Sunday, October 29, 2023

Here's Why One School District Cancelled Its Halloween Activities


A school district in New Jersey reportedly banned all Halloween activities this year over “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” known as “DEI,” according to a report from the New York Post.

Earlier this month, Dr. Ronald G. Taylor, the superintendent of the South Orange-Maplewood School District, sent a letter to parents informing them that Halloween would not be celebrated in schools this year. This decision was made to be “inclusive” to students who do not celebrate the holiday or cannot afford costumes. 

"As you know, SOMSD is committed to promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion meaningfully - not just saying the words but also promoting an inclusive school... Our aim is to build a consistent approach across the District as to how our schools observe and celebrate holidays and special events," Taylor wrote to parents.  

"Each year, questions arise from families, students, and staff about what SOMSD schools will be doing regarding Halloween,” Taylor continued. "Is promoting school-sponsored Halloween activities creating indirect and unintentional financial hardships for students and families? Do school-sponsored Halloween activities violate the dignity of some of our students and families, either culturally or religiously? Does the promotion of school-sponsored Halloween activities create tensions with the equity and access values of SOMSD?"

He concluded that the decision to ban Halloween “[aligns] with SOMSD’s commitment to to building equity.”

This week, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) responded to the news.

“Seriously? We can’t let kids celebrate Halloween? Give me a break,” he wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Taylor wrote in a follow-up news release that the decision was made after school principles were surveyed and said they felt “overwhelmingly in favor of discontinuing Halloween celebrations in school.”

The school district’s assistant superintendent of “access and equity” doubled down on the decision. 

“All of us realize that this breaks with what the district has usually done, and that can be a difficult thing to do sometimes,” Dr. Kevin Gilbert said in a statement. “Often, working to instill greater equity in our district begins with recognizing that we cannot do what we have always done.”



Well Son Of A Bitch....

Sunlit7 op




 Finally, some solid proof on who is pushing the buttons behind the scenes. It's not Obama, nor Trump as speculated on a couple news sites. According to a recent statement made by Fox News host Laura Ingraham it's none other than the originator of the diabolical covid scheme, Mr George Bush.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate leadership had lunch with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of the George W. Bush administration and "walked away with a firm commitment to all of these projects being connected together," Ingraham said. 

Now we can coalesce on whether Condoleezza is working behind the scenes with the current administration on behalf of Obama or Biden but that just doesn't fall within the established party lines. It's much more likely that Condoleezza meeting with republicans leaders are doing so on behest of the man who set this whole chain of events into action. He's the head honcho calling the shots on behalf of republicans. Bush, aligned with democrats are in on it to reset the world governance to a global standard. Now it makes sense why Paxton won in court. Somehow the chain had to be broken. There's always going to be an answer. I don't know how many times I've said that. Bush, being in oil, has bigger prospects on the horizon as much as anyone else in the transition of our energy supplies.

Just as I've speculated these hearings on Trump inflating the value of his properties may just be the planned out from underneath a business empire that was costing him millions of dollars a year in losses. Logically why would you hold on to a losing proposition. So it could drain all the newfound gains of billions? Trump's own CEO of Trump properties left from the job stating he was doing so because the Trump family was moving into new investments. There always has to be a reason and that reason couldn't be I lied to all of you that I wasn't beholding to anybody, in fact I was beholding to everybody and was a paper billionaire. I never had one hundred million to run my own campaign, I had to borrow it. I am not saying he wants an out on the entire hospitality business, just the ones creating a huge drain on his empire. New York for him was pretty much a wrap.

We'll just keep plugging along putting all the pieces of the puzzle together until they fit. Why Bolton was brough back in, why McMasters was brought back in, Obama to strain race relations of all kinds and a man to set it all off who'd suffered the loss of his entire empire unable to jump through the hoops required to keep it afloat during a shut down. An indebted man at that, he had four hundred and eighty five million reasons to do it.

This brings us about face to the Bush doctrine that the China model was the righ model all along. See how we are going full circle back to the beginning, only this time it's not just going to be the middle east, not if we are following the China model.

Laura couldn't have put it better:

"We’re back to the axis of evil," Ingraham said, appearing to refer to former President George W. Bush’s phrase in his 2002 State of the Union address.

Bush, Obama and Trump, the new axis of evil.


Links to the information in the post can be seen at it's orignally posting here:

Well Son Of A Bitch.... — Hive


X22, On the FRinge, and more- Oct 29




Emails Show How Federal Agencies Doubled Down on ‘Russian Disinformation’ Lie About Hunter’s Laptop


Emails published by a watchdog group on Wednesday show the extent to which multiple federal agencies went in pursuit of the debunked narrative that the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop were simply “Russian disinformation.”

As Just The News reports, the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), demanding records of all payments to X, formerly known as Twitter, by the FBI.

The lawsuit was filed based on a disclosure in Elon Musk’s “Twitter Files,” detailing collusion between the social media platform’s prior leadership and the federal government, which alleged that the company was paid at least $3.5 million to process “disinformation” requests. Judicial Watch sued after the FBI denied the original FOIA request, claiming that releasing such information would compromise investigation techniques.

Judicial Watch has also sued the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for ignoring the group’s records request to the National Counterterrorism Center regarding the nature of the Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC), an entity whose existence was not officially acknowledged by the government until a congressional hearing in May.

At the heart of the effort to suppress the Hunter Biden story is the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which has already faced efforts from congressional Republicans to defund it. Just eight days after the New York Post first published the laptop story, in October of 2020, internal emails show that staff flagged the story for attention.

Then, on October 22nd, an internal presentation at CISA titled “Weekly Reporting and Analysis,” produced by CISA’s COVID-19 Countering Foreign Influence Task Force, had nothing whatsoever to do with COVID despite coming from the COVID task force. One news report shared by the presentation, from Axios, noted how the Hunter laptop story had “sparked renewed activity from Q[Anon],” and directly compared discussion of the laptop story to conspiracy theories regarding child sex trafficking in pizzerias in Washington D.C., known as “Pizzagate.”

Later that same day, consulting firm Deloitte used similar talking points to dismiss the Post story in an analysis for CISA, as shown by files previously disclosed due to a FOIA request. The report, which listed “elections” as a major subject, denounced the Post as an “American daily tabloid newspaper,” and falsely declared the story to be full of “unsubstantiated allegations.”

In the immediate aftermath of the story’s publication, big tech platforms such as Facebook and Twitter began censoring efforts to share the original Post article. Twitter explicitly forbade any users to share the URL, automatically blocking any efforts to post it or send it via private messages, while Facebook’s algorithms were altered to reduce the visibility and sharing capabilities of posts featuring the story. Numerous polls have since indicated that if the Post story had not been suppressed and was more commonly-known among voters ahead of the 2020 election, Joe Biden probably would have lost to Donald Trump.



Lewiston Tragedy: A Turning Point or a Flashpoint in America's Gun Control Debate?


The tragic mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, which left 18 people dead and shook the community to its core has ignited yet another nationwide debate on gun rights and gun control in America. The state’s residents – and the rest of the nation – are desperate for answers and ways to prevent future tragedies. Yet, the politicization of these incidents makes it nearly impossible to develop actual solutions.

Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) recently announced that he was reversing his previous stance against a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons,” as a way of preventing more gun violence.

The lawmaker made remarks shortly after the shooting in which he explained his new position.

I have opposed efforts to ban deadly weapons of war like the assault rifle he used to carry out this crime. The time has now come for me to take responsibility for this failure. Which is why I now call on the United States Congress to ban assault rifles, like the one used by the sick perpetrator of this mass killing in my hometown of Lewiston, Maine.

Golden’s change of heart, which appears to be motivated by emotions related to the shooting, reminds me of the adage that “hard cases make bad law.” The mass shooting in Maine was a horror that nobody should have ever had to face. Indeed, other incidents of this type pull at all of our heartstrings regardless of which side we fall on the gun debate. But using these tragedies to restrict gun rights is clearly not the answer.

As many studies and experts have pointed out, banning certain types of guns does not decrease homicides related to guns. Moreover, at least one of the locations the Maine shooter targeted was a “gun-free” zone, which further illustrates that more gun laws do not make people any safer. A sign at the door of the bowling alley asked patrons to leave their firearms in their vehicles. 

Yet, the shooter did not obey these signs. Indeed, most active shooter situations occur in areas in which firearms are not allowed, which means the law-abiding folks in these places are more vulnerable to mass shooters and other types of violent criminals.

It is also worth noting that the shooter had an extensive history of mental health issues and even made threats of violence against his military regiment. Even further, Maine’s “yellow flag” law could have triggered a confiscation of his guns – yet this did not happen.

There are also plenty of studies showing that gun owners are more likely to use their weapons to defend life than to victimize innocent people. In fact, a significant percentage of active shootings have been stopped by armed citizens, as a new report released by the Crime Prevention Resource Center (CPRC) shows.

The report noted that the FBI’s statistics on these cases do not tell the whole story. The Bureau says armed citizens have stopped only 14 out of the 302 active shooter incidents between 2014 and 2022. The media has used these numbers to paint the picture that this rarely happens.

However, the CPRC’s report reveals that 41 percent of active shooting incidents were stopped by armed citizens. Furthermore, in incidents taking place outside of “gun-free zones,” 63 percent of active shooting cases were stopped by a “good guy with a gun.”

The organization’s report shows that, in reality, armed civilians stopped about 157 out of 440 active shooter situations during the aforementioned time period. Dr. John R. Lott Jr., the head of the CPRC, indicated that this discrepancy is the result of FBI oversights and misclassifications, including omitting cases in which armed citizens scared away attackers or were mistaken for security personnel.

Mass shootings elicit a plethora of emotions. The senseless killing of innocent folks elicits outrage, sadness, grief, confusion, and other feelings. But they should not overwhelm the nation to the point that it takes actions that not only violate people’s natural rights but also make them less safe.



Andrew Cuomo Bares Fangs at Joe Biden in Delicious Preview of Democrat Infighting to Come

Sister Toldjah reporting for RedState 

Disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and some powerful enablers in his administration have been on a revenge tour of sorts in recent months, with his former secretary and close advisor Melissa DeRosa releasing a scathing book Tuesday, in which she unsheathed her claws against anyone and everyone who she says wrongly accused Cuomo and herself of wrongdoing during his time in office.

Both appeared together on Bill Maher's "Real Time" program Friday night, where unfortunately Cuomo was lovingly treated with kid gloves. While DeRosa made her opinions known, it was Cuomo baring his own fangs that by far got the most attention, specifically what he had to say about President Joe Biden, for whom Cuomo did no favors whatsoever when he brought up Biden's own "#MeToo" scandals from 2020, highlighting them for the world to be reminded of ahead of 2024:

"I think what Biden's calculus was — he was accused [by] Tara Reade, fingers in the vagina… other women came out — ‘He smelled my hair,’ etc. He wanted to quickly distance himself from this," Cuomo said. "He could have said, 'You know what? I went through this. Let's take a deep breath and actually get the facts before we ask a governor to resign.'"

After telling Maher he'd probably run against Biden in 2024 if he was still in the governor's office and also suggesting a Democrat presidential primary was necessary this time around, Cuomo explained why he thought Biden was unfit for a second term and why he believed the Democrat strategy for 2024 was all wrong:

"I don't know that candidate Biden is the strongest candidate that we can put up, and frankly, I doubt it," Cuomo continued. "I think the Democratic Party has to engage with real people and real voters on a different level. They're too much ‘Trump is no good and Trump is a bum.’ You can't run on banking that the other guy is gonna lose. You have to have an affirmative strategy to win, and the truth is there has been a paralysis of government, right? There's social division, political polarization equals government paralysis, and that is on the ground. And they have to see that, and they have to answer that."

Watch:



I don't know if Andrew Cuomo is right about the Biden/Democrat campaign messaging for 2024 and really don't care. What I do enjoy about this, though, is that at a time when Joe Biden is trying to flex the most muscle to prove to the American people that he has what it takes to effectively handle serious matters both foreign and domestic, high-profile Democrats, including a new primary challenger (Rep. Dean Phillips), are now openly tearing him down - intentionally or not - by essentially saying he's too old, ineffective, and curmudgeonly to serve a second term.

Between that and their infighting over the Israel issue, I'm settling in with some popcorn and sweet tea, and of course, a bottle of Tylenol, because though watching Democrats eat their own is fun, it's still watching Democrats, which can give one a headache if not careful -- mainly due to the eye-rolling it takes to get through it all.



Media Squawk About Mike Johnson’s ‘Sexual Anarchy’ Predictions as They All Come True

The media spilled thousands of words detailing the new House speaker’s LGBT track record — but they won’t say how well his views have held up.



In the 48-or-so hours since Rep. Mike Johnson inherited the speaker’s gavel, the media have devolved into hysterics over his Christian faith and consistent opposition to homosexuality on the basis of that faith.

While it’s common for politicians to reference the Bible, everyone knows opposing same-sex unions hasn’t been in vogue since before Barack Obama became president. That’s why, in order to claw his way into the good graces of Democrats and then into the Oval Office, Joe Biden had to throw all his former beliefs on sexuality right out the window. Don’t forget, this is a former senator who supported legislation defining marriage as between one man and one woman. The one who called homosexuals “security risks.”

We don’t have to wonder why he changed his tune; he told us years ago: “Things are changing so rapidly, it’s going to become a political liability in the near term for someone to say, ‘I oppose gay marriage,’” he said while he was vice president. “Mark my words. And my job — our job — is to keep this momentum rolling to the inevitable.” Roughly translated, that’s: The LGBT train has left the station. Either get on board or get run over.

Johnson similarly has a written record of his opposition to redefining marriage. In 2004, for example, he penned an editorial supporting Lousiana’s Defense of Marriage Amendment — not unlike the federal legislation Biden once supported. Here’s Johnson in his own words:

If we change marriage for this tiny, modern minority, we will have to do it for every deviant group. Polygamists, polyamorists, pedophiles, and others will be next in line to claim equal protection. They already are. There will be no legal basis to deny a bisexual the right to marry a partner of each sex, or a person to marry his pet.

His tune, on the other hand, doesn’t appear to have changed.

A Blast from the Past

But this week, the media — which largely gave Biden a free pass on his past views, marveling at his “evolution” from bigot to “the most LGBTQ-friendly president in U.S. history” — have spilled thousands of words detailing the new House speaker’s track record.

Johnson thinks gay marriage is “sinful” and “destructive” and “dangerous,” shrieked the likes of ABC NewsUSA Today, and The New York Times. He believes a “‘homosexual agenda’ will destroy Christianity and society” and that same-sex relationships are “inherently unnatural.” 

Johnson “has a history of harsh anti-gay language” and “predicted same-sex marriage could doom America,” squealed CNN. He “sought to narrow the separation between church and state,” The Washington Post chimed in. Here’s ABC:

While arguing against granting the benefits to same-sex couples, Johnson made anti-gay comments suggesting support for homosexuality could lead to support for pedophilia. “When you tear down the taboos, the doors open up for everything. That’s the danger,” Johnson said. “We are not trying to tie homosexuality to pedophilia, but when you tear down one barrier, others fall. … Let’s stop here and draw the line here, because then it leads to sexual anarchy.”

I could go on. The corporate media sure did. But in the midst of this super serious and hard-hitting news, they are missing the real story, which is: How did those views hold up?

Seeing the Future

Of course, they can’t get into that because it turns out Johnson was right on the money, especially when taking his actual arguments in full instead of just skimming corporate clickbait. Yes, tearing down sexual “taboos” does open the door for a lot more. And yes, rejecting the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic has led to “sexual anarchy.” That goes for heterosexual sex outside of marriage just as much as gay sex. But the changes in America since the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell decision, which required states to recognize same-sex “marriage,” have been drastic.

Exhibit A is the undeniable proliferation of the “T” in LGBT. The “gay rights” movement hog-tied itself long ago to the transgender movement, and in that pink-and-blue hellscape, there are no rules. A boy can catapult to internet fame by documenting his offensive “days of girlhood.” With nothing more than a daily ladyface minstrel show, a sexual anarchist can go from an audience of impressionable TikTok followers to an audience with the president of the United States. These are the reality-denying activists shaping our laws, language, and everything in between.

For those seeking to avoid today’s LGBT barrage, there’s simply nowhere to go. It’s infected popular retailers and an untold number of brands. No more safe trips to the library or local festivities. Everything on Netflix needs a parental pre-screen. Public schools and universities are LGBT indoctrination centers. Even many religious denominations have rejected sexual orthodoxy and thus the gospel’s call to repent and believe.

Meanwhile, the media love to pretend the support-for-homosexuality/support-for-pedophilia nexus is extreme and unfounded, but there’s just no denying the hypersexualization of children that’s occurred since Obergefell. It’s not that being gay makes someone a pedophile — and that’s certainly not what Johnson or this column argues. It’s that tearing down one sexual more devastates the rest of them.

So Drag Queen Story Hour has metastasized into “family-friendly” drag shows, with other obscene adult activities now including kids (like a naked bike ride in Madison, Wisconsin, where a child attended and was exposed to untold adult genitalia). Kids get sucked into the school-to-scalpel pipeline, where public educators encourage them to explore transgenderism, then try to hide it from their parents. The California legislature recently passed a bill that would force courts to consider parents’ acceptance of “gender identity” in child custody battles (a measure that only failed in order to protect Gov. Gavin Newsom’s presidential ambitions). A chorus of devastated detransitioners has swelled, with an increasing number of once-confused adolescents detailing the ways the adults in their lives manipulated their sexual vulnerability.

It’s really not that complicated: Men cavorting around for singlesin G-strings with exposed prosthetic breasts in front of toddlers, is just pedophilia by another name.

As for the “destruction” and “danger” Johnson predicted, let’s not forget the harm to women that’s resulted from allowing men to overtake women’s spaces, from swimming to sororities. When you redefine marriage, redefining sex naturally follows. You don’t get Bostock without Obergefell.

Redefining marriage also redefined families. No longer is marriage a committed union between one man and one woman for the purpose of procreating. Now, legal unions are based on adult sexual desires that can’t possibly produce children. Thus, reproduction is further commodified via the rent-a-womb industry, with kids now existing primarily to satisfy adults’ familial fantasies. As for adoption agencies, those with Christian values about a child’s right to a mother and a father can expect to face unending legal assaults, Jack Phillips-style.

Just peruse the pages of SlateCosmoor Vox — or even The New York Times — for a few moments to get a taste of today’s push for “open relationships,” such as polygamy and polyamory. “Sexual anarchy,” indeed.

Could’ve Predicted This

Johnson’s views might be out of favor with the broad majority of Americans who capitulated to Obergefell‘s core arguments (even if many of them are now dumbfounded as to how we’ve drifted so far from sexual sanity — a real head-scratcher!). However, they’re perfectly in step with thousands of years of Biblically orthodox teaching on sin and sexuality. If you think Johnson’s editorials are inflammatory, I’ve got news for you about Romans 1.

And just as Johnson’s predictions have materialized, so have those of the Obergefell dissenters — both the justices who penned them and the many other conservative Christians who saw the writing on the wall.

Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent, for instance, argued the decision would infringe on religious liberty. Justice Samuel Alito presciently expounded, saying the decision would “be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy.” Here’s more from Alito:

I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

The media have fulfilled that prophecy. For his outspoken traditional beliefs, Johnson is ultra-bigoted.

But he’s also right. In 2015, five elite robe-wearers decided to open Pandora’s box, and now we’ve all seen what’s inside.



WATCH: Turkish Pro-Hamas Protesters Get a Brutal Lesson in Not Playing with Fireworks


Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Pro-Hamas protesters in Turkey learned the hard way on Saturday why you don't play around with fireworks. 

The protest, which was attended by Turkish "President" Tayyip Erdoğan, was a stark showing of the Islamism that has overtaken a once secular and welcoming country. The dictator gave a speech in which he claimed Israel isn't a country, and that the attacks of October 7th were entirely the fault of "the West." Aren't you really glad Turkey is part of NATO? 

But Erdoğan's pandering remarks aside, there were some bright spots. For example, a protester tried to launch fireworks while holding them, and things went all kinds of wrong. 

Looks like that guy's new nickname is going to be "Stubby" because I'm pretty sure he just lost every single one of his fingers. If I believed in karma, I'd say that was a pretty clear case of it.

After the explosion, the crowd scatters in all directions while the shrieking of what I assume are various women can be heard, as rockets fire in all directions. I'd hope those weren't men crying like that. Also, if you slow things down, you can see what looks like a father dumping his son onto the pavement, while he takes off running from the explosions. What a great show of courage, right? Turkey is obviously sending its best.

All of this is just so tiring. Most of the people at these protests are too young and stupid to know what it's actually like to live in a real Islamic state. They haven't had to actually abide by Sharia law or deal with the abject poverty that comes with that. They've been spoiled by Turkey's quasi-secularism, but that's all disappearing, and soon enough, they'll learn that cheering from a bunch of terrorists isn't nearly as fun as having a prosperous nation and basic freedoms. 

But hey, if that's the road these people want to go down, have at it. They should be made the learn their lessons the hard way. After all, they voted to keep Erdoğan in power even though his tyrannical tendencies were already out in the open. When Turkey ultimately collapses into total Islamic authoritarianism, to the extent it hasn't already, not a single one of them should be let into a Western nation. Let them live in the downfall of their own making.



Leftist Streamer Hasan Piker Justifies Hamas Baby Beheadings as Both Legal and Moral



Leftist commentator Hasan Piker — one of the most influential political personalities on the internet — tried to justify Hamas’ recent murder of Israeli babies as “a matter of law” and “maybe” even “a matter of morality.”

While on the “Leftovers” podcast, Piker said, “This is going to sound very radical and possibly very violent, but this is a matter of law, and maybe even if you agree with this a matter of morality, Palestinians have the legal ground to violently seize back their own homes from the settlers.”

Piker vaguely invoked the concept of “international law” — which clearly does not allow for the intentional killing of civilian noncombatants — in an apparent effort to dodge publicly acknowledging what his rhetoric suggests: that he is OK with Islamic terrorists dismembering Israel children and beheading babies.

While debating his co-host, Ethan Klein, on the morality of designating Israeli babies as “militants,” Piker insisted, “There are baby settlers as well — there are babies in the settlements.”

“The other school of thought here is that all matter of Israelis living [in] Israel proper are also [settlers] in the eyes of some,” Piker continued. “I do not agree with that because I don’t think that that is a reasonable solution, and it’s not realistic anyway, and that only will lead to the complete evisceration of Palestinians, and far-right Israelis will use that to continuously radicalize regular Israeli citizens in their endless bombing campaigns and ethnic cleansing campaigns.”

When Klein said it was evil that another leftist podcaster defended the murder and decapitation of Israeli civilians, including babies, by arguing that the victims were not civilians but occupiers, Piker said, “I’d have a different opinion on the matter” if the year were 1949, but “you can’t say that in 2023.”

Throughout the podcast, Piker defended leftists going to bat for Hamas online as “nothing in comparison to [Israel’s] multibillion-dollar [media] operation.”

As of October, Piker is the sixth most-watched streamer on Twitch in terms of hours watched.

Previously, Piker was temporarily suspended from Twitch for saying America deserved to be attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, while reacting to an episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” featuring Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw. 

“This is so insane. America deserved 9/11, dude. F-ck it, I’m saying it,” he said.



When Progressives Do What They Accuse Conservatives of Doing



So, there has been yet another tragic mass shooting, this time in Lewiston, Maine, and people are falling all over themselves to exploit the tragedy for their political agenda. As is typical, the anti-gunner lobby has eagerly used the bodies of the dead victims to push for disarming responsible Americans, furthering their objective of making it harder for regular folks to defend themselves.

Yet, the shooting has also elicited a rather braindead take coming from a Portland City Councilor named Victoria Pelletier, who gleefully used the tragedy to brand all white people as violent. In a post on Instagram, Pelletier, described the shooting as an act of “white violence,” and claimed that “we see this type of angry, violent, whiteness every single day.”

In essence, she was using the actions of the shooter to paint white men as “violent” and “angry.”

As the statements begin to roll out, make sure you peep which one of your representatives actually calls this what it is: an act of violent, white nationalism and domestic terrorism.

This isn't a 'senseless tragedy', this is a targeted, intentional act of white violence that we see regularly in this country. We are no stranger to angry white men with guns. This happens all the time, and will continue to happen all the time.

Most of our federal delegation has been in power since I was in elementary school - if they wanted to enact gun laws, they would, but they likely never will because the institution of government benefits from this type of sanctioned violence.

We see it with the nazi marches and the push for Maine to become a white ethno-state. We see it with policing and public safety. We see it with the criminalization of homelessness and racist, xenophobic rhetoric towards our marginalized groups. We see this type of angry, violent whiteness every single day.

I am so exhausted by the need to identify a motive. "He lost his job" "He was getting a divorce" "He had issues with mental health" etc ec (sic) etc.

The motive is he's white, he has a gun, and he can enact terror and violence on innocent people because the world has awarded him the privilege to do so.

It is difficult, nay, nearly impossible, to find a display of hypocrisy more glaring than Pelletier’s statements, which are shared by many on the fringe left. These are the same people who will complain about members of the media – especially conservatives – who portray most black men as violent brd on the actions of a small percentage of the black population.

Yet, when there is a mass shooting perpetrated by a white male, folks like Pelletier relish the opportunity to pretend that this is indicative of some murderous traits that white folks innately possess – never mind the fact that the vast majority of whites do not engage in this behavior, or anything like it. In perpetuating these tropes, these people constantly show they are no better than those who stereotype blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and other ethnicities. Indeed, they are the same people, just on the opposite side of the coin.

This story is yet another showing that progressives are not serious people – especially when it comes to the issues they claim to care about the most. Indeed, when it comes to racism and other forms of bigotry, these people are quick to signal their virtue in lofty, self-righteous posts on social media. But in essence, they care nothing for displaying bigotry against whites and other demographics when it suits their purposes.

As I have said many times, progressives do not view bigotry as a societal problem to be solved, but as a political cudgel to be weaponized against their political opposition – nothing more, nothing less. This is why you see so many far leftists who are more obsessed with white people than they are about empowering black Americans and other demographics. It is all part of the con job these people seek to pull on the rest of the nation. Unfortunately, in many ways, it is succeeding.