Monday, May 27, 2024

The White Left and the Racial Rubicon


The progressive anti-white platform sweeping away Western civilization owes its origins to what the authors shall refer to as the “White Left,” who originally founded, organized, promoted, and funded the anti-white movement that is now fully adopted and embraced by the United States government and most major media, academic, and business institutions.

It is primarily the White Left who advocate and agitate for the anti-white hate we see on a daily basis in mainstream media outlets, schools and colleges, and corporate and government environments.  And it is these people who, by dint of their skin color, lend their imprimatur (and thus enormous credibility) to the progressive anti-white movement.  (If these powerful and influential white people are saying white people are racist and evil, then it must be true, right?)

Who, exactly, are the White Left, and what do they gain from spawning the anti-white hate they promote?  In broad terms, the White Left fall into three categories:

(1) Tenured government employees and politicians who are basically “set for life” (with lifelong taxpayer-funded job security and government pensions, early retirement at 50 if they wish, etc.).  This category would include the likes of Merrick Garland (the proudly anti-white attorney general of the United States) and Dick Durbin (Illinois senator and anti-white advocate) and their legions of federal and state government colleagues

(2) Whites who have inherited their fortunes through generational wealth (trust fund babies) and those who are so wealthy that they are insulated from the anti-white policies they advocate. This second category would include the likes of George Soros, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Tim CookJack Krawczyk(Google’s anti-white artificial intelligence leader), and nearly the entire population of Martha’s Vineyard, along with most every white mainstream media anchor, news editor, Hollywood producer, and corporate CEO.  These double-talking racial demagogues and provocateurs drive the anti-white narrative and are responsible for the plague of anti-white violence and intolerance in the world today. 

(3) The third category, while largest in sheer numbers, can be characterized as the street-level foot soldiers of the movement.  This growing base of Caucasians is easily dismissed on intellectual grounds as useful idiots, but they nevertheless influence, incite, and persuade others by endlessly parroting the bigoted rhetoric of those who inhabit the first two categories.

This latter category includes many white university students and young people who have come of age with technological skills but acquired no wisdom or actual knowledge along the way, in addition to no small number of self-abasing whites who think they can dodge the blood libel of “racism” as long as they trash and dehumanize other whites.  This brainwashed third group, which numbers in the millions, could reasonably be compared to the mindless Borgof Star Trek, or the unthinking ummah of the Muslim world who support terrorism.

Why, one wonders, would the White Left advance racial division in such unrelenting fashion, stoking hatred and hostility toward whites?  Indeed, why make it the single most important organizing principle of society, the animating moral imperative and centerpiece of Western civilization? 

Using Occam’s razor as our guide, the answer is more prosaic than sexy: money, profit, and power, with a heavy dose of exhilarating nihilism and civilization-destroying anarchy for good measure.

Government gains profit and power by encouraging dependency on the state.  If you are employed by one of the countless welfare agencies affiliated with government, you want more (predominantly minority) people on the welfare rolls, more dependency, more single motherhood, more children in broken homes or foster care, as these social pathologies ensure your own livelihood (ironclad job security, larger budgets, salaries, et al.).

If you work for one of America’s now numberless government spy agencies, you want more money from taxpayers, bigger budgets, higher payrolls, better facilities, a surveillance state that encroaches on citizens even more than now.  To justify such an expensive wish list, maybe more security threats are needed? 

To that end, you declare that America desperately needs lots more refugees from Gaza, or Afghanistan, or that racial and ethnic diversity is our greatest strength, or engage in similar self-serving psychobabble.  Plus, you can experience the frisson of being an altruistic superhero with a white savior complex as you pretend to care for “underserved communities of color” or other boilerplate progressive nonsense.

If you are a trust fund NGO or Silicon Valley executive promoting unlimited immigration into the United States and other majority-white Western countries, and you derive power, profit, cheap labor, and government grants from the same, you desire more of all those things. 

The material and human costs to the host nation are irrelevant to your concerns.  You aren’t bothered by children being trafficked and raped along America’s southern border; indeed, you’ll deny it’s happening at all, or seek to minimize awareness of it.  You don’t care if gangs and criminals bring fentanyl that kills roughly 100,000 American citizens annually.  You are unmoved by — and will ignore or rationalize — reports of U.S. citizens being murdered by illegal “migrants.”

You aren’t troubled that illegals just show up at the border and are ushered unvetted through the turnstiles by the millions.  All that matters is that you continue to expand your power and profit while bleating endlessly about how only white racists and xenophobes could find your compassionate, humane approach to globalism and mass migration objectionable.

If you are a reprehensible hagiographer for the anti-white left — say, a Scott Pelley of CBS News — you go on the air and broadcast that a developmentally disabled youth has been scalped and tortured by people who uttered the “N-word,” and invoked the name of Donald Trump as they livestreamed their depravity.  

And if you are a shameless shill like Pelley, you leave out the fact that the tortured youth was white, and that his tormentors were black.  Instead, you deliberately lie by omission, knowing your captive viewing audience will wrongly infer evil white gargoyles tortured a disabled, helpless black youth — the exact opposite of what really happened.

Consider the canonization of various black criminals who lost their lives while violently assaulting or resisting law enforcement.  George Floyd, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray — we all know their names.  Now, among the tens of thousands of whites murdered by blacks over the past 50 years, try to think of a single name that has been similarly beatified.  Or, failing that, try to name a single white cop ambushed and murdered while eating a donut in his squad car, or out on routine patrol.

Has there been a single national or global march or demand for justice or racial reconciliation in their honor?  No, they’re just a statistic, because white lives matter to the anti-white White Left only insofar as they can serve their assigned role as global villains to be racially demonized and exploited for power and profit. 

America and the West already crossed the racial Rubicon; we are well beyond slippery slopes, inflection points, points of no return, and are freefalling into the racial void, which will end badly for white people — including, ironically, whites of the left.



X22, And we Know, and more- May 27

 




Joe Biden: Angry Warrior


He’s rough and gruff and thoroughly displeased with everyone and everything. And if he’s not careful, it’s going to cost him the election.


Last weekend, President Biden spoke at the graduation ceremony at Morehouse College, an all-male, historically black college, aggressively attacking his Republican opponents and decrying what he sees as pervasive, overt, and violent ongoing racism in American society. “What,” Biden asked rhetorically, “is democracy if black men are being killed in the street? What is democracy if a trail of broken promises still leave black communities behind? What is democracy if you have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot?” Finally, he intoned, “And most of all, what does it mean, as we’ve heard before, to be a black man who loves his country even if it doesn’t love him back in equal measure?”

The speech has been the subject of much discussion, particularly among Republicans, most of whom have bemoaned the President’s purposeful victimization of young black men for political purposes. Rather than tell them the truth, rather than encourage them to be great and to dedicate their lives to fixing the problems that exist in the nation, he encouraged them to wallow in their misery and to blame others for their problems.

Certainly, there is considerable truth in this criticism. And certainly, Biden should be chided for playing into an ideology that thrives on resentment and jealousy. Still, the substance of the President’s comments is quite probably less important in the grand scheme of things than the tenor in which they were delivered.

A week before his speech at Morehouse, President Biden and his campaign team released a video addressing the Trump campaign’s demand for head-to-head debates. “Make my day, pal,” Biden challenges Trump as he declares that he beat the former president twice in their previous campaign and will gladly do so this time too.

Here again, critics rightly noted that the substance of the video was questionable at best. “6 jump cuts in 11 seconds,” conservative commentator Stephen L. Miller noted. Biden is so bad at this that he can’t even read his cue cards in a studio. How is he going to do an entire debate, much less two? He’s not up to his actual job, much less to running a grueling campaign in addition.

This is another fair point, to be sure, but one that still misses the bigger picture—Biden’s tone.

Joe Biden—or at least the Joe Biden the public is allowed to see these days—is angry. He sounds like he wants to fight Trump. He yells at the young men at Morehouse on one of the most joyful and special days of their lives. He’s rough and gruff and thoroughly displeased with everyone and everything. And if he’s not careful, it’s going to cost him the election.

To be clear, Joe Biden has always been a bully. Whether attacking reporters for not being as smart as he claims he is; stopping just short of calling a campaign-stop questioner a “fat a**,” or trying to intimidate Clarence Thomas(of all people) on the intricacies of Natural Law, Biden has long tried to browbeat those with whom he has a problem. He has never been an especially gentle politician.

At the same time, however, he has always had the reputation of being a friendly, if somewhat gaffe-prone, decent guy. The media would never, ever describe him as such, but he’s always seemed very much to fit the description that Clark Clifford inaptly used to describe Ronald Reagan. Joe Biden has always been, more or less, an “amiable dunce.” He may be a braggadocious and plagiaristic dunce, but he’s also, ultimately, a happy dunce.

But not anymore. Now, he’s incensed. Now, he doesn’t like what’s going on in the country. Now, he’s angry, and he wants everyone to know it. Or at least his campaign directors do.

One senses that those campaign directors have been backed into a corner here. For whatever reason—most likely his age and his diminishing mental acuity—Joe Biden seems to be most coherent when he’s irritated. When he’s calm, he mumbles and slurs his words. When he’s jovial, he seems kind of creepy or, at the very least, just a little bit “off.” But when he’s angry, he’s different. Sure, he yells rather than speaks. And sure, it’s not easy to get him riled up all the time, but then, as Donald Rumsfeld keenly noted, you go to war with the army you have. What choice do they have but to have him be ticked off all the time?

Unfortunately for them—and for him—this creates some not-insignificant problems.

For starters, Americans like winners. They like a “happy warrior.” That term dates back more than two centuries, to William Wordsworth’s depiction of Vice Admiral Horatio Lord Nelson, who led the Royal British Navy heroically—and happily—in the Napoleonic Wars. It has been used ever since to describe politicians who embody the cheerful and victorious nature of Nelson. It has been applied to such political luminaries as Al Smith, Winston Churchill, Hubert Humphrey, and most notably Ronald Reagan, who, contra Clark Clifford, was never a dunce but was perpetually amiable.

America has also, on occasion, had a handful of “UNhappy warriors.” The late John McCain, for example, was often described as an unhappy warrior, a man who overcame many struggles of his own, who saw problems with the nation’s governance, and who set about—joylessly and methodically—trying to correct those problems

“Angry warriors,” however, are largely unheard of—mostly because no one wants to associate with or give four years of non-stop media coverage to someone who will spend those years scolding and yelling at them. That’s no fun.

The other major problem that Biden’s angry warrior strategy presents can be found in the fact that he is running for “RE”-election. Americans could, theoretically, get behind a campaign based on anger and the righteous rebellion against broken promises and lies. It’s never really been tried, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t work. The catch is that Joe Biden is the incumbent, which is to say that he’s had four years to fix the problems that make him angry, and he hasn’t done so. Indeed, if you count the Obama years, when he was the Vice President, Biden has been in charge (or almost in charge) for 12 of the last 16 years. Being angry about all the injustices in the world now implicates him far more than it does his opponents. Frankly, It makes him look impotent: This stuff is destroying our country! I’ve had four years to fix it, but I haven’t! So…four more years?

That’s not going to fly. The American people are not going to elect an angry warrior. Either the Democrats must figure out a way to tap into Biden’s more admirable personality traits or they must find another candidate. Or they should prepare themselves to lose in November.



🎭 π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓


Welcome to 

The π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓 

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. 




Here's Why the Supreme Court Should Reject Mexico's Ridiculous Lawsuit Against US Gun Manufacturers


Mexico’s legal action against American gun manufacturers could finally be coming to an end, if the Supreme Court has anything to say about it.

Over the past three years, the Mexican government has pursued lawsuits against U.S. firearm companies, blaming them for the rampant gun violence happening in their country.

Despite having some of the strictest gun restrictions in the world, Mexico is plagued with gun violence driven by drug cartels who run many parts of the nation. Instead of facing the problem, the Mexican government seeks to deflect from its ineptitude – or complicity – by pretending it’s the fault of American companies that manufacture firearms.

Even more telling is the fact that 13 Democratic attorneys general have been colluding with the Mexican government to help them target gun manufacturers. Now, it appears the ball is in the Supreme Court.

Mexico claims the companies engaged in bad business by selling guns that hold more than 10 rounds, including semi-automatic rifles.

The Mexican government, which says the guns were smuggled across the border to commit crimes, is asking for billions in damages and for the court to impose an injunction on the companies so they have to meet new safety requirements.

Those being sued are: Smith & Wesson Brands Inc., Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc., Glock Inc., Beretta U.S.A. Corp., Witmer Public Safety Group Inc., Sturm Ruger & Co. Inc., Interstate Arms, Colt’s Manufacturing Co. and Century International Arms Inc.

The gun companies' filing argues that “Mexico boasts some of the strictest gun laws in the world” and pointed out that “The country has only one firearm store – and it is located on a military br.”

At the same time, Mexico is presently suffering a scourge of violence at the hands of its drug cartels. But rather than take meaningful steps to solve that problem — improving border security, rooting out public corruption, and adequately supporting its police, for starters — the country has instead turned to litigation.

On the other side, Mexico’s government contends that 70 percent to 90 percent of firearms recovered from crime scenes are trafficked from the United States.

“For decades the Government and its citizens have been victimized by a deadly flood of military-style and other particularly lethal guns that flows from the U.S. across the border, into criminal hands in Mexico. This flood is not a natural phenomenon or an inevitable consequence of the gun business or of U.S. gun laws. It is the foreseeable result of the Defendants’ deliberate actions and business practices,” the Mexican government alleges.

“Defendants design, market, distribute, and sell guns in ways they know routinely arm the drug cartels in Mexico. Defendants use reckless and corrupt gun dealers and dangerous and illegal sales practices that the cartels rely on to get their guns. Defendants design these guns to be easily modified to fire automatically and to be readily transferable on the criminal market in Mexico.”

It is absolutely ridiculous that one even has to explain why Mexico’s lawsuit should result in an ignominious failure. But, here goes.

Firstly, the establishment of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) was aimed at shielding gun manufacturers from lawsuits in the event that their products are used for criminal activity. It is intended to prevent precisely the type of lawsuit Mexico is bringing against these companies. This is why a district court initially rejected the case, noting that it prohibits lawsuits against gun companies when their products are used for nefarious purposes. However, the First Circuit Court of Appeals later ruled that Mexico can proceed with the lawsuit.

Of course, the reason for the law is obvious. The notion that gun companies should be held responsible for how bad actors use them is absurd on its face. It is akin to holding car manufacturers liable for car crashes caused by people misusing their vehicles. Companies are not responsible for evil people who use their products to harm others. Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who signed on to a brief with two dozen other Republican attorneys general, argued that “American firearms manufacturers should not and do not have to answer for the actions of criminals.”

“Rather than take responsibility, Mexico and anti-gun activists are trying to blame and bankrupt American companies that follow the law,” he added.

Knudsen touched on the crux of the matter: This has nothing to do with cracking down on the rampant violence plaguing Mexico. For the Mexican government, it is about deflecting responsibility for its failures. For the American anti-gunners working with them, it is about making it harder for people to keep and bear arms. What is sad about this situation is that neither entity seems interested in protecting Mexican citizens who become victims of this violence.

Lastly, if the Supreme Court allows this ridiculous legal ploy to proceed, it will open the floodgates for other governments to do the same. This could overwhelm U.S. courts while becoming a larger-scale legal assault on gun manufacturers. Mexico’s government is not the only one failing to protect its citizens. Letting them get away with this could empower others to scapegoat American gun companies.

The bottom line is that allowing a foreign entity to dictate America’s gun policies is about as sick as it gets. The fact that Democrats are actively collaborating with a foreign power to restrict the Second Amendment rights of American citizens shows exactly where their loyalties lie, and it is not with the American people. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will put an end to this farce.



How Low Can You Go: Ana Navarro's Vile Remarks About Latino Trump Supporters


Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

Is there any wonder that some black people and Latinos are fleeing the Democrats and supporting former President Donald Trump? 

Trump has a big tent, he wants everyone to come in, and he's talking about the things that they care about, including the economy and illegal immigration: 

Meanwhile, if you are a black or Latino South Bronx supporter at Trump's Bronx rally, you have Democrats denying that you were even present at Trump's rally: 

You had Democrats wishing them ill: 

You had Democrats calling them "clowns" and his Bronx rally "fake": 

But CNN commentator Ana Navarro apparently decided she wanted to compete with Hochul and the other Democrats for worst remark of the week. CNN's Jim Acosta asked Navarro about what she made of all this and why Latinos would support Trump:

There are some Latino immigrants who forget they came here as immigrants and who want to shut the door behind them, and who think being anti-immigrant somehow is going to make them pass as more American, pass as whatever. And that’s a very stupid attitude to have.

She even made it worse, somehow suggesting a comparison to an anti-Hispanic shooting.

Navarro then cited the 2019 mass shooting by a gunman targeting Hispanics in El Paso, Texas, in an effort to shame Latino GOP supporters. 

"What folks don’t realize is that when the guy drives thousands of miles to go hunt down Latinos in a Walmart in Texas, he doesn't care when you came here. He doesn't care what your accent is," she said. "What he's looking for is, does it look like me, does it sound like me? That's what he's looking for. So, you know, when people are anti-something, they're not asking for your papers, they're just anti-that group."

 Wow, how disgusting is this take? Talk about a "you ain't black" and "deplorables" moment. 

Did she just claim that Latinos were trying to "pass"? Yes, she did. 

Then she claimed that by supporting Trump, they were somehow forgetting they came as immigrants and were "anti-immigrant." 

No, being against illegal immigration isn't being "anti-immigrant" -- it's being supportive of the law and of a proper immigration process, the process that they, legal immigrants, had to go through and illegal aliens are bypassing. It's a perverse lie to call them anti-immigrant. 

Plus, maybe they're fleeing to Trump because like many other Americans, they see he's better on policies and for the economy. They remember when there weren't wars brewing around the world, and when they had more money in their pockets under Trump. And some fled Communism where they came from, so they will do all they can against it taking hold here. 

But this is how low the media and Democrats will sink to try to put down Trump or anyone who supports him. They wouldn't try to better their policies or understand why Americans are supporting Trump. They'll just attack to try to hold onto control. 



DΓ©jΓ  Vu? $75M Set Aside for Security As 70 Groups Pledge to March on Chicago DNC Convention


Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

Are we soon to witness 1968 all over again, where violence wracked the Chicago Democratic National Convention in the lead-up to the November presidential vote?

Many pundits have predicted exactly that, taking into account the George Floyd riots in the summer of 2020 and the ongoing pro-Hamas demonstrations roiling campuses across the nation. RedState’s Andrew Malcolm and Ward Clark have both delved into the issue before:


Democrats Fear Their 2024 National Convention May See Repeat of Violence in 1968

1968 Again? Protesters Also Aim to Gather in Chicago for Joe Biden's Nomination


But let’s examine some numbers to get a better sense of the chances of chaos overtaking the Second City when Democrats meet there in late August to formally certify the decrepit incumbent President Joe Biden as their standard-bearer for the ’24 election.

Unlucky 7s?

Two numbers, both starting with “7,” trigger red flags:

Over 70 organizations have joined a coalition called “March on the DNC” and plan to protest President Joe Biden for being “complicit in the genocide” of Palestinians, a spokesperson for the group told Time Magazine. Despite the federal government granting $75 million to the city for security measures, Democratic Chicago Alderman Raymond Lopez told the Daily Caller that the incoming gatherings are “raising some serious concerns.”

Radicals are not exactly hiding their intentions to cause disorder in Chi-Town:

"We will reject the DNC in Chicago?" What exactly does that mean? It doesn't sound peaceful, that's for sure. 

Chicago has already seen plenty of unrest long before the convention gets underway, as Alderman Lopez points out:

“We’ve seen that these protests are not necessarily going to be contained just to the area where the Democratic National Convention happens. We have seen routinely on Fridays and Saturdays, weekend takeovers of our downtown district, our central business district, to Lakeshore drive — which is one of the main thoroughfares along the lakefront — and if those protests are in those areas, or worse, are happening in neighborhoods, that’s going to be a severe disruption that our police department quite frankly won’t be able to manage because they already have been having difficulties because of attrition and lack of response to hiring efforts.” [Bolding mine.]

The potential problem is one entirely of the Democrats' own making, and should bedlam descend upon the Windy City this summer, they will deservedly take the blame. They lauded the purposeless (and depraved) “P-Hat” protests after Trump was inaugurated in 2017, they egged on the deadly, destructive George Floyd-BLM anarchy in 2020, and they’ve been celebrating the pro-Hamas mobs as just good people exercising their First Amendment rights, instead of calling them out as the vandalistic, violent, antisemitic hooligans they so often are. 

If we do see the convention roiled by turmoil and, God forbid, violence, and if disgusted Americans vote Trump into the Oval Office just as they voted in Richard Nixon in a ’68 landslide, many critics won’t be able to help themselves and will think, the “chickens are coming home to roost” for Dems.



Trump’s Multiracial Working-Man Optimism Beats Biden’s Corrosive Anger And Resentment


Unlike Biden, Trump’s optimistic campaign speeches show a man who loves this country and wants it to return to health.



Former President Donald Trump managed to pull off a campaign miracle with a wildly successful rally in South Bronx on Thursday night.

The Bronx is the poorest borough in New York City, and South Bronx is the poorest area. Most residents are black or brown, and they vote overwhelmingly Democrat. No Republican presidential candidate has gone anywhere near the area in decades.

On Thursday morning, heavy rains flooded the park where the rally was to be held. Bronx-based Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted “God is good” upon seeing the weather, believing it would keep Trump crowds away. She also taunted Trump for being the victim of Democrat lawfare, saying he had to rally in the Bronx because he was in the “legal version of an ankle bracelet.”

God is good regardless of political outcomes, of course. In this case, He dried Crotona Park in the Bronx before a raucous crowd of thousands poured in to hear one of Trump’s best campaign speeches yet.

“Certainly a bigger crowd than I think Democrats would like to see, particularly given this is one of the bluest counties in the entire country,” one CNN reporter conceded upon seeing the crowds.

Trump barely mentioned the NYC show trial he’s being subjected to and mixed campaign staples with a declaration of love for New York City and the country at large. He seemed truly happy and at home.

“I was thrilled to be back in the city I grew up in, the city I spent my life in, the city I HELPED BUILD, and the city WE ALL LOVE — THANK YOU!” Trump said on Truth Social. Trump grew up in Queens but officially moved to Florida in 2019. His effusive praise for New York shows a remarkably positive attitude from the former president, given that the city and state are currently part of a Democrat campaign plot to bankrupt and imprison him.

Trump reflected on lessons from his success in New York City real estate, doling out career advice along the way, during his hour-and-a-half speech. A parade of local politicians and activists announced endorsements and support of Trump.

When he discussed his economic and immigration policy proposals for getting the country back on track, he argued that his policies would help everyone in the country. It’s part of a concerted effort by the Trump campaign to drive up votes from black and Hispanic voters who traditionally vote Democrat.

“It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or brown or white or whatever the hell color you are — it doesn’t matter. We are all Americans, and we are going to pull together as Americans!” Trump said.

The contrast with President Joe Biden couldn’t be starker. In three decidedly non-raucous speeches within the last week or so, Biden leaned into racial grievance politics. At a speech at the National Museum of African American History and Culture last Friday, Biden claimed America was beset by “forces trying to deny freedom of opportunity for all Americans.” He claimed there was an “insidious” resistance and an “extreme movement” led by his political opponent to hurt black people. In another disaster of a speech to the NAACP, the White House later had to make 10 corrections to it.

The same day as the NAACP speech, Biden gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, a historically black men’s school in Georgia. In a self-centered speech riddled with some of his familiar falsehoods about his life and family, Biden painted a picture of a racist and evil country.

He said the country was under the “poison of white supremacy” and falsely claimed Americans were trying to put forth a national book ban to harm black people.

It’s “natural to wonder if democracy” actually works, he said. “What is democracy if black men are being killed in the street? What is democracy if a trail of broken promises still leave black — black communities behind? What is democracy if you have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot?”

Biden also falsely claimed Georgia doesn’t allow anyone to drink water in voting lines and that black election workers are being constantly attacked.

Biden’s message is that the country is evil, racist, and full of hatred and that he will fix it by emptying the Treasury to buy votes.

Trump, who has the benefit of having already had one very successful term as president, acknowledges the very real economic, social, and foreign policies the country faces. But unlike Biden, his optimistic campaign speeches show a man who seems to love the country, love its cities, love its people, and want the country to return to health.

Whether Biden’s race-baiting rhetoric or Trump’s unbridled multi-ethnic optimism will win the day remains to be seen. The speech in South Bronx showed how successful the latter can be.



Biden Reminds West Point Graduates of their Political Duty to Interfere in Election if Leftist Vision of Democracy is Threatened


Judicial Watch Tom Fitton puts it this way: “In a speech today at West Point, Biden, who is directly trying to jail his political opponent, suggested the United States military must be prepared to intervene in domestic political affairs against President Trump.”

Many political followers have likely tracked the Obama-era emphasis about changing the intents, purposes and mission of the U.S. military.  During the Obama administration the ideologues who traveled with the Lightbringer, looked at the Pentagon through the prism of domestic affairs; essentially, how can the Dept of Defense be shifted to support the anticolonial effort?

With standards changed to accommodate women in combat, the U.S. military had been increasingly shifting toward political correctness and gender inclusion since the late 1980’s.  However, it was Obama Inc who pushed wokeism to be the primary effort of military leadership.  Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) is a Marxist tool for domestic manipulation of military and social engineering.

By the time we see the issues behind Defense Secretary James Mattis, Joint Chief’s Chairman Mark Milley, and the attitude of Alexander Vindman et al, it was already too late.  Just like the DOJ and FBI the “fundamental transformation” of the Pentagon was fully metastasized.   Our USA military leadership are now predicted to operate just like the Chinese Mongolian divisions during Tiananmen Square massacre.  If you doubt this comrade, please remind yourself how the U.S. military was used to enforce COVID-19 compliance.

WASHINGTON POST – […] In his 22-minute commencement address, Biden did not mention Trump by name, but he made clear that he was referring to his Republican opponent by pointing to a letter that was a clear reprimand of Trump’s leadership. The open letter, signed by more than 1,000 West Point alumni, was addressed to the graduating class of 2020 before Trump delivered the commencement address here. It came just days after military police helped forcibly clear peaceful protesters outside the White House ahead of a Trump photo op. The alumni reminded that year’s graduating class that they pledge service to “no monarch; no government; no political party; no tyrant.”

“Remember what over 1,000 graduates of West Point wrote to the class of 2020 four years ago,” Biden said. “The oath you’ve taken here ‘has no expiration date,’ they said.” (read more)

The U.S. military dependency on ‘contractors‘ also originated out of necessity.

[2018]


[2021 – COVID, Checkpoint]