“COVID-idiocy”

Yep, “COVID-idiocy” is now a word. I made it up. Why? We need to create a new COVID-19 group in which we can relegate the ever-growing number of idiotic plans and ideas pulled from the air by private “experts” to assist Americans in the fight against our current pandemic — you know, the medical pandemic “thing” that, according to the CDC guidelines, ceased even to be a “pandemic” six weeks ago. That doesn’t matter at all! We still need to spoon-feed Americans with a daily dose of stupidity to guarantee American leaders are always the smartest people who breathe!

We had the mask: “to wear” and then “not to wear;” “to medicate with Hydroxychloroquine,” then it was “don’t dare take it cause you’ll die!” Then we could take it “only in a doctor’s direct care,” then “don’t take it cause you’ll die!” “Everybody stay inside,” then,” then “go back to work, but only in small numbers.” Then, once again, we hear the cries of “stay at home, don’t work. If you do, you’re going to die!”

Everyone responsible for the creation of these lines of “COVID-idiocy” needs to be marked so that everyone will know they are the manufacturing of caustic, hateful, demeaning, and fearful “musts” that have together torn apart the hearts and minds of good and honest Americans.

But there’s more.

As New York City schools grapple with how to handle a virus that has an under 1 percent infection rate in children, parenting boards frequented by the educated, monied-but-not-so-monied-as-to-send-their-kids-to-private-school set, are forming “pods.” A ‘pod’ will be a small group of children, usually no more than five, who will meet at each other’s homes instead of traditional schooling in September. You, and four other families in your same tax bracket, will hire a teacher to educate the five children in the pod. Parenting boards are overwhelmed with requests for these tutors. The families will agree to only interact with each other: an absurd and impossible promise that will surely be broken.

We’re in a time where there is a ‘right’ opinion on everything, and every other idea is stupid and likely racist. The right advice right now is that it would be just crazy to open schools in New York City in the fall. This is even though every other country is opening schools, and New York’s governor is on a prolonged victory tour on late-night television for his celebrated handling of the COVID crisis…which resulted in the death of 32,000 New Yorkers.

If you’re a parent who is pushing to open schools, well, you don’t care about the lives of teachers. Those sending their kids to private schools that plan to open must love their kids less than the podders. Pods have become the only acceptable way to educate your children this fall.

The idea that moving a group of children from house to house, and bringing in a commuting educator who is theoretically isolating herself from others in the name of teaching the group, is somehow seen as safer than just sending the kids to a traditional classroom, is a testament to how much science and reason have ceased to matter. It’s the latest in our COVID security theater, which now includes having a temperature check when entering certain restaurants or buildings. However, someone can be COVID-positive and asymptomatic, or ya’know, take Tylenol.

It would be one thing if parents revolted and asked for $25,199, the amount spent per student in New York City’s mainly failing school system, to be returned to them to educate their kids as they wish. But school choice is stupid, and racist and only those terrible Republicans want that. These parents are doing something very different than icky school choice. They’re choosing, you see, to keep their white, affluent kids safe and educated when their local schools won’t do it. As for the people who don’t have the money to hire a tutor, and need to be at their own jobs while their kids are either on some wacky part-time school schedule or fully remote, that’s their problem.

The one-two punch of pods, while not demanding the money be returned, will go so far to keep down poor kids across the city. It’s almost as though that is the intention. Anyone sane still left in New York City must demand funding to be returned to parents to use how they see fit for their child’s education. Don’t let the rich podders get to ignore the choices they are making that will further exacerbate inequality in education. Make them face it.

Anything other than that is pure “COVID-Idiocy.”

What Other COVID-idiocy Can we Expect?

Every TV Show Is Going To Have A Coronavirus Episode

Or at least all of the medical drama’s will. I’m not sure how they’ll work a coronavirus episode into The Simpsons or whatever, but I’m sure they’ll try, and I’m equally sure that it will be terrible.

It’s weird how we want to consume media about the things that scare us, but we totally do. The popularity of the 2011 drama Contagion has increased by about 9000% since the pandemic started. Do people think that they’ll find some secret code to surviving the virus in a movie about a similar outbreak? Or does watching Matt Damon go through what we’re going through while also being hot just make us feel better? Maybe we enjoy the superiority of seeing Meredith Grey get a slight cough and wave it off as nothing while we sit at home eating popcorn and saying, “Oooo girl, you got no idea.”

Will We Ever Wear Pants Again?

Global disasters always affect fashion. After World War I, skirts and haircuts got shorter. During World War II, pants became more widely accepted as casual wear for women. During the pandemic, very few people are choosing to get out of their pajamas.

With each global disaster, humanity has said “Heck No!”, fewer layers, more comfort. After working from home for possibly many months putting on real pants might as well be climbing into an Iron Maiden. A suit? Don’t even joke about that.

Not only are clothes going to get even more comfortable but now that we’re all used to seeing facemasks in public you might start seeing them in daily life outside of the hospital and airport. Yes, the Mortal Kombat Ninja look is going to be walking the runway at Paris fashion week next year.

Get Ready For Running To Become Stupidly Popular

While most of us are trapped inside feasting on those fancy Pepperidge Farm cookies that were all that was left in the snack aisle, apparently some people are using this pandemic to get swole. One of the few ways you can safely leave your home during a pandemic is to go for a run outside.

Once you start running, your brain produces some pretty great chemicals that tell you running is good for your body. After you’re done feeling like you’re going to die, you feel pretty great after a long run, and the hardest part of running is having the time and energy to get started.

The end of the pandemic will be the start of everyone running a 5K. Everyone you know will suddenly not shut up about running. I mean, I figured the apocalypse would involve a lot of running, but I hoped it would be from something rad like a big dinosaur.

Our Butts Will Never Be The Same

Bidets have been in America for a while. You probably know a few people who have one and at least one unfortunate soul who’s chosen to take on the personality of Bidet Guy. You know, Bidet Guy, the guy who will not stop talking about how clean his rear-end is. If there isn’t one in your current group of friends, there’s about to be.

The toilet paper shortage is causing more than just the obvious issues. Cities are concerned that people flushing non-toilet paper items like paper towels could royally overload sewer systems. Bidets are the most obvious problem to the lack of TP issue, and Amazon is still selling out of them like crazy. Once the hoards lust for butt paper is satisfied, and we have a stable toilet paper supply line again, lots of people are still going to have bidets. We’re going to discover that they’re not as scary and European and as we initially thought and why uninstall one when the next toilet paper shortage could happen eventually. Guess what? We’re all Bidet Guys now.

There’s Going To Be A Divorce Boom

Everyone has been talking about the potential for a quarantine baby boom, and I’m sure that’s a distinct possibility. Still, when people got out of quarantine in China, the first thing they wanted to do was get divorced. Allegedly there were so many people going immediately from quarantine to their divorce lawyer that there was actually a shortage of appointments. That’s right. We had a toilet paper shortage; China has a divorce shortage.

It’s tough being locked inside with anyone for months, even someone you have loved and cherished since you were nineteen years old, who may have for example had a job that required frequent travel and routine sixty to eighty-hour workweeks, and now he’s home all the time, and you’ve suddenly realized that he doesn’t know how to open a door. It’s like every door he encounters, he rams his entire body into and then at the last possible seconds remembers to turn the and nob and somehow at the same time as he full-body slams the door he burst into the room, every single time he opens a door! It’s like living with Kramer from Seinfeld.

Anyway, that’s just a totally random example. What I’m trying to say is if there is something insignificant about your quarantine partner that annoys you get ready for it to be amped up by a hundred after a month inside. Once that’s over, maybe you’ll be prepared to split up over it.

Summary

If we don’t get back to normal life — you know, getting up at 6:00, drinking a cup of coffee after showering and dressing for work, skimming the overnight news, jumping in the car and headed to the office or packing the kids’ lunches and hauling them to school — we’ll ALL be making shrink appointments! Don’t get me wrong: I love being with my wife of 45 years. But, 24 hours a day? That’s burning way to much time from the “Tolerance Clock.”

There’s plenty of COVID-idiocy to go around as we watch the Democrat big-city mayors and state governors face turn green and spew COVID-idiocy insults toward Washington D.C. But I’ll bet you one thing: you haven’t yet seen the craziness that will shock us all the longer we live in this semblance of sanity at the hands of COVID-19 and the lack of REAL information. It’s getting ugly now, but, in New York City, imagine how the parents and kids in the “pod-schools” are going to feel being cooped-up for another nine months. There might be some killings — both by parents AND kids before it’s over.

OMG…if we don’t have a 2020 World Series or NFL football, there’ll be dads running down the streets taking potshots at total strangers! Yep. And there’s plenty of COVID-idiocy to go around to all 330 million of us. We’ll probably use most of it!

Play

Somewhat Shocked to see Trump in a Facemask

I actually have a call-in to a Republican member of Congress who’s an attorney to get an answer to this question: “Are the government mandates (from ANY government) Constitutional?” There’s no science to support any justification for the mandates. Why do I say that? It’s the truth! There are countless opinions of some of the finest epidemiologists, immunologists, and infectious disease specialists who are actually split down the middle on the answer to that question. But what resolves the “science” question about mask efficacy of wearing masks for the purpose of stopping COVID-19 infection-spreading are numerous controlled laboratory tests over a period of years — a decade or so — that clearly state that NO mask of any kind stops viruses. And that includes N95 masks. Each of these tests conducted on thousands of individuals using every conceivable type of mask in addition to proving the inadequacy for any of these masks to stop the virus from impacting the “wearer” or persons around them show that often wearing masks for too long will negatively impact the person doing so.

I don’t have the “constitutionality” answer yet, but I will. But for the purpose of our conversation today, let’s assume that the answer will be, “No, a mask mandate does NOT pass constitutional muster.” So what about the “now” if the response follows science and confirms we shouldn’t wear masks.

Let’s dive in!

President Trump

Next time Donald Trump poses for a photocall in one of those ridiculous, unnecessary and completely off-brand face masks, maybe he should remember the history of his good friends the Chinese.

In the 17th century, China’s Ming dynasty was overthrown by the Manchu invaders of the Qing dynasty. The Manchus imposed their will on the conquered Han majority by forcing them to adopt their hairstyle. Where the Han had traditionally worn their hair long and tied in a bun, they now had to wear it Manchu-style, shaved at the front and sides with the top grown long and plaited into a queue. The sentence for failing to have the correct new haircut was death by beheading.

Does this scenario sound vaguely familiar? Sure all those U.S. states now enforcing the wearing of face masks may claim they’re acting in the interests of public health and safety — and sure it’s not a capital crime — yet. But really, all those corona-fascist state governors imposing this unnatural and unfamiliar dress code are doing it for the same reason the conquering Manchus did it to the Han: to show the lowlifes — that’s you and me — who’s boss.

I can understand why Democrats and other liberal-lefties are unable to see the problem here: why should they when they so adore regulation and the firm hand of Big Government? What does puzzle me greatly, though, is why the entire conservative movement isn’t united in outrage at this blatant exercise in judicial overreach.

This ought to be THE civil liberties issue of our era: an intrusive, economically damaging regulation, irrationally imposed on Americans for the flimsiest of reasons. Yet instead of fighting it tooth and nail, far, far too many Americans are just shrugging their shoulders and saying: “Well if it saves a few lives, why should I mind having to wear a bit of cloth over my face when I go to the mall?”

Well, the reason you should mind is that the number of lives it may end up saving is likely even smaller than our personal number of brain cells.

Even at the very height of the pandemic about two months ago, cloth masks (as opposed to the professional medical variety) would have been next to useless in preventing viral transmission: as a number of studies and medical experts have noted, the mesh is too large to stop a virus and anyway, they’re often incorrectly worn.

But now that the virus has begun to retreat — as viruses tend to do in the summer months — and the number of deaths has tumbled almost to nothing, the rationale for imposing masks is more nonsensical still. It’s like surrendering your arms to an enemy you’ve just beaten in battle: again, something liberals might find appealing, but which all conservatives ought to find incomprehensible.

Granted, the mainstream media continues aggressively to promote the narrative that the crisis is far from over — and will continue to get worse until we find the Holy Grail vaccine. But conservatives really ought to know by now that what the MSM tells you about coronavirus should be taken with a massive pinch of salt. The MSM reports a “surge” in infections as something shocking when it fact it’s just the inevitable result of more widespread testing; it cherry-picks localized “spikes” in death rates to signify impending catastrophe when a) the national trend remains downward and b) increases which may look large in percentage terms are actually tiny in terms of numbers. Furthermore, as Senator Ron Paul (R-KY) recently noted, the figures are deeply suspect anyway. One twenty-something listed as having died of COVID in Florida turned out, on closer examination, to have been killed in a motorcycle crash. In South Carolina, the state health agency admitted that the recent “spike” in deaths was simply the result of delayed reporting.

This is what makes it so especially disappointing seeing Trump wearing one of those masks. He ought to be taking a stand on this issue: signaling to the world that whatever Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates and the World Health Organization may say to scare us into cowering under our beds until Big Pharma can come up with an expensive vaccine, he Donald Trump remains on the side of the Ordinary Joe who refuses to wear one of those stupid muzzles unless there is compelling evidence that they’re going to make the slightest difference. And to blow the mask mandate out of the water is that hundreds and thousands of reports are showing-up that people who never even were tested are being reported: “confirmed COVID-19 infected!”

So who do we believe?

Currently, there is no such compelling evidence. We red meat conservatives love and respect our old folk at least as much as liberals do. (Probably more, actually, let’s be honest). But we refuse to be degraded by leftist elitists with emotionally blackmailing arguments about how, by not wearing masks, we’re putting these people at risk. If that were really the case, we’d all wear those masks, no problem. But it’s not the case: those masks are being imposed on us for the most cynical of political reasons which have nothing to do with public health. Shame on those of our brethren too ill-informed — or simply too hard-headed — to realize this.

So what do we do?

For this conversation, let’s put away any thoughts of wearing masks that can actually negatively impact the Pulse-OX levels in a person’s blood. That IS happening and can be very dangerous. Be that as it is, consider the scenario where we keep a mask in our cars, at our desks at work, or in our pocket or purse when we’re out and about. When we are going to be exposed to or in a group of people, or we go to the grocery store or a restaurant, we just pop the mask on. Certainly, we’re not going to be in that environment for an extended period of time, so the Pulse-OX issue will not become an issue. When we leave the populated area, we take it off.

What will that accomplish?

There are millions of Americans that have listened to Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Deborah Birx, local and even nationally acclaimed physicians that have amazing credibility all on television, social media, and speaking in groups telling Americans, “We must wear those masks because we are each COVID-19 dispensaries.” These normally astute, educated behemoths in Healthcare in saying this is simply expressing a personal opinion. And they shouldn’t be doing so! Why? Because NOTHING in science supports their allegations. And, yes, they are nothing more than allegations!

Don’t let this seem like an accusation or insult to your doctor. It’s not. It’s coming from science and is NOT diminishing in any way the veracity or credibility of any doctor. If it’s not true, why would they continue to say this again and again?

It’s simple. In my business, for thirty years we have dealt daily with doctors of all specialties, all degrees of practice, (sole practice, medical clinic, researchers, hospitalists, specialists, etc.) of every age, origin, ethnicity, and with various stages of medical education. They’re all different, BUT, they’re all the same in one way: they are experts at EVERYTHING, especially their trade: MEDICINE!

No, they’re not all narcissists and know-it-alls. But most are. To that end, they seldom accept even a remote possibility of being wrong, of not having critical information that they have personally researched or learned scientifically, but they seldom let their lack of specific knowledge of anything pertinent to anything in medicine stop their pontificating to all who listen what is little more than an opinion.

That’s a fact!

Ironically, all of the pushback I hear regarding the mask issue is about the purported rejection of science by those who reject mask-wearing. Logically thinking, however, doctors are certainly the folks who SHOULD know the science, SHOULD study all the controlled laboratory research on mask use that has happened exhaustively over the last ten to twenty years. I cannot answer for certain why they do not. But, obviously, if they demand all to wear masks using as justification for saying so that masks stop COVID-19 (or any virus at all), they are ignoring the science of the matter themselves.

Summary

So what should we do? I will NOT give you advice on the subject! But I HAVE read and heard hundreds of “experts” tell us that we must wear masks. I have also heard hundreds of “experts” tell us that we should NOT wear masks. And they all claim they’re referring to the “science” of the matter, but they never volunteer the “science” that supports that theory.

What should we do?

I’ll answer by telling you what I do: I’m one who keeps a mask handy. And when I’m going into a grocery store, restaurant, or some other public place expecting to face other people, I wear the mask. “If the science doesn’t support a need to do so, why do you do it at all?”

Good question. And there’s a good answer:

If I can keep one person — one 70-85-year-old person — from feeling a panic attack coming on when they see me at Kroger without a mask walking down an aisle toward them, I’ll voluntarily pay the price.

Does that make sense to you?

I’m all-in on that. But: there’s more.

What is tearing at my mind every day about this issue is this one thing: there obviously are people who really know the answers to this issue that refuse to share it with all Americans. Why does that bother me? Their doing so can only be for one purpose: to use fear for some political purpose. That can be the only REAL answer that makes sense.

I’ll close by saying this: Steve Rasmussen — a famous and very accurate national pollster — today reported about a poll just taken by his firm of 1000 Americans from every possible background and political affiliation. The poll asked this question: “How do you feel today about the state of our nation — economically, socially, etc. — but WITHOUT factoring into your feeling of well-being the state of politics?”

When tossing their feelings about the political state of our nation, 75% of those polled said everything’s OK!

My final thought for you is this: whether you know beyond any reasonable certainty that masks work or don’t work, consider wearing one for others. Fear is a horrible state in which to live at any time in our lives. But to be forced to live there regarding a medical condition with which many people have died makes life unnecessarily caustic and difficult. No one deserves to live there, especially not those the most vulnerable in the U.S. today.

So I’ll carry my mask around with me. And I’ll pull it out and harness up.

I just had this thought: what if the answer comes back from that constitutional expert that tells me these politicians DO have the right to force us to wear masks? Easy answer: I’ll already be doing so!

Think about it.

To Mask or Not to Mask: The Science According to Multiple Laboratory Reports

Take a look for yourselves: mask or no mask, what kind works, is there any damage in NOT wearing a mask.

Facts matter. We’ve seen and heard (and published) the “opinions” on this subject from very reputable people on both sides of the argument. We at TruthNewsNetwork don’t promote nor endorse either school of thought. We thought it best to provide you with scientific laboratory testing results so you can make your own decision.

Thanks!

Dan

A Writer from The ATLANTIC Claims Christians Feel President Trump Has Failed Them

An editorial published last week in The Atlantic began with this:

“White, conservative Christians who set aside the tenets of their faith to support Donald Trump are now left with little to show for it. The closest thing social conservatives and evangelical supporters of President Donald Trump had to be a conversation stopper, when pressed about their support for a president who is so manifestly corrupt, cruel, mendacious, and psychologically unwell, was a simple phrase: “But Gorsuch.”

The editorial struck me as odd, especially when it began with these assumptions and insults. It’s as if the writer has a perch in the Heavens that provides him a clear vision of everything Donald Trump thinks, feels, says, and pierces the reality of his mental status. I’m certain God could do that. I doubt a “contributor” named Peter Wehner at The Atlantic can.

This thought also struck me: “Who is this writer? How can the assumption of the thoughts of every social conservative be known to this editorialist? Did God author Wehner’s column? I seriously doubt so.

But what I know for certain is that true Christians — you know, those that pray daily, believe God’s Word is infallible, Jesus is the Son of God, He died for our sins, rose from death, and points His followers to make right decisions on everything in their lives — are NOT single-issue voters. And to insinuate so reveals far more about the columnist than of the targets of his story.

I proudly number among that last category. Even with the political things in D.C. that don’t exactly fit my picture of political perfection, I don’t park my brain and its biological discernment ability on the church pew when I leave the service. It goes everywhere with me. I assume (and am certain) the same is true of other Christians.

Wehner certainly didn’t speak to very many of the 60+ million Trump voters before penning this missive. If he had, he would have heard a vastly different synopsis of Donald Trump’s considerable accomplishments for not just Christians, but for ALL Americans. That list is far too long to include here. But you certainly can find a laundry list of his accomplishments as President that will take more than a few minutes to read and a day or so to digest. But Peter Wehner didn’t do that, or worse, did do such a look-see and then ignored his findings. Why would any reputable journalist dismiss such critical information? The answer is wrapped in one word from the previous sentence: “reputable.”

It is far too common to believe that most print editorialists have inside information (which Wehner claims to possess) that provides the truth of Trump’s ineptitude that justifies their inclusion in his editorial. But facts, understanding facts, and making educated and realistic conclusions from facts are not necessary must-have elements in most print or broadcast reports today. Wehner simply confirms his membership in a class of journalists void of any concern for the accuracy of their claims against this or any other President’s abilities.

What’s sad is this writer, like many others, presumes to own an unfettered right to foist onto Americans his personal fodder disguised as truth.  In reality, his claims are nothing more than leftist anti-Trump drivel. His doing so DOES enhance the animus held by many liberal minions against this President. Wehner justifies the absence in his piece of the opinions of the Christians he purports to “know.” That is an example of classic Leftist journalism today: bait and switch.

Wehner chose to use as support for his premise a recent Supreme Court case, Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. That case decided in mid-June in which the majority opinion, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, protected gay and transgender individuals from workplace discrimination, handing the LGBTQ movement a historic victory.

Wehner maintained that Gorsuch’s doing so was “a crushing blow for the religious right, and it must have dawned on more than a few of Trump’s evangelical supporters that if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency, the outcome of the case would have been the same; the only difference is that the margin probably would have been 7-2.”

How callous, how brazen, and how demeaning of Christians! Wehner, throughout his piece, used broad and sweeping assumptions about “Trump’s evangelical supporters” and what they feel about any Trump purported failures. Why was that case’s outcome so earth-shattering for Christians? I’ll assume here and say Wehner certainly did not ask any evangelical Trump supporter — certainly not me or anyone I know — how big a blow it was to their dream for this President to appoint a justice that ruled differently on this or any other issue which rebuffed the President’s wishes.

What other justification could any writer possess for their total denigration of the political appetites of 60+ million voters?

The truth is that NOT Wehner, NO other columnist at ANY newspaper, No broadcast journalist, No blogger or podcaster could possibly know the minds and hearts of ANY American without spending a massive amount of time conversing with not just one or two “social conservatives,” but with a few million of them. In this case, that didn’t happen.

Wehner did quote a conservative blogger named Rod Dreher — although Wehner never spoke to Dreher — claiming Dreher stated, “True, they (Supreme Court) have blocked some bad things over the years. That’s not nothing. But I think we’ve always known that judges are the real deal here.” Dreher continued, “Every institution — the media, academia, corporations, and others — are aginst us on gay and transgender rights, and GOP lawmakers are gutless. The only hope we had was that federal judges would protect the status quo. Now that’s gone.”

“If” Dreher really did say that, what he said was nothing more than a conservative American who, through a single SCOTUS decision, was disappointed to NOT receive his desired outcome. No doubt, many conservatives were too disappointed in that decision. Pardon me for assuming once again, but it is my opinion that few if any American feel it is possible for a majority of the justices to vote in support of conservative causes in every case that comes before them. Wehner apparently feels that because of what Dreher stated after the decision bashed the hopes of every Christian for this President to produce everything attempted in this presidency.

Wehner must think that all Christians are single-issue voters. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Without exhaustively recounting Trump’s wins for Americans, consider just a few:

  • Massive tax cuts for individuals and corporations;
  • The rollback of dozens of onerous regulations on energy companies and major corporations that incentivized previously vapid expansions, hirings of millions of new workers, and bringing manufacturers back to the U.S., something that his predecessor said was “gone forever” and would never return;
  • Undeniably massive new employment, plunging unemployment with the largest number of African Americans working than ever, and the highest labor participation rate in history;
  • Median household income is today the highest ever;
  • Regarding that Christian “single-issue” that Wehner claims is all that matters, Trump gave the biggest blow to Planned Parenthood in the last 30 years;
  • His tariff threats forced Mexico to stem the flow of illegals through the U.S. southern border;
  • He ordered the strike that killed Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi who had personally ordered the killing of hundreds of Americans;
  • He continues to appoint a record number of conservative judges to federal courts across the nation: 200 of those he nominated have been confirmed and are at work today.

We can stop there, but there are hundreds of others. It’s easy to conclude from facts without any assumptions that this President has done much more for Americans than just appointing two conservative justices to the Supreme Court.

Do you think Wehner really believes that Christians don’t care about all of this? Or does he truly think that millions of those who put Trump in the White House are turning away because a Supreme Court ruling on a case didn’t go their way? Accepting that requires a belief that Christian conservatives are too simple, single-minded, and blind to the issues that matter to EVERY American. And all those wins by this Administration dwarf those from his predecessor’s eight-year reign at the top.

The only thing proven in Wehner’s column is that Leftist members of the Media really are blind to the realities of the issues important to Christians. Abortion and LGBTQ issues are certainly important to them, but a call by the Court that goes the wrong way is certainly not an end-all. Trump’s accomplishments in total are monumental when compared to the accomplishments of the last three presidents combined.

After my response to Mr. Wehner, one question popped into my mind? Does he, or does any other writer, maintain that they represent the political hopes of Christian Americans? I think he really does. That alone explains the conclusions he reached sufficient to pen this column. He produced “fruit from a poison tree.” In this case, the tree from which originated the fruit he described was the tree of bias, partisan elitism, and Leftist ideology. That tree is certainly not embraced by any Christian I know. It’s certain that Wehner, if honest, would agree.

You will be shocked to learn that Peter Wehner is a Vice President and Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. “Ethics.”

Ethics is defined as “the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions.” After digesting Wehner’s assault on President Trump, Wehner destroys what that institution stands for. But that’s common for Leftist members of the Media. Truth is valuable only when it feeds specific political narratives. In this case, Wehner failed.

Feel Free to Download Peter Wehner’s article from The Atlantic. (Click on the link below)

https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Peter-Wehner.pdf

Play

Coincidence?

Some time things happen that cause you to just shake your head in disbelief: “How in the world do you think that could have even been possible? SMH!” Look at the picture of that little boy on the beach. He took his head off and dropped in the sand!

I think it is relatively safe to conclude this one thing: If something looks like it cannot possibly be actual or real, we almost always call it “a coincidence.” In actuality, if it seems like it cannot be genuine or real, it almost certainly IS NOT real! Another way of putting that is, “If it looks too good to be true, you can almost bet it isn’t true.”

These kinds of comparisons are prevalent in pretty much every part of our lives. If you google “coincidences,” you’ll get hundreds of examples of some of the strangest “coincidences” that often look real even though they are undoubtedly contrived. Most coincidences are not coincidences at all. Look at some of these pictures:

I doubt pretty seriously the girl actually painted grass all over her body and then put on a pair of cutoffs and a bikini top! I also don’t think that clouds are created with hot coffee and will sneak out of a coffee cup to spread across the sky.

Our world today is full of coincidences that each and everyone seems to be real. But we know IF we look close enough, we can see the attempted trick that is always included in each. I think the problem in America today is that too many people are content to just live at the 10,000-ft. Level instead of living at sea level. Two miles in the air, things look much different than they do at sea level. Because we all are prone to determine what something is based on OUR perspective of it in whatever surroundings we see it, we often ignore some of the tell-tale signs of the realities of things and happenings that we see in our lives every day. We take for granted in most cases that it appears to be legitimate, so it must be real!

Far too often, it’s NOT real at all. And that’s where our problems begin.

Can you Think of Any Coincidences in our World Today?

Oh my! There are far too many to count. But why don’t we do this: let’s list a few and breakdown a few of those so we all can understand that in 2020 (and in 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016), there were far too many coincidences to be casual occurrences simply. In reality, most coincidences are just plans that have remained hidden — until just the right time.

 

Coincidence #1: the Trump Family

Our coincidences began when someone came across some books on the office of Congress’ Library website. The books are called, “Baron Trump’s Marvelous Underground Journey,” and, “1900; Or, The Last President.” Both were written in the 1890s by Ingersoll Lockwood. The books themselves are real. But wait, it gets better.

The plot of the first book about Baron Trump includes the story about a young boy who finds a secret portal and time travels. Dan Evon of Snopes.com gives a great, in-depth description of the eerie connection. “There are some incredible connections to be made to the first family of the United States and Lockwood’s novels from the turn of the 19th century. For starters, the main character’s name is the same as President Donald J. Trump’s son, albeit spelled differently. Trump’s adventures begin in Russia and are guided thanks to directions provided by ‘the master of all masters,’ a man named ‘Don.’ Before leaving for his voyage through the unknown, Trump is told of his family’s motto: ‘The pathway to glory is strewn with pitfalls and danger.’” But wait, it gets even creepier.

Lockwood wrote a sequel series of novels four years after the initial publication of his first book. In his third novel, “1900; Or, The Last President,” things link eerily to the present day. The story begins with a scene from a panicked New York City in early November. It describes a “state of uproar” after an election in which an enormously opposed outsider is granted power—an outsider candidate. Sound familiar? After the chaotic scene in NYC, we find out that the man who won the presidency is extraordinarily wealthy and resides on 5th avenue. In case you did not know, the Trump Tower lives on 5th avenue.

We’re just getting started!

Coincidence #2: COVID-19

Wuhan, where the virus originated, just happens to be the location of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China’s only level 4 biosafety lab. Also curious is how quickly Wuhan purportedly became virus-free, and how other major Chinese cities such as Shanghai and Beijing weren’t affected. While the Chinese government quarantined Wuhan, the virus had already been around for months, potentially spread by Chinese New Year travel before the quarantine was placed. Yet the outbreak was quite limited and short-lived in China, unlike elsewhere, almost as if they were prepared.

Coincidence #3: from a Virus to Economic Disaster in Just Days

Just four months ago, Trump’s economy was on top of the world, literally. A booming stock market, strong economic growth, and record low unemployment was Trump’s first term legacy. What better way to derail a gangbuster economy than shutting it down due to a viral pandemic? It would be an ideal way to weaken a president ahead of an election. So what if there was collateral damage? Trump is the existential threat to the deep globalist state, and the ends justify the means.

A viral outbreak, whether hatched in a laboratory or a wet market, could have been a nuisance like past outbreaks. Yet this one was treated far differently, devastating world economies.

What a coincidence in timing.

Coincidence #4: Mysterious One Million Trump Tulsa Rally Tickets

The Trump Campaign gleefully announced for two weeks that their first rally since the start of the pandemic was quickly packed far beyond capacity: one million tickets had been snatched up! Who can forget what happened at showtime that Saturday night? When the television lights went on, the BOK Center in Tulsa looked to be not even half full. What went wrong? Where are all those who claimed those one million tickets?

As part of a coordinated effort, K-pop fans and teenage TikTok users scooped up tickets to President Trump’s rally in Tulsa, potentially leaving at least hundreds of empty seats, The New York Times reported. A tweet from the Trump campaign June 11th urged people to use their phones to register for the free tickets. The K-pop fans shared the information and encouraged their followers to get tickets, and then not show up for the rally. The plan quickly caught on on TikTok, where people followed the K-pop fans’ lead.

CNN credited Iowa grandmother Mary Jo Laupp with leading part of the charge on the video platform. She posted a TikTok video two weeks before the rally encouraging people to “go reserve tickets now and leave him standing alone there on the stage.”

We could spend your entire day listing coincidence after coincidence regarding numerous political events during this presidency. There are far too many to number. But there are some significant ones that we must share here to get you thinking and looking for more of this ahead of the November 3rd election. We’ll just list them in bullet points.

  • Was it a coincidence that the soap opera removal of the federal attorney of the Southern District of New York happened as it did and when it did? Geoffrey Berman was a powerful attorney who regularly dealt with high profile cases that involved some of the most influential people in Washington and elsewhere. Berman and Barr clashed multiple times over the handling of several different cases involving politics and even foreign governments. When Berman was ousted, CNN and other leftist media outlets accused Barr of sidelining Berman because he prosecuted Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen and an ongoing case against NYC former Mayor Guiliani. Those news outlets forgot that Barr was not the Attorney General when those cases happened. But there’s an odd coincidence that occurred immediately upon the firing of Berman. Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend and accused accomplice in Epstein’s sex trafficking business had been under surveillance by U.S. intelligence agencies living in a mansion in New Hampshire. Indictments of her were issued but were not executed UNTIL Berman’s termination. Is that a coincidence? It seems that Berman was connected to some high power Americans and foreign dignitaries that had been fingered as being complicit in the Epstein criminal activity. It was widely thought that Berman would have gone light on Epstein if he had not committed suicide and would undoubtedly have done the same in the prosecution of Maxwell. Immediately after his firing, agents arrested Ghislaine in New Hampshire. She has told the world she’s ready to talk. Who knows who and how many of these powerful men and women will be implicated by her testimony. Many thought with Berman handling the case, she would be coddled in her prosecution and might even have walked. Coincidence?
  • Let’s go back several years — to the early 60s. Lee Harvey Oswald was a loner, a political dissident who had close ties to Cuba and a Russian wife. He was not a fan of President John F. Kennedy. He was fingered as the lone gunman who assassinated the President in Dallas. Surprisingly, two days after Oswald was arrested, he was being moved to another facility. During the transfer, a man named Jack Ruby — a high roller and owner of a bar — mysteriously appeared in the basement of the Dallas police station, walked right up to Oswald. The latter was being escorted by several detectives to a car and shot and killed Oswald. It was later revealed that Oswald had terminal cancer and would not have lasted long. And Ruby knew about that before the shooting. Coincidence?

Summary

Let’s end this with some “today” coincidences. We’ll do these in bullet points as well:

 

Timing

  • Was it a coincidence that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was appointed by the president only to recuse himself from the Russia Collusion investigation almost immediately immediately?
  • Was it a coincidence that his successor, Rod Rosenstein, immediately appointed his good friend Robert Mueller as Special Counsel for that investigation shortly after Mueller had met in the Oval Office to discuss Mueller becoming FBI Director because of the firing of James Comey? (Rosenstein and Mueller are close friends and had worked together multiple times)
  • Was it a coincidence that Russia was (and still is) the focus of EVERY Democrat in Congress, every media outlet, every day regarding any news or discussions about election interference, which Russia preferred in 2016 to be President and the same thing for 2020? Did the fact that Hillary Clinton funded the production of a fake document that implicated then-candidate Donald Trump for massive wrongdoings in Russia? And why was that fact never revealed until after Mueller brought no Trump impeachable finding to Congress?
  • Was it a coincidence that shortly after the Mueller report, Democrats morphed immediately into Ukraine-Gate? It was to the surprise to many when revealed that former Vice President Biden had threatened to withhold U.S. aid to Ukraine if they did not first fire a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Biden’s son for financial wrongdoing. Was it a coincidence that before that alleged wrongdoing by the Bidens could be investigated, the Democrats found a way to turn that into an impeachment attack against President Trump. Coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence when immediately after the failure of the impeachment of Donald Trump, the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic was used by Washington to begin the systemic destruction of the greatest economy in World history? Not only did they use the fear of the unknown about the virus, but they also transitioned that into the necessary shutdown of the nation, unemployment of 40 million Americans with no certainty of the details, and the scope of the virus. Coincidence?
  • Was it multiple coincidences that the World’s foremost virologists and epidemiologists of the Centers for Disease Control were pushed on President Trump as the “experts” of how to handle the coronavirus? That happened to then only force Americans to make critical decisions every day based on faulty information that was wrong as many times as it was right. Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx were and still are so mixed up and unsure about what is valid, what is necessary, what is prudent, and what things are not that Americans today are still uncertain about what and who to believe. Coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence that the drug Hydroxychloroquine that had been prescribed for 60 years to treat malaria and other infectious diseases in America successfully? Dr. Fauci began trials for a coronavirus vaccine weeks before the first U.S. coronavirus case was confirmed. Was that a coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence that immediately upon notification that the pandemic looked to not be as critical as first thought that protests and demonstrations and racial unrest would sweep through the nation following the death at the hands of four policemen of one black man?
  • Was it a coincidence that the pandemic lockdown stopped the convening of grand juries in several criminal cases regarding the wrongdoing of many politically connected members from the Obama Administration? Many in the nation thought that Attorney John Durham would have begun releasing indictments in those cases long before the November election. It appears now not to be possible.
  • Is it a coincidence that Democrats are pleading for school systems around the nation to cancel classes for the Fall? One Louisiana state senator sent a letter today to the Lousiana Board of Education advising them to not only cancel school classes, but every athletic event, training, practicing, and anything else that involves close contact between athletes, but to make that mandatory for the entire 2020-2021 athletic season for all sports.

We MUST stop there! There are hundreds more. It’s amazing what creative people who have deep embedded anger and hatred for others can build from pure hatred. But we see it happen over and over again, all of which is certainly not coincidental. And few people today will even deny that there is no way for it to BE coincidental.

But don’t weary: we still have five months before the election. You can bet we’ll see many more coincidental things that happen on the national stage.

Stay tuned!

One Nation Under God

 

Will we continue to allow 2% of our population — elitists in Washington D.C. — control the 98%?

Remember: “Nothing Changes if Nothing Changes”

God Bless the United States of America!

Indemnification for the Big Social Media Platforms: Good or Bad?

If you haven’t been in Facebook or Twitter Jail at least once or have never had a post pulled down for “violating their social guidelines,” you are either 100% happy with everything in your life, someone who never posts anything on any social media site, or you can’t remember any of your passwords! One would think in today’s litigious world in which anyone can sue anyone for anything, most of which never result in a court victory but almost always end with a settlement, Americans would be standing in line with lawsuits in hand. Virtually every day, someone posts some craziness at every social site, lies, innuendos, and even untruths that impact the lives of millions of people who read and see those posts and just “assume” what they see is true. It’s similar to being in a crowd of people with an acquaintance named Jim you may not like, and you scream across the crowd to him, asking, “Hey Jim. Have you ever quit beating your wife?” Jim probably never DID beat his wife. But everyone in that crowd that knew Jim and heard you would automatically accept the inference you made as factual. And that’s just not right.

Social media is a different animal. And when federal laws were made to align with Federal Communication (FCC) broadcast issues, Zuckerberg was still in college, scamming all his buddies back East. Because of that and the misunderstandings of the First Amendment by most lawmakers, the Social Media companies armed with tens of millions of campaign dollars quietly visited the halls of Congress. They set the stage for their universal indemnification for ANY of the content posted on their sites. It didn’t matter if Donnie threatened with a tweet that he was going to gun down his next-door neighbor that night or posted on Facebook that his boss was out every night in drag picking up other guys from work, Congress gave both Twitter and Facebook indemnification for either of Donnie’s posts — regardless of their truth or any outcome of either post. That policy just opened Pandora’s box. And the last decade-plus has seen millions of posts that fall into this category or others that are way below acceptable in the minds of most people.

How did Congress facilitate this? They passed a law. This “covering” for the Social Giants comes from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from the 90s. Hey, that’s a lifetime ago in this age of technology. And Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snap Chat, and all the others have lived at the trough of complete immunity for themselves, stockholders, and employees for ANYTHING posted on their sites. It wasn’t until they each decided to forge into politics that saw ANY censorship of posts and pictures. No one told the giants to take any such actions. But owners and management decided they had social responsibilities to tackle politics. And grab that world they did.

To no one’s surprise, the mostly Democrat workers that populate the employee lists at these Silicon Valley companies decided to take a Democrat party tilt in their censorship of posts. How could they do that? It certainly seemed to violate the Freedom of Speech guaranteed to us all in the First Amendment. But they had a trick up their sleeves: they are privately owned companies! Therefore, they slide beneath the Constitutional restrictions that prevent censorship of words and writings. And they have had lots of fun!

But, enter Attorney General William Barr and the current Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice is aiming tech’s liability shield with a new set of legislative proposals released Wednesday. The proposed reforms are the latest action aiming to weaken legal protection established through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1990s-era law. The statute protects online platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter and Google’s YouTube, from being held liable for content their users post on their sites, and also allows them to moderate content in good faith.

The DOJ’s proposed reforms, which would have to be passed by Congress to go into effect, would limit the broad protections that Section 230 typically provides to the tech industry. Platforms could lose immunity if they facilitate or solicit federal criminal activity, like trafficking illicit drugs. It would also create carve-outs for child exploitation, terrorism, and cyberstalking, holding tech companies accountable for taking action on such content.

The proposal also would make clear that Section 230 protections cannot be used to dispute antitrust claims, a significant statement as the Justice Department is reportedly preparing an antitrust suit against Google for as soon as this summer. Facebook has also disclosed an antitrust investigation by the Federal Trade Commission.

“Changing significantly … the balance of responsibilities and provisions about liability in Section 230 would mean less speech of all kinds appearing online,” said Nick Clegg, Facebook’s vice president of global affairs and communications, in a call with reporters on Wednesday afternoon.

It’s unclear how much support the proposals will gain in Congress. Both Republicans and Democrats have argued that Section 230, which was initially envisioned as a way to protect upstart tech companies from a deluge of lawsuits, now appears outdated as it protects powerful companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

But while Democratic concerns have focused more on holding companies accountable for keeping users safe, Republicans have also emphasized alleged censorship of conservative voices. Tech companies have repeatedly denied that they censor political speech, but instances, where they have removed posts in error, have fueled such criticism.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), a former venture capitalist and a frequent critic of Section 230, said in a statement that he is wary of reforms brought by the Trump Administration.

“While I believe reform of this outdated law is needed, I have serious concerns that under the supervision of Attorney General Barr this effort has been politicized and will be used by the Trump Administration to cow platforms into allowing Trump, dark money groups, and right-wing militias to continue to exploit their tools to sow disinformation, engage in targeted harassment, and suppress voter participation,” Warner said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), another leading critic of Big Tech and Section 230, introduced a new bill that would require platforms to promise to act in good faith in their terms of service. That would open tech companies up to potential lawsuits from users claiming breaches of contract.

Last month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order instructing the Federal Communications Commission to write rules regulating how social media companies can remove content from their sites while maintaining Section 230 immunity, and encouraging the Federal Trade Commission to take action against companies engaging in “deceptive” acts of communication.

At the time, Attorney General Bill Barr indicated the DOJ would seek to sue social media companies and said Section 230 “had been stretched way beyond its original intention.” Barr held a forum at the DOJ earlier this year, inviting experts to weigh in on potential reform of the law. He told a gathering of the National Association of Attorneys General in December that the department was “studying Section 230 and its scope.”

A White House spokesperson said in a statement that “President Trump is pleased to see the department following through” on legislation modeled after the executive order.

Without legislative reform, little is likely to change. Courts have consistently upheld Section 230 protections under current law. Bills aiming to amend the law have already drawn tremendous pushback from the tech industry, which claims that cracking down on Section 230 will ultimately stifle speech since platforms will have to remove any content that might leave them open to legal repercussions.

The tech industry has also pointed out that Section 230 already allows tech companies to be held criminally liable for illegal activity. But the DOJ’s proposal would allow victims of online scams or child exploitation, for example, to pursue civil action against a platform if they believe the company had knowledge of the illegal activity and did not take steps to remove it.

Congress did successfully introduce reform to Section 230 in 2018 with the passage of FOSTA-SESTA. The pair of bills from the House and Senate aimed to crack down on online sex trafficking by creating a carve-out to Section 230 immunity for ads promoting sex work. While the bills gained broad support in Congress at the time, they have been criticized by sex worker advocates for making their livelihood less safe by removing websites where they would vet potential clients.

Summary

So what is the right way to go here? In my opinion, Congress should look around the world of business in this Capitalistic society. The founders of these tech giants rolled the dice, created start-up struggling companies by borrowing money, selling stock, putting what little money they had personally to get things going in their pursuit of the American dream. Each of them knocked home runs. They and their stockholders have billions of dollars in ownership equity, most of whom at the beginning invested virtually nothing compared to their worth today.

In the rest of the business world, there is a risk that goes along with reward. Congress gave the tech companies the green light to create a place for everyone on planet Earth to vent, say anything, represent anything, and even create and publish scams that have cost unwitting Americans billions of dollars through the year. Yes, law enforcement agencies have, in some cases, been able to find and prosecute some of these wrongdoers. But shouldn’t these companies like every other company in the U.S. bear some responsibility for their allowing anyone to say anything without those people or their content being investigated in any way for accuracy and truthfulness? John Smith’s Corporation is held liable to that principle. Why should Google, Facebook, and Twitter not bear the same responsibilities?

I’ll just offer a guess: maybe these companies have grown too large, have spread too wide, and while doing so have used their power and money to pushback the responsibility to lawmakers that supposedly watch over all of us to prevent con artists from scamming us.

Additionally, the Censors for these private companies don’t neglect to fulfill their partisan political agendas by grabbing posts and tweets of many who are from some other political ilk with which the techies do not agree and delete them, post warnings with those they let be published, or just simply put the poster in jail, restricting ANY posting for some arbitrary period of time. They can do it because they’re private entities.

The bottom line is this: “those who own all the gold are the ones that make all the rules.”

Throw Apple and Microsoft into the bunch (although neither is a social media monster), and the collective value of them together is about $4 Trillion.

I’d say that if they don’t own ALL the gold, they certainly own MOST of the gold!

Play

Something Strange Going On

Mario Murillo is a Pastor in Oakland who has for decades been at the forefront of ministry to people of all races, ethnicities, and nationalities. His voice has always been one of reconciliation between people who seem to have nothing in common.

“Let me bid a fond farewell to some of you who will read this. Because after some of you read this, you will not read anything I write, again.

There is no doubt that the actions of one police officer were heinous. There is no question that we should all be outraged at anyone who believes in murdering someone, simply because of the color of their skin. As a nation we must stand together to rid ourselves of the scourge of hatred.

But will the way we are going about it make any difference? And why are Christians acting weird?

Something strange is in the neighborhood: Christians and preachers who have yet to repent before God for a. grieving the Holy Spirit; b. for preaching an artificial Gospel; or c. for their silence on abortion and sexual sin are, instead, repenting for being white.

They are reading a script handed them from the Left. They are not repenting of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow Laws, or racist cops. They are repenting of whiteness.

Nazi’s hated Jews, not because of anything they had done, but merely for being Jews. How is this emerging idea about the crime of ‘whiteness’ any different? I don’t care who you are, do you want to sow that seed into the heart of your child? And where will it end?

This tactic is not new. Some years ago, feminist scientists decided that testosterone was evil. In other words, manhood is intrinsically evil. They actually had a plan for eradicating your husbands, sons, brothers, fathers, and grandfathers. The current term is ‘toxic masculinity’.

Does someone need to explain Marxism to you again? Leftists need to incite blind rage. Everywhere a Communist revolution has taken place, it was fueled by hate. It identified certain groups as deserving any and all punishment. Again, not for what they had ever done, but simply because of who they were.

Chinese Communism identified Christians as evil and slaughtered them. In other countries they slaughtered Buddhists. At this hour, a great horror is unfolding in India where hundreds of Churches are being burned and Christians are being forced to engage in animism.

How many ways can I tell you that leftists do not really care about you? They need you, as Americans, to be in such a blind rage, that you will not see what they are doing behind your back. For decades Democrats have had unquestioned power over our inner cities. You want to talk about supremacy? That is supremacy! And what have they done for those citizens? What became of the trillions of dollars sent to those places to improve them? Show me a city run by Democrats for decades, and I will show you a city in decay.

The Left, like locusts, move on to a new field after they have consumed the old field. Right now, the Left has set its sights on Latinos. That’s because there are more of us. Next, they will get us angry and grieved. They want Latino children to feel like victims. They will leave the Black community behind as soon as their votes don’t matter anymore.

What does all this anger and rage do to us? It causes inner city children to waste time—time they could use to build a future. Villains have forced them to put their lives on hold—to make them feel victimized—to enrage them to do acts of violence. And when that crime is permanently on their record, and when that moment of rage has ruined their chances for a career…do you think any of these Marxists are going to come around and fix their family?

But it is not too late! You can turn that pseudo-repentance into true repentance. God can expose the Left, the evil they are doing, and their long-term goals. Right now, America is sick of the division and the hatred—and they do not care anymore where that hatred is coming from. Americans do not want to replace old hate with new hate, or old racism for new racism.

The only force that is able to save America is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The only love that can stop the crushing cycle of oppression and hatred is the love of God. My dear brothers and sisters in Christ, now that you realize your need for repenting…for God’s sake, don’t repent for being white, repent for sinning against the Lord.”

 

Racism and “We, the People”

Here’s what I have not heard through the years in discussions of Racism: “What will it take to end it?” In this latest spate of racial discord, I’ve struggled desperately to unearth the answer to that question. I’m 66 years old, and I grew up in the South. I don’t remember ever hearing an answer to that from any leaders of any kind in the U.S. Why is that?

It seems logical to me that in the greatest and most prosperous country on Earth, there should be a groundswell of support to tackle Racism and to rid its existence in our country. Call me an optimist, call me a dreamer, call me a fool, but I think it can be done. But what would such a process look like? Who would have to be involved? Who would be in charge of identifying all of the things necessary to implement, how, and when they should be put in place, and who would determine all of the intricacies of that process?

Those questions are tough ones. I think the determination of those might individually be more robust than the process itself. But I’m going to take a stab at it.

Although I doubt any single person understands the totality of what such a daunting task will entail, I do feel there are collectively enough Americans who could together master a plan to eliminate this scourge of humanity. IF all the pieces were identified, debated, discussed, agreed to, and then put in place, it could be achieved.

Who?

At first thought, we would generally look to the government for guidance for a process this massive. The government has the resources of every type necessary for such big tasks. But I think this process is too big for the Government to manage. I think it should be attacked by the People. But who are the People that should drive this? In what timetable should we realistically expect to “get ‘er done?

I’ll answer those questions the only way I know how: “If not Me, then Who? If not now, then When?”

“Who” Requirements

Let’s face it: the government has, for a couple of centuries, been in charge of responding to the will of the American people to put the necessary infrastructure in place for the smooth operations of our country. Our forefathers structured that and then empowered through the U.S. Constitution for the People to control the “Who” in creating and operating our government. Sadly, however, much of the substance of the massive job of establishment and operation of the government has been relegated to a few. Sadder is the fact that the few have often been caught up in the power and control that comes with the job.

The government has ceased to be “Of the People, By the People, and For the People.” It’s at some point morphed into “Control of the People.”

At this point in our history, if we genuinely want to tackle the systemic problem of Racism, the government MUST be returned to the People. There are those who might argue that it is that today. However, if Americans carefully examine what that process is today, it is nothing as structured when the Constitution was penned.

Yes, the People elect Senators, Representatives, and the President and Vice President. Yes, Congress is the institution that, in representing us debates, revises, then sends to the President jointly approved measures to be signed into law. But that process has become so cluttered, so bloated, so unreasonable that most of the details of each law no longer come from the People but the legislators themselves. That must stop!

To that end, it seems reasonable to entrust the formation of this attack to the People rather than to Congress.

“How can that possibly be achieved? Constitutionally, Congress makes the laws. To change that would require at least one Constitutional amendment, and that is an almost insurmountable task.”

It will be a formidable task with formidable headaches, roadblocks, attacks, and specific revisions. But the American People have faced hard times, very tough foes, and egregious threats to our country. In each of these, the People have always prevailed. Why could the People not achieve that again?

The “Who” Structure

Let’s start with a concept today and build from there. That seems simple enough!

  • We have 50 states full of U.S. citizens. No two states or the Americans living within are identical. Diversity is everywhere, and that’s a good thing! Let’s make this process a 50-state group of “citizen representatives.”
  • Each of the states will select via an election ten citizens to represent their state in this battle against Racism.
  • None of those from any state can be an elected official at any level of government, a known activist member of any political group formal or informal, and will agree to receive NO compensation of any kind other than necessary direct travel and direct expenses as approved by the “Representatives,” but NOT to exceed direct expenses.
  • Each state group will meet and designate two of its elected members to serve on a national Racism Board. That Board will choose a group of five members to serve as the Executive team to initiate all actions approved by the Racism Board and the Citizen Representatives.
  • Representatives will immediately begin discussions (format to be determined) of how during a period of no longer than one year prepare a template for all Representatives to use to systematically address measures necessary to identify, plan for, and eliminate each revealed element of Racism currently living in the U.S.
  • For the purposes of time, the Racism Board will quarterly prepare and release to the general public a status report of the progress made in the development of this template.

The Template

What should be included in this template? Most will agree that it should be simple to identify the various areas in life in the U.S. in which racism exists. Those would certainly be included as well as others that will be identified through this entire process. What will certainly be a tougher task will be to determine the proper and realistic measures necessary to eliminate as many of these elements of racism once identified. To that end, it seems to be prudent to open this process up at this point to the total of each state’s representatives for discussion within their own group, followed by an electronic meeting (internet streaming seems realistic for that task) to update each state’s representatives’ findings with the entire Citizen Representative group.

In planning and the implementation of a timeline for this process, it seems prudent to pick a future target date for the completion of this entire process and work backward from there in the determination of each segment’s timing. However, the People of the United States will want to know the progress stage by stage, summaries of elements approved stage by stage and an expected completion date. Setting the date for the ultimate completion will be difficult. But in the nation’s glaring racial tensions we should all be aggressive at moving forward quickly. Two to three years will be a daunting task for completion. But if all involved will commit to that end AND all measures necessary to get there together, it CAN be achieved.

Summary

Before you scream at me about this, It CAN be achieved! It will take the incredible commitments of Americans of every race, every state, from every level of economic status and age group.

“Why not just let the government handle this? After all, they are already together with a complete structure conducive to the fulfillment of this task. Why complicate the process by starting from scratch?”

Why? The government has not done it! And Racism continues to expand and consume the bandwidth of freedom this nation needs to propel its citizens into a new and positive era of American history.

“What authority do YOU have to initiate such a process as this?” None. No one has asked me to do anything like this. I have not spoken to anyone about a process like this. I personally would love to initiate this process so that my grandchildren will face what if any of this enormous task remains when they take over my spot with a plan that has started the process, worked it into existence and revised as necessary to guarantee THEIR children that they will not be forced to face the evil of Racism because our generation did not act!

“If not Me, then Who? If not now, then When?”

This is just the beginning. I invite you to join me today from 9:00 AM until 10:00 AM Central for TNN Live streaming online from this site: www.TruthNewsNet.org. For one hour, we will discuss this process. And I will quieten, open up the phone lines and listen to YOU discuss your thoughts, your ideas, your questions, and your suggestions.

We will NOT resolve anything today! But what we WILL do is begin a conversation that is pointed at the accomplishment of one thing and one thing only: Destroy Racism in America.

How do you join in the conversation? At the top of the web page of the site, there’s a later blue banner that says “LIVE NOW: click to listen.” When you click that link, it will take you right to our show. You will be able to call toll-free at any time: 866-378-7884, or 866-37TRUTH.

We’ll probably have a busy phone. When you call if it keeps ringing, we’re talking live. Please call back in a minute or two. If it rings busy, the same is true.

To make this work, we MUST get started. To get started, we MUST hear from you.

We have tens of thousands of partners with us and join our daily broadcast. However, this is the time we ALL need to engage in the conversation. Do we have the answers? Nope. But we DO have suggestions just as you should. Engage with us during this process. We hope it will be a process in which thousands join. What will it look like at the end of the day? It will look just like what you, me, and other Americans want it to look like: hopefully to create a successful banishment of Racism.

Share this and join this conversation today!

Play

The Master “Electioneer:” George Soros

George Soros is 89 years old, but by gosh, before he dies, he’s going to see to the internal destruction of America.

At least that’s how it seems.

How else can we listen to his words in Davos, Switzerland, track his funding of American political races and pay attention to what he says about President Donald Trump, capitalism, and the leftist causes he backs and the leftist Open Society Foundations he runs, and come to any other conclusion?

In the last few years, Soros has taken to trying to take over local law enforcement agencies by pumping massive amounts of money into candidates he favors in key district attorney races.

“George Soros’ quiet overhaul of the US justice system,” Politico reported, way back in August of 2016. Soros was overwhelming with cash to support Democrats in local and state law enforcement. In my sleepy little town of Shreveport, Louisiana, Soros made a $250,000 donation to a Democrat Party PAC that supported an African American lawyer for the office of District Attorney. Not a U.S. Attorney or a state Attorney General — a local District Attorney!

“PAC funded by George Soros pumps nearly $1 million into local races for prosecutor,” The Washington Post reported in June, about the money from the Justice and Public Safety PAC that went to the left-leaners of both Arlington County, Virginia, and Fairfax County, Virginia.

“Soros Adds Intrigue and $800,000 to D.A. Race, Backing Progressive,” The New York Times reported in November.

The district attorney’s office is one of the first local lines of defense of the Constitution and the rule of law. That means the potential for immediate progressive impact is huge — and it’s an impact that can be had without all that costly political fighting over, say, a senator’s seat, or a Supreme Court slot.

Buying D.A. seats gives you good bang for the buck, in other words. And oftentimes, quietly, unbeknownst to those who might oppose.

That doesn’t mean Soros isn’t busily buying into congressional races, too. or the media. Or — and this, particularly in recent months — the grassroots.

Democracy Alliance, a nonprofit founded in 2005 to advance a progressive vision throughout America, and funded by wealthy elites, recently shifted its charitable giving strategy from think tanks in high-powered Washington, D.C., to small, mostly unknown groups in various communities. Why?

And Soros recently personally funded an $18 Billion donation to his 501(c)3 organization — one that is supposed to be a charity (according to IRS regulations) that is prohibited from participating in “electioneering!”

Think the IRS has called Soros to announce an impending audit?

Call it — once again — under-the-radar influence.

Politico in 2018 described the process: “Kevin Rodriguez, a 19-year-old aspiring singer in tight jeans and gray-and-white Nike high tops, had never heard of the powerful progressive donor group Democracy Alliance. But he is a key part of the secretive billionaire club’s plot to flip the Sun Belt. The donor clique, which counts George Soros and Tom Steyer among its members, is quietly giving funds to a handful of local grassroots groups like Rodriguez’s employer, Living United for Change in Arizona.”

It’s a strategy aimed at quietly taking down President Donald Trump, one “new voter in rapidly diversifying states across the southern U.S.” at a time, as Politico wrote.

It’s a strategy that skirts the enemy’s knowledge, and therefore, oftentimes, the enemy’s win.

And it’s a strategy that takes full advantage of dark money-type donations that are difficult to track and even more difficult to thwart.

It’s one thing for Soros to take his hatred of this president and his disdain for free market America to the public stage — as he just did in Davos, when he criticized Trump as a “con man” whose “narcissism” has turned “into a malignant disease,” as CNBC reported.

It’s another for Soros to slide, on the sly, his anti-American influences deep into America’s politics and culture. And now: education.

In Davos, he announced the infusion of $1 billion into a new Open Society University Network to fund schools around the world — to “educate against nationalism,” is how the Financial Times reported it.

In other words: to train the next generation in the evils of sovereignty — to teach the emerging youth how to become good obedient citizens of the world.

Soros calls it his “most important and enduring project” ever. No wonder. It truly could be. If successful, it could mean the collapse of borders, the implementation of world government, the end of America as we know it.

If children are the hope of the future, America’s children must be educated on the greatness of America — before it becomes too late and America, as a sovereign nation, hasn’t any future at all.

The Man

George Soros — born György Schwartz in Budapest on August 12, 1930 — escaped from his home country after World War II and put himself through the London School of Economics and eventually earned a Master’s degree in philosophy.

His career in the financial world really began with his first hedge fund, Double Eagle, in 1969 and in 1970 formed Soros Fund Management, later known as the Quantum Fund. He gained notoriety in the early 1990s for shorting the British Pound, leading the country into Black Wednesday in 1992 — and adding $1 billionto his wealth in the process.

Though he was active in European philanthropy — including in his home country of Hungary — during the 1990s, Soros’s foray into U.S. politics didn’t start until the 2004 presidential election when he gave John Kerry $20 million in his run against George W. Bush.

He also helped fund the liberal think tank Center for American Progress and MoveOn.org — and he started talking openly about conservatives, saying that the U.S. would have to experience “a certain de-Nazification process” once Bush left office.

Soros also backed President Obama during his first election, but told the New York Times that Obama was “actually my greatest disappointment” because he never asked for Soros’ advice.

“He made one phone call thanking me for my support, which was meant to last for five minutes, and I engaged him, and he had to spend another three minutes with me, so I dragged it out to eight minutes,” he told the Times. “He was someone who was known from the time when he was competing for the editorship of The Harvard Law Review to take his supporters for granted and to woo his opponents.”

Soros donated $25 million to Hillary Clinton and other democratic causes during the 2016 election — and he’s often accused of silently backing everything from the 2017 Women’s March and the Occupy Wall Street protests. He did provide millions to the Women’s March through his Open Society Foundations, but didn’t pay people $300 to show up.

But though he’s supported his opponents, Soros is complimentary of President Donald Trump, telling the times that he was “very afraid” that he’d “blow up the world,” but is pleased with how he’s reached out to Kim Jong-un and North Korea.

“I think the danger of nuclear war has been greatly reduced, and that’s a big relief,” he said.

But don’t expect the answer to “who is George Soros supporting politically” to turn to conservative candidates. He’s predicting a Democratic landslide in the 2018 midterm elections.

Trump is a “purely temporary phenomenon that will disappear in 2020, or even sooner,” Soros said.

Summary

There’s plenty of irony in that those in the American Left — especially Hollywood’s Left — personally demean the wealth of capitalism while building huge mansions and piling up millions in the entertainment industry. It’s OK for them to do so, just not you or me.

That irony stretches into politics. It’s always been laughable to me to watch and listen to a spoiled group of artists, musicians, actors, and their “clingers-on” demean every person who disagrees with them personally. And in doing so they always claim they are individuals who are deep thinkers who “know” what’s right and what’s best. How could everyday Americans be so gullible as to think our lives are significant in any way — especially when measured against their lives!

Soros is “their” guy.

I’ll stop here: there’s too much irony and hypocrisy to even read through this story yet alone life through it.

They just don’t get it.

But here’s what they DO get: including Soros. Capitalism in conjunction with our Representative Republic is the antithesis to the beliefs of these elitists. They continue to pedal their cries for socialism: “The rich are evil. We need to tax them from their financial class and take that money to distribute among the plebes!” Yet, many who make those cries don’t realize that within that espoused philosophy is the seizing of THEIR accumulated wealth to do just that: distribution.

But those cries are NOT cries that come from Soros. He sees a grand and mighty autocracy that will look at these Hollywood and east coast “Elite Waanabes” as scum not worthy of membership. Soros is European. He knows how to pacify the masses while coddling elitist hangers-on.

Neither class will ever pass muster. But the autocrats handpicked by a paltry few will pass right by those wishers and hopers on their way back to World political domination at the hands of — you guessed it — Marxism.

The IRS SHOULD be auditing Soros and his 501(c)3. But I’m certain that will not happen. The word is that the IRS Director wants a seat at the Soros table.

That’ ain’t gonna happen either!