Tuesday, April 25, 2023

In Our Time

How is it that previous generations did so much with so little, and we are still living now on what they built? Are we beyond rebuilding?


I look into the sleeping face of my four-month-old granddaughter and find myself considering the fact that in a few days it will be the 100th birthday of my mother. There is a pause in me over this realization because she is gone now from the scene. And I cannot help but know that I have been very fortunate. I would like my granddaughter’s world to be at least as good as mine has been, and better than my mother’s was. 

My mother was born to a poor family. Her parents were uneducated. They knew nothing of the books I love so much. My grandmother was a seamstress—a fancy word for someone who can sew, as she did all her life, as well as to clothe her 11 daughters, and to clean the small house they had built, and to farm the food her family ate, and to cook simple meals so good that the memory of it might be the last sweet thought I have before I die. 

Theirs was a red dirt world, and my grandmother’s life was not easy. Out of what is academically called “economic necessity,” she left behind a storied family in the deep Smoky Mountains to work in a textile mill when she was still only 15 years-old. In turn, my mother left her mother’s world behind when she was 17, just out of high school, and went to work in a Hot Shoppe near Washington, D.C., where an older sister was already a waitress. For a farm girl to find herself suddenly dealing with a rude public, this must have come as something of a shock. 

My mother was, as all her sisters were, very good-looking, and one older sister had gotten a job as a model with the Powers Agency in New York City. My mother followed her there and did very well. That was the real break in her life. She took speaking lessons to suppress her Southern accent, educated herself to high fashion, and left any thought of poverty behind. 

My mother raised four children who had no real idea, beyond the shallow observations of summer and holiday visits to “grandma’s house,” of anything other than the great prosperity of the second half of the 20th century. Their daughters had given my grandparents as much as they could without making them dependent, so I had little understanding, beyond the small five-acre red dirt farm that remained, of what had come before. That story, in itself, is quite astonishing considering the world I was given in my turn. 

Now I watch the sleeping face of my granddaughter and I am confronted with a reality beyond my fixing. I cannot repair the damage of the years between. All that my mother and her mother worked for has been spent. Politics has become the coin of our time. The promise of fiat currency and false profits has replaced the good, animus is our only savings, and it does no good now to complain or blame. 

I sat with my grandparents and watched the first moon landing on a small black and white television. This was yet another product of the world I expected, but for them, it was a pure wonder. The television itself was quite enough magic, and their comments then suggested the landing was just another show. But they had once been present when a Wright Brothers’ army aircraft crash landed in the stubble of a cornfield and still thought that was true wonder. 

Theirs was a time when wealth was not assumed to be a right, but a privilege, and earned by hard work and frugality. Those who were born to wealth and abused it would lose it. But of course, they knew nothing of trust funds and tax exemptions and corporate reinvestments. With these “vehicles” we have debased our currency with credit and debt to pay for our toys and leisure while we print cheap money to cheat those who were not smart enough to do the same. 

My grandmother did not have any form of artificial birth control, and despite her strong religious faith, I don’t believe I would be here if she had. My mother didn’t have that option, either. She was a very successful fashion model and likely would have opted for a longer career if she had. But I can only speculate that if she had chosen to avoid having children when she was doing so well, she might have regretted the decision in middle age. She had so many other regrets as it was. 

Recent generations have found little use in childbearing—with credit easy, there are so many more important things to do, places to go, people to see. Children are too much trouble, a burden, and besides, they are raised more now by the public schools and state mandates than the family. Let someone else do it. Someone else can cut our lawns, or grow our food, or cook our food. We will be perfectly happy to eat it. 

In my time, what had been a special Christmas gift or two proliferated and became 10 or 12 not so special tokens of our ability to buy, on impulse, anything we wanted. Christmas was not improved by the gaudy display. In my time, the family car became two, and then more, as children grew old enough and the driveway became a parking lot. In my time the camp in the woods became a vacation home and then a real estate investment, while all camping skills were lost. Yet, Sierra Club and Audubon memberships increased. 

Many would say these were improvements but learn too late that love and affection cannot be purchased. Nature does not return our care. Families, once only broken by economic necessity, are now scattered merely by the winds of impulse with little to anchor them to any one of the various homes they knew in childhood. In my time friendships were relegated to networking advantages, and true love devalued as a product of hormones and a figment of a foolish imagination. Marriage for better or worse became only for the better. 

Most of the people in America in my grandparent’s time would be considered poor by today’s standards. My mother said that to me on several occasions as she later pondered her own life. But how is it they did so much with so little, and we are still living now on what they built? All the second homes and petty luxuries of middle-class America have been purchased with the credit that our parents and grandparents earned and left to us. And in the meantime, we have debased that very currency that we might have used to repay the debt to our own children. 

We brag about our scientific achievements and longer lives. The doctor will see you now . . . for seven minutes. The pharmacy will dispense your relief. But you will never go to the moon and your longer life will be spent alone in a retirement home. The AI will never bother to make a CGI of your life. You will never know the taste of a handmade buttermilk biscuit, or homemade jam, or lick the ripe blackberry on your fingers the moment after you picked it on a summer day. That nostalgia will never be yours. But at least you can argue over the better store-bought brand. 

You can pack yourselves into a metal and plastic blister of a boat and cruise the Caribbean, or all the old ports in Europe, or see Alaska from the rail. They are all so happy to see you there—and thrilled each day to dance the same authentic jig they have danced for countless hoards before. The credit card payment will only be $150 per month. Or, instead, you can download your thrills and adventure now with a $20 monthly subscription and mail order the same sweater from the comfort of your Ikea couch for less. (The stuff in the duty-free shop was all made in China anyway). 

In my time, we went from the strivings of my mother to have a better life, to a life of hollow things and artificial means. Too late, I think, she realized that she had mistaken the gloss for the fact. But in a single life, there is usually no going back. And back is not where it was in any case. Being poor was not being without. It was making do with less. Wanting more is not a sin, but for the way you get it. The cost of things is truly in what it takes to make them good. 

My granddaughter will be OK, if we don’t manage to incinerate ourselves. I trust my daughter will see to that much. But we have spent our legacy. The old values have been discarded for a computer simulated effect—a simulacrum. High fashion now has no bearing on the human being within, just as Christmas has no connection to its source. Books are too much trouble to keep unless they can be stored on an electronic device, but when electricity becomes an extravagance, what then? 

As I see us watch our lives away in digital bits, I cannot help but wonder, would we be better off if an EMP were to wipe the slate clean but for the memory in our own heads, and make us reclaim what is worth the trouble of reclaiming; each of us judging thereby what we care for most? What use is the rest except to constrain us, distract us, and bury us. We are so much better off with the smell of buttermilk on our hands and biscuits for breakfast instead of Froot Loops. 

The losses are already irreparable. Too few have noticed. And those who do notice too often have lost the skills that made the things worth remembering. And I ask myself today, are we beyond rebuilding?



X22, And we Know, and more- April 25

 




A Grand Alliance to Overcome the Elite Betrayal of America

The sooner we join together to save our civilization, 
the easier the path.


For the first time in history, the ruling class of a powerful nation has abandoned its fellow citizens. What is happening in America today is more than a return to feudalism, although the new economic model into which we’re being herded is correctly compared to feudalism. The reality is actually much worse: America’s elites view ordinary citizens as no longer necessary. Because of globalism, they are replaceable. Because of automation, they are superfluous. Because of environmentalism, they are unsustainable.

These factors explain what is otherwise inexplicable: Constitutional conservatives and Christians, and the values they profess, are now stigmatized by establishment institutions as often, if not more often, than they are praised. Nationalism and religious faith empower individuals and communities to resist a ruling class that has abandoned them. That makes them a threat. They recognize that the ideology of America’s ruling elites is itself leading to disaster. They recognize that America’s elites have decided the nation’s middle class is disposable, and this is the real reason they are pushing an agenda of woke degeneracy and extreme environmentalism, designed to lower birthrates and reduce standards of living.

It’s hard to imagine how America’s elites could get things more wrong. Their transhuman and transnational vision is provoking a clash of civilizations at the same time as they are destroying the human foundation of their own civilization. Nations where nationalism or religion remains the prevailing ideology are not about to emasculate their populations and eviscerate their energy sectors.

If America’s elites attempt to impose this agenda worldwide, the world will fight back. Do they intend to win this clash with robots? Because if they reduce America to a geriatric, poverty-stricken nation, ruled by a handful of billionaires, robots are all they’re going to have left at the rate we’re going.

The Grand Alliance

The elites who have betrayed their own people are not invincible. America’s historical legacy has built a cultural unity and resiliency that should not be underestimated.

While America’s tradition of assimilation is under attack by an elite-driven obsession with multiculturalism, it remains the robust product of more than 200 years as a successful melting pot. Moreover, America’s Bill of Rights offers protection to people still fighting for the values of faith, family, and freedom—values that are not as easily undermined as they are in other Western nations with less explicit constitutional safeguards.

Winston Churchill titled the third volume of his World War II memoirs The Grand Alliance. It described an alliance against a threat more obvious and imminent than the one we face today, uniting partners more intrinsically opposed than those who need to join together today. Instead of Western democracies uniting with Communist Russia to fight the fascist dictatorships, we have merely to unite a critical mass of Americans who want to save their nation from an elite that has declared war on their way of life and their future.

This isn’t as hard as it seems for two reasons. First, because most Americans don’t want to live in a degenerate culture. They don’t want to live in a culture that has devolved to cater to society’s lowest, most abnormal, deviant, hedonistic, psychotic, sociopathic, dishonest, crooked, lazy, defiant, bizarre, militant cohorts of individuals, regardless of the fact they’ve become politically organized and demand equality of outcome in every imaginable context. Most Americans understand the inherent necessity and benefits of nuclear families, hard work, and immutable standards for achievement and recognition. There is a deep, latent unity among Americans. It needs only a few sparks to immolate the thin film of oil on the surface.

Second, what is the nature of this oil that smothers America’s ocean of common sense and unity? It is a fractious coalition of fanatics and lunatics, relatively small in number, who harbor an innate antipathy toward each other that is only held in check by rivers of money flowing to them from globalist billionaires, opportunistic corporations, environmentalist pressure groups, and government unions. Their resources are money and anger. They win elections because all that money, and all that anger, is used to brainwash voters into thinking that tolerating decadence and chaos is compassion, people who oppose extreme tolerance are bigots, and recognizing the indispensability of fossil fuel is, somehow, “fascist.” The brainwashing, in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence, is wearing thin.

The only thing normal Americans have to do in order to bring America’s swing voters back to the side of common sense is to promote an attractive vision. It is not enough to just explain how bad things have gotten. To begin that process they may start, they must start, by bringing the secular and religious wings of the common sense coalition together.

In his 2017 book, The Strange Death of Europe, British journalist Douglas Murray suggests those forces still extant in Western societies and still resisting the derangements of our time—the secular and the religious—put aside their differences and unite to save Western civilization.

Finding a new synthesis of Western culture capable of addressing the questions of the 21st century may be a topic of active debate in think tanks. Still, to date, it hasn’t filtered down to retail politics. On the street, politicians trying to overcome woke insanity have limited themselves, at most, to rolling back the insanity. They have not expressed a new vision for America that unites religious and secular conservatives.

This is regrettable, but it also presents a tremendous opportunity.

If religious and secular conservatives reached a consensus, the political agenda they would share would necessarily have attenuated the most extreme positions held by either side, which in turn would attract millions of independent voters. Although it would still be declared extremist by elites who would now see their plans endangered as never before, in reality, it would form a new political center. It would be an irresistible force.

Vivek Ramaswamy, who at the very least is the second most interesting Republican candidate currently running for U.S. president, has made a centerpiece of his campaign answering the question of what it means to be an American. His positions are unequivocal. For example, there need to be clear limits to what we tolerate as normal. The prerequisites for prosperity include clean fossil fuel, and that is nonnegotiable. Meritocracy is the only equitable way to deliver equal opportunity to everyone. Freedom in America, as embodied in the Bill of Rights, must be defended. These are unifying issues because they reject the establishment’s manipulative narrative of anger, resentment, fear, and perpetual crisis, and instead, envision a future of growth and greatness.  

Consider the wondrous possibilities a healthy political coalition could express to an electorate desperate for hope. Imagine a political platform centered on deregulation and infrastructure investments to deliver abundant and affordable energy, the foundation of all prosperity. Imagine a foreign policy oriented to helping all nations achieve these gains, instead of being limited to “renewables” that condemn them to poverty, famine, tyranny, and war.

Optimism is contagious. Imagine a strong and united America beginning to harvest the resources of the moon and the asteroids. Imagine a culture that celebrates beauty and talent again. Imagine a generation of youth inspired to work hard so they can play a meaningful part in the brilliant unfolding story of a proud nation in a peaceful world. Imagine good things happening from now on, not out of naïveté, but as the product of practical investment and steadfast resolve.

The sooner we join together to save our civilization, the easier the path.



If The Right Wants To Win, It Must Drop Its ‘That’s Not How We Do Things’ Approach To Organizing

The right should build a school to teach conservatives how to organize for political power and action beyond and between elections.



We previously looked at the effect of the left’s ability to escalate politics from the halls of legislatures to the politics of the streets. We’ve considered how the right’s interest in protests, boycotts, and other political action has grown. But the right’s lack of relevant knowledge hinders such efforts.

In the words of the left’s most notorious organizers, “What is to be done?”

Perhaps the time has come for a modest proposal. What if the conservative donor base took a tiny fraction of the money it spends on campaigns to win elections and spent it on building a school to teach conservatives how to organize for political power and action beyond and between elections?

This wouldn’t be a school for educating children, as vital a task as that is. Hillsdale’s initiative focusing on K-12 schools and the growing Christian classical school movement are certainly commendable for the purpose of forming young minds. But this effort would be more a boot camp for adult conservative organizers to learn the tricks of the trade for real political organizing.

Schools to teach political organizing are not a new innovation, at least not on the left where they proliferate. The communist-linked Highlander Folk School was founded in 1932 to train labor union organizers in the union-resistant South. It played a crucial role in training activists, including many notable and famous ones, for what would become the civil rights movement. It’s still around today and played a significant role in training Black Lives Matter activists prior to the 2020 George Floyd uprising.

Rather than reinvent the wheel, conservatives could begin, at least initially, with a curriculum pulled from the works of the left, which has made a study of organizing for political power for nearly two centuries. The right has long rejected this approach to its detriment, as David Hines, author of the Radical Book Club blog and the Organize Right column at The American Conservative has noted:

For some reason, many Righties are allergic to learning from the Left. THAT’S NOT HOW THE RIGHT DOES THINGS, they bellow, by which I assume they mean unpleasant stuff like “winning.” But you don’t have to do everything the way Lefties do it to learn some of the lessons they’ve learned. The Left has been working hard for decades, and they’ve been good enough to put some of their knowledge and experience into books that anyone can read. If you’re going to oppose the Left, it’s useful to know how the Left actually works.

Leftists to Study

Other places to look for educational materials would include the works of Gene Sharp, author of “The Politics of Nonviolent Action” and a library of other work on the influence of nonviolent political action in places where electoral politics is not an option (such as in authoritarian states). The Albert Einstein Institute, founded to carry on his work, is an example of institutional organizing gone global, as it teaches organizing techniques for political power around the globe in a variety of hotspots.

Sharp’s efforts to utilize people power became the basis for what are now euphemistically called “color revolutions” and are the exact kind of program that various elements of the left were prepared to unveil in the event that Donald Trump had managed to win in 2020.

Possible Instructors

Of course, any such conservative institution would initially struggle to recruit instructors, given the dearth of interest the right has in organizing. But there are some places one could go to look.

In addition to recruiting conservative researchers like Hines who have an understanding of the nature of left-wing organizing, there are individuals at places like the Capital Research Center who have looked into the nature of left-wing fundraising. Within a few places where the right focuses on policy advocacy, particularly within the Second Amendment and pro-life fields, there may be some diamonds in the rough. Other potential teachers are those like journalist Chris Rufo, who can discuss what has and, more importantly, has not worked in recent battles against the left.  

There is also a small, and shrinking, generation of conservatives within the national security space who taught the strategy and tactics of the political dark arts to America’s special operators back when America’s foreign policy was to organize opposition to communist movements in civil society (and not to support them).

There are no doubt some former leftists who have repented of their views and can teach the right lessons learned from their time on the other side.

Seeking Students

Of course, teachers are only half the equation. Where might such a revolutionary new school find students? One place it should not search for them is among political campaigns, political staffers, and GOP operatives. The work of organizing is different from the work of electioneering, and those with ingrained bad habits are likely to be tough students. Instead, students should be true grassroots activists who either belong to, or who have committed to creating, a nonprofit activist enterprise.

Consider starting, at least initially, in areas where conservative activism has a strong grassroots component, such as Second Amendment and pro-life advocacy, and with those focused on local community efforts such as taking over school boards dominated by leftists pushing their transgressive sexual agenda. Donors might offer fellowships to their preferred activist groups or condition funding upon their willingness to participate in such an educational effort.

Redirecting Funds

In 2020, almost $800 million was spent on the effort to reelect Trump. The Biden campaign spent at least a billion dollars, not counting dark money funds, which favored Biden. Had Trump won, the left was prepared to pull out all the stops to use political street activism to prevent him from taking office, as was outlined in the now notorious Transition Integrity Project’s wargame document.  

In the chaos of the post-election environment, the right struggled to organize any kind of campaign to oppose election-integrity issues, which many believed marred the presidential election’s outcome. Charlatans and pied-pipers (including possibly among federal agencies) led many well-meaning people into foreseeable and avoidable disaster because of a lack of professional organizers who knew how to conduct and maintain a lawful but effective protest.

The left’s tendency to reject the outcome of lawful elections has only grown, as can be seen in the ongoing campaign to unseat Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who handily won a democratic election only to be undermined by U.S. and left-wing Israeli organizing campaigns that have rocked the country at the behest of the Biden administration. The Israeli right has found itself as defenseless as the American right, and for the same reasons.

If conservative donors are willing to spend nearly a billion dollars to put a person into office, isn’t it reasonable to consider hedging that bet? A mere fraction of that money spent endowing a conservative version of the Highlander School would pay dividends, not just every four years, but for decades to come. If conservatives wish to successfully engage in the modern political arena, they can’t afford not to.



WHO warns of 'extremely dangerous' bio-lab occupation in Sudan

 

'There is a huge biological risk associated with the occupation of the central public health lab'

Nima Saeed Abid, the World Health Organization's (WHO) representative in Sudan, on Tuesday warned of "biological risks" after a laboratory in the east African country was taken over by armed forces. 

In a statement, Abid said that soldiers "kicked out all the technicians from the lab... which is completely under the control of one of the fighting parties as a military base.”

"There is a huge biological risk associated with the occupation of the central public health lab," Abid added, saying that the lab holds samples of deadly diseases, including measles, polio, and cholera, and that the situation has gotten “extremely dangerous.”  


On Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced a three-day ceasefire agreement between the fighting factions in Sudan. According to the Sudanese army, the lull in fighting was brokered by the United States and Saudi Arabia.  


The Sudanese military and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, the two fighting sides led by formerly allied generals, agreed to the agreement after several failed attempts to secure a temporary truce. “We must all do everything within our power to pull Sudan back from the edge of the abyss,” UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said.

Tens of thousands of refugees flooded into bordering countries since the fighting began on April 15. Hundreds have been killed, with thousands more wounded. Several countries have been forced to evacuate their nationals, including their diplomatic personnel, because of the deadly clashes that broke out more than a week ago in Sudan.  


https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/africa/1682433202-who-extremely-dangerous-occupation-of-bio-lab-in-sudan  




Tucker Highlighted the Existential Fight We Face (and Must Win) in Last Speech

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

I started this post before the news about the stunning departure from Fox by Tucker Carlson.

The fact that he seems to have been shoved out the door, without much notice, after saying, “We’ll be back on Monday,” makes me and everyone else wonder what the heck happened. There has been speculation on the matter. We will doubtless hear more.

But what I wanted to write about is the existential problem that we face as a country with the Democrats in charge and I was using the following video from Tucker’s remarks at the Heritage Foundation 50th Anniversary to help make my point. Now with Tucker out, it perhaps puts that threat into even sharper view.

Here’s the relevant part that has gotten a lot of attention and the part I was taking off on — it isn’t about people disagreeing on the right methods for the same good outcomes.

It’s that Democrats seem to want to throw order and reason under the bus and bring in chaos for their power. Carlson talks about the transgender movement — and there certainly is chaos there, with trying to throw out even the basic concept of what a man is and what a woman is. Democrats refuse to even define women now, a man with a penis can be a woman because he believes he is a woman. If you can’t even determine the basic binary of life, where are you in reality? When there is no reality, it becomes simply what the government tells you it is, ever-changing with no foundational truth.

But it’s beyond that. It’s that disorder, it’s the defund the police movement, it’s the control under COVID and the censorship of what you can hear and what you can say. It’s even surrendering our energy independence. It’s making us more helpless and reliant on our adversaries like China. It’s the Long March through all the institutions to tear down anything we knew, to replace it with what? If Joe Biden was trying to destroy this country purposely to make us subservient to adversaries like China, what would he do differently? It’s not just that we have to be concerned about his compromise with the Chinese, we’ve already seen the complete compromise with the radical left anyway — that’s who is in power now.

“None of this makes sense in conventional political terms,” Carlson said. He spoke about when the government decides that the “goal” is to destroy things, “destruction for its own sake…what you’re watching is not a political movement, it’s evil.”

Carlson said number one, “We should say that” and number two, he suggested people take ten minutes out of their day to say “a prayer for the future.” Both of those sentiments I endorse, I think I’ve been saying and doing both for a while now on the subject.

The problem is so much of the Republican Party doesn’t seem to understand this existential question — that it isn’t about compromise or debate when the purpose is that destruction. You can only win and stop all this when you understand the nature of the fight and are fully committed to defeating the evil.

Carlson got this and there are others on the right who get it as well. But if the point in the parting with Fox is to shut up what he has to say, to bury such points, they may find that they’ve walked into a hornet’s nest with this move. Already we see their stock diving and I think it’s fair to say this has infuriated their viewers. Carlson is so big he can write his ticket to go anywhere, even create a media entity, to be able to say what he wants to say. They may have struck him down, only to have him rise more powerful than before.

Here was another critical point in Carlson’s speech.

There’s a battle underway, and we must win it.



Tucker Carlson: ‘Information Control’ Via Internet Censorship Is A Huge Problem For Democracy



Tucker Carlson told attendees at The Heritage Foundation’s 50th-anniversary gala that the biggest variable changing everyday Americans’ lives in recent years is the ruling class’ monopoly on information.

“What do you think over the last 10 or 20 years — whatever timeline you think is appropriate —has changed the most?” Roberts asked. “I mean that socially and culturally, I don’t mean that politically, although you can go there if you want, that has affected everyday Americans’ lives?”

“The lack of information,” Carlson quickly replied.

Despite living in a digital world where data and details are available to everyone with access to the internet, Carlson said normal Americans’ access to the information pipeline is significantly hampered.

“The core promise of the internet was as much information as we’ve ever had at your fingertips, and the result has been a centralization of information. This is deliberate, needless to say, but unnoticed by most people. That results in more controlled information than we could even have imagined more than 20 years ago,” he said. “A lot of information just is not available because it’s digital and it’s controlled by a small number of companies.”

Carlson said “hundreds of millions” of Americans “have no idea what’s going on” because the ruling class does not want them to know the facts.

Despite living in a digital world where data and details are available to everyone with access to the internet, Carlson said normal Americans’ access to the information pipeline is significantly hampered.

“The core promise of the internet was as much information as we’ve ever had at your fingertips, and the result has been a centralization of information. This is deliberate, needless to say, but unnoticed by most people. That results in more controlled information than we could even have imagined more than 20 years ago,” he said. “A lot of information just is not available because it’s digital and it’s controlled by a small number of companies.”

Carlson said “hundreds of millions” of Americans “have no idea what’s going on” because the ruling class does not want them to know the facts.

“It’s not just because they’re dumb or they’re distracted on their iPhones. The whole point of the iPhone was to inform you, and the net effect has been to make people completely ignorant of the core, the actual facts, like the non-disputed facts about a lot of different things. And you saw this, certainly, during covid,” Carlson remarked.

Keeping Americans clueless, Carlson said, is advantageous to those who control information pipelines because it “challenges the idea of democracy, which rests on the notion of an informed voting public, of a citizenry.”

“We don’t have that, and that really, I never would have expected that at all,” Carlson said.

Next, Carlson warned listeners not to throw away hardcopy books and to consider buying “gold and ammo.”

“Definitely don’t throw away your books because they can’t be disappeared, because they exist physically,” Carlson repeated.

Similarly, Carlson said Americans should be keen not to throw away “relationships with other people because they can’t be disappeared either.”

“The material, the physical, things that you can smell, those are the things that you can trust,” Carlson said between a smattering of applause. “Your spouse, your dogs, your children, especially your dogs, but your actual friendships, your college roommates, people in person. As the world becomes more digitized and people live in this kind of this realm that’s disconnected from physical reality, I think the only way to stay sane is to cling more tightly to the things that you can smell.”

Carlson said that he’s “gotten to the point where if I can’t smell it, I’m not dealing with it.”

“Books, relationships, and ammo: Tucker Carlson’s guide to the universe,” Roberts remarked.

“Yes!” Tucker replied.

During the more lighthearted portion of the q-and-a session, Roberts joked that “if things go south for you at Fox News, there’s always a job for your Heritage.”

Mere days after the event and Roberts’ teasing, Fox News abruptly announced that it “mutually agreed to part ways” with the host of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” which is consistently ranked the highest-rated cable news show. Carlson has yet to announce his plans for the future.



WATCH: Renowned Criminologist Sunny Hostin Reveals Underlying Cause of 'Gun Violence' - 'White Men'

WATCH: Renowned Criminologist Sunny Hostin Reveals Underlying Cause of 'Gun Violence' - 'White Men'

Mike Miller reporting for RedState 

Given all the goings-on in the media on Monday, I thought I’d toss in the latest tripe from the geniuses of ABC’s “The View.” In this episode, noted criminologist [sarc] Sunny Hostin idiotically reveals the fundamental cause behind so-called gun violence — “white men.” I know— who knew?

Except for the ladies of “The View,” I mean.

For those unfamiliar with the overarching theme of “The View,” Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, and Sunny Hostin — with an occasional assist from various other lunatic co-hosts — can connect virtually anything to “racism,” “white supremacy,” or “systemic racism” with no more than two dots. Toss in “gun violence” and anything connected to Second Amendment rights, and we’re talking, immediately or sooner.

With no explanation necessary, here’s Ms. Hostin:

I honestly think, um, certainly we know that America is the only country in the world that has more guns than people — and those guns are owned by about 30 percent of the population — 33 percent of the population, and largely, they’re men, and they’re largely white men. 

And I think what you are seeing, um, happening is that people are being radicalized — by Fox News; they’re being radicalized by other right-wing media, and they’re being taught to fear people who don’t look like them.

For the love of (fill in the blank as you choose), give me a break.

While Hostin’s first comment (relative to the number of firearms in the U.S. and the population percentage of gun owners) was largely correct, it was irrelevant to her argument — and her second comment was pure conjecture based solely on her delusionally predisposed beliefs.

Before we hit the silly “radicalized by Fox News” nonsense — particularly as it relates to “gun violence” — let’s first get to the 800-pound gorilla in the room: Hostin’s suggestion that “white men” are largely responsible for killing “people who don’t look like them.”

As even reported by USA Today — not exactly a right-wing media outlet — in late 2020, a vast majority of homicides in the U.S. are intraracial, meaning white-on-white and black-on-black. Moreover, the percentages are similar in both groups — long-term and in individual years.

Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims were killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2018, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 81% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 89% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2017, the FBI reported almost identical figures — 80% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 88% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

Care to respond, Sunny? [Cue the crickets.]

She continued with what I surmise she considered a proof source to back up her unsubstantiated claims:

We have a clip — and this is not just speculation, now, for me, because Ralph Yarl, the 16-year-old boy that [sic] was shot on someone’s porch. Andrew Lester, who is the defendant — his grandson said the same thing.

Before we continue with Hostin’s schtick, Kansas City resident Andrew Lester, 84, as reported by Fox News, was recently charged with first-degree assault and armed criminal action for allegedly shooting 16-year-old Ralph Yarl after the teenager mistakenly rang the man’s doorbell, believing he was at another house. So here’s Lester’s grandson — on CNN, of course —in the clip shown by Hostin:

I feel like a lot of people of that generation are caught up in this 24-hour news cycle of fear and paranoia, perpetuated by some other news stations, and he was fully into that. He watched Fox News all day, every day … and I think that stuff kinda reinforces this negative view of minority groups and … reinforces and galvanizes racist people.

In other words, prior to airing the clip, Hostin parroted everything the grandson previously said —every word of it nonsense.

Fox News in 2022 averaged 2.3 million viewers during primetime hours, and 1.5 million total “day viewers,” crushing all competition for the seventh straight year. Chances are, you’re one of them — or were.

I stopped watching Fox several years ago, albeit for reasons likely different than those who were apoplectic on Monday after Fox announced that it has parted company with Tucker Carlson, but here’s my point: Raise your hand if you’ve been “radicalized” by Fox, particularly to the point of shooting a person of color. Hmm — no hands. You don’t ‘spose Sunny Hostin is completely full of crap, do you? Nonetheless, she concluded, melodramatically, after playing the clip:

This is his grandson, who obviously loves him, explaining the motivation behind at least that shooting.

Not to nitpick, but a braided pony-tail-wearing dude sharing his own thoughts on CNN of what he thinks was behind his grandfather’s motivation was less than anecdotal, at best.

The Bottom Line

While “The View” and its race-baiting hosts remain a bad cartoon, gun grabbers are gonna gun-grab. And in the case of Sunny Hostin, why not lie yourself silly and imply racism is to blame for pretend “gun violence,” just to look even more ridiculous?