t it matter that race and sex are based on biology while transgenderism is based on feelings?
It most definitely matters because sometimes people’s feelings can be wrong, and if those feelings aren’t corrected by reason, they can become harmful. Researcher Jared Eckert argues this point in The American Conservative with the example from two decades ago of young people suddenly developing Body Identity Integrity Disorder (BIID), the belief that there is something wrong with one’s body.
They would go online and read blog posts about others seeking to amputate healthy limbs because they felt like they didn’t belong — and then these young people started feeling it too. The same thing happened with young people developing eating disorders because they felt like they were overweight.
Fortunately, as Eckert explains, social media platforms censored material that promoted these disorders because of the harm it was doing to young people. Unfortunately, in the case of transgenderism, censorship goes the other way — anyone who dares to question the idea that feeling like a woman makes one a woman will be censored. It’s the equivalent of punishing people who tell an anorexic woman she’s not fat, or an able-bodied man that he shouldn’t dismember himself.
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-06-22 07:16:162022-06-22 07:16:16Fairfax County School Board Votes To Make It A Potential Crime To Call A Boy A Boy
As gas hit historic highs, leftists keep arguing it’s a perfect time to transition to a “clean energy” economy. “Now is the moment to double-down, triple-down, and quadruple-down on clean energy,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren tweeted on Friday, linking to a CNN piece that contends “wind and solar” have been “bailing out” Texas during its recent heat wave.
In the piece we learn that wind, solar, and nuclear have “powered about 38% of the state’s power in 2021, rivaling natural gas at 42%.” That’s quite the sleight of hand; tantamount to bragging about how Babe Ruth (60), Lou Gehrig (47), and Joe Dugan (2) combined for 109 home runs in 1927. True, but deceptive.
Subsidized solar power generates less than 2 percent of Texas’ energy during the year. Nuclear power generates around 10 percent and wind nearly 20. Coal accounts for nearly 15 percent and natural gas for more than 52 percent of electricity generation. It would be far more accurate to say that coal, nuclear, and gas are bailing out Texas.
No nation has anything approaching a clean energy economy. And those that have promised to build one are all struggling.
More than a decade ago, after a major earthquake caused the Fukushima nuclear disaster, German chancellor Angela Merkel announced her nation would close down all its nuclear power plants, at the same time quadrupling down on the decarbonization of its economy—energiewende. Once there were 17 reactors in Germany. Now there are only three remaining, all of which are scheduled to go offline by the end of the year.
The move to “clean energy”—without nuclear—has accomplished three things:
1. It has prompted Germany, and the rest of the EU, to begin relying more heavily on Russian natural gas as it “transitioned.” Putin, who has begun demanding EU nations pay for their energy in roubles, is now able to undercut the European economy at will.
2. It has created the highest global electricity prices per household in the world. In 2019, German households were paying 34 cents per kilowatt-hour compared to 13 cents in the United States. The price of energy has doubled since 2000, when Germany first mandated decarbonization, an effort that forced energy companies to purchase long-term inefficient renewables at high, fabricated prices.
3. It has meant the burning of coal. Even before Russia began cutting off supply, Germany was more reliant on coal than the United States. This week, Germany’s Economy Minister Robert Habeck, who earlier this year rejected a European Union label of nuclear energy as “green,” announced that in an effort to avoid future gas shortages—because cars can’t run on wind—the government would incentivize the use of more coal-fired power plants.
The “transition” to green that Germany began 30 years ago has not worked. In 2000, Germany obtained 84 percent of its energy from fossil fuels. By 2019, it was 78 percent. As Vaclav Smil pointed out a couple of years ago, at this rate, Germany would still be deriving 70 percent of its energy from fossil fuels by the year 2050. With a move back to coal in 2022, it will surely be even later, if ever.
Setting aside the high cost of transitioning to renewable energy, and the failure of wind turbines and solar panels to produce energy in the winter, the intermittency problem is not going to be overcome in any season. To pull back on the only reliable “clean energy” source that can mitigate this problem has been suicidal.
Unlike Germany, we don’t even have to worry about pipelines from Russia; we are situated on a continent with abundant energy sources. Germany’s problems are self-inflicted. Ours will be, as well, if we follow its lead.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-06-22 06:58:552022-06-23 07:25:09Germany’s ‘Green’ Energy Disaster Is A Warning To The United States
Sissy: “A person regarded as effeminate or cowardly.”
Soy boy:“A pejorative term often used in online communities to describe men lacking masculine characteristics.”
A reader sent is a link to the Hoover Institution’s interview with Senator Benjamin Sasse by Peter Robinson to discuss his book The Vanishing American Adult. Our reader BL stated, “One of the most remarkable videos we have seen in years.”
The Vanishing American Adult is a 2017 book by United States Senator Ben Sasse published by St. Martin’s Press. In the book, Sasse describes Americans as “a drifting and aimless people — awash in material goods and yet spiritually aching for meaning.”
We fully agree. It’s time for every American to hear what Senator Sasse said in 2017. Why? Because the cultural war against manhood is happening now and it must be stopped.
We have written about how a war is being waged against manhood and womanhood. In our January 22nd, 2022 column “America’s Sissy Problem” we wrote:
A reader of ours sent a link to a very interesting The American Mind article titled “China’s Sissy Problem—and Ours” by John Mac Ghlionn.
We have been concerned about the “sissyfication” of America’s boys, and girls, for some time.
Claremont Institute researcher and essayist John Mac Ghlionn wrote:
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a concerted effort to banish so-called “sissy men” from society. “Morally flawed” men are no longer welcome. Men, we’re told, should look a certain way—no makeup, no high heels. Moreover, they should have resilience and a desire to seek meaningful employment. Some prominent authors argue that Beijing’s effort will backfire. Will it? Possibly, but when it comes to crackdowns, the CCP is frighteningly effective. If in doubt, just look at what is occurring in Hong Kong, a sprawling, once free-wheeling city with a population of 7.5 million, where free speech has died a swift and brutal death.
But perhaps worse we are now seeing free speech dying a swift and brutal death here in America, with a population of 330 million. Social media has now censored the truth about gender being binary and have banned it, because it doesn’t fit their narrative, as being against their collectivist social justice “community standards.”
This has led to our youth growing up not understanding what is happening to them culturally. In America today young boys are being neutered via verbal fiat.
Generation Z boys, and girls, are growing up without strong male, and female, role models.
It’s important to make clear that this piece is not an attack on homosexual men; it’s an attack on sissies. There is a difference between the two. In his latest special, Sorry, Louis CK finished the show with a joke about American men. Today, according to Louis, gay men carry themselves with an air of authority, purpose, and meaning. They keep themselves in good shape and dress appropriately. Straight men, on the other hand, have become notably weaker, both physically and mentally; many of them lack the characteristics that we would have associated with previous generations of men. They are sloppy, weak-willed, and overly apologetic. They dress terribly. At the end of the joke, which is much funnier than I just made it sound, the audience applauded and let out a collective roar. Why? Because Louis’s joke resonated. He articulately expressed what so many of his fans were already thinking. The United States, too, has a crisis of masculinity—one even worse, perhaps, than China’s.
QUESTION: Aren’t gays by definition sissies?
Actually if you go to a gay pride parade you see men dressed as sissies, wearing chains, in dresses with heavy make-up and acting effeminate. Not sure who Louis CK is referring to.
QUESTION: Are Ghlionn and Louis CK afraid of being labeled homophobic? So, does this make Ghlionn and Louis CK sissies?
We are seeing more and more films featuring gays and lesbians. We are seeing non-binary (a.k.a. gender queer) athletes competing in women’s sports. We are seeing men dressed up like a woman reading books to elementary school students. We are seeing graphic under age sex oriented books in public school libraries. And we have reported on the growth of Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) clubs in our public schools.
This is all part and parcel of the culture war against boys in general and manhood in particular.
to Hollywood producing the film “Show Dogs” which had two scenes that seemed to groom children for sexual abuse. In 2018 GLAAD found only 12.8% of mainstream films featured LGBTQ characters. They have called for the number to rise to 50% by 2024,
and finally to the United States Supreme Court legalizing gay marriage.
We have reported on efforts by groups such as B4U-ACT and the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to indoctrinate children into believing that sex with men by children is not only normal but encouraged.
Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.
Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17 [2015]. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”
Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.
Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”
However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.
Sissies and Soy Boys
We do have men, real men, who carry themselves with an air of authority, purpose and meaning. Most of these men are active duty military, in law enforcement, are first responders and veterans of Iraq, Afghanistan, the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
Today instead of real “alpha” males we have “soy” boys.
For generations, the sissy has been a frowned-upon character in American life. Only recently it has become a respected, even institutionalized lifestyle. California’s Silicon-Valley stereotype of the “soy boy”, a demasculinized consumer of a meatless, synthetic diet, is now national. [Emphasis added]
Sadly, since the end of the draft, those who serve are all volunteers and make up about 1% of our male population. The other 99% have never sacrificed themselves in service to the nation. The problem lies in the group of Gen Z boys that have never become real men by serving, rather they are demanding bigger government to serve them regardless of their needs to work for a living. Because Gen Z boys vote for a living.
Sissyfication and Single Parenthood
Today we have seen manhood, and womanhood, denigrated to the point where if you mention that gender is binary you are ostracized from society. We are seeing men competing in women’s sports. We are seeing the normalization of sodomy to the point that sissy men dressed as a woman are reading books to grade school students.
[A]ccording to a Pew Research Center study, rates of children living in single-parent households have never been higher. In fact, the U.S. now boasts the highest rate of children living in single-parent households in the world. As the study notes, “3% of children in China, 4% of children in Nigeria, and 5% of children in India live in single-parent households.” In the U.S., meanwhile, the rate is a staggering 23 percent. At least 80 percent of the country’s single-parent homes are headed by single mothers.
Absolutely nothing good comes from father absence—which, according to a report published by the U.S. Department of Justice, “has a strong and significant effect on both female and male levels of violence,” including “homicide and robbery.” Children look to their fathers to lay down the rules and enforce them, and learn to do so through imitation.
Beyond the main point of the signatures of the founders and main thinkers of the French, postmodern philosophers all demanding that pedophilia be made legal, these guys make a lot of good points.
Also, it is food for thought about how similar the push to make little boys into drag queen strippers for adult men mirrors Afghan Muslim culture.
H/T Xanthippa
So there you have it.
Pedophiles are looking at recruiting the next generation of your children as their perverted sex slaves.
They will brainwash your child into thinking first that he/she are neither just male or female (binary) but they can choose their (non-binary) gender pronoun at will. If this doesn’t emasculate our boys, and girls, I don’t know what will!
Then they push your little boy, and girl, into the LGBTQ+ community where by then they’re to far along to resist.
If parents and grandparents fail to stop this then our children are lost for ever!
It’s time to man up.
Ditch the soy, stop being a sissy. Take charge of your lives or we will see Generation Z sissies take over our nation.
We need real men, and women, to take charge in our families, communities, culture, society and nation.
Cowards don’t lead and leaders aren’t cowards.
Edmund Burke wrote:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-06-22 06:30:002022-06-22 06:30:00VIDEO: ‘The Vanishing American Adult’ One of the Most Remarkable Discussions We’ve Ever Seen
In a tweet posted Thursday evening, NYC Mayor Eric Adams promoted “drag storytellers” and “the libraries and schools that support them,” claiming they are advancing the city’s core values.
“Drag storytellers, and the libraries and schools that support them, are advancing a love of diversity, personal expression, and literacy that is core to what our city embraces,” he wrote.
In, Adams argued that the education system must “educate” and make students “emotionally intelligent” through such programs.
“At a time when our LGBTQ+ communities are under increased attack across this country, we must use our education system to educate,” he added in a follow-up tweet. “The goal is not only for our children to be academically smart, but also emotionally intelligent.”
A wave of online backlash ensued.
“No @NYCMayor men dressed as highly sexualized women do not belong in schools. It has nothing to do with diversity or literacy,” wrote New York congressional candidate Maud Maron.
“Why not just advocate for taking kids to strip clubs while you are at it?” asked media personality Lisa Boothe.
“They are just dudes in women’s clothes grooming kids. Stop it,” wrote journalist Kyle Becker.
“Grooming is at the core of what NYC embraces?” asked Claremont Institute Communications Director Nick Short.
“Flee NYC while you still can,” wrote Rubin Report host and free speech advocate Dave Rubin
“This is the hill the Democrats want to die on. Pushing drag queens in schools. What insane clownworld are we living in?” wrote President of the New York Young Republican Club Gavin Mario Wax.
The mayor’s comments come as New York City’s public schools continue to use tax money to pay drag queens to perform for children, often without parental knowledge or consent. Since its creation in 2018, Drag Queen Story Hour NYC — which recently changed its name to Drag Story Hour NYC — has received $207,000 in taxpayer funds.
At an April 4, 2022 press conference at City Hall, Adams announced the start of a new advertising campaign that would use five digital billboards to try to entice Floridians to relocate to New York City. The billboards’ pitch would focus on the alleged injustice of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill, which Florida Governor Ron DeSantis had signed into law a week earlier. Though the legislation was misrepresented by leftist critics as a “Don’t Say ‘Gay’” bill that supposedly prohibited any and all use of the word “gay” in Florida schools, the bill merely banned classroom discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity by teachers of young children in grades 3 and below. The billboards — which would be displayed for eight weeks in Fort Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa and West Palm Beach — contained the following messages:
Adams voiced his hope that these billboards, by depicting New York City as a place that welcomed LGBT people much more readily than Florida, might help reverse the recent trend that had seen massive numbers of New Yorkers relocating to Florida. Said the mayor: “We are going to loudly show our support, to say to those who are living in Florida, ‘Listen, we want you here in New York. Want you right here in New York City.’ It’s more than just saying that. It’s also standing up and aligning ourselves with the men and women of LGBTQ-plus community, and state that we are in unison with you and your right to have a self-identification, your right to live the lifestyle, live the life that you choose to live, without any form of harassment…”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2022-06-22 06:01:462022-06-22 06:11:17Adams Blasted for Promoting ‘Drag Storytellers’ in NYC Schools
Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem.
We continue to see a push for legislation to cure America’s ills. Red flag laws for guns, on demand abortion available in the name of women’s rights, prosecution of “insurrectionists”, all of these are being touted as a solution or cure. But the reality still remains, that evil will always be present in this world. Evil acts are a physical manifestation of Satan and the control that he has over our flesh. You cannot pass legislation to end evil. You can take action to minimize evil and incentivize moral behavior, but you cannot stop the Prince of Darkness with a bill that comes out of congress.
There are nuances that come with these “feel good” proposals in congress, and there are unintended consequences that result from those nuances. Sometimes the proposed government solution can be abused and manipulated in order to expose loopholes in the law. The worst legislation to ever come out of the halls of congress, has been a result of a knee jerk reaction to an event or crisis. It is the “do something” mentality that has destroyed liberty in America. The definition of tyranny is said to be, “The deliberate removal of nuance.”The USA Patriot Act is a prime example of the government abuse that is tolerated by the people when there is fear among the citizenry. If you acknowledge that the government has the authority to suspend portions of the constitution in a time of crisis, then the government, in its quest for power and authority, will create a crisis to exploit. Use the Reichstag fire in pre Nazi Germany as a point of reference. There is too much trust in government. People have a tendency to believe the government narrative, even when it doesn’t make sense, because they believe that our government has credibility. Jim Garrison once said, “Is the government worth preserving when it lies to the people? Doesn’t it become a dangerous country when you cannot trust anyone anymore, when you cannot tell the truth?’ Garrison then sternly asserted this familiar maxim, “Let justice be done though the heavens fall”. He was of course referring to his case against New Orleans business man Clay Shaw, regarding the alleged conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Do we seek justice anymore, or have we decided to forego justice and replace it with political expediency? Garrison’s words are still very relevant today.
Do you not think that the government creates crises to push agendas? Try running “Operation Northwoods” through an internet search and read the declassified documents. Or maybe dig into the Gulf of Tonkin incident that was used to justify going to war in Vietnam. Our government does not deserve our trust or respect, if they continue to lie to us, take advantage of us and waste our hard earned tax dollars on other countries and promotion of sexual deviancy. All of this while our so called representatives, enrich themselves and become multi-millionaires after only a few terms.
Why is knee jerk legislation dangerous even when it sounds good on paper? The answer is nuance and unintended consequences. These two forgotten components are never part of the legislation being proposed and there is little thought into how these things may affect implementation of said law after it goes into effect. We’ll start with Red flag laws and the very concept of imposing such law on the masses, opening Pandora’s Box when it comes to abuse and manipulation. Hypothetical scenario, a couple is getting a divorce and the woman wants to get under the skin of her soon to be ex so she makes an accusation that leads to a man having his guns confiscated in the absence of due process, because a bitter ex-wife or husband to be fair wanted to get back at their former partner. What about a leftist progressive that lives in a neighborhood where they find out their next door neighbor possesses firearms? An accusation is made about the gun owner to trigger confiscation of a law abiding citizen’s weapons. These are just unintended consequences that make things worse. This is on top of the fact that due process is being scrapped here totally. Even if the allegations are legitimate, the accused still has a right to due process. Suggesting anything less is putting forth a “minority report” enforcement mentality. These loopholes and the total disregard for due process and the 5th and 6th amendment, are not highlighted in the legislation, and there is no acknowledgment of these pitfalls as congress scurries to appease the activist mob.
Let’s move onto abortion laws, and the potential abuses that may exist in drafting state legislation if the SCOTUS sends regulation on the issue back to the states. Once again, a hypothetical but realistic scenario; a woman gets pregnant and does not want to have the baby, and she lives in a state that has strict abortion restrictions but makes exceptions for rape and incest. In order to justify her abortion, she accuses the partner that she had of rape, which leaves the accused no alibi, because he was with her. Even though it was consensual from the perspective of both parties, the woman screams rape because she wants an abortion. I believe that if a state passes abortion restrictions with an exception for rape, that state would see rape accusations skyrocket. So on abortion, we must not attempt to appease the moderates. Life is life, period.
Now onto the so called “insurrection”, and the screams from the left to prosecute any and all involved. BLM and ANTIFA are generally given a pass, and released soon after arrest, but because they subscribe to a leftist ideology, they are handled with kid gloves. They are certainly not subjected to the same scrutiny. This is my warning to both sides of the aisle, and to all ideologies across the spectrum of the electorate. Be careful what you wish for, because there will be a day when there is someone in the White House, in control of the DOJ, that wants to target political opposition, and they are at the opposite end of the political spectrum from where you are. Be careful when you demand peoples’ heads on a silver platter. German born Martin Niemöller, son of a Pastor, wrote a poem that I think is relevant to this subject.
“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
Martin Niemöller
We have to stand up for the rights that we have as individuals as dictated by God, not government. We must be consistent in our defense of these rights, not selective, based on political ideology. If we don’t take this seriously, the law is dead, and all that is left is tribalism and warring factions. I hear many people cite the 14th amendment when it comes to equal protection under the law. However, I have to submit, that if we are all given equal protection, we must all be held accountable under the same law. Translation: government officials from either side of the aisle, should not be immune to prosecution when corruption/wrongdoing are present.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2022-06-21 15:27:132022-06-21 15:27:13Proposed Government Solutions Ignore the Presence of Nuance, and Perpetuates Unintended Consequences
A new era of independent news has started with an eye to revolutionizing the way America views the news, as American Uncensored News has made its debut!
American Uncensored News Network, (AUN-TV), was founded to solve what may be America’s biggest problem: the near monopoly on television of corrupt and censored news that advances the world view and policies of a small group that is hostile to American Values. These values, such as Liberty and Justice for All, Economic Freedom, and Limited Government have already been severely damaged. The future of America depends on exposing and defeating this monopoly by having a truthful and legitimate alternative.
All the news that’s true has a home at the AUN-TV network, The Uncensored News Network! AUN-TV has a mission of creating “uncensored” news, talk and documentary programming from independent media and grassroots production. The network’s goal is to report the news and features other networks are afraid to touch. AUN-TV Network with its sister website AUN-TV.com will air and post hard hitting credible stories that no other television network will touch.
AUN-TV will open with a 11 station television broadcast network based in Northern California. Broadcasting outlets will include: Channel 3 (San Francisco, CA), Channel 12 (San Francisco/Marin County) CA, Channel 8 (Fort Bragg/North Coast CA), Channel 27 (Santa Rosa, CA), Channel 45 (Wine Country, CA), Channel 23 (Redding, CA), Channel 11, (Chico, CA), and Channel 28, (Sacramento/Chico, CA). All combined, the network covers a market of over 10 million people, with many yearning for AUN-TV’s unvarnished and uncensored take on news and views. Future stations in process include outlets in Monterey, CA, Carson City/Lake Tahoe, NV, and Reno, NV.
Dana Allen the founder of AUN-TV has also announced the appointment of Rick Trader as President and CEO. AUN-TV and its companion website – http://www.aun-tv.com, – is proud to announce the launch of the AUN-TV Television Network. There is an unmet need in America for uncensored news and investigations. Most TV news sources ridicule and demonize the majority of their own viewers, something unheard of in other industries. For example in polls only 15% of Americans believe that evolution is the sole source of humans, yet that 85% of Americans is ridiculed as if they were an extremist 2% group by most TV news channels. The same is true on other issues. AUN will respect our viewers right to think for themselves. The majority of Americans believe the news media has covered up multiple government corruption scandals, they are right. As someone who has been in the news media I have first hand witnessed news censorship. It is the mission of AUN to end that censorship.”
Rick Trader is also the producer and host of the Conservative Commandos Radio Show (CCRS). Over the past 10 years, the CCRS has interviewed a “Who’s Who” of thinkers, authors, writers and policy makers from Washington and around the world.
Trader will be responsible for bringing the best of uncensored talk shows to the AUN-TV Network.
“I am thrilled and excited at the prospects of AUN-TV! Now, many great shows, views and voices will have a television platform to call their own” says Trader. “The AUN-TV Network is badly needed to report on the stories the alphabet networks do not want the American people to know of. Our goal is to bring original, thought provoking programs to the viewing public that has a thirst for the truth, and to return our country to the principals of Liberty, Rule of Law and Judeo-Christian ethics our founding father created it for.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Conservative Commandos Radio Showhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show2022-06-21 14:59:282022-06-21 15:04:37AUN-TV and its 11 TV Stations are Seeking Conservative Shows and Programming
Here at 2ndVote we always advocate for the three pillars of shopping your values; shop local whenever possible, shop the highest 2ndVote score whenever possible, and shop American whenever possible. American production has been outsourced overseas for the sake of labor costs, sometimes even using slave labor, for far too long. It is high time that we as Americans demand that the goods and services we purchase are made by Americans, for Americans, in AMERICA!
That’s why we at 2ndVote endorse a product Made-in-America every week. This weekly message features various products that have been verified to be 100% American produced so that 2ndVote shoppers can better support American economic independence. It should be noted that while any products or companies featured in this series have been vetted for being American-made, there is not a guarantee that all such companies have been scored by 2ndVote at the time of publication.
Introducing the CreekKooler. An innovative patented floating cooler designed with dual-wall construction and top quality insulation resulting in superior ice retention.
The CreekKooler glides across all surfaces and easily navigates behind your kayak, canoe, SUP or raft. With tow points allowing users to tie it to their boat or canoe, users favorite beverages and food are always within arms reach.
The CreekKooler, whether used as a cooler or for safe storage, is at home anywhere, especially in the water.
American Fireworks Company was started in 1902 by Vincenzo Sorgi, the fourth generation of his family to be involved in the field of pyrotechnics.
Starting out in one small building, Vincenzo Sorgi quickly gained recognition for his handmade products of beauty and quality. In 1929, “Jimmy the Bomb” (as his friends referred to him) gained worldwide recognition by becoming one of the first attempting to shoot a rocket to the moon. Though never achieving his goal, his designs and plans closely parallel those used today and he was regarded as an innovator, well ahead of his time.
Today, over a century later, things at American Fireworks have changed very little. The business is still family owned and operated. Vincenzo’s son Jim and grandson John guided it from the late 20’s to the early 2000’s; they were the fifth and sixth generations of the Sorgi fireworks family. Now, over a hundred years later, Jim’s wife Nancy, John’s wife Mercy and the seventh generation of Sorgi’s, his great grandsons John and Roberto, are carrying on the family’s passion. Over their seven generations they have always tried to raise the bar in terms of quality and most importantly safety.
Vincenzo’s one building on 1/2 acre has grown into more than 60 buildings on 70 acres. Special formulas, handmade craftsmanship, and unique touch for each show are still hallmarks of the company. Although they are no longer trying to shoot rockets to the moon, their firework displays are still like Vincenzo said, “ahead of their time.”
The best way to make positive change in the world of woke businesses is to vote with your wallet, so remember: shop local, shop the highest score possible, and shop American! 2ndVote is not paid for this feature. While any products or companies featured in this series have been vetted for being American-made, there is not a guarantee that all such companies have been scored by 2ndVote at the time of publication.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png002ndvote .comhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png2ndvote .com2022-06-21 12:02:282022-06-21 12:02:28Made in America Series: CREEKKOOLER & American Fireworks for the 4th of July
Twitter’s board unanimously recommended Tuesday that shareholders approve billionaire Elon Musk’s offer to buy the social media site for $44 billion.
Musk told Twitter employees earlier in June that he still planned to move forward with the purchase, despite shares in the company remaining significantly lower than his offer price, The Associated Press reported. He noted on Tuesday that approval of the purchase by shareholders was one of a number of unresolved matters halting his purchase, the outlet continued.
The Tesla billionaire’s offer would net a profit of $15.22 per share for investors if it closed now, the AP noted. Musk offered to pay $54.20 per share, despite them falling short of this number upon opening bell Tuesday, the outlet reported.
Twitter’s board of directors said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission that it “unanimously recommends that you vote (for) the adoption of the merger agreement.”
Musk has previously said that Twitter “will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.” He then offered to buy the entirety of the company in order to “unlock” the “extraordinary potential” of the social media platform. Twitter founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey has praised Musk’s decision to purchase the platform and has also said that he will “never be CEO again.”
In the end Dr. Fauci was no more successful in avoiding the virus than Prince Prospero, the villain from Poe’s imagination who believed his castle could protect him from the plague.
I recently returned from a week-long vacation in the north woods of Wisconsin. We played beach volleyball, went fishing and boating, had a lively game of Wiffle Ball with the kids, and swam until our skin was prune-like.
Even without a cell phone, I managed to stumble on a bit of breaking news from an unusual source: television. (It was virtually the only media I had up there.) Naturally, I had to share this bit of news.
“Fauci has Covid,” I told some of my companions, stuffing beer into coolers.
A discussion quickly broke out over whether the news was relevant.
“So what?” a friend responded. “I accepted a long time ago that everyone is going to get this thing.”
I partly agreed with my friend. Even during the early stages of the pandemic, I harbored suspicions that the virus was going to spread regardless of any interventions politicians or bureaucrats enacted—and those interventions could prove to be destructive, perhaps more destructive than the virus itself.
But I told him not to underestimate the importance of Fauci contracting Covid.
Why It Matters That Fauci Got Covid
It’s important to understand that Fauci isn’t just the president’s top medical advisor. Fauci, whose official title is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is “America’s Doctor,” as The New Yorker described him in April 2020.
More importantly, for better or worse, Fauci became the architect of the US Covid response.
It was Fauci who, early in the pandemic, proposed a Covid strategy that was simultaneously radical and simple: keep Americans apart from one another, using state force, if necessary.
In March 2020, Fauci told “Face the Nation” that the strategy was working.
“The kinds of mitigation issues that are going on right now, the things that we’re seeing in this country, this physical separation at the same time as we’re preventing an influx of cases coming in, I think that’s going to go a long way to preventing us from becoming an Italy,” Fauci said.
The “mitigations” Fauci was referring to were lockdowns. Schools closed. Parks closed. Businesses closed. Any enterprise or activity not deemed “essential” by state authorities was illegal.
Americans were told these efforts were only temporary. “Fifteen days to slow the spread,” became a national mantra.
Six months later, however, nothing had changed. In fact, Fauci was now saying it would have to continue until 2022.
The idea that humans could hide indefinitely from an airborne pathogen if government bureaucrats turned the dial just right has more than a touch of madness to it, but what few seem to realize is that for Fauci, this was just the first step in a larger revolution.
Writing at the Brownstone Institute, Jeffrey Tucker points to an August 2020 Cell article written by Fauci wherein the doctor explains his ideological vision, which rings of Rousseauian idealism.
“Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues.
In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming.”
The article, Tucker points out, makes it clear Fauci’s pandemic response was not just about Covid, but a larger technocratic revolution that was hard to define—and one Americans had not signed up for.
“It’s not socialism or capitalism. It’s something else entirely, something very strange,” Tucker writes. “No one has voted for such a thing. It is something Fauci and his friends dreamed up on their own and deployed all their enormous power to enact just as a test, until it fell apart.”
And this is what makes Fauci’s infection—which comes more than two years after the first lockdowns were imposed—so important.
“It’s a sign and symbol that [Fauci’s] entire theory of virus control was wrong,” Tucker writes. “He got his way with policy and it did not work. The virus finally landed on him, as if to reenact Edgar Allan Poe’s fictional story of Prince Prospero in his castle that he believed would protect him.”
The Fatal Conceit
In his 1974 Nobel Prize acceptance speech, the economist F.A. Hayek concluded with a warning: he urged humans to act humbly with the immense power of modern science.
“There is danger in the exuberant feeling of ever growing power which the advance of the physical sciences has engendered,” Hayek said, “and which tempts man to try, ‘dizzy with success,’ to use a characteristic phrase of early communism, to subject not only our natural but also our human environment to the control of a human will.”
He continued:
“The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society – a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.”
A careful look at Dr. Fauci reveals that humility is not one of his stronger attributes, and his actions show the fatal conceit that Hayek warned against infects public health officials as well as economic planners.
Despite all his efforts, Fauci was no more successful in avoiding the plague than Prince Prospero. But his mad, arrogant effort to extinguish the virus through force is a tale worthy of its own parable.
Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-06-21 07:32:152022-06-21 07:32:15Why It Matters That Fauci Got Covid-19
The Biden administration continues its assault on U.S. national security.
Biden’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan has created unprecedented threats to U.S. national security as I noted in an earlier article, Biden’s Catastrophic Policies: Immigration and Afghanistan and those threats are about to be exacerbated by a policy change of the Biden administration.
Here is how this disconcerting news report begins:
Doctors, teachers, engineers and other Afghans who were forced to associate with the Taliban will now have a chance at asylum or visas after the Biden administration loosened a terrorism-related designation on Tuesday, according to government officials and documents reviewed by the Los Angeles Times.
The exemption will be applied on a case by case basis after security vetting and is expected to help Afghans who fled their country after U.S. troops withdrew and the Taliban took over last August, as well as some Afghans who entered the U.S. earlier, said officials from the Department of Homeland Security.
The administration assurances that each case will be adjudicated on a case by case basis that will involve security vetting does absolutely nothing to assuage my serious concerns.
The fact that among the refugees are doctors, teachers and engineers does nothing to prove that these individual do not pose a threat to US security. I would remind you that Osama bin Laden had a degree in civil engineering (which, in fact, made him all the more dangerous) and George Habash the founder of the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) an exceedingly violent terrorist organization, was a pediatrician.
A Pentagon inspector general report released this week found that officials identified at least 50 Afghan evacuees who were brought to the United States in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan whose information indicated “potentially significant security concerns” –and were unable to locate dozens of those who it said had “derogatory information” that would make them ineligible for parole.
The report, released on Thursday, found that U.S. agencies “did not use all available data when vetting Afghan evacuees.” The National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC) later expanded its review to fill the gaps in screening, the report said.
The Fox News report is only the tip of a very huge iceberg.
There is a Yiddish expression that states, “When the fish goes bad, it smells from the head!”
The head of DHS is Alejandro Mayorkas the very same Mayorkas who now promises that the applications for visas and asylum will be carefully scrutinized.
Putting Mayorkas in charge of DHS is the equivalent of putting an arsonist in charge of the fire department!
In short, Mayorkas, who demanded that those who worked for him at USCIS approve virtually all applications for visas, demonstrated serious malfeasance that undermined the integrity of the visa issuing process.
Even before Biden was sworn in as President, he announced that Mayorkas would be his pick to become the Secretary of DHS (Department of Homeland Security). I wrote an article about Biden’s choice for this important position in my December 7, 2020 article, Biden’s DHS: Department of Homeland Surrender: Alejandro Mayorkas, architect of DACA, picked by Biden to head DHS.
My article included a link to an Inspector General report that was issued on March 24, 2015 into allegations made by employees of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services)that were, at the time under the direction of Mayorkas. Here is how the cover letter from the Inspector General began:
Attached is our report of the investigation on the allegations made against Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. I have also attached the written statement he gave to our investigators. The report is furnished for whatever action you consider appropriate.
This report resulted from employees within USCIS who stepped forward to tell us what they witnessed. We will protect the confidentiality of these courageous employees, who are protected from retaliation by the Whistleblower Protection Act and whose identities are protected under the provisions of the Inspector General Act. We hope that their actions will set an example for all potential whistleblowers who look to the Office of Inspector General to give them a voice.
My article also included this excerpt:
ABC News published several in-depth articles about the troubling findings of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
The above-noted report was preceded by two ABC News reports that were published on February 3, 2015 which illustrate a clear nexus between these visas and national security:
Officials overseeing a federal program that offers an immigration short-cut to wealthy foreign investors have ignored pointed warnings from federal agents and approved visas for some immigrants suspected of having committed fraud, money laundering, and even one applicant with alleged ties to a child porn website, an ABC News investigation has found. The shortcomings prompted concerns within the Department of Homeland Security that the boutique immigration program would be exploited by terrorists, according to internal documents obtained by ABC News.
“It is shocking,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican. “Particularly when you have F.B.I. and other law enforcement agencies that are saying national security could be compromised or is being compromised — that’s enough for us to be concerned.”
Federal agents in Los Angeles are investigating an L.A. shipping firm and its Iranian-born owner who for years have participated in and promoted an obscure U.S. immigration program — allowing the company to recruit wealthy foreign investors to receive visas and potentially Green Cards, law enforcement sources told ABC News.
The company’s name surfaced in a confidential Department of Homeland Security government document, which raised “concerns that this particular visa program may be abused by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States.”
Whistleblowers inside the federal agency that oversees the immigration program told ABC News they have been deeply frustrated by an inability to de-certify the company, even after they became aware of the investigation and saw the company’s name surface in an alarming internal Department Homeland Security memo. The memo, shared with ABC News, outlines concerns that Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have attempted to exploit the visa program “to infiltrate the United States.”
The ABC report included this excerpt about one company in particularly, TTC (Total Transportation Concepts):
The records show that the TTC employee was suspected of ties to an Iranian terror network that was involved in bombing plots and attempted assassinations. In 2012, federal investigators sent an email to immigration officials to advise them against re-certifying American Logistics for the immigration program, warning that an approval “would likely have serious national security implications.”
“I strongly advise against a favorable adjudication,” wrote a Homeland Security Special Agent in the Counter-Proliferation Investigations Center in the April 30, 2012 email.
But agents with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) moved forward and green-lighted American Logistics and Mahdavi, to continue overseeing a designated “regional center” for a special U.S. immigration program for wealthy foreigners known by its visa classification, EB-5.
Under the best of circumstance, vetting aliens, particularly those who come from countries that are under the control of hostile governments is daunting, to say the least.
On September 19, 2019 the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York issued a press release that announced, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Indictment Of New Jersey Man For Terrorist Activities On Behalf Of Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization. The subtitle of that press release provides more disturbing information, Alexei Saab Allegedly Was Trained by Hizballah’s External Terrorist Operations Component in Bomb-Making and Conducted Intelligence-Gathering in New York City and Washington, D.C., and Elsewhere in Support of Hizballah’s Attack-Planning Efforts.
When you add to the mix the mindset of an individual such as Mayorkas, who has refused to secure our borders, enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States and refuse to pursue immigration fraudsters, as I wrote in my October 22, 2022 article, Biden Administration Plans To Protect Immigration Fraudsters we have a potentially catastrophic situation even as intelligence services warn that within a couple of years ISIS and other terror groups will be in the position to carry out deadly terror attacks within the borders of the United States- the borders the Biden administration refuses to secure.
As I noted in a recent article, Mayorkas is not America’s guardian — he’s its innkeeper.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Michael Cutlerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Cutler2022-06-21 07:16:102022-06-21 07:16:24Providing Former Taliban Associates with Visas and Asylum
“Our Founding Fathers didn’t give us the Second Amendment for duck hunting or simply for self-protection in a country that at the time had a vast and yet unknown frontier. They bestowed it upon us so that we could protect our precious nation from devolving into tyranny as so many others have done.”
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns; that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
The quote was from Mao Zedong, founder of Communist China. Mao’s first act after gaining complete control of China in 1949 was to take away all guns from the population. It was a policy he began in 1935 as he took over each rural province. Anyone found with a gun post-confiscation was executed.
An estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China. Anyone who got in his way was done away with—by execution, imprisonment, or forced famine.
Mao killed more people than either Stalin or Hitler during World War II. And it all began after he took away the guns.
Dictators throughout much of history have disarmed their populations before they began their mass killings. Examples abound beyond Mao: Hitler took guns from the Jews in November of 1938, and Kristallnacht and the Holocaust followed; and then there was Fidel Castro in Cuba and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, to name but a few.
Cuba and Gun Control
Everybody ought to have a gun, Castro maintained—until he took over Cuba in 1959. At a rally in Havana before he assumed power, he explained: “This is how democracy works: It gives rifles to farmers, to students, to women, to Negroes, to the poor, and to every citizen who is ready to defend a just cause.”
Weapons ranging from Czech submachine guns to Belgian FN automatic rifles were handed out to 50,000 soldiers, 400,000 militiamen, 100,000 members of the factory-guarding popular defense force, and to many men, women, and children in Cuba’s 1 million-strong “neighborhood vigilance committees.”
Immediately after assuming power in 1959, Castro changed his position, following Mao’s rule that guns should not be in the hands of the people.
For three weeks after the Castro government was formed, Radio Havana warned, “All citizens must turn in their combat weapons. Civilians must take arms to police stations, soldiers to military headquarters.”
Radio Havana’s explanation was somewhat contradictory: The guns were in bad shape anyway and the “struggle against our enemies requires a rigorous control of all combat weapons.”
There was an urgency about the new policy that suggested serious concern. Failure to turn in military weapons by Sept. 1, 1959, warned Radio Havana, would be punished not by criminal courts but by the dreaded Revolutionary Tribunals—those kangaroo courts that sentenced thousands of Cubans to death after Castro took over.
Venezuela and Gun Control
Venezuela is now paying the price for allowing Chavez to implement the Mao rule when he came to power in 2012.
The shocking nature of an economic collapse that led Venezuela from being one of the richest countries in Latin America to one of the poorest has been well documented.
One aspect of the Venezuelan crisis that does not receive much coverage is the country’s gun control regime. All guns were outlawed when Chavez came to power, and harsh penalties were imposed on violators. The Venezuelan Armed Forces have exclusive power to control, register, and potentially confiscate firearms.
Many citizens now regret the repressive gun control legislation the Venezuelan government implemented in 2012. Naturally, this regret is warranted. The Venezuelan government is among the most tyrannical in the world, with a proven track record of violating basic civil liberties such as free speech, debasing its national currency, confiscating private property, and creating economic controls that destroy the country’s productivity.
Elections have proven to be useless, as they’ve been mired with corruption and charges of government tampering. For many, taking up arms is the only option left for the country to shake off its tyrannical government. But the Venezuelan government has prevented such an uprising with its draconian gun control.
These life-and-death lessons of history are lost on too many Americans. Our Founding Fathers didn’t give us the Second Amendment for duck hunting or simply for self-protection in a country that at the time had a vast and yet unknown frontier. They bestowed it upon us so that we could protect our precious nation from devolving into tyranny as so many others have done.
Politicians who respect the American ideal don’t try to diminish the Second Amendment or blame it for other ills of society that they have failed to solve, but rather embrace it as part of the legacy of rights that helps keep America free.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-06-21 06:53:442022-06-21 16:06:26VIDEO: After the Guns Were Confiscated, the Killing Fields Began
The discussion which should follow the Supreme Court decision on abortion.
This is the second part of a review of The Rights of Women: Reclaiming a Lost Vision, by Erika Bachiochi. The first part is here.
When the US Supreme Court in its 1992 Casey decision doubled down on RoevWade, the court majority claimed that “an entire generation has come of age free to assume Roe’s concept of liberty in defining the capacity of women to act in society”.
What was Roe’s concept of liberty? That of the autonomous individual, the hero of American libertarianism and a parody of the self-governing (virtuous) individual of the founding era.
Roe’s heroine is the one who “chooses”, behind the veil of “privacy”, all by herself, what to do about an “unplanned” child she has conceived.
Her options are stark. Will she keep the baby and risk her marriage or career, or both? Is she prepared to see the last of her uncommitted partner, and face years of poverty and loneliness as a single parent, trying to balance work/welfare and care of her child?
Or will she “get rid of it” and simplify her life, make progress in the job market – and hope for better circumstances next time around?
Since 1973 American has, through its laws and economy, told women that they are on their own in this matter. Caring for children is a choice, a private thing. Society is interested in women as workers, not mothers. Workers just like men.
As Erika Bachiochi observes in her book, The Rights of Women: Reclaiming a Lost Vision, “When Casey reaffirmed the ‘right to choose’ abortion, employers and other public institutions remained ‘free’ to be unchanged by women’s participation in them.”
In support she quotes a pro-choice law professor, Deborah Dinner:
“The discourse of reproductive choice continues to legitimate workplace structures modelled on the masculine ideal [with no caregiving responsibilities] as well as social policies that provide inadequate public support for families.”
“In the end,” adds Bachiochi, “it may just be that an unmitigated right to abortion serves of profit-driven market above all else.”
How did “women’s rights” end up in this blind alley?
In the second-last chapter of her book, Bachiochi explores the work of Harvard legal luminary Mary Ann Glendon to throw light on this question.
Family law in America vs Europe
Glendon, whose early experience of single parenthood was formative for her views, traced the source of the problem to the libertarianism of the Anglo-American rights tradition and its effect on family law and culture.
By the mid-twentieth century, she found, “self-sufficiency” had become the guiding principle in US family law, leading to the removal of legal protection from the family unit (through, for example, no-fault divorce) and to the idea of marriage as, “an association of individuals”.
In Europe, things were different. In many countries the civil law, reflecting classical and Christian ideas about human dignity and the common good, had more to say about spousal rights and duties, and envisaged marriage as a community of persons for the nurture of children. As women won equal status during the twentieth century, marriage law was not emptied of content as in the US.
In most modern European constitutions the basic social institution of the family (and often the status of motherhood itself) remained protected, as it had been in the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Thus, in 1970, the Federal Constitutional Court in West Germany stated:
“The concept of man in the Basic Law [i.e. the Constitution] is not that of an isolated sovereign individual; rather, the Basic Law has decided in favour of a relationship between individual and community in the sense of a person’s dependence on and commitment to the community, without infringing on a person’s individual value.”
Though European countries have since bought into autonomy and individualism, most have far better supports for families. They are also more conservative regarding abortion.
A dignitarian vision of marriage
Glendon pointed out that while American law advanced women’s rights in the sphere of work and public life, it simultaneously devalued women’s role in reproduction and the concrete caregiving work they had traditionally done at home, and which still had to be done by parents – or someone. She wrote, in 1996:
“[In modern times, women] have adapted to that situation in two ways. They are having fewer children, and they are maintaining at least a foothold in the labour force even when their children are very young. But that strategy still does not protect mothers very well against the risk of the four deadly Ds: disrespect for non-market work; divorce; disadvantages in the workplace for anyone who takes time out; and the destitution that afflicts so many female-headed households.”
Having men do half the caregiving and other domestic work, as advocated by mainstream feminists, could never remove these risks because of the deep “asymmetry” (not simply “difference”) between their reproductive roles. Like Mary Wollstonecraft, Glendon advocated not strict equality but, as Bachiochi puts it,
“an equal dignity that admits the special ‘power’ and ‘privilege,’ and ‘disability’ too, of childbearing and childrearing, seeking not the erasure of these facts of life, but a reconciliation of them within reciprocal relationships of mutual respect, interdependence, and collaboration in all realms of life.”
To make this dignitarian vision a reality for women Glendon called for a cultural turn towards the family, in recognition of the fundamental importance of stable, self-governing families to public order and a flourishing society.
As Wollstonecraft insisted: “If you wish to make good citizens, you must first exercise the affections of a son and a brother. This is the only way to expand the heart; for public affections as well as public virtue must ever grow out of private character…”
Familism, communities and society
This would entail a “social ecology” in which smaller groups and systems (“communities of memory and mutual aid”) would play their supportive role in the neglected space between the state and the family or individual.
With others, she proposed to the Clinton administration in the early 1990s that society should:
Support infant-parent bonding in the home until the age of one year. This through a combination paid leave (for six months at least) flexitime and work-from-home arrangements.
Provide a generous, European-style child allowance, and tax policies which did not favour those who work outside the home.
Foster a culture of familism to shore up the essential work parents do and reaffirm the value of children over “excessive careerism or acquisitiveness”, so parents could put their children first.
The aim, here, was not some kind of “work-family balance”, but a fundamental change in the way parents in the workforce – both men and women – are seen: not as employees first and caregivers second, but as caregivers first and employees second. The economy should serve families and not vice-versa.
Coming to the present, the fate of those ideas can be judged, perhaps, by President Biden’s recent (failed) attempt to spend more than $200 billion on subsidising childcare for millions of poor and middle-class families where both parents work, while offering nothing to families who would like to have one parent stay at home with their young children – as many would.
Reimagining feminism
Yes, despite more flexibility in the workplace and diversity in familial arrangements in the direction of “gender equality”, Glendon’s call for a family-friendly culture remains unfulfilled. And some things are worse.
College-educated fathers may be doing a larger share of caregiving and domestic work, but further down the social scale they are often simply missing. More than a third of children in the US live without their father in the home, Bachiochi notes. Marriage rates and fertility are at historic lows, and the happiness of women has also fallen. Where there are two spouses or partners, they often both need to work full-time to keep the small family afloat.
In the face of all this, most feminists remain obsessed with the gender pay gap and abortion rights.
However, there is nothing inevitable about the present, and Bachiochi concludes her historical study of the rights of women by imagining a 21st century feminism shaped by the dignitarian values of Wollstonecraft and Glendon.
The new feminism, while preserving the real gains for women of the last two centuries, would correct mistakes and carry forward the work of harmonising marriage, parenthood and the social and economic equality of women.
Importantly, it would disentangle the sexual revolution from the movement for women’s rights. Given the role abortion has played in enabling the sexual chaos and in delaying proper recognition of the work of the home, repudiating abortion would be a good place to start, Bachiochi suggests.
It’s a big ask, but Bachiochi’s own history is proof that it is possible. She was a pro-choice feminist when, at 20, she read Mary Ann Glendon’s RightsTalk, with its appeal to human dignity as the basis for human rights, and could not shake off its arguments.
Later, when she started her research on theories of women’s rights, she was stunned to discover Mary Wollstonecraft’s view that male chastity was the precondition for equality between the sexes.
There is much, much more in her book, but by bringing the thought of these two women to light for today’s scholars and students, Bachiochi has done them a great service. And the timeliness of her work is only enhanced by the pending Roe and Casey decision, since it lays out the terms of the discussion that should follow.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-06-21 06:35:412022-06-21 09:26:37From ‘your choice’ to familism: A path for 21st century feminism
The political and terrorist arms of the American Left are in sync.
A few weeks after the Buffalo mass shooting, another domestic terrorist attack occurred in the upstate New York city. CompassCare, a pregnancy care clinic guiding new mothers away from abortion, was firebombed by the pro-abortion hate group, Jane’s Revenge. The group has been linked to the firebombing of at least two other pro-life offices and organizations last month.
Its threatening graffiti included the warning, “If abortions aren’t safe, then you aren’t either.”
“We demand the disbanding of all anti-choice establishments, fake clinics, and violent anti-choice groups within the next thirty days,” the Jane’s Revenge communique threatened. “We are forced to adopt the minimum military requirement for a political struggle.”
Since then the abortion domestic terror group has claimed responsibility for more attacks. And Senate Dems appear to be working in tandem with it.
A group of Democratic senators and representatives called on Google to look into search results and ads tied to “anti-abortion ‘fake clinics’” amid a recent report that showed their prevalence in 13 states with so-called “trigger laws” that would almost immediately ban or severely restrict abortion should Roe v. Wade be overturned by the Supreme Court.
Thirteen senators and eight representatives signed a letter to Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google parent company Alphabet Inc., dated Friday in which they highlighted a report by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) that showed that in 13 states with trigger laws, searches for “abortion pill” or “abortion clinic near me” showed clinics that did not provide those services 11 percent of the time.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate is a British leftist group run by Imran Ahmed, a former adviser to future London Mayor Sadiq Khan, now operating out of Washington D.C. CCDH Senior researcher Sophie Wilkinson used to write pieces for Vice and The Guardian. Samples include “I Posed as a Man Online for Sex”, “Slutdropping: the Dancefloor Move That’s Bringing Women Together”, and, “I Got My Faeces Tested to See If It’s ‘Super-Poo’”.
Absolutely the folks that Senate Dems should be relying on for intel, instead, they want Google to get rid of pro-life pregnancy centers from its search results.
This is the same agenda as their domestic terrorist allies are following, except they’re using Big Tech allies to do the destroying.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-06-21 06:17:042022-06-22 05:33:27While Abortion Activists Vandalize Pro-Life Clinics, Senate Dems Want Google to Ban Them
