A very interesting article from Politico notes that President Trump is positioning himself to screen candidates for 2022 who support the MAGA initiatives. This would essentially be considered a hostile move by the professional republican elites.
As we previously mentioned, no republican is going to win any nomination, primary or general election without the MAGA endorsement of President Donald J Trump. This is the leverage that begins the “Big Ugly”, the destruction of the DeceptiCon wing of the UniParty bird.
POLITICO – […] According to three people familiar with the planning, Trump will soon begin vetting candidates at Mar-a-Lago who are eager to fulfill his promise to exact vengeance upon incumbent Republicans who’ve scorned him, and to ensure every open GOP seat in the 2022 midterms has a MAGA-approved contender vying for it.
Trump already has received dozens of requests from prospective candidates seeking to introduce themselves and nab his endorsement, and formal meetings with them could begin as early as March. Now that Trump has survived his second Senate impeachment trial, he has shifted his focus to post-presidential activism — a venture mostly bankrolled by his new leadership PAC, Save America, which had $31 million in its coffers at the start of this month. (read more)
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears to be trying to rig an “independent security review” of the January 6th Capitol riots by appointing an extreme left-wing partisan to lead the investigation, and Republicans are starting to cry foul.
Retired Lt. General Russel Honoré, hand-picked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last month to oversee the “9/11-style” commission, is under increased scrutiny after numerous crude, extreme, and profoundly partisan tweets and comments have come to light.
Honoré, best known for leading relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, was appointed by Pelosi without any consultation with Republicans.
House Administration Committee Ranking Member Rodney Davis, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, House Oversight Committee Ranking Member James Comer, and House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes wrote a letter to Speaker Pelosi demanding answers regarding the security decisions surrounding the Capitol riots, particularly, her part in the decision to deny the Capitol Police Chief’s request for National Guard support, and her refusal to comply with requests to turn over materials relevant to the decision.
In their letter to Pelosi, Davis, Jordan, Comer and Nunes also expressed concern that the House’s “independent security review” of the event would not be free of political motivations.
As American Greatness reported on Monday, the retired general viciously decried President Trump’s response to Hurricane Maria in Sept. of 2017, characterizing Trump’s perceived mishandling of the disaster as a biproduct of his alleged racism.
“The president has shown again, you don’t give a damn about poor people, you don’t give a damn about people of color and the SOB that rides around in Air Force One is denying services needed by the people of Puerto Rico,” the retired general said on CNN.
Since Monday, several more partisan and profane comments have come to light featuring Honoré blasting Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mis.) and other Republicans for objecting to the 2020 election results, blaming conservative Capitol Police for “allowing Trumpsters” to get into the Capitol, and savaging President Trump.
“That little peace of shit with his @Yale law degree should be run out of DC and Disbarred ASAP,” Lt. General Russel Honoré wrote of Hawley in a now deleted Twitter post on January 11.
Becker News unearthed several more tweets that point to the general’s extreme partisanship. On November 18, Honoré tweeted out a meme with an image of himself wearing a black mask on the left and President Trump looking gruff on the right. The tweet included a statement he apparently made last March beckoning the president to “stop the bullshit” and deploy the National Guard “to meet national testing needs.”
The general said, “we need a quick, mass, flexible, accurate system to win this war. Stop the bullshit, the 50 state solution is not working, we are losing the Covid-19 war.”
In another tweet, Honoré tweeted somewhat incoherently, “Covid19 the @WhiteHouse Shit Show. Wear ya Damn Mask. Stay ya Aaa Home.”
In another bizarre tweet, Honoré lashed out at several Republican Louisiana lawmakers in the wake of the Capitol riots.
“Crying Damn Shame we already last on most list now y’all go do this stupid shit!,” the general wrote. “Now go kiss the Dems ass and get $ For LA.”
On Twitter, Honoré had a habit of retweeting left-wing agitprop from the likes of lefty director Rob Reiner, and the New Republic, according to Becker News.
But it gets worse.
As the video below shows, the man chosen by Pelosi to lead the security review of the Capitol riots, agreed with left-wing talk show host Roland Martin in an interview on Jan. 10 that former president Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr., and Rudy Giuliani should all be arrested for “causing an insurrection.”
Honoré’ also told the host that the reason some people think the election was stolen is because “they don’t want to lose their white power. They don’t like the browning of America.”
The general went on to claim—without evidence—that those questioning the election were motivated by racism.
“It took the sheet off a lot of people claiming to be conservatives, and what they are are racists,” he said.
Incredibly, he also urged the feds to bar freshman Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Co.) from flying on commercial aircraft, tweeting “put her stupid A** on a No Fly List @SpeakerPelosi.”
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL.) posted on Twitter a video montage of Honoré’s most outrageous statements and tweets.
Why would Texas have prepared for record cold and snow if they
listened to the media and other global warming fanatics the last forty
years?
Since
1980 Americans have heard that the Earth was warming rapidly, that the
South would not have winters anymore and we would see “the end of snow.”
We
were told it is the “scientific consensus” and the science was
“settled.” So why the heck would politicians prepare for something when
they were told by "experts" that it would never happen?
Clearly
the UN, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Gates and all the others that push
this garbage on the public, without scientific data to support it, are
to blame, not the Texas politicians.
John
Kerry, who flies on private jets, is out there saying there are only 9
years left to solve the problem. If we had honest reporters, instead of
people pushing an agenda, they would tell him that the UN said in 1989
that we only had ten years left to solve the problem. As far as I can
tell we are still having snow, the temperature is nearly the same, the
coastal cities are still here, the icecaps are still here, and Manhattan
and Miami are still not flooded.
Fifty years of made-up dire predictions that have been wrong and yet we are told the science is settled?
Let's Review 50 Years Of Dire Climate Forecasts And What Actually Happened
1967 Salt Lake Tribune: Dire Famine Forecast by 1975, Already Too Late
1969 NYT: "Unless
we are extremely lucky, everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue
steam in 20 years. The situation will get worse unless we change our
behavior."
1970
Boston Globe: Scientist Predicts New Ice Age by 21st Century said James
P. Lodge, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
1971 Washington Post: Disastrous New Ice Age Coming says S.I. Rasool at NASA.
1972 Brown University Letter to President Nixon: Warning on Global Cooling
1974 The Guardian: Space Satellites Show Ice Age Coming Fast
1974
Time Magazine: Another Ice Age "Telling signs everywhere. Since the
1940s mean global temperatures have dropped 2.7 degrees F."
1974 "Ozone Depletion a Great Peril to Life" University of Michigan Scientist
1976
NYT The Cooling: University of Wisconsin climatologist Stephen
Schneider laments about the "deaf ear his warnings received."
1988 Agence France Press: Maldives will be Completely Under Water in 30 Years.
1989 Associated Press: UN Official Says Rising Seas to 'Obliterate Nations' by 2000.
1989 Salon: New York City’s West Side Highway underwater by 2019 said Jim Hansen the scientist who lectured Congress in 1988 about the greenhouse effect.
2000 The Independent: "Snowfalls are a thing of the past. Our children will not know what snow is," says senior climate researcher.
2004
The Guardian: The Pentagon Tells Bush Climate Change Will Destroy Us.
"Britain will be Siberian in less than 20 years," the Pentagon told
Bush.
2008 Associated Press: NASA Scientist says "We're Toast. In 5-10 years the Arctic will be Ice Free"
2008 Al Gore: Al Gore warns of ice-free Arctic by 2013.
2009 The Independent: Prince Charles says Just 96 Months to Save the World. "The price of capitalism is too high."
2009 The Independent: Gordon Brown says "We have fewer than 50 days to save our planet from catastrophe."
2013
The Guardian: The Arctic will be Ice Free in Two Years. "The release of
a 50 gigaton of methane pulse" will destabilize the planet.
2013
The Guardian: US Navy Predicts Ice Free Arctic by 2016. "The US Navy's
department of Oceanography uses complex modeling to makes its forecast
more accurate than others.
2014 John Kerry: "We have 500 days to Avoid Climate Chaos" discussed Sec of State John Kerry and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabious at a joint meeting.
The article has actual news clips and links to every one of the above stories.
We
have decades of destruction of the U.S economy based on inaccurate,
manipulated computer models and yet not one question from reporters
asking Kerry, Biden, Yellen or any cabinet member for scientific data
from the last 140 years to support the radical leftist agenda to destroy
America.
China, Russia and Iran are cheering loudly as the media and democrats intentionally weaken America and harm the poor.
So when will reporters do their job instead of repeating what they are told?
The Biden administration vowed to end ‘America First’ policies put in
place by President Trump. Joe Biden spoke to G7 leaders at the virtual Munich Security Conference on Friday and outlined his foreign policy goals, which seemingly favored the globalist agenda.
Throughout his speech, Biden reinforced the alliance between the U.S.
and Europe. He said the United States will “work in lockstep with
allies and partners.”
“The transatlantic alliance is back and we are not looking backward,”
Biden said. “We are looking forward together. It comes down to this:
The transatlantic alliance is a strong foundation, the strong foundation
on which our collective security and our shared prosperity are built.”
While discussing China, Biden gave a mixed message by saying he
welcomed the competition. He later added the U.S. and its allies must
fight against China’s abuses within the global economic system. Biden
stated:
“Competition with China is going to be stiff. That’s what I
expect and that’s what I welcome because I believe in the global system.
Europe and the United States, together with our allies in the
Indo-Pacific, worked so hard to build over the last 70 years. We have to
push back against the Chinese government’s economic abuses and coercion
that undercut the foundations of the international economic system.”
He also claimed the U.S. and its European allies must come together
to protect the “free exchange of ideas in open democratic societies.”
Richard Grenell, a former intelligence official under the Trump
administration, took to Twitter to comment on Biden’s speech. He claimed
“Biden’s America will not be first.”
The Trump administration was known for prioritizing the U.S., which
often involved ending partnerships the administration considered harmful
to the nation.
The new administration and its supporters disdain the Constitution
As
the Harris/Biden administration shows its power, it is the secular left
that now steers the ship of state. With liberals running the show,
there is no wellspring of morality. Good and evil are whimsical
fantasies that have no real existence and morality is a construct of the
individual to uphold their own beliefs or desires. If there is no
God-given morality, then there can be no God-given rights. If there are
no God-given rights, then we live and die as property of the state.
The
current situation could not be further from the original intent of our
Founding Fathers, but those holding the wheel are clearly pulling hard
to port despite the huge rocks and warning buoys. They strive to make
the state our god and then to exert godlike power over us.
It’s
natural for people to be afraid or even terrified of absolute power --
even more so when it’s wielded with no moral compass. The gods of
progressivism will return us to the unchecked and often malevolent power
of dictators and authoritarians. Their claim to be pro-American and
pro-democracy is belied by their actions. They stomp on the rights of
the individual at every turn and they are not constrained by ethical or
moral concerns. They thrive on fear and oppression.
The
Declaration of Independence asserts that we have been endowed by our
creator with certain unalienable rights. Neither human beings nor their
governments can revoke those rights because they are wrought by God and
transcend the affairs of men. The individual citizen has been elevated
above all the autocrats and their minions. The government and it’s
bureaucracy answer to the people and not vice versa. This was the
culmination of thousands of years of trial and error. It is the legacy
that the Founders bequeathed to us.
We
are now poised to abandon our colossally successful experiment in human
freedom through neglect and moral depletion. As a nation, we have
forsaken restraint and tolerated the corruption of the institutions that
have sustained us.
Education
has become indoctrination. Media is the state-sponsored ministry of
conformity and the state itself seeks only unlimited power. The
tentacles of this beast stretch out into many aspects of daily life.
Churches have been forced to retreat into themselves and toe the
government line. Sports and entertainment aid and abet the destruction
of traditional American values in favor of a corrupted view of our
history and nation.
An
elitist cabal of deep state actors, “journalists,” technocrats, and
academics have co-opted the young, the poor, and the dependent to be the
foot soldiers and votes in a revolt against the American meritocracy
and the once-thriving lifeblood of our country, the middle class. This
new, would-be aristocracy wants to roll over and muzzle all opposition
or to crush it out of existence.
The
one thing that stands in their way is the very thing they hate the most
and that which they routinely twist and distort to try and further
their warped utopian dreams – the Constitution. As one of the world’s
oldest governing documents, it has withstood the test of time. Whether
it can withstand the dark night of the left remains to be seen.
Our
society is nearing a precipice. We know what evils lie beneath and yet
we continue down the path of least resistance that will eventually lead
us over the edge. We are witnessing unprecedented attacks on our
liberty, our ability to speak freely, our right to bear arms, religious
freedom and, indeed, the entirety of our constitution and common law
traditions.
It
would serve us well to be afraid of this blight on our society but
being afraid does not mean being cowed. It means we finally understand
what we’re up against. We’re being pushed ever closer to the edge.
They’re making our choice simple. We can push back or fall into the pit.
Bradley Manning, traitor to the Nation and the human race
Article by James S. Corum (LCol USA Ret.) in The American Thinker
How the Biden Administration is Politicizing the Military
Defense
Secretary Lloyd Austin has made it absolutely clear that the U.S.
military’s top priority is not facing external threats, such as the
Chinese or Iran’s aggressive strategy in the Middle East or foreign
terrorist groups. Instead, Austin sees the main threat as coming from
within the U.S. military. In his confirmation hearings, Austin said
that he would make it his priority to combat racism and extremism in the
United States military. Once confirmed as defense secretary, he ordered
a two-month stand-down of the American military in order to examine the
problems of extremism among military personnel.
National
defense is supposed to be a bipartisan endeavor, yet never before has a
defense secretary made such overt moves to politicize the military.
Austin’s order to remove all Trump appointees to the 42 Defense
Department advisory boards is unprecedented and downright stupid. I have
some experience with advisory boards in a military organization and
find them very useful. Advisory boards are a second set of eyes from
outside the organization to review policies, planning or course
curricula and offer suggestions. Often outside advisors spot a problem
your organization overlooked or offer good ideas for better policy
implementation. And it’s useful to have a diversity of ideas for policy
review. But cutting off all input from anyone connected to Trump
(representing 74 million voters) and accepting advice only from Biden
loyalists will ensure only party line thinking will be allowed in the
military. Two notable defense secretaries were famous for not listening
to advice or tolerating debate on policy as they insisted it was “their
way or the highway” in defense decisions. Those secretaries were Robert
McNamara and Donald Rumsfeld, and both led our armed forces into
military disaster. Lloyd Austin seems bent on choosing the worst defense
secretaries in our history as his leadership models.
Defense
readiness is clearly not a priority for Austin. The deployment of
thousands of National Guard troops to Washington, which will last until
March, will cost the Defense Budget $483 million.
This is an awful lot of money to spend on pure political theater
against a nonexistent threat. Yet withdrawing $483 million from the
military’s operations and training budget means that in this next year
many National Guard unit exercises will be either cut or cancelled
completely. Note that higher unit training is a requirement for
maintaining unit efficiency and readiness. So, we can expect a major
downturn in our military capabilities.
An especially troublesome feature of Austin’s focus on extremism is the preference of the military and the FBI to employ the ultra-left Southern Poverty Law Center
(SPLC) as their authority on extremism. According to the SPLC, numerous
groups that hold traditional views on Christian faith, or which lobby
on political issues, are classified as extremist. For example, the SPLC
describes the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which
has a large membership and lobbies for more restrictive immigration
policies, as extremist. Yet, according to the latest Rasmussen polls, a strong majority of Americans favors more restrictions on immigration.
Conservative
Christian groups such as the Family Research Council, the Ruth
Institute, and the Alliance Defending Freedom are listed as extremists.
Yet such groups simply adhere to mainstream, 2,000-year-old Christian
doctrines concerning human sexuality. Consequently,
they oppose gay marriage, argue there are two, not 52, sexes, and
oppose homosexual ideology from within the Christian tradition. All the
aforementioned groups are completely peaceful, do not advocate
violence, and operate within the American democratic system. The
positions they hold may be unpopular with the Biden administration,
but they represent the core beliefs of tens of millions of Americans
including all social classes and millions of minority voters as well.
A very disturbing new tendency is the call by some Democrat leaders to investigate the personal civilian lives
of members of the Reserve Forces and National Guard. Ever since the
founding of the modern Reserve/National Guard system at the turn of the
twentieth century, the relationship between the part-time
citizen-soldier and the military has been carefully regulated by the
Constitution, by law, and by tradition. It allows for a part-time
citizen-soldier to maintain a civilian life separate from life in
uniform -- including civilian involvement in politics. National Guard
and Reserve members of all services have full freedom to run for
political office, to make statements, and propose policies in their
civilian political lives without either sanction or punishment from the
military. It is when they put on the uniform and serve on active duty
that they are no longer politicians and must conform to the military
regulations and act in a fully apolitical manner. In fact, this system
has worked very effectively for over a century.
Take
the example of Senator Barry Goldwater in his election campaign against
Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Senator Goldwater, in his campaign literature
and speeches, made an issue of President Johnson’s business relationship
with Texas con man and big-time crook Billie Sol Estes, and his very
close relationship with the incredibly sleazy Robert Gene “Bobby” Baker,
who served under Johnson as Secretary of the U.S. Senate. Goldwater’s
charges of Johnson’s corruption (and Johnson was a very corrupt
politician) were fair and fully within the tradition of United States
politics. However, Barry Goldwater was, at the time he ran for
president, also a major general in the Air Force Reserve. Goldwater,
who had the very tough and dangerous duty of serving as an Army Air
Forces transport pilot over the Himalayas to China during World War II,
had moved up through the Air Force ranks by merit. He had thousands of
flight hours and was by all accounts an exceptionally capable pilot and a
competent unit commander. Yet, in the American tradition of the
citizen-soldier, when he put on his uniform and carried out his military
duties, he left politics behind, as was right and proper. In 1964,
despite the heated nature of the election, it would have been
unthinkable for the military to have punished or sanctioned Senator
Goldwater in his military status for making strong statements against
the president as a politician.
But
will that tradition of the citizen-soldier, currently allowed under law
and the Constitution, be allowed to continue under Secretary Austin?
The current use of the FBI to examine the civilian lives and social
media of 25,000 mobilized National Guardsmen, and the call by Democrats
to likewise investigate the social media and civilian life of
prospective military recruits, sends the dangerous signal that one’s
political life as a citizen is likely to be cancelled in Lloyd Austin’s
Defense Department.
Austin’s
steps to politicize the military to a degree never seen before means a
culture war on the conservative half of America. That might make Austin
extremely popular with Biden, but it will make recruitment and retention
for the armed forces pretty difficult. The U.S. military comes
disproportionately from the politically/socially conservative states
(especially the South) where the military is respected. If Austin bans
conservatives from the military under the SPLC definition of “extremism”
and takes away the constitutional rights of citizen soldiers in the
Reserve and Guard, he’ll never get enough recruits from the liberal
states.
The Democratic Party woke up Saturday morning to its 31st day of leading both the executive and legislative branches of government. They had run on “immediate [economic] relief” to Americans put down and out by largely Democratic COVID shutdowns. Relief, you might notice, that hasn’t actually come.
On Jan. 14, less than one week before taking the oath of office, President Joe Biden promised, “We’ll make sure that our emergency small business relief is distributed swiftly and equitably, unlike the first time around. We’re going to focus on small businesses, on Main St. We’ll focus on minority-owned small businesses, women-owned small businesses.”
But so far in the first full month that Sen. Chuck Schumer, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and President Biden have been in control, the only money that has gone toward American relief has been from that money allocated while President Donald Trump and Sen. Mitch McConnell still joined Pelosi in power, including $1 trillion that remains unspent.
Instead of their promised relief, over the past month Democrats have tried the former president, re-entered the Paris Climate Accords, locked down the U.S. Capitol, and freed up American tax dollars to go to aborting children abroad.
So what about American business owners, parents, and workers suffering under COVID-19 restrictions? Anything for them? So far nothing.
Well, not exactly nothing. President Joe Biden has mandated masks on busses, for example, and Vice President Kamala Harris has claimed credit for the Trump administration’s vaccine development. Biden has also established a COVID board, created a COVID task force, developed a COVID plan, reviewed COVID, assessed COVID, and held a COVID town hall. Lovely.
“Our rescue plan will provide flexible grants to help those hardest-hit small businesses survive the pandemic,” Biden promised more than five weeks ago. His administration, he said, would “help entrepreneurs of all backgrounds create and maintain jobs, plus provide the essential goods and services communities depend upon.”
Instead, at this week’s CNN town hall Biden told Wisconsin brewer Tim Eichinger, a Democrat who is struggling to keep his employees on and his business afloat, to give White House staff his address so they could mail him that COVID plan — the one he laid out five weeks ago. It’s the same one Democrats have been sitting on for a month while they fight over things like a $15 national minimum wage hike unlikely to pass the Senate and which even the president admits likely isn’t going anywhere.
Whether it does or doesn’t will be no help to Tim Eichinger. Nor will taxpayer money for abortion, nor any of the other completely unrelated left-wing projects jammed into this apparently necessary COVID relief.
Meanwhile, a Republican push for domestic abuse survivors to not have to go through their former abusers for access to their checks was denied by Democrats. So too was a push for schools to even have a plan to reopen their doors before receiving money. So too is Republicans’ completely accurate complaint that there is still $1 trillion in unspent relief money allocated by the last Congress.
In exchange for electing him president of the United States, Biden promised “immediate relief to Americans hardest hit and most in need.” But promises are cheap, and one whole month into his administration he hasn’t accomplished a single bit of it.
Article by E. Jeffrey Ludwig in The American Thinker
A Fifty-Year History of Anti-Patriotism in the United States
Patriotism
is under attack. The idea of the cultural Marxists on the left is to
replace traditional patriotism with a different vision of the meaning of
American nationalism from the vision that has obtained since 1776,
although that traditional understanding and vision of the USA has gone
through modifications over decades. Unwillingness to say the Pledge of
Allegiance or even to stand for the Pledge is not a first step in that
direction, but part of an endgame toward a revised understanding of what
America is and what its role is in history. The readers of this
article should not be surprised if legislation for a revised American
flag is offered in the halls of Congress in the near future.
Many
blacks and black athletes are unhappy with our country and the
treatment of black citizens even though they have fared well. Many fans
even considered the victory by Tom Brady and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
in the Super Bowl racist. In addition, an NBA owner, Mark Cuban of the Dallas Mavericks, said the Pledge of Allegiance would not be recited at
home games. Thus, an expression of traditional patriotism is portrayed
by the knee-takers as an expression of racism. This is increasingly
becoming the narrative even though many black athletes have become
cultural "role models" for many young men, both black and white, going
back to Jackie Robinson in the 1950s and, a little later, to the
incredible Jim Brown of the football Cleveland Browns. Yet the success
of integration into pro sports seems not to satisfy. This white writer
admired Jackie Robinson throughout my life as an example of someone who
did the right thing, moved forward on the basis of his athletic merits,
and ignored the catcalls and verbal abuse. As a boy growing up, I hoped
I would become a man of similar character. Likewise, I watched Jim
Brown get smashed into the ground after gaining yardage for the Browns,
and I wondered how he would get up. He would lift himself up very
slowly, but on the next play, he would run just as hard or harder. I
found myself hoping I would have that kind of durability and
determination in life.
Despite
the breakthroughs of the past, with the success of black athletes as
well as black politicians, nurses, physicians, entertainers, writers,
professors, and business executives, the narrative of America's
essential racism is still in place and growing. The disparagement of
the United States' traditional patriotism as being based on racism can
be expected to continue. The anti-patriotic N.Y. Times author of
the 1619 Project is aggressively moving this narrative of the founding
of the USA away from the history that states that life, liberty, and
pursuit of happiness were being attacked by British
oppression. The 1619 Project instead affirms that the U.S. came into
existence to preserve and defend the institution of slavery. According
to this bleak and angry narrative, the founding of America was driven
throughout by dark, racist motives.
Anti-patriotism
is a gradually upsurging socio-political trend, and I expect it to
continue, not to decline. The first phase of that trend was during the
years following WWII up through the early '70s. The second phase has
been a regrouping and re-orientation of the left during the past fifty
years. This was a patient move forward and an American counterpart to
Mao Zedong's "Long March."
It
began in our colleges and universities decades ago, after WWII, as a
knee-jerk reaction to the Cold War against our "ally" in WWII, the
USSR. Rabid old-line commies and deluded "progressives" saw Russian and
Chinese communism as attempts, albeit sometimes misguided, to make a
better world. Anti-patriotism morphed into an even more aggressive
stage during the anti–Vietnam War movement in the sixties, and the civil
rights struggles gave birth to radical hate groups like the Student
Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, the Black Panthers, the Weather
Underground, and the Black Liberation Army (remember Patty Hearst
holding a machine gun in a bank robbery?). Only Martin Luther King's
and Ralph Abernethy's Southern Christian Leadership Conference seemed to
promise cultural and political reform without a violent agenda, and
with a belief in traditional moral values. The Communist Party USA
continued to spew anti-American vitriol.
Voting
rights legislation had passed in the 1960s. The Vietnam War had come
to an end by the early '70s. Many of the dissipated thug leaders of the
more violent civil rights organizations gradually were imprisoned, were
shot by police or confreres, fled to other countries, or settled into
more peaceful lifestyles. There was a lull in street protests and
active, anti-American vitriol. A rethinking of the path of
anti-Americanism was taking place in leftist organizations. In 1971, the Congressional Black Caucus was founded in
the House of Representatives. It now has 55 members. The commitment
shifted from the streets to working within the system. Black Americans
were a protected class under the law and thus enjoyed certain real-time
protections against discrimination they believed had oppressed them
during earlier decades.
Anti-patriotism
can literally be dated back 55 years. Rejection of the flag and
traditional patriotism has been with us for decades. During the Vietnam
War, the New York City schools stopped requiring daily recitation of
the Pledge in effect since 1966, at the height of antiwar protests about
Vietnam. The pledge was not reinstated for more than 35 years. That's
right: they had 35 years without the Pledge being required in the
public schools, which enroll approximately 1,000,000 kids a year. After
9/11, N.Y. State mandated the Pledge. But not all schools were in
compliance, and there was no enforcement of the so-called "mandate." At
that time, I was teaching high school. The school I was in complied
with the mandate. The principal ruled that the Pledge would be recited
every day over the P.A. system, but that students did not have to stand;
however, they could not talk during the Pledge and could not turn their
backs on the flag (imagine: not turning one's back on the flag had to
be given as policy as recently as 19 years ago). Most other high
schools were not even in compliance. My former high school, when in
session, continues to comply and recite the Pledge, although in the
junior and senior homerooms, only 0–3 students can be seen standing and
reciting.
Now
there is a virulent, aggressive, and far-left attack on capitalism,
whites, the traditional family, straight males, and the very
construction of the English language. The old grievances about our
country that had been addressed in the sixties and early seventies are
now resurfacing in a mutated form that is more aggressive and
uncompromising. Unlike the sixties and seventies, one of our two major
parties has embraced significant portions of the mutated, radical vision
that is being advanced.
We
are not simply "descending into the mud" of anti-patriotism. We are
immersed and suffocating within the mud, and soon it is likely that the
Stars and Stripes will be dispensed with as the symbol of the country we
love.
ATLANTA, GA—To fight white supremacy, Coca-Cola has discontinued its controversial product Vanilla Coke, saying it is "too white" and must be dismantled as part of the company's continued emphasis on eliminating whiteness from society.
All varieties of Vanilla Coke, from Cherry Vanilla and Orange Vanilla to Vanilla Vanilla, will be pulled from shelves as part of Coca-Cola's push to lessen whiteness.
"We now recognize that our Vanilla Coke product perpetuates whiteness in a racist, problematic society and harms our efforts to make people less white," said a Coca-Cola executive Friday. "Anything with even a hint of whiteness must be eliminated. We now realize that we were, in fact, part of the problem all along as we promoted the alt right-adjacent flavor of 'vanilla.'"
"We will do better," he said before resigning, canceling and doxing himself, and banishing himself to a remote island in the Caribbean to think about his whiteness.
Chocolate Coke will replace the "toxic, problematic" product, and drinking it will, of course, be mandatory.
Here’s How To Avoid A Debt Disaster In The Next Decade
The levels of national debt are increasing at a
“staggering speed,” with the Gross Federal Debt reaching levels it
hasn’t seen since WWII, an economist told the DCNF.
If
the U.S. reduced the growth rate of spending to about 1.5% annually the
national budget would be balanced by 2031, a Heritage Foundation expert
told the DCNF.
If the U.S. stays on the current trajectory that it is accruing debt, the country is heading towards a debt crisis.
The
U.S. could reach default on the national debt if it continues
accumulating deficits at the current rate, but the national budget could
solve the issues by 2031, an economics expert told the Daily Caller
News Foundation.
The
levels of national debt are increasing at a “staggering speed,” Stony
Brook University Research Associate and Economist Marins Azzimonti told
the DCNF. The debt the federal government owes as a percentage of gross
domestic product, or the measure of the market value of goods and
services produced in a specific period, reached around 135% in the
second quarter of 2020, the highest it has been since WWII, Azzimonti told the DCNF.
“There
are lots of ways to avoid a debt crisis,” Heritage Foundation Senior
Policy Analyst Adam Michel told the DCNF. “The sustainability of our
budget has much more to do with growth rates than the level of debts or,
that they were accumulating.”
“If you look at the latest CBO
[Congressional Budget Office] report that just came out, they showed
that spending is supposed to grow on a trajectory that is faster than
how fast revenue growth comes in, and faster than the economy is
supposed to grow,” Michel said. (RELATED: Congressional Budget Office Projects Record Deficits Over The Next Decade)
Increasing the federal deficit and spending money we do not have will harm our economic recovery.
Since people and businesses were negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic,
it makes sense for the U.S. government to borrow in order to
redistribute resources to those affected, according to Azzimonti.
President Joe Biden’s proposed coronavirus relief package would cost
$1.9 trillion and some worry it could lead to hyperinflation, the Daily
Caller reported.
“More
worrisome, because of the Pandemic, almost any country that can borrow
is borrowing at this point. Does that mean that the U.S. will suffer a
national debt crisis? Not necessarily. There is scope to increase taxes
and the U.S. still has good credit ratings (it has never defaulted),”
Azzimonti told the DCNF.
“Every economist would say that this is exactly the time where you should be borrowing to pay for COVID packages,” he said.
A
$900 billion deficit was predicted by the Congressional Budget Office
in 2019 due to the Trump administration’s 2017 tax cuts and increased
government spending, according to the Balance. COVID-19 exacerbated the projected federal deficit, which is estimated at around $3.3 trillion for 2020.
The
U.S. could balance the national budget by 2031 by doing nothing other
than reducing the growth rate of spending to around 1.5% annually,
Michel told the DCNF. The country could also start paying off some of
its debts if the growth rate of spending were reduced.
Fiscal stimulus
historically leads to large debts and deficits that cause higher taxes
in the future which slow growth and hinder recovery, according to
Michel. The U.S. needs to reduce the growth rate of spending because
there is not a reasonable way to increase revenue enough to close the
fiscal gap, Michel said.
“Saying we’re going to continue racking
up trillions of dollars of debt until markets stopped lending us money,
is a surefire way to ensure that we precipitate a fiscal crisis, because
though in that sort of mental model, the only thing to stop us is
runaway inflation and or incredibly high debt service costs,” Michel
said.
