The Narrative About Bad America First Candidates Is Nonsense

posted by Kurt Schlichter at Townhall 

We keep hearing a lot about how America First conservatives, the faction of the Republican Party that took power in the wake of the utter failure of the GOP establishment, keep nominating terrible candidates. Why, we Republicans are wasting gettable seats by choosing people who actually agree with our principles and policies! Not surprisingly, this is the kind of nonsense cope we’ve been hearing from these establishment losers ever since we rejected them for their unbroken track record of failure. It’s the lame rationalization of people who want the power back that we stripped from them because of their gross incompetence, corruption, and condescension. Don’t buy it.

Kari Lake is a great example of this narrative in action. Let’s get real about Kari. I’ve had the chance to get to know her a little bit. She’s terrific. She’s smart, articulate, and if you listen to her on the equally great Megyn Kelly this week – and you should – you’ll see that what she’s supporting is what we want and how she’s expressing it is smooth, rational, and persuasive. She is not the crazy woman the regime media and her jealous GOP critics claim. The image of Kari Lake as some sort of lunatic is a lie. Nothing could be further from the truth. She’s a great communicator – she was a TV journalist in Arizona for years and knows her own state. She’s gotten even better at politics this go-round. Yeah, Kari made mistakes in the past, like everyone else. Her critics often accuse her of being a nut for insisting that the Democrats stole the 2020 Arizona election, though after all that has happened in the last few years, someone who believes we ought to default to believing in the honesty of governmental actions, the integrity of the judicial system, and the good faith of the donkey party is a nut. Regardless, she’s learned from her experience and is running a different campaign this time. The reason her opponents, inside and outside of the GOP, tell you she’s some sort of wacko is so that you don’t listen to her unfiltered, because once you do she’s likely to win you over.

We’re told by all the self-appointed smart people that if Arizona’s GOP primary voters had only nominated somebody “normal,” why, this seat would be in the bag for the Republicans and Democrat Ruben Gallego – a straight-up communist scumbag – would be 10 points behind. But that’s nonsense. It’s utter nonsense. Why? Well, because Arizona nominated Martha McSally. She was the most normal of the normal, an establishment Republican who was not carrying the America First banner. She was so completely “normal” that even a Mitt Romney would’ve approved of her white bread blandness. Now, I’m not disrespecting Martha at all. She’s a fellow colonel and was just fine as a senator. But she didn’t get it done. She got crushed – twice. McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema in 2018, got appointed as a senator temporarily, and then lost again in a special election to Mark Kelly. The facts simply don’t support the narrative that an establishment Republican is a guaranteed winner in purple Arizona. If it was, center-right establishment ex-governor Doug Ducey would not have passed up the opportunity this cycle to walk into a Senate seat.

Arizona is not a deep red state anymore and the Arizona Republican Party is a mess, not just in organizational terms but because of a split within it between the aging McCain faction and the ascendant America First faction. You have some of the old McCain faction – and the McCains – actively supporting Kamala Harris. Did you know John McCain’s second wife is an ambassador appointed by the Biden administration (sic)? That’s not on America First that when it was time to unite, the McCainites gave unity a thumbs down when they did not get their way.

The Arizona primary voters were not crazy for voting for Kari Lake. They were simply voting for somebody who supports what the majority of them support instead of somebody from a faction that supports what the majority of them oppose. The fact is that the Arizona Republican Party is fractured, and some nominal Republicans decided that if they didn’t get their way they would go over to the Democrats. This is a continuing problem within the GOP. We American Firsters are endlessly lectured that we’ve got to vote for the GOP nominee, even if he’s a squish, just because he has an (R) behind his name. It’s always time for us to unite. And that’s the right thing to do. That’s what we should do. You have a primary, fight it out, and then you get together behind the winner. But the establishment doesn’t like that rule when it’s applied to them. They don’t want to unite when they lose. They want to either cry or collaborate with the enemy. You can’t have two sets of rules, one for us and one for them. We’re getting tired of that. It doesn’t work.

Kari has tried to re-unite her party anyway. This time, she’s much more experienced, and her efforts to reach inside our own aisle to bring those establishment Republicans back into the fold may be paying off. Kari is also reaching out to normal Arizonans, campaigning relentlessly. She won’t get the credit for it from her enemies, but she is a sensational retail politician. The Democrats are obviously afraid enough to be spending a ton of money in Arizona, and according to her internal polls she’s slightly ahead. I hope that’s true. She’d make a great asset for us in the Senate. 

Now, that’s not to say that we primary voters always get it right. Sometimes you’ve got to be strategic. In Delaware years ago, we had a chance to take a Democrat seat with a long-time moderate congressman and instead nominated that woman who had to go on TV to deny that she was a witch. And clearly, she wasn’t a witch because if she was, she would’ve cast the Spell of Winning and won. The William F. Buckley rule applies – you vote for the most conservative person who can win. This means that you have to vote for somebody who’s not as conservative as you are. But it also means that sometimes you’ve got to vote for someone more conservative than you. Are you listening, establishment folks? 

And there’s a lot of talk about the North Carolina governor’s race with Mark Robinson. The primary voters picked him, and he was a fiery orator who says many great things and many other things that appear to be taken out of context. He had a sort of sex scandal – imagine, a North Carolina politician in a sex scandal! The revelations about his alleged – and I see no reason to trust the regime media telling us anything about him – browser history indicate that, if true, the Democrats would want to use it as an elementary school syllabus. There’s been a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth about how the primary voters screwed up by nominating him. The establishment put out word that his issues were known to oppo researchers before the primary. Well, perhaps before the primary might’ve been the time to release that key information, if it existed. “You should have read our minds and knew he was kinky” is a pretty weak argument – not that I give the regime media’s claims an iota of credibility.

Yes, Republicans sometimes do nominate bad candidates. You know what? A certain percentage of candidates are always going to be bad, whether they are establishment Republicans or hard-core America First conservatives. That’s life. But the idea that somehow America First conservatives are uniquely bad and establishment ones are winners is baloney. Do you know who else are America First conservatives? Tom Cotton. Ted Cruz. Mike Lee, Josh Hawley, and, of course, the great JD Vance, to name a few. Does anyone think we’re worse off having them in the Senate? Do you know who are some of those “normal” conservatives of rectitude and dignity? James Lankford, the Oklahoma establishment hack whose crappy border bill surrender, gets brought up every single time Harris opens her piehole about her failed border czar tenure. Thanks for giving the Democrats cover, Jimmy. Oh, and there’s John Cronyn, the Texas establishment hack who’s perfectly normal, unlike that scary Ted Cruz, and who cooperated with the Democrats for a gun control bill that gets brought up every single time Harris opens her piehole about taking our guns. Thanks for giving the Democrats cover, Johnboy.

You know, if the establishment wants us to nominate more establishment candidates, maybe they should try this plan – stop sucking. In the meantime, all of us – hard-core and establishment Republicans – need to jump on the team to bring it in for the big win and support the great Kari Lake.

X22, And we Know, and more- Sept 30

 

In Defense of Nation-States

posted by J.B. Shurk at American Thinker 

Nationalism has become the great bugaboo of global talking heads today.  It is discussed in the marbled halls of Western capitals as a scourge that must be eliminated just as swiftly as its equally detested cousin, populism.  Policies that are popular with the people and nation-states that reflect the self-determination of the people cannot be permitted!  

Who says?  Some very important people who belong to august bodies such as the European Commission, the United Nations, the Bank for International Settlements, the World Economic Forum, and the World Health Organization.  International groups with lofty reputations have no time to trifle with the beliefs and needs of discrete peoples.  The globalists are here to save democracy by ridiculing and rejecting whatever the people might want!

Sounds a little bit like an absolute monarchy, does it not?  The public is not in the mood for another round of COVID lockdowns.  Who cares? — it’s what the WHO director commands!  Citizens are extremely unhappy with the attendant crime, cultural conflict, and expanded welfare obligations that come with rampant illegal immigration.  So what? — the unelected bureaucrats at the E.C. and the U.N. are committed to destroying national identities!  Westerners demand an end to money-printing and runaway inflation.  Who asked them? — we do what the multinational investment firms say!  

What we have today are kings and queens who sit on distant thrones and bark orders at the common people living under their rule.  Those who object to being ruled are condemned as “extremists,” vulgar “populists,” and bigoted “nationalists.”  From the royalty’s point of view, anyone who represents the people is a threat to the globalist monarchy’s continuing reign.  Populists and nationalists, you say?  Egad, off with their heads!

Why can’t the French, Dutch, British, German, Polish, Swedish, Italian, Spanish, Australian, Canadian, and American governments represent their own peoples?  Because those territories are too small for their designs.  Today’s “elites” have global domination on their minds.  The concerns of individual nation-states are too petty for those who covet the whole planet.

We used to have a pretty good word to describe an arrangement in which many separate countries are forced to bend the knee and pay tribute to a superior power: empire.  

Every empire’s defenders describe its institutions as absolutely necessary for promoting social cohesion, economic growth, and political stability.  Respect for authority and the hierarchical order is touted as essential for civilization.  But we are not living in the age of Caesar Augustus, Charlemagne, or Kublai Khan.  Must a small collection of global “elites” really keep distinct nations under their thumbs in order to keep the peace?  Not if immediate history is any guide.  Peace isn’t what empires do!  They command...until they are opposed by those who refuse to be conquered or until they are resisted from within by those no longer willing to obey.

During the twentieth century alone, many great empires clashed and died.  The First World War brought an end to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the German Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the Russian Empire.  The Second World War brought an end to the Japanese Empire, the German Reich, and the Kingdom of Italy.  In the aftermath of those global conflagrations, independence movements emerged in overseas territories once administered by the United Kingdom and France and set in motion decades of decolonization across Africa, the Balkans, the Middle East, and Asia.  The combined results produced dozens of new nation-states around the globe.  

Some had existed as kingdoms, tribes, or proto-nations earlier in their respective histories, whereas others materialized as products of diplomatic wrangling among peace negotiators partitioning military maps.  The trend, however, was clear: cultural and ethnic groups all over the planet sought independence from the much larger empires that had once swallowed them whole.  Following two horrific wars that had claimed hundreds of millions of lives to bloodshed, disease, genocide, and famine, the mid-twentieth century witnessed renewed calls for national self-determination, political statehood, and local decision-making.

Those calls were often ignored.  For millions of Eastern Europeans trapped behind the Iron Curtain, WWII did not really come to an end until the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union nearly fifty years later.  The rise of communism in Asia divided China, Korea, and Vietnam and left most of the continent in various stages of civil war to the present day.  For those unlucky enough to have lived through the ethnic slaughter of the Yugoslav Wars in the ’90s, the Great War that began in 1914 lingered for most of the twentieth century.  

In contrast to the proliferation of nation-states, the last century also produced a new kind of empire: the global superpower.  The United States and the Soviet Union faced off in a simmering Cold War that could have easily exploded into a third world war at any time, and their respective military alliances — the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact — stretched their tentacles across continents and oceans.  While the U.S. and the USSR treated the world as a chessboard and nation-states as game pieces belonging to one side or the other, national independence movements often became little more than smokescreens for proxy wars between the world’s two dominant empires.  Under the shadows of the global superpowers, many fledgling nations were relegated to the status of client states — vassals doing their hegemons’ bidding. 

The twentieth century’s clash of empires gave the world carnage and chaos that surpassed that of any other century and left humanity on the knife-edge of total destruction during a Cold War that carried the prospect of nuclear Armageddon.  From such savagery and perpetual angst, several obvious lessons could be gleaned: empire-building leads indubitably to empire collapse.  Likewise, when empires fall, people all over the planet suffer.  Finally, anything in this world that is “too big to fail” represents a threat to everyone.  Those lessons apply equally to financial as well as political Leviathans.

A rational person might well conclude that concentrated power and centralized government are the essential ingredients for future public resentment, social instability, and revolution.  An impartial observer might similarly conclude that unrepresentative government leads to the abandonment of protections for individual human rights and the concomitant growth of brute totalitarianism.  Finally, an honest messenger might warn that authoritarianism inescapably delivers violent repression; dogmatic speech controls; and, ultimately, genocide.  The twentieth century’s butcher’s bill might even suggest that local decision-making, community empowerment, and stalwart respect for personal freedoms remain the crucial bulwarks against the real scourge of humanity: tyranny.

How strange it is, then, that twenty-first-century global powers demonize nation-states as antiquated political entities detrimental to world peace and their defenders as xenophobes not worthy of recognition? 

Most of Western Europe cheered the fall of the Third Reich because a continent of distinct nations with unique cultures and cherished histories did not want to become conquered vassals of the Nazi regime.  Eighty years later, those same European nations have become part of a continental union that promotes endless immigration from competing civilizations and recognizes Germany as its unofficial head.  Similarly, eight years after the British people voted for national sovereignty over European Union membership, several iterations of U.K. governments have watered down the intended effects of a real Brexit.  And the United States has spent the post-war period building a NATO military alliance, international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, and a labyrinthine system of “free trade” agreements — all meant to buttress what the U.S. government and its allies affectionately call the “rules-based international order.”  

It would seem that two world wars and a debilitating Cold War did nothing to dissuade global “elites” from building a new empire on the ashes of the old.  It will surely suffer a similar fate.

Shhhhh, Trump Is Winning!

posted by Kevin McCullough at Townhall 

Over the last few weeks, I’ve been everywhere, from  Galaxy’s Edge in Disneyland to a domestic oil rig in the plains of Colorado, back and forth to NYC in between. I’ve been asked the same question over and over.

When sharing an Uber with one of America’s most well-known billionaire investors, I was asked. Then, at a recent dinner, I was asked by perhaps the most well-known living television producer just before being seated. The following day, on a flight home, a second-generation school teacher asked me.

“Are you worried about the outcome of the election?”

Given the complete absurdity of the outcome of 2020, I understand their pangs of anxiety. With CoVid providing the cover, crooked Governors & Secretaries of State conspired to unconstitutional means of altering ballot processes. Then they engaged (thanks to Zuckerberg and others) in history's most aggressive harvesting operation. Additionally, states like Michigan printed more ballots than there were residents. And states like Nevada lowered signature matching requirements to zero so that literally a scribble would be legally acceptable to a ballot being cast. 

Well, CoVid protocols have been struck down, signature matching is back in place, Zuckboxes are illegal, and many states are taking definitive measures to clean up slop from their voter rolls. 

Millions of dead people who were dead in 2020 have now been removed from rolls in dozens of states—many of them swing states. In several states voters lacking proof of citizenship or residency in the state they were registered in have been bounced. In several states, more voters have been expunged from their rolls than the margin of victory in 2020. 

In North Carolina, the 2020 margin was less than 200,000; this week, they removed 747,000 “voters.”That’s nearly four times the difference. 

But voting integrity action isn’t the only indicator in my mind. 

Every person who has asked me about this is almost stunned when I tell them to “believe the polling.”

Not for its accuracy. Polls are still being disproportionately weighted to over-sample left-leaning voters. They are still undercounting independent and Republican participants. So precision isn’t what you are learning from them. But you can take away some perspective with historical comparison. 

At this point in the cycles of 2016 and 2020, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden maintained a +6 and +9 advantage, respectively.

In 2016, Clinton lost.

In 2020, Trump became the only sitting President in the modern era to secure more votes than he had received in his first election. Nixon didn’t do it, Reagan didn’t, and Bush, Clinton, and Obama didn’t. And Trump didn’t just get a “few” more votes in 2020; he got 14,000,000 more.

So if Trump was behind by 6 and 9 points in those two cycles, and polls are still being weighted, and he’s sometimes leading and sometimes tied or maybe at most 1 or 2 points behind, read that as a definitively stronger position than he was in 2016 or 2020.

The reasons Trump is leading are numerous. They’ve tried everything from lawfare to assassins (both shooters were financial supporters of the Democrat party and cause), and none of it has worked.  

He also stated clear policies that he would implement. Look, when Saturday Night Live opens its season premiere with Maya Rudolph mocking Kamala Harris' vague, meaningless word salads, you know the citizenry sees them, too. Clarity is key, and the voter is getting the most contrasting options to pick from that we’ve seen in American elections.  

Trump has expanded his base. He’s doing significantly better with suburban moms, African Americans, Latinos, and voters under 35. She leads in some categories but nowhere near the levels that Clinton and Biden did.

Trump is winning. But don’t tell anyone. Just be quietly determined to take ten people to the polls this year.  

The night of November 5th will be here soon enough!

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

It's Time for Gun Rationing to End

posted by Tom Knighton at Townhall 

Imagine, if you will, that the government decided you could only exercise your freedom of speech once per month. What would you do? What if it told you that you could only go to church once per month? What then?

If you're like most of us, you'd be angry. However, states do this with gun purchases all the time, and it's time for that to end.

The Firearms Policy Coalition recently took aim at a New Jersey law restricting people from buying more than one gun per month. 

“

“This case presents a simple question of law,” states the lawsuit. “The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms’—plural—‘which shall not be infringed.’”

“It’s been said that ‘as goes California, so goes the nation.’ In this case, California’s ban was properly declared unconstitutional and enjoined from enforcement following years of litigation, and so it will go with all such bans throughout the United States. We will force New Jersey and every other state to abide by the Second Amendment’s protections without exception,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

”

This is important work, because gun rationing laws like what New Jersey has on the books need to die a fiery, painful death.

In theory, these laws are meant to prevent straw buyers. If people can only buy one gun per month, they can't make a living off of buying guns for prohibited people.

Reasons for Great Hope Start To Appear in the Mideast After 75 Years of Multilateral Hypocrisy Conrad Black

 The Israelis, as Churchill said of Finland in 1940 and Greece in 1941, ‘are showing what free men can do.’

Gruesome though war always is, there are in the current Middle Eastern conflict reasons for great hope for dramatic progress in what has for 75 years been an intractable problem aggravated by multilateral hypocrisy. Almost the entire current peace process is a fraud: meaningless posturing of no relevance to the geopolitical facts.

The sequence of events that culminated in the unspeakable crime of the Hamas invasion of Israel nearly a year ago has been an aggregation of acts and policies of utter hypocrisy until there was no alternative but the radical solution now being imposed by the defense and intelligence forces of Israel.

The hypocrisy has been universal. Egypt ignored for many years the massive importation of arms and war supplies to Hamas through tunnels under the Philadelphi crossing. The government of Egypt and its officials were simply bribed to ignore its promise and its mandate to assure that the Gaza-Egypt crossing was not used for the importation of weapons and war supplies.

By doing nothing to moderate the arming of Hamas, Egypt avoided frictions with radical Arabs, enriched itself, and attempted to maintain civil relations with Israel by professing neutrality and goodwill in trying to mediate a cease-fire. It is all a sham, and Egypt’s economy, including tourism, is disintegrating and the failure of the Egyptian government to institute economic reforms will soon bring it under intense pressure. The Muslim Brotherhood bungled its opportunity at government between 2011 and 2013; we cannot risk them doing so again.

Qatar’s hypocrisy is even more brazen. It has materially supported Hamas and sheltered its leaders for years. It has ignored the sanctions that it is supposedly upholding and its television service, Al Jazeera, is simply the mouthpiece of Hamas. Qatar also goes through the charade of pretended neutrality and good-faith mediation but it is paying Danegeld to the Hamas terrorists while implausibly masquerading as an agent for conciliation.

The hypocrisy of Hamas itself is naturally the most egregious of all the protagonists. They appear to have been ordered by Iran to disrupt the Israeli-Saudi Arabian settlement negotiations and did so while apparently confident that hostilities would soon be de-escalated as so often in the past by demanding the release of a huge number of their cadres in Israeli detention in exchange for another limited, comparative peace.

It is not clear if the thugs they sent into Israel on October 7 exceeded their remit in the hideous barbarity of their actions or if this was part of the Iranian instruction to its terrorist puppets. All participants knew that the subsequent peace talks were a fraud.

Hamas dictated terms as if it was victorious: release of thousands of their terrorists, complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, guarantee of the survival of the new Hamas leader (whose predecessor Israel had killed at the Iranian government VIP guest house in Tehran), a return to the status quo ante — with Hamas tyrannizing Gaza and provoking Israel whenever it wished, while Israel recognized Hamas as a legitimate nation-state.

This hardly reflected the facts on the ground, which are that 80 percent of Hamas terrorists have been killed and Israel promises to eliminate the rest. Hamas apparently expected that Hezbollah and the Houthis and even Iran would join them in war with Israel. Despite professions of enthusiasm to die, Hamas’ “brothers” have been reticent.

The American  government has also been steeped in hypocrisy and has sponsored a cease-fire which would include Israel handing over the Philadelphi corridor to Hamas and withdrawing entirely from Gaza. The Biden-Harris formula that “Israel has a right to defend itself” means that it has a right to expel invaders but not to retaliate with the level of force that would seriously deter future aggression.

The American administration is happy to sacrifice the lives of untold thousands of Israelis in the future for a sprinkling of Islamist votes in Michigan in the November election.  Three-quarters of the world’s political problems would be resolved if the United States ceased to be a weak super power; the world awaits the result of the American presidential election.

The government of Israel has not entirely escaped the contagion of hypocrisy either. It has sensibly concluded that Hamas must be destroyed as a terrorist force, but they have been less than candid in acknowledging the likely human cost of this escalation.

It is a myth that this is a Netanyahu policy only  —even his domestic opponents acknowledge that Hamas has to be destroyed. The prime minister is not so easily excused for his past policy of also paying Danegeld to Hamas, to prevent the Palestine Authority from being able to found a state.

Israel issued up to 20,000 work permits to Gaza and facilitated the transfer of large amounts of cash from Qatar to Hamas. Mr. Netanyahu plays the Churchillian role well now but that does not entirely whitewash his former performance as a covert appeaser.

Naturally, the summit of hypocrisy has probably been scaled by the United Nations, which has knowingly and generously funded Hamas for many years. UN hospitals and schools and other buildings have been allowed to be used as shields for Hamas to build tunnels and violate all agreements to pursue peace, while UN personnel have actively collaborated with Hamas in its terrorist barbarities.

Practically all of the United Nations employees in Gaza are Hamas nominees, and United Nations ambulances are routinely used to shuttle Hamas military personnel about. The United Nations is entirely complicit in the Hamas practice of expropriating all aid of any kind that is sent to Gaza while supporting false claims that Israel is trying to starve the population. The United Nations largely funds Hamas’ terrorist operation, and certainly foots the bill for most of Hamas’ “government.”

The complete destruction of Hamas and prospectively of Hezbollah also, which still has tens of thousands of rockets but now only about 100 launchers which the Israelis are systematically eliminating, will create a possibility for peace that has not existed before since the founding of the State of Israel. 

The culmination will be the destruction of Iran’s military nuclear program, which Mr. Netanyahu promised when he addressed Congress two months ago and which President Trump promised in his debate with Vice President Harris.

Mr. Netanyahu is not the cause of this problem and after a tortuous career may well be part of its solution. In killing the Hamas and Hezbollah leaders and blowing up the Hezbollah electronic devices and carrying the battle to their enemies, the Israelis, as Mr. Churchill said of Finland in 1940 and Greece in 1941, “are showing what free men can do.”

https://www.nysun.com/article/reasons-for-great-hope-start-to-appear-in-the-mideast-after-75-years-of-multilateral-hypocrisy

Hezbollah Reaches Out To U.S. For Advice On How To Govern With A Dead Leader

 BERUIT — Following the death of their leader Hassan Nasrallah, members of the militant group Hezbollah asked the U.S. for advice on how to govern with a dead leader.

"Following the demise of our great ruler Nasrallah at the hands of those Israeli pigs, we here at Hezbollah need to know how to run our organization with a dead leader," Omar Ibadi told the press. "We have reached out to leaders in the United States to ask how they can govern their own people with a dead president still in office."

U.S. officials say Ibadi has been sending texts to high-ranking members of President Biden's cabinet for guidance on how to run a large organization of people and govern many different groups even while the leader is deceased.

"It's a unique problem," Senior Whitehouse staffer George Corinado commented. "We've been managing for almost four years now but it does come with some specific problems. These guys are resourceful though, they'll figure it out."

As of publishing time, Hezbollah announced they would be asking the U.S. to send over Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib to replace Nasrallah due to her extensive experience running Hezbollah in America.

https://babylonbee.com/news/hezbollah-reaches-out-to-us-for-advice-on-how-to-govern-with-a-dead-leader

John Kerry Explains Intent of Next Administration to Eliminate First Amendment

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

Comrades, I’m really glad to see former Secretary of State and Climate Czar, John Kerry, outline the transparent truth of their intention in such a matter-of-fact way.   Trust me, this is a really good thing. Perhaps no 2-minute encapsulation of current events more accurately outlines the worldview of the Biden-Harris administration, than this one.

Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.  Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.  WATCH: 

On another positive note, millions of people now accurately understand why it is so important to refute the terms “mis-dis-mal information.”  When CTH initially warned about the labeling, most people did not understand; however, as the consequences begin to surface, I would argue almost a majority of people now understand.

2022: CTH encountered criticism for our position on information.  Perhaps it is important to step back and explain exactly why we should not be playing by rules, like those proposed by John Kerry, which are established to control us while engaged in the battle of ideas.  First, my position:

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

There is only information.

There are only two elements within the public discussion of information, truth and not truth.

In an era filled with “fact-checkers” and institutional guardians at the gates of Big Tech, let me explain exactly why it is important not to accept the speech rules of the guards.

When you accept the terms “disinformation”, “misinformation” or the newest lingo, “malinformation,” you are beginning to categorize truth and lies in various shades.  You are merging black and white, right and wrong, into various shades of grey.

When your mind works in the grey zone, you are, by direct and factual consequence, saying there is a problem.  You are correct; however, this is where people may make a mistake. The problem is supposed to be there.

It is not a solution to the problem to try and remove the grey simply because it takes too much work to separate the white pixels from the black ones.  You were born with a gift, the greatest gift a loving God could provide.  You were born with a brain and set of natural instincts that are tools to do this pixel separation, use them.

If you define the grey work as a problem you cannot solve on your own, you open the door for others to solve that problem for you.  You begin to abdicate the work, and that’s when trouble can enter.

The sliding scale of Pinocchio’s is one of the most familiar yet goofy outcomes.

Put more clearly, when you accept the terminology “disinformation”, you accept a problem.

The problem is then the tool by which authorities will step in to make judgements.

Speech, in its most consequential form, is then qualified by others to whom you have sub-contracted your thinking.

When you willingly sub-contract information filters to others, you have lost connection with the raw information.

CTH was founded upon the belief that truth has no agenda, nor does it care about you, your feelings, or your opinion of it.  It just sits there, empirically existing as evidence of information in its most pure form.

The search for truth, in all things, is the mission objective of this assembly.   Often, we don’t like the truth; often, the truth is bitter, cold, challenging and even painful to accept.  However, the truth doesn’t care.  Information in its most raw form is ambivalent to your opinion.  If you struggle to accept these things, that’s when you need grey.  The New York Times is not called the “grey lady” accidentally.

Personally, I am an absorber of information – perhaps on a scale that is unusual.  But I do not discount information from any form until I can put context to it and see if the information makes sense given all the variables present.  When something doesn’t feel right, it’s almost always because it isn’t right.

Often, I find myself struggling in the grey and complex.  It is not unusual to spend days, perhaps weeks, researching, digging, clarifying a situation, only to discover the path to finding the truth is in another direction entirely.   Erasing everything and starting over is frustrating, but it is genuinely the only approach that works; and often finding truth is supposed to be difficult, that’s why it is rewarding.

In the digital information age, we are bombarded with information.  It is easy to be overwhelmed and need to find something or someone who has better skills at separating the black grains from the white ones.  All opinions in this quest should be considered; thus, it is important to allow the free flow of information.

I am not necessarily a speech absolutist.  There is some language, particularly foul language, that needs to be constrained if we are to participate in a respectful society, with grandma’s rules and knowing the audience.  Articulation of arguments needs to be effective, respectful and forthright.

CTH has guidelines for comments for this exact reason.  It’s not about what is said, most often it is about how the opinion is said, vulgarity is not appropriate.  Those constraints need to be based on a set of inherent values.   However, when it comes to information it is important to draw a distinction from speech.

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.   We are in this situation right now.

Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove a certain speaker from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

COVID-19 and the subsequent government lies, have helped many people to see just how dangerous the modern political Marxists are. Those who proposed a “global information governance board,” are now on their heels and increasingly desperate.  Hence, “governing is now hard” according to John Kerry.

The flickering flame of liberty and freedom has been under assault for decades, we are at an inflection point.  I remain optimistic in our ability to defeat those who are trying desperately to use all the mechanics of every system to retain power, for the same reason that all abusive relationships eventually have to end.

WOLVERINES!

.

Do not get alarmed, get informed.

RESOURCES:

Using AI for Content Moderation

Facebook / META / Tech joining with DHS

Zoom will allow Content Scraping by AI 

AI going into The Cloud

U.S. Govt Going into The Cloud With AI

Pentagon activates 175 Million IP’s **ahem**

Big Names to Attend Political AI Forum

DoD to use AI to monitor U.S. Internet for Disinformation

DHS Announces Guidelines for Using AI to monitor Americans.

DHS Announces “Expert Group”