Besides a 2020 VP Candidate with Joe Biden, Who is Kamala Harris?

Everyone has heard: former Presidential Candidate and now Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) has joined Joe Biden on the Democrat Party ticket as the vice-presidential candidate. Most had Biden’s VP-choice narrowed to Harris and former UN Ambassador and Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Months ago, TruthNewsNetwork predicted that Sen. Kamala Harris would win the Democrat Party presidential nomination. We missed it — by one spot!

What does Harris mean for the Democrat Party? What does her joining Joe Biden on the ticket mean for Democrat voters? Does Harris bring anything to the table to help Biden win the election?

All of these and other matters will be discussed extensively and consistently over the next few days. But by next Monday, Harris will be little more in the public eye than Biden’s VP pick. So let’s get to know Kamala Harris.

We are not going to dive into the minutia of her history. Instead, we will detail elements of her public service, conversations, interactions with others in the public sphere, and where her specific political stances on various issues related to the American electorate stand on multiple issues. After all, even though she’s been in public service, most Americans know little about her politics.

We’ll begin with some bullet-points that include multiple situations in which the Senator has made several personal political perspectives known. There are far more points than just these listed below. But this a point for all to understand where and on what issues Sen. Harris stands. After all, she, as all other Vice Presidents would, if the Biden ticket is chosen in the election, will be at all times just one heartbeat away from holding the highest office in the U.S. Let’s get started.

Let’s Bullet-Point ten things you may or may not know about the Senator

1. As both a district attorney and state attorney general, Harris pushed for a new statewide law that lets prosecutors charge parents with misdemeanors if their children are chronically truant. “We are putting parents on notice,” she declared. “If you fail in your responsibility to your kids, we are going to work to make sure you face the full force and consequences of the law.”

3. Harris also has been a strong advocate of civil asset forfeiture. She supported a bill in California that would have allowed prosecutors to seize assets before initiating criminal proceedings — a power now available only at the federal level — if there were a “substantial probability” they would eventually initiate such actions. Besides cases involving violent crimes, the legislation allowed seizures in cases involving such crimes as bribery, gambling, and trafficking endangered species. Harris endorsed the bill after then-attorney general Eric Holder sharply limited civil asset forfeiture among federal prosecutors. She argued that the practice gave local and state law-enforcement officials “more tools to target the illicit profits [of transnational criminal groups] and dismantle these dangerous organizations.”

4. As San Francisco district attorney, Harris created “Back on Track,” an anti-recidivism program that she expanded as state attorney general. The program received $750,000 in federal funding and quite a bit of praise from crime-policy experts. But it faced criticism early in its history, when illegal immigrant Alexander Izaguirre, who had pleaded guilty to selling drugs, was selected and graduated, only to grab a woman’s purse later and run her down in an SUV, severely injuring her.

As the Los Angeles Times put it, “Harris’ office had been allowing Izaguirre and other illegal immigrants to stay out of prison by training them for jobs they cannot legally hold.” Harris said she had been unaware that Back on Track had been training illegal immigrants and that they would no longer be eligible for the program.

5. In 2012, Harris submitted a brief supporting an illegal immigrant’s application for a law license. In 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled in the immigrant’s favor, even though the California State Bar’s rules state that it is disqualifying professional misconduct to commit a criminal act.

6. In her first speech on the Senate floor, Harris declared, “An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.” She later avowed the belief that illegal immigration is “a civil violation, not a crime.”

This classification applies to only a portion of those in the country without permission. First, entering the country illegally has criminal penalties. Overstaying a visa is considered a civil violation, not a criminal one, with deportation as the appropriate penalty. But reentry without permission after deportation is a crime, as is, in most cases, working in the United States without legal residency, since it almost always involves some falsification of documents or lying on work forms under penalty of perjury.

7. Harris’s reputation as a tough prosecutor has played a key part in her political rise, and she continues to tout the high rate of felony convictions on her watch. But in 2010, SF Weekly reviewed the work of her office and concluded that “felony convictions for cases that go to trial and reach a jury verdict — a comparatively small group that nevertheless includes some of a district attorney’s most violent and emotionally charged cases — have declined significantly over the past two years.” The review found that in 2009, San Francisco prosecutors “won a lower percentage of their felony jury trials than their counterparts at district attorneys’ offices covering the 10 largest cities in California,” and San Francisco’s rate dropped further in the first quarter of 2010. Harris’s 71 percent conviction rate on felony cases had been boosted by a significant increase in pre-trial plea agreements.

8. In October 2017, Harris declared that she would rather shut down the government than vote for a spending bill that did not address the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and ensure those covered by the program would not be deported. “I will not vote for an end-of-year spending bill until we are clear about what we are going to do to protect and take care of our DACA young people in this country,” she said. And she has kept her word, at least so far.

9. In April 2018, Harris urged the Senate Appropriations Committee to “reduce funding for beds in the federal immigration system,” reject calls to hire more Border Patrol personnel, and “reduce funding for the administration’s reckless immigration enforcement operations.”

10. In 2010, a California Superior Court judge declared that as San Francisco district attorney, Harris had violated defendants’ rights by hiding damaging information about a police drug-lab technician and was indifferent to demands that the lab account for its failings. The crime-lab technician had been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence in 2008; district attorneys are obligated to hand over to the defense information about prosecution witnesses that could be used to challenge their credibility. Prosecutors’ failure to disclose the information about the technician led to the dismissal of more than 600 drug cases.

11. Before she was serving the people of California as a senator, Harris served as the state’s attorney general. As attorney general, Harris had to enforce California’s laws as written, but she also used her position to advocate for policies she felt would keep her constituents safe.

12. Formerly as California’s Attorney General she supported immigration laws that though controversial had to be enforced — even that which required the reporting of illegal juveniles to ICE, which flies in the face of sanctuary cities. As a presidential candidate, her story changed. She encouraged all federal, state, and law enforcement members to NOT cooperate with ICE on anything that goes against the concept of sanctuary cities and supports deportation of illegals — a “Switch-A-Rooskie.”

Then during a radio interview with “The Breakfast Club,” Harris claimed that she smoked pot when she was younger and that any claim that she opposes full marijuana legalization is “not true.” But, in her 2014 campaign, her Republican opponent for attorney general, Ron Gold, was very public about his support for full legalization of pot. Harris was not on the same page. When she was asked about legalization by KCRA in 2014, she laughed at Gold’s stance and said he was entitled to his opinion. Her presidential campaign may have been pro-pot, but her time as attorney general certainly wasn’t.

13. During an interview with CNN shortly after her presidential announcement, Harris told host Jake Tapper that America should “eliminate” the private healthcare system. “Let’s eliminate all of that,” Harris said of the private health insurance industry. “Let’s move on.” BUT, according to CNN, “as the furor grew” toward her plan to ban private healthcare, her team announced that she is open to keeping a market system.

Harris has also done the old “Switch-A-Rooskie” on a required investigation of cops involved in killings and on mass incarceration.

14. As U.S.Senator for California, in a confirmation hearing of one federal judge, Harris delved into religious matters. Harris, in her questions to the nominee, called the Knights of Columbus “an all-male society” and asked the Nebraska lawyer if he was aware that the group was anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage when he joined. The California senator also referenced Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson’s statement that abortion amounted to “the killing of the innocent on a massive scale” and asked Buescher if he agreed with the statement. Buescher responded that his involvement in the group consisted mostly of charitable work and community events at his local Catholic parish. He indicated he would abide by judicial precedent regarding abortion.

Summary

Today, Sen. Harris needs NO ONE to answer questions for her about anything in her public record. Facts speak for themselves. And in the weeks to come, Americans will see and hear her on a number of issues important to each of us. And each American who votes will decide if she and her running mate are the match that can and will be best to lead the nation.

What shocked me when this decision was announced is my realization of just how far Left the Biden/Harris ticket will be for the Democrat Party. Think about it: less than a year ago, Joe Biden was considered among all of those 24 Democrat Party presidential candidates as the lone representative of the moderate center of the Party. Now, with Biden’s embrace of the Green New Deal, Medicare-for-all, free college tuition along with the cancellation of student debt and a strong move back into international agreements with Iran and the Paris Accords, the selection of Harris to reinforce the ticket proves Joe Biden is no longer a moderate in any way. He has joined the ranks of Leftists with Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

It’s going to be interesting (and I think it’ll be fun) for the next 80 days or so to watch Democrats with faux glee try to get everyone excited about “their” ticket. It probably will be hilarious to hear the things they allege about the good Biden and Harris will do for the nation after the pair is inaugurated.

The Democrats only hope now is to get their party members out to vote. In this pandemic, that’s going to be hard to do. So they’ll resort to the worst possible political tactics: they’ll everyday present the vilest and nastiest campaign attacks possible directly at President Trump. And specifically for that purpose, their VP pick is a perfect choice. If you don’t think so, just go to YouTube and watch some of her viciousness in Senate Judiciary hearings as she grills Attorney General Barr, Jeff Sessions, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh in his Supreme Court confirmation hearing.

I think two things are certain: the anti-Trump attacks, which have never gone away, will only amplify from the Media talking-heads and intensify daily. Harris and Biden will just add their two-cents to the media rhetoric on cue. President Trump must tamp-down his rage and furor and refuse to fight back.

Of those two things, I doubt the second is even possible!

But one thing of which I’m pretty certain: Kamala will do her best to irritate the President daily by making continual outlandish allegations. The Biden media lapdogs will follow her around and give her 24/7 camera time. For that reason, she was the correct VP pick over Susan Rice. Rice isn’t a fighter. Harris is not just a fighter, she’s a fighter who cannot stand to lose and seldom does lose.

My pick about the fight result? She won’t be the fight loser: Trump will be the winner ,and Biden will go back to the basement.

Play

“Nothing Changes If Nothing Changes”

I heard that line for the first time at a Men’s Conference in New Mexico in March. Steve Smotherman — who pastors the largest church of any brand in New Mexico — stated that in a presentation to attendees. I thought it through. Until then I had never considered it, but it certainly IS true.

The purpose of the statement is obvious: men and women alike are always wanting things to change and get better — for themselves, family members, and others around them. But it makes perfect sense to believe that no change of any kind will happen to anyone without something that is causing present circumstances that create the undesired results changes. It just makes sense.

Know what? The same holds true in American politics.

American politics is just getting old. Donald Trump and Barack Obama were both elected to instigate changes in the country, specifically the things originated during the Bush and Clinton dynasties. But after eight years of Obama, very little had changed at all. He did make some minor changes, most of which have been eliminated by Donald Trump. Frustrated from the lack of change, voters ran to a more radical alternative in 2016 — Donald Trump.

Now, everyone knows for certain voters are about to kick Donald Trump to the curb in November because they want MORE change than he has offered. At least that what polls are saying. Polls are always right, right? If that DOES happen, voters are NOT going to get a real agent of change to replace Mr. Trump. They are going to get another old guy — one that was at the top of the Obama eight-years of same old same old: Joe Biden. Biden is little more than a 77-year-old former vice president. And his political history shows very little if any accomplishments which give Americans any promise of anything new happening during his presidency. All the issues in foreign policy and domestic matters that opened the door to Obama and Trump have NOT been solved — well, most are still around. Yes, before the “Corona-demic” of 2020, the economy had zoomed and held steady for several years. But where it will head and when is still up for grabs.

We’re still in Afghanistan and Putin still dominates Russia and every state around it. Xi Jinping still controls every aspect of the lives of 2 billion Chinese Communists while North Korea and Iran are still hunting nuclear bombs — if they don’t already have them — ready to aim at Washington.

The Democrats are little more than a tired group of old folks picking out songs to sing in the dining rooms of their rest homes. Forget Biden — consider the oldest ever Speaker (80-year-old Nancy Pelosi), and an even older House majority leader (Steny Hoyer, 81) and the third, eighty-year-old majority whip (James Clyburn, 80). House Republicans are MUCH younger — except for leadership. The Senate boasts the leadership of 78-year-old Mitch McConnell. Then there’s President Trump, age 74, who is just a baby compared to the others.

What hammers D.C. leadership in both Democrat and Republican parties more than age is the lack of political substance in both parties. There’s been very little “new stuff” offered to the nation by either. Obama thought he would light a match under the do-nothing Democrats. But he too brought symbolism at best with NO substance. He recycled a few things: Romney’s healthcare plan from Massachusetts and a few of Bush’s foreign policies.

Both of their second terms were void of anything substantive except for one thing: they each made the balance of their lives VERY financially rewarding. And that was not from just the lifetime salaries given to ex-presidents.  Trump may have been old by the numbers, but he was sharper and more ready to go with his past accomplishments than any of the others. And even though his first couple of years saw amazing economic achievements for the nation, there’s this thing called “Congress” that roadblocked most of his legislative desires after a quick start.

If Biden takes over, it will be just another oldster in the White House. If Trump succeeds in winning four more years, he will face the exact same roadblocks he’s faced since November of 2016, except MORE roadblocks and much more aggressive targeting of him and his administration at every turn. Democrats and Democrat Party leadership hate him for two reasons: he beat Hillary in 2016 which destroyed their imagined Socialist Utopia planned by Hillary Clinton. Then, he made dramatic economic plans that succeeded — at least until COVID-19 swooped-in to give them some 2020 hope.

There’s an eerie comparison between Trump’s populist victory and Brexit in Britain, both in 2016 and both against conservative parties. Britain’s David Cameron was in power in the U.K. in 2016. He was NOT in favor of Brexit and stood firmly against it. Britain had turned to populism just as the U.S. had that resulted in Trump’s victory. Cameron was ousted in favor of Brexit backers. Cameron’s replacement — Theresa May — was also against Brexit, and now she’s gone!

In the U.S., Trump and American populists had to not only tackle Hillary Clinton Democrats but had to overcome a massive mountain of opposition from RINO’s from the Republican Party — “Republican in Name Only.” That group was galvanized by the Bushes, Romney, and a boatload of establishment Republicans who had built a ship in D.C. that was purposed to not do anything that would “rock the boat.” Their idea was “every party will lose sooner or later. The smart way to govern is to simply do the minimum for YOUR party in legislative accomplishments to keep voters happy. That way when the other party eventually wins (which always happens), you will not have done too much to them so as to enrage them so much so that you and your party lose ALL your power.”

At this late stage of Trump’s first administration, it’s odd that traditional members of the Republican Party in Congress have not en masse embraced his populism. It’s obvious, however, that grassroots Americans HAVE done so. Those are the ones in large from southern and midwestern states along with voters from blue states that jumped aboard the Trump Train because of his promises to bring jobs back, which he did. Middle-Class Americans have basked in the success of lower taxes, virtually zero unemployment, skyrocketing income from new and recycled manufacturing operations, and the re-establishment of factories that fled with jobs and money under Obama. But Republican “politi-Hacks” continue to just sit with crossed-arms waiting for the next change. And they really don’t care about any short-term effects of a looming Trump loss in November. They are comfortable at just sitting this next presidency out, waiting for their turn to make waves once more.

They, of course, assume that if Trump loses, a Biden administration that will surely be managed by Democrats who share the same “boat-rocking” philosophy as theirs, will do nothing major. They’ll just calmly sit by and do very little in the way of changes. But they are really missing it!

What’s going to happen in November?

“Nothing Changes if Nothing Changes”

Democrats believe — including Democrat Party leadership in the House and Senate — that American voters are so enraged about what they see as a failure on the part of President Trump to address the “serious” challenges facing Americans that they’ll throw him out. What are the challenges per these Democrats? Racism, White Privilege, Elitism, economic inequality, unfair immigration policies, and a host of other leftist causes. Of course, they have given no thought to any of the impressive achievements during this administration, achievements like massive tax cuts on individuals and businesses, the overturn of dozens of onerous regulations that under Obama when implemented crushed the American economy, closing the southern border and forcing Americans to abide by the Rule of Law. We could go on and on. But under this party’s leadership, none of that matters. All that matters is what drives the ship named “U.S.S. Democrat.” THEY drive the ship. And THEY decide who gets to board. Donald Trump just screwed all that up!

Here’s what both RINOS and establishment Democrats are missing: the 63 million Americans who elected Donald Trump in 2016 almost all agree with the Trump Agenda and accomplishments. And, it appears, there are a plethora of others who have signed on to that same belief.

“Wait a minute: don’t you read the polls?” Yep, as I’m sure you do too. I read all of the polls that YOU read, plus a few more. I see where some polls show Biden ahead of Mr. Trump by double-digits with only one that I can find that shows Trump leading: and that’s by just one point. I remember election morning 2016 when only one poll that day showed Trump had any chance to win while 40+ national polls showed Hillary winning in dramatic fashion.

There’s another poll that I read. It’s the one that shows that 66% of Americans are afraid to share their political opinions when asked by anyone. Who are they? They’re certainly not the mainstream Democrats who take pride in not only answering questions asked about their political beliefs, but enjoy getting in the faces of whoever asks the question. No, most if not all of this 66% are conservatives along with some establishment Republicans and probably even some Democrats who don’t want another four years as they had under Obama and Biden.

Believe it or not, most Americans really enjoyed the pre-COVID American economy under Trump. Biden with Obama showed us all NOTHING remotely similar to what we’ve basked in under Trump.

Yeah, he’s just an old guy. But the old guy got it done well during the last four years. Just imagine what more can get done if Democrats will leave him alone in the next four years. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a Congress that would do just what they committed in their oaths to do: make laws and make sure everything is OK with Americans?

Play

“white” Folks Ain’t Woke — Until Now

Just when we get to the point where we in America think we have things all together and we understand everything, we don’t. Just when we think we’ve reached a point where everyone knows how to address people of every race, ethnicity, religion, economic status, we don’t. But God knows we certainly know what it is to be Woke! You are not going to believe this, but the “real” journalists in our media have just turned the corner on exactly how to prove one is Woke: it’s how you spell two critical words in the English language.

What you are about to read will probably turn your face red — if not red then white, and your temperature will skyrocket. But here’s a critical promise you MUST make before continuing to read: don’t stop reading until you get all the way to the end! If you will not commit to that, simply click off this story and go to CNN or MSDNC online! It’s a story written by a reporter named Jarvis Dupont. We’ll tell you about Mr. Dupont at the completion of his offering to us all today. (Don’t forget: you MUST read all the way through)

Jarvis Dupont

The Associated Press — without question the oldest and formerly most reputable national newsprint disseminator — recently posted an announcement on their website detailing their decision to capitalize the “B” in Black when used in the context of race and culture.”These changes align with the long-standing capitalization of other racial and ethnic identifiers such as Latino, Asian American, and Native American,” writes AP’s Vice President for Standards, John Daniszewski in a blog post on the AP website.

The following day a further announcement was made explaining why they had taken the decision to continue to use a lowercase “w” in “white” when used in the same context.

Predictably, this has upset a lot of white people (or as I like to call them “racists”) who obviously cannot understand that when it comes to race, they really need to stay in their lane and get used to not “capitalizing” (haha!) from the labor of Black and Minority Ethnic people.

“There was clear desire and reason to capitalize Black,” explains Daniszewski in a second blog post. “Most notably, people who are Black have strong historical and cultural commonalities, even if they are from different parts of the world and even if they now live in different parts of the world. There is, at this time, less support for capitalizing white. White people generally do not share the same history and culture, or the experience of being discriminated against because of skin color.”

What John Daniszewski is saying here is that white people come from a wide range of cultures and social backgrounds, whereas Black people are one homogenous group with the same outlook and experiences and only one distinct identity: Black. Every Black person I know enjoys rap music and supports Black Lives Matter. I am fairly sure of this. When it comes to white people, their likes and dislikes are all over the place. You just can’t pin them down to anything specific. It’s like trying to nail ants to a wall. Horrible mess.

“We agree that white people’s skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to robustly explore those problems,” Daniszewski continues.

From this, we can deduce that although white people come from many different cultures and backgrounds and experience no meaningful shared experience regarding their skin color…they DO share a propensity towards slave-ownership, white privilege and racism due to their, well, skin color. This makes perfect sense. white people benefit universally from Black slavery, they each have a duty to accept and dismantle their white privilege, they need to recognize the injustices that their lack of melanin have brought against Black people and strive to make amends. Only last week I made my grandfather go to his nearest KFC and apologize to any Black people he came across (apparently they can’t get enough of fried chicken which is another shared experience of theirs) for the death of George Floyd. He’s 83 and suffers from dementia, so he ended up telling a black Labrador that he killed George Foreman. The Labrador didn’t seem to pay him much heed but I still feel this was a valuable step towards making reparations.

So with all this in mind, I fully support the non-capitalization of the word ‘white’ when used in conversations surrounding race issues. white people need bringing down a fair few pegs, and this would be a damn good start. In fact, I think it would benefit us greatly if we took this a bit further and have outlined a few suggestions for a less white-oriented society:

  • Petition paint companies to not capitalize the word “white” on any of their products;
  • Create a typeface that automatically makes the “w” smaller when used before the letters “h”, “i,” “t,” and “e;”
  • Get rid of the “w” altogether so that the term “hite people” contains fewer letters than “Black people;”
  • Force editors to print the word “Black” in gold lettering on all magazine and newspaper articles, and have the word “white” handwritten in cheap crayon;
  • Completely remove the word “white” as a descriptive term, so that when we are discussing matters of race, the conversation becomes centered on “people,” and “Black people.”
  • Capitalize every letter in “Black” on everything everywhere to address the inequality and oppression BLACK people deal with every day.

I feel confident that we will begin to make huge strides towards true racial equality once we learn to treat people differently according to our preconceived notions regarding their skin color, and I would like to thank the Associated Press for taking that first brave step.

Summary

No doubt at some point during the Jarvis Dupont story you felt some disgust, probably some anger, and certainly screamed at your computer screen. You probably thought something like this: “How can this guy — and how can the Associated Press relent to the ‘Woke-Mongers’ and bow to the Black Lives Matter and do something so trivial which is nothing more than symbolic at best with NO substance?”

Jarvis Dupont

I’ll answer your question and give you some context this way: Jarvis Dupont is a fictional character who is either “a” person or “some” people who via Twitter have in large part headed this Social Justice Culture that pretty much totally controls the United States! Supposedly, Jarvis, fake-pictured to the left, is a transgender woman who exclusively uses Twitter to spread the LGTBQI, Woke, BLM, message using racial, ethnic, and bigotted language.

The Associated Press decision to, in all reports, keep the word “white” lower-case while capitalizing “Black” is true. USA Today and its network of 260 media outlets announced the plan to do the same last week. NBC News, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Sun-Times are expected to follow suit quickly.

I could rant and rave about every part of this: the use of a fake transgender Twitter character, lighting ANOTHER fire of racial anger spelling “Black” and “white” in all reporting to disparage all white people, certainly pours gasoline on an already raging inferno.

Isn’t this what the U.S. needed in the shadows of the vilest racial violence and political upheaval of the last 50 years? It’s as if some political terrorist leader sitting at a table with henchman having a beer and laughing said, “What else can we do to create news to perpetuate the already existing hatred, anger, and divisiveness so this chaos will continue and even get worse? Hey, let’s think of something we can get Jarvis to dump on Twitter that will take this to an even higher level!”

Maybe that terrorist leader is Jarvis Dupont! Maybe, it’s George Soros or Barack Obama or Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin. Heck, it might even be Hillary. But whoever it is and whatever their plan is it has certainly succeeded so far. The fires of hatred and anger burn brightly in many of our major cities. Sadly, it appears that REAL violence might break out quickly in deadly fashion.

Play

“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

Is it Too Late for a Trump 2020 Victory?

Donald Trump is trying to break through a 2020 wall.

By January 2019, after over three years of failed efforts to impeach him, sue him, indict him, and destroy him, the left had failed. The economy was booming. Trump’s tweets were mostly bragging about his accomplishments. And the left was dumbfounded that both impeachment and Mueller had only made Trump stronger.

Then came an unexpected trifecta catastrophe — plague, a quarantine-induced recession, and a leftist cultural revolution in the streets. Suddenly, the left saw all of that as a gift that might succeed where its own self-constructed melodramas had failed.

By late May, Trump’s polls had dived.

His enemies declared this time he was really, actually, truly finished. Never-Trumpers hit the media to boast they were finally redeemed.

The discredited pollsters of 2016 reemerged, this time even convincing once-burned, never-again Las Vegas bookies that Trump was toast. Leftists, depressed over the progressive implosion in the Democratic primaries, now rebranded Joe Biden as a useful 80-year-old bard of knowledge filled with Americanism. He could carry them to victory before being pushed aside.

Biden was put on ice, a virtual prisoner of the Democratic establishment, who gave him teleprompted messages and pre-canned interviews to stumble through on Skype. “Keep silent, keep hidden,” was the motto of Biden’s keepers.

Trump railed. He fumed. As a furious Achilles, he tweeted about the unfairness of it all — how he had defeated concocted attacks, but suddenly a virus from his nemesis China had unleashed sheer madness, with him as its target.

To get back on track, Trump almost alone became the defender of tradition under assault, security, and safety. He deplored the statue toppling, the madness of cancel culture, the racial obsessions of the Black Lives Matter/Antifa cultural revolution. He praised America’s goodness and reminded the country it was good without having to be perfect. And still, the left hobbled him.

In truth, the media, the universities, and the left by weaponizing the COVID-19 plague, lockdown and riot had found a winning strategy. The mere threat of being called a “racist” in such a Reign of Terror climate could win over unlikely allies and appeasers. Corporate America, the retired and serving four-star officer class, local and state government federal gov’t wannabees, and many terrified Republican politicians and pundits (hoping to be dismembered last by leftist wolves) began pledging their allegiance to the left or staying mum.

In Hollywood, directors promised to begin choosing their casts by race, or as the outward racialist director Jordan Peele recently put it, “I don’t see myself casting a white dude as the lead in my movie. Not that I don’t like white dudes. But I’ve seen that movie before.” According to this logic, I suppose a Latino NFL coach one day could say something similar, “I don’t see myself casting a black dude as the lead on my team. Not that I don’t like black dudes. But I’ve seen that team before.” Uh-Oh: Cancel Culture!

Suddenly, American CEOs shined the sneakers of rappers, on video no less. There were to be “black” and “white” national anthems played at NFL games. “Diversity training” would be rebooted as segregated white reeducation sessions in full Maoist style. In New York, all protests were dangerous to public health, except those of Black Lives Matter, as if the virus was political in its targeting.

The more Trump was bleeding out from a thousand such nicks, the more his enemies thirsted for the kill, and the more his political supporters hedged their bets.

What then was Trump to do?

Trump already is starting to do the first superbly: stand up for America prior to May 25 (when George Floyd was killed), and tell Americans that in this 244th year of their existence, they will not cowardly renounce their heroes like Washington and Lincoln. Thomas Jefferson was not Jefferson Davis.

They will not topple statues, like frenzied Taliban, in the dead of night. They will not reduce their rich history and traditions to ‘racism’. And they will not embrace McCarthyism and destroy lives and careers.

But they will protect the Bill of Rights. They will honor dead Americans who gave this current lucky generation the freest, the most secure, and the most prosperous nation in history.

He might also remind the country that the United States is the beacon of freedom and anti-racism. Try naturalizing as a black citizen in China or South Korea. Try to become a white Christian citizen of Pakistan. Try living as a Catholic Latino in Saudi Arabia. Try opening a private roadside bar-restaurant in Cuba or Venezuela. Try founding a Jewish or Buddhist temple or evangelical church in Iran or Turkey. Try dealing with the police in Somalia or Sudan. Try rallying against illegal immigration, radical Islam, the European Union, or wind and solar power in Germany.

Trump cannot just talk about his pre-virus administration. He can of course remind Americans that he knows how to resume the booming economy as the virus weakens. He is right to remind us that he did close the border and is now making good progress on the wall. Given China’s culpability, he is justified in reminding the country that his lone voice was heard in warning of the multiple dangers coming from the Chinese Communist Party. He did deregulate and expand our energy resources. All that by 2021 will help restore prosperity.

But that is now, unfortunately, ancient history for a terrified public assuming a fetal position in the face of a public health threat. The swing voters, independents, and purple-staters are framing their 2020 choice in the stark terms of who will “make it all go away.” They want a magical end to the virus, the quarantines, the violence, the hate, and the division. And at this point, they want near-divine interventions to do all that and more.

But in November, less than four months from now, rightly or wrongly, they will see their choices both rationally and emotionally.

About half of swing voters, however, remain defiant. They want no more apologies; in lieu of just another defense of America, they want a plan to go forward and make it even more prosperous and secure. To win these swing-state voters, Trump needs to offer a blueprint for 2020 that builds upon his proven 2016 economic restoration.

But he must address the causes of the current turmoil in terms of solutions to many of the root causes of the current chaos.

First, Trump, the builder, can outline a rebuilding, a Renaissance effort, to reconfigure infrastructure, especially in light of the failed high-density, mass transit, high-rise progressive model that proved a feeding trough for COVID-19 —and will again when the next Chinese virus arrives.

A far better option is to diversify the nation’s demographics and to reboot smaller cities and towns, along with reconnecting to rural living. America’s small towns are underpopulated, while big cities of plague, protests, and panic are overpopulated, overpriced, and over-popularized. We could start by ensuring rural spaces high-speed internet, a repair of our crumbling interstate freeway system, and completion of the long-planned highways, reservoirs, bridges and transmission lines that were canceled over the last 50 years in the elite green-era madness of “small is beautiful.”

The crisis of the inner city is not just the erosion of the black family, high crime, fatherless children, dismal schools, cynically concentrated abortion clinics, racism, and tribalism, but the old nemesis of segregation. Black families should have the alternative of moving out of Chicago or Baltimore into smaller towns and the countryside, where race far more easily becomes incidental, not essential, to one’s identity and personality.

Second, he needs to create a task force to deal with the next epidemic—and we can be sure that there will be one, given China’s realization of how easily it went from global goat responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands to a murderous totalitarian bully who might do it again unless concessions are made.

Such a plan would entail a national board of medical experts including front-line doctors who do not work for the government; a national stockpile of protective equipment and medicines; a graduated plan of quarantine, with red/yellow/green phases known to the public in advance; and national standards that define viral levels of seriousness, define cases of infection, and evaluate ALL possible treatments.

Of course, people need liquidity now. And the mega-deficits for the present have put-off depression— at least for now. But the public is terrified of the national debt that is now nearing $30 trillion. It is serviceable only by continual zero-interest rates that themselves warp the economy. Trump could dust off the recommendations of the now old Simpson-Bowles commission, update them, and remind Americans that a restored economy, not a depression, will soon be the time to control spending and avoid financial Armageddon.

Fourth, in some sense, higher education fueled this entire clamor against all that is good about America — the attacks on its founders, its history, icons, music, and culture. The quarantine pulled away the curtain of campus overcharging and showed the public that tele-teaching does not require a huge overhead of counselors, facilitators, and busybodies. The ways universities treat guest lecturers, use star-chamber proceedings against their own students, and stifle free speech explain much of the present street violence and cancel culture. Constitutional protections were under consistent assault for a half-century by a narcissistic and exempt class of professors and administrators who fed venom to an indebted and now angry generation of lower-middle-class youth, who lack all the material opportunities of those who radicalized them.

Large university endowments over a specified size should have their interest and stock income taxed. The federal government should no longer guarantee student loans, but shift their bonding to vocational schools, where training is quicker and will lead to sustainable wage jobs. The argument for a well-rounded liberal education for half the country’s youth was the university’s selling point, but when it junked that idea and replaced it with indoctrination, so went any obligation of the government and people to subsidize their own extinction. Teaching credentials and the school of education should have no monopoly on K-12 education; master’s degrees in academic subjects should also certify teachers. Federal aid to higher education should be based on guaranteed campus adherence to the Bill of Rights.

Fifth, the ghost of Joe Biden: Trump need not be cruel but remind the country that Joe Biden is not really a candidate. He is a placeholder with little substance. Trump must remind America he is not running any more against even the facsimile of Biden, but rather against an entire socialist cultural revolution — a pirate ship with Joe Biden as its carven wooden figurehead.

Trump needs to emphasize not just the effectiveness of his administration but its effects on real people. He needs to stop using “I” and substitute with “we.”

  • A record low percent black unemployment rate? That translated into job seekers having leverage over employers and with it dignity and value.
  • Gas prices falling due to expanded oil production? That means the minimum wage worker can afford her commute.
  • Returning industry? That means more clout, honor, and a good living for an unemployed middle-aged worker in Ohio and Michigan, and less fuel for the Chinese Communist Party.

Tweeting cannot be about the past, but only the present and future. Trolls, washed-up celebrities, know-nothing pampered athletes, and hack leftists don’t deserve mention in the campaign’s final 100 days.

Ignore them all and focus on Restoration, 2021 — and how the president has a detailed plan to focus on all classes and races while reminding us of what we owe the dead and all that they have given us.

Play

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

Actor Terry Crews Feels to BLM Only ”Some” Black Lives Matter

This Cancel Culture and Elitism we’ve talked about for several years at TruthNewsNetwork is consuming our world. Every day we see example after example of how frustrating it is to be caught up in a conundrum that puts you in the bullseye of those who have taken command of the determination of everything and everybody regarding saying and doing the “right” thing. It’s bad enough that anyone has to even think about such silliness. But your having to do so just to survive in your chosen career or to maintain friendships or keep your job is nasty. And it’s not based on what you DO, but based solely on what someone who controls the rules of Social Elitism can with a snap of the fingers put you in a good place or send you to “Hell on Earth” with no regard at all for the truth of any matter. The substance has been deleted and replaced by Social Elitism. And those in charge control far more of this nation today than they did just two weeks ago. And if things don’t change, in 90 days, they will be telling everyone what cereal to eat for breakfast and what color bowl from which to eat it!

That may seem to be a joke, but it’s no joke. Today more than ever, the jobs, friendships, family relationships as well as friends, business associates and fellow employees are more than ever before being forced to embrace a set of fundaments, standards, rules, how to’s and how not to’s that regulate every process of being “acceptable” within all these overlapping circles. Additionally, the social elitists that control the circle in which you find yourself have the power to at any time, for whatever reason, and without any justification, put the word out. You’ll not only find yourself thrown to the curb, but without any knowledge of your doing anything wrong! You’ll never know in advance what you are supposed to and not supposed to do.

Today’s craziness has evolved into schizophrenic paranoia: everyone is afraid of saying anything for fear of saying the wrong thing. And few even know what the right and wrong thing to say are!

Social Elitism Now Dominates Hollywood

Actor and comedian Terry Crews is taking heat for criticizing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) organization over its tendency to hone in on police brutality and ignore far more significant issues in the black community. He recently tweeted that he wants to make sure “black lives matter” doesn’t turn into “black lives matter more.” Predictably, he was met by reactionary shrieks of “Uncle Tom” and “coon.”

Crews appeared on CNN on Monday night to explain his objections to BLM, and instead received a lecture from Don Lemon about the grievous errors in his line of thinking. After informing the movie star that he (Lemon) has “skin as tough as an armadillo” thanks to his soapbox at CNN, Lemon told Crews that “if you want an All Black Lives Matter movement that talks about gun violence,” then he should “start that movement with that name.”

“The Black Lives Matter movement is about police brutality and injustice in that manner, not about what’s happening in black neighborhoods,” Lemon said smugly.

Crews tried to explain that the Black Lives Matter movement is no longer solely about police brutality, as the organization’s website admits, but was repeatedly interrupted. Lemon, of course, had to keep his viewers from hearing the truth: that an organization purportedly dedicated to making black lives matter only actually cares about some black lives.

According to a database compiled by the Washington Post, only nine unarmed black people were killed by police in 2019. At least half of those incidents occurred after the unarmed individual attacked the police officer on the scene. This figure hardly compares to the thousands of African Americans affected by violent crime, largely perpetrated by other African Americans.

As a matter of fact, between recent crime waves in major cities and innocent black folks like David Dorn losing their lives in the wake of riots and looting, BLM and the related #DefundThePolice movement may be responsible for many more than nine deaths by the end of the summer. An eight-year-old girl was shot to death over the weekend in Atlanta near Wendy’s where Rashard Brooks was killed.

Cockburn suggests that Black Lives Matter should change its name to “0.00001 percent of Black Lives Matter” — “0.00001BLM,” for short.

Not Smart To Mess With Terry

BLM’s hypocrisy doesn’t end with claiming to want to lift black people while ignoring interracial crime. The organization is also against one of the most proven ways to reduce poverty and violence: fatherhood. BLM explicitly opposes traditional two-parent families: “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

Even the progressive left’s radical gender ideology seems to be more critical to BLM than reducing violence and providing stable homes for black children. “We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum,” the organization also says on its website.

Like the leaders of Black Lives Matter, prominent politicians are failing to take responsibility for the uptick in crime over the past several weeks. Just as Don Lemon attacked Terry Crews for mentioning negative trends outside of police brutality, Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago shifted the blame to firearms: ‘Tonight, a 7-year-old girl in Austin joined a list of teenagers and children whose hopes and dreams were ended by the barrel of a gun.”

Crews perfectly captured this phenomenon in another one of his recent tweets, writing, “There are ‘gatekeepers of Blackness’ within our own community who decide who’s Black and who’s not. I have often been called out for not being ‘black enough.’ How can that be?” (Crews is happily married to a mixed-racial wife)

Welcome to 2020, Mr. Crews. Anyone who questions the far-left agenda of groups like BLM will be shut down, black or not.

Rather than give you more of Don Lemon’s whipping of Terry Crews from his CNN show Monday night, we decided to call on Rob Smith of The First to break it down with an actual segment of that confrontation for yourself. Rob is an African-American journalist and is conservative. This piece includes a portion of the Crews interview which shows you just how black elites in media treat those of their own race who dare to make sense of the obvious that none of the BLM supporters from the black community want to accept: that Black Lives Matter only cares about Black Lives when those lives fit their peculiar narrative that details any opportunities to diminish any white person or group of white people, or, in Terry’s case, any black person who doesn’t toe the BLM line:

Summary

I cannot go without saying this: Terry Crews is not only an outstanding actor, but he’s also an African American man who made it out of some nasty spots in Flint, Michigan growing up. He chose to put aside all the petty racial partisanship in favor of working hard, working smart, honing his skills, and pursuing his dreams of becoming a successful actor. He made his own breaks. He did that by consciously refusing to allow the black environment in the U.S. to flood him with thoughts of victimhood. He took responsibility to make his life what it is today by not letting the elitist perspective dominate his thinking.

These babies were shot last week and died. Where is BLM on saving These lives?

Terry certainly is NOT a sellout or an Uncle Tom. He’s a smart, sensitive, and thoughtful American. He believes strongly in personal accountability and responsibility for one’s own life.

That’s too much for Don Lemon. After all, CNN has mastered the art of putting people in front of their cameras, who are mediocre at best at their craft. But they are all masters of denigration: the denigration of anyone and any group that refuses to accept being a mirror image of what someone else — ANYONE else — thinks they should be.

Lemon’s insistence that BLM is ONLY protesting against police violence is grossly false. His doing so repeatedly in Terry Crews’ face is an insult to every black person in America.

Sadly, Lemon has a big microphone. Fortunately, however, very few people watch him make a fool of himself every weeknight. And Terry Crews did it masterfully by just allowing Don to speak. Lemon’s little more than an empty suit. And his ratings confirm that again and again.

I bet all three of his fans got a kick watching Lemon insult Terry Crews.

Play

“On Behalf of Environmentalists, I Apologize for the Climate Scare”

I know: this seems like a foolish time for TruthNewsNetwork to get worked up about Climate Change and Environmentalism. “After all, there are FAR too many D.C. items that Americans are far more afraid of than Climate Change, right?” The answer to that depends on who you speak to. Greta Thunberg — the young lady who spoke so passionately about Climate Change at the United Nations — would argue that Climate Change is far more important than whether or not President Donald Trump gets re-elected in November. Remember: she refused to even shake his hand at the UN.

But we ARE speaking today about Climate Change. Let’s take a break from all the “he said — she said” in Washington and get some factual and REAL truth about Climate Change. You’ll probably enjoy this, too. Why? Because it debunks ALL of what the environment experts — ALL OF THEM — have been shoving down the throats of every person on Earth for decades! And the “debunker” is not an environmental hack, a flaming Conservative out to get the liberal-left, he’s a learned environmentalist, a scholar, and someone who has spent his life practicing his trade by actually doing all that’s necessary to get facts! (No, I doubt he will be on Al Gore’s Christmas card list this year!)

Let’s get right to it. Listen to what Michael Shellenberger has to give to us about the TRUTH of Climate Change.

Meet Michael

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.

But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as an Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.

Here are some facts few people know:

  • Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
  • The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
  • Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
  • Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
  • The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
  •  The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
  • Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s
  • The Netherlands became rich, not poor while adapting to life below sea level
  • We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
  • Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
  • Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
  • Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture

I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism. In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other leading scientific bodies.

Some people will, when they read this, imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s cooperatives. In my early 20s, I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.

I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27, I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to invest $90 billion into them. Over the last few years, I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions.

But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilization, and called it a “crisis.”

But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.

I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the news media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke, Jr., a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favor of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse.

But then, last year, things spiraled out of control.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said, “The world is going to end in twelve years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed: “Climate Change Kills Children.”

The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilizations.”

Mainstream journalists reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world,” and that deforestation was like a nuclear bomb going off.

As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.

Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.

I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence.

And so my formal apology for our fear-mongering comes in the form of my new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All. It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialization, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.

Some highlights from the book:

Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress

The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land

The most important thing for reducing air pollution and carbon emissions is moving from wood to coal to petroleum to natural gas to uranium

100% renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5% to 50%

We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities

Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4%

Greenpeace didn’t save the whales, switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did

“Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300% more emissions

Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon

The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants

Why were we all so misled?

In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the financial, political, and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable.” And status anxiety, depression, and hostility to modern civilization are behind much of the alarmism.

Once you realize just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavory or unhealthy motivations, it is hard not to feel duped.

Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it. The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop.

The ideology behind environmental alarmism — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever. But there are also reasons to believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.

The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, Covid-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people and shattered economies around the globe. Scientific institutions, including WHO and IPCC, have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicization of science. Their future existence and relevance depend on new leadership and serious reform.

Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications. Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.

The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilization is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilization that climate alarmists would return us to.

The invitations from IPCC and Congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists, and environmental scholars. “Apocalypse Never is an extremely important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science Tom Wigley.

“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love:’ a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful but an attainable future.”

That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree that it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist, progressive, and climate activist felt the need to speak out against the alarmism.

I further hope that you’ll accept my apology.

~Michael Shellenberger

Play

What Happens if Trump Loses in November? The “Great Reset”

How would you respond if I asked you, “Is your world one of questions without answers, fear without peace, anger without resolution, and unknowns with no way to know them?” If I asked that to most Americans today, they’d nod their heads in affirmation. I know I feel that way. What’s strangest of all is beginning in January of 2017, all such difficulties disappeared for most of us. Why? Because newly inaugurated President Donald Trump had begun fixing multiple things in the U.S. at once that we didn’t even know were broken. And even with the roadblocks he faced, he was successful at turning around the economy in dramatic fashion, reduced unemployment, and subsequently increased employments to levels never before seen. Additionally, he brought trillions of dollars of manufacturing back to the U.S., supervised the U.S. becoming energy independent and Earth’s largest producer of oil and gas, passed a comprehensive criminal reform bill, and gave Americans individually and even companies tremendous tax cuts. All of this while watching federal revenues climb to unheard-of levels in just three years!

Things were pretty darn good: until February of 2020. (They were good even in spite of his impeachment by the House)

Enter Coronavirus. And the slide down the tunnel of “Uh-Oh” began. And we haven’t stopped sliding as of the end of June.

But, never worry. The likes of John Kerry and Al Gore have a plan to fix everything: Global Warming, Coronavirus, national debt, cultural and religious differences, wrapped in a contrived economy that we in the U.S. will find it to no longer be our concern. I forgot: while we’re doing all that, we’ve got to ante-up a to global government the trillions of dollars necessary to prop-up this pipe dream.

What? You haven’t heard about the “Great Reset?” Although you are probably not familiar with it, it could be well on its way, if the World Economic Forum (WEF) and a bunch of other powerful global organizations have their way. Trust me, the Great Reset is gaining traction faster than a middle-school fashion fad—and this is not a good thing.

In case you don’t care to take my word for it, allow me to introduce the architect of the Great Reset: World Economic Forum founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab. “A Great Reset is necessary to build a new social contract that honors the dignity of every human being,” Schwab recently announced.

Yes, Schwab wants out with the old social contract, and in with the new. But, what would Schwab’s new social contract look like?

According to Schwab, “The global health crisis has laid bare the unsustainability of our old system in terms of social cohesion, the lack of equal opportunities and inclusiveness. Nor can we turn our backs on the evils of racism and discrimination. We need to build into this new social contract our intergenerational responsibility to ensure that we live up to the expectations of young people.” What the heck does any of this mean?

As if his description there wasn’t enough to make you do a double-take, consider this statement from Schwab, “This global pandemic has also demonstrated again how interconnected we are. We have to restore a functioning system of smart global cooperation structured to address the challenges of the next 50 years. The Great Reset will require us to integrate all stakeholders of global society into a community of common interest, purpose, and action.”

I don’t know about you, but when I hear phrases like “integrate all stakeholders of global society into a community of common interest, purpose, and action” my internal alarm bells ring louder than Big Ben.

In reality, the “Great Reset” is just another attempt at a global government. And a global government is a farce. There are 195 sovereign countries in the world. It is laughable, not believable, to expect that 195 countries, accounting for more than seven billion people, would ever agree to a Great Reset.

The world is full of nations with vastly different cultures, political philosophies, and social-economic systems. Have we not learned over the past few centuries that these countries would rather govern themselves than be under the thumb of a faraway, big, unresponsive dragon of a government? Have we not learned that local government, which is closest to the people, and most responsive to their needs and unique circumstances, is vastly superior to a far-off, out-of-touch, bloated worldwide governing body?

The Great Reset, if ever enacted, would turn back the clock to the pre-Enlightenment era; to a time when individual freedom was more a wish than reality and elites like Klaus Schwab were unquestioned. The Enlightenment changed the world for the better. The “Great Reset” would set the world back centuries and thus should be resisted at all costs.

Understand This…

None of the noise during this year that turned into chaos and then morphed into an impeachment, a pandemic, and now social and racial protests and riots was accidental. “Oh, Dan. That’s just another conspiracy theory!” Rethink that, folks. There are too many moving pieces that have been craftily placed in their appropriate places at the exact time necessary to keep the fires of destruction burning brightly for this to be just “another strange coincidence.” If something looks too real to be unreal, you can always bet it’s real. And this is real.

The idea of a global government has been the dream of a group of world elitist individuals and governments for centuries. Their thought in hypothesizing this has always been, “With just one government, one economy, one set of laws and rules, the World would move smoother, simpler, quicker than it ever will with 195 different countries, people, and governments each trying to function all by themselves. One entity is the best solution for every ill for every person on Earth!” Of course, all who believe that think they are the individual and the group that is best suited to operate such a government.

In the U.S., we heard the whispers before Obama’s election that he was the globalist that would be anointed to lead such a transition to a globalist society. His pandering to the big names in Europe and the Middle East was a clue something like that was being planned. Then, John Kerry and Al Gore jumped onto the bandwagon and became Obama’s messengers to the Rothschilds of France and Switzerland, Prince Charles in the U.K., and the others who get together each January in Davos, Switzerland to plot their path. Their specific plans? One world currency and economy, Climate Change, a single worldwide military, and a globalized education system. Taxation would be from the Top Down and would include all nations. Every aspect of life in America as we know would be obliterated. That would be necessary to make it happen.

Many feel that the massive amount of government debt for every nation would prevent the implementation of such a model. Others think (and I fall into this category) the “closer” to make such a reset would be if “they” — whoever “they” are — would offer each nation the cancellation of their entire national debt if they participate in such a platform of one global government.

Summary

Know this: This coming January, regardless of who is in residence in the White House, global elites by the thousands will board their private jets from every quarter on the Globe to make their way to Davos, Switzerland to drink, brag, and pontificate about all that’s best for the World and who should pull it all together as the leader of such a utopia. They’ve had this same conversation numerous times over several centuries. But the stars have never aligned to facilitate such a radical and necessarily universal transition by so many countries. I cannot imagine even trying to get Xi Jinping of China on the same page as Prince Charles of the U.K., let alone Kim Jong Un with Japan’s President to agree on some type of unified entity for Japan that includes everybody on the Korean Penninsula.

Does this mass of Autocratic globalist wannabees think they could possibly pull this off? They very well might be successful — “If” this one thing happens: it will NEVER occur with Donald Trump at the helm of the United States.

These globalists know that. Why do you think there is such a concerted effort on every front to discredit him, his policies, his considerable achievements for the American people, and his plans for even more significant achievements in a second Trump term?

They MUST remove Donald Trump from office to allow any possible transition to a Globalist structure even to get started.

I won’t waste your time and start naming more names. Just imagine for a moment if something like was happening, who in power in the United States would be the likeliest of individuals who are fighting so hard to remove Donald Trump. Every person that comes to your mind is likely to be a part of it. And there are certainly just as many again who are foaming to dump this President who has done little but rain on their parade. Obama was to lay the groundwork. Hillary was to move it forward in transition. Who was to take the torch from Hillary? We’ll never know because Donald Trump destroyed their grand scheme.

Am I certain of all this? There are few things involving our government, of which I am certain. In this, just as I have poured it out to you, I cannot honestly say I’m certain of every piece of this plan. But what I am certain of is that such a utopian worldwide concept has long been just a dream and that are thousands of very powerful, very wealthy, and very politically connected individuals that certainly feel they can make this a reality.

We lowly plebes will be forced to stand on the sidelines, hope and pray for our nation, and trust God to thwart the evil schemes of these evil people and “Keep America Great.”

Play

The “Cancel Culture”

It’s become so convoluted, so broad and wide, so misrepresented that most Americans do not understand what Cancel Culture is, what its purposes are, and what is its basis.

Some are quick to respond by saying “The U.S. founders were almost all slave owners. We demand that their evils are erased from history books and they are no longer honored! After all, they committed the most egregious acts any man can force on another: slavery. The fact that a white man would own a black man and that the black man had absolutely no rights at all is the opposite of what Americans have studied in U.S. history for more than 200 years. It’s all lies!”

Watching and listening to people who tag themselves as “authorities” on racial rights and wrongs resonates deeply with many folks — those who vaguely remember the horrors in Europe and Asia in World War II where nations ruled by despots portrayed REAL racism on people who were different colors, different cultures, sometimes different languages, and religions. But THOSE tyrants didn’t just tear down statues selectively chosen by a few as being eligible for cancellation, they slaughtered people with whom they disagreed: men, women, and children. More than six million Jews were shot, burned to death, gassed, or starved. All of those happened in places scattered throughout Europe.

Do American minorities have some unilateral right to destroy the history of the racial injustices, not only injustices around us today, but injustices from every part of America’s history? Does that even make sense?

Before we go any further, one African American man became so enraged at today’s “Cancel Culture” he boiled over. Listen to his words describing his thoughts and feelings:

For What and Whom IS History?

The subject in college that I hated most was American history — not because it wasn’t important and not because I didn’t enjoy learning the details about our nation, but because every professor I had in four different American history courses concentrated almost solely on specific dates! Their exams were not about the history of which we learned, it was as if they wanted to trip us up for not remembering exact dates. Maybe the exact dates are not so important. But the context of time and life in the U.S. at those specific times IS critical to our understanding.

When my children went through the same dilemma, their much older Dad explained that I felt the exact same way when I was in college. What was different from the way my professors explained was this: I told our children that every important American history event never happened in a vacuum. Life around each event was far more important to understand than just each historical event by itself.

We all live in context. Our laws are made in the context of the day. What was meaningless in 1965 may be critical to address in a law today. What today prompts a law probably would have been insignificant and certainly not important in 1965.

History is to give us all not only a few details of a few events from our past. It is to give us the understanding of how and what initiated those historical acts, learning the details of those acts themselves, and putting them each in historical context as was applicable when each occurred and then to compare each with today’s America.

The Holocaust

Not only the Jewish people, but people from every ethnicity, nationality, and culture have at least heard of the Holocaust. The Holocaust did NOT occur in a vacuum either. It was not initiated by one or two events but from a generation of elitism in Germany that included gross racism against Jews by German nationals. I don’t want to be cold or harsh in saying this, but today’s cries by the Leftist media and many political activists of systemic racism are totally wrong. Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940s WAS systemically racist. What’s the difference?

The government of  Nazi Germany fanned the fires of racism with laws, policies, regulations, and even social structure to continually fan the fires of racism among the people. But then Hitler’s government became aggressive actions to target not just a few Jews embedded among the German people but to force Jews out of their homes, jobs, and even neighborhoods to segregate Jews to keep them separate from Germans.

The “Final Solution” — or the plan to rid Germany of Jews — began with the Wannsee Conference.

In 1942, a group of high-ranking Nazi officials meet and calmly discuss the logistics of the “Final Solution,” the elimination of Jews from Germany. Along with notorious figures such as Adolf Eichmann (Gerd Böckmann), a number of lesser-known officers like Reinhard Heydrich (Dietrich Mattausch) debate plans of whether to reform the Jews, ship them elsewhere or simply end their lives. The actual minutes of the meeting were taken from each attendee to be destroyed. But, years later, it was discovered that one attendee kept the notes. From those notes came the movie that told the entire story of the planned extermination of six million Jews to rid Germany of them entirely. That movie, Conspiracy, is available today and can be viewed at several online streaming services. (I highly recommend it to all who want the REAL version of Germany’s World War II)

Erase History?

One can destroy some of the representations of historical events. That’s what horrifies most Americans watching evening news today. Statues, monuments, even buildings, many of which have been in existence for 200 years are being defaced and destroyed by “Cancel Culture’s” minions. Why? It’s foolish for one to believe history can be erased. It’s crazy to want to do that!

If any culture in modern history has a right to remove reminders of their history, it is the Jewish people. Their eradication by Nazis was as horrible and insidious as any other in World history. And Jews cringe even at the thought of anyone trying to erase that history. Why?

Remember: no historical event exists without context. The details of the context along with the historical events themselves are the greatest tools for building a future without repeating those horrors from the past.

Dachau was a Nazi concentration camp opened in March 1933, which was initially intended to hold political prisoners. It is located on the grounds of an abandoned munitions factory northeast of the medieval town of Dachau, about 16 km northwest of Munich in the state of Bavaria, in southern Germany. When the Allied forces invaded Dachau and saw the inhumanity of the slaughters of an estimated one million Jews there, every citizen — man, woman, and child — of that small town were forced to go to the concentration camp to view the remains of tens of thousands of Jews that died in the gas chambers. The bodies those people from Dachau Village were forced to see were just those that had not yet been incinerated in the ovens at that camp.

Why would our European allies force that on those German villagers? They knew that unless German civilians were witness to the travesties of the German army, no one would believe those stories.

That is history. Jews nor Germans would EVER think about destroying Dachau. In fact, it remains to this day in the exact same form in which it existed the day those Germans were forced to go view the carnage. Why would they leave it in place all these years? It was so horrible, one would think (like many today in the U.S.), “We want it gone! It illustrates some of the lowest depravity of man. Why would we even think about keeping it?”

Simple Answer: To keep historical events that when described in their context would keep generation after generation of Germans from ever thinking, “Nothing like that could ever happen here.” The context in which the horrors against the Jews were created is exactly what needs to be branded on the minds of every German from every future generation after World War II in perpetuity.

I’ve been to Dachau!

Its horrors are forever in my memory. I walked through the large room where Germans tricked prisoners by telling them they were going to get a shower. When they all entered that room, (about 200 at a time) the doors were closed and locked and the gas was turned on. It took about five minutes for them all to die.

After about ten minutes, the doors were opened, and German soldiers began to haul their bodies and stack them in the adjacent large room where three massive ovens stood ready to welcome tens of thousands of lifeless innocent Jews for their cremation.

Those ovens are forever stamped in my memory. And with those memories and the context of their creation, no one can ever convince me “That was horrendous! We need to destroy that Concentration Camp!” German people never thought their leaders would allow such devastation.

By the way, all German concentration camps from WW II were preserved for history.

What’s Different Here?

NOTHING!

It is not only unconscionable that a large group of Americans choose to destroy representations of the American Revolutionary War, the Civil War, and even the memories of the men and women who led and served in those and other important American events. What is their reasoning for doing so? “To erase the memories of those who instigated the atrocities of those events.”

Doing so is the definition of Lunacy!

There is no doubt slavery was and is a travesty. There is and never has been any justifiable purpose for any human owning another human. But thinking one can do anything to erase historical memories of events — both good AND bad — is actually stupid. Doing so WOULD steal a number of great learning opportunities from every future generation of Americans. And for what purpose?

Summary

My youngest daughter had a Japanese classmate during her freshman year in college. That Japanese girl was horrified the first day in American history where the professor showed an old black and white film of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. That Japanese student actually got up and stormed from the class.

My daughter saw her later that day and asked why she was so upset. That Japanese student shared that ALL World War II history in Japan stated that World War II in the Pacific began when the United States bombed Tokyo! Nothing is Japanese history books even mentioned Pearl Harbor.

Cancel Culture is pure lunacy.

Instead, let’s be realistic, understanding that everyone must have the opportunity to see and hear all American history: even the bad. Someone more knowledgable than me once said, “If we don’t learn from our history we are doomed to repeat it.” Sure, there are parts of history I wish were different. But they weren’t different! And those bad things for which most Americans are ashamed they are part of our history, let’s learn from those and make certain none of that ever happens again.

Doesn’t that make better sense than just ignoring the reality of our past? My grandchildren and THEIR grandchildren need to know and understand slavery and its horrors — not to honor the evil, but to learn to never let it creep back into America again.

 

Here’s the Link for the Article: “319 Square Miles”

https://truthnewsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/319-Square-Miles.pdf

Here’s the link to the video/audio played today on TNN Live Regarding the Truth about Today’s America:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBMEMuFW3Fo&fbclid=IwAR0FluBTSfV7TK7uN4dVqSjBxDQVo2pSuUALyt8g1QhvJSG6JlcLzoCkZfQ

Play