Babylon Bee: CIA Replaces Waterboarding With 12-Hour Lectures On Intersectional Feminism

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Sarah Richter from Pixabay

On Wednesday, I posted about the completely over the top new CIA recruitment ad which must be seen to be believed.

I wrote that the left has taken their “woke” identity politics way too far and have now entered parody territory. They’ve become so unreasonable in fact, I suggested we launch a ridicule campaign against them which, according to the late radical “community organizer” Saul Alinsky, is one of the most effective tools in politics.

Rules for Radicals No. 5:  “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.”

In that spirit, I present to you a little parody from the Babylon Bee:

New CIA Recruitment Ad Starring Cisgender Woman of Color with ‘Generalized Anxiety Disorder’ Is an Epic Fail

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Darwin Laganzon from Pixabay

After checking off all of the following boxes, woman of color, mom, cisgender, millennial, diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder, intersectional, the narrator of the CIA’s new recruitment ad tells us her existence is not a box checking exercise. She could have fooled us.

As she continues her slow-motion stroll through the corridors of power, she exudes confidence.

Wearing an uber confident smile, she tells us she is “perfectly made” and that her inflection does not rise at the end of her sentences suggesting a question has just been asked. She can even change a diaper with one hand while consoling a crying toddler with the other.

In fact, she’s a “walking declaration.”

“I used to struggle with impostor syndrome, but at 36, I refuse to internalize misguided patriarchal ideas of what a woman can or should be,” she tells viewers.

Former CIA officer Bryan Dean Wright joined “Fox & Friends” on Tuesday and expressed his disgust over the ad, calling it “propagandist garbage.” He points out the dangers of our “woke” new CIA dealing with countries that remain unenlightened.

“What happens when you hire a bunch of folks who are wokesters going out into the world that is not woke?” he asked. “Is an analyst who is a wokester – are they going to bring nuance to their analysis? … Of course not, They’re activists now.”

“The rest of the world. China, for instance, is deeply racist and bigoted. Will you go out with your Marxist BLM signs: ‘No, no, no, don’t do that. That’s bad.’ I mean, come on.”

“Just a few years ago, [the ad] would never have made it out of the front office. Look, you know, I started after 9/11 and our focus. If you asked us if we were to star in a recruitment video, we would have talked about the mission of the country. Nothing in that two-minute video was focused on the country.”

Watch the full interview here.

Needless to say, the ad has been widely mocked – on both sides of the aisle.

As I see it, the left has taken their “woke” identity politics way too far and have now entered parody territory. Somewhere along the line, they managed to jump the shark.

It may have happened when Democrats, starting with the President, threw their collective tantrum over Georgia’s new voting law.

Even many blacks take offense over the implication that they are too stupid to figure out how to get a state ID card. Likewise, Democrats have become so pathetic that some of their own have run out credible excuses for this stupidity.

This is a perfect opportunity for Republicans to launch a ridicule campaign against the party.

Rule number 5 on the late radical “community organizer” Saul Alinsky’s Tried and True Rules for Radicals list says, “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.”

If ever there was a time for ridicule, it’s now.

DemoCats and Other Radical Creatures

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

Lately, it’s been getting crowded in my house or at least it seems like it. At first, it was just me and the fourth First Lady. Then, and almost without fanfare, I noticed that an alter-ego had arrived. Not too inconvenient, but he (for those of you who care, Mr. Narrator’s pronouns remain officially undeclared) did impinge upon my time and was seen to be taking up space in the landscape of my thoughts. Okay, still a livable arrangement and the fourth first doesn’t seem to mind. But ‘it’ eventually happened. After a  year of two of skirting the issue, the fourth first popped the question: “Since your allergies are under control, can we get a cat? All Russian households, at least ‘real’ Russian households, have a cat.”

Panic. Last time I checked the atlas (for you younger readers, it’s a book of maps – not a god or a bodybuilder), Arizona isn’t anywhere close to Russia. Okay, we’re not a Russian household but the fourth first lady is Russian and that trumps all other geographical arguments. (Did I mention that Russians tend to be somewhat intransigent personalities?)

Renewed panic. If forced to declare a preference, I am a dog person. Conservatives are dog people. How do I know? Dogs are loyal, affectionate, smart (sometimes) and (mostly) reliable. Some of them are even classified as ‘working’ dogs, dogs that can even carry alcohol in kegs under their chins. How much more ‘conservative’ can you get?

Cats, ugh. Cats are the animals of the 1%. The ones with which I am familiar have been distant, dispassionate, aloof, elite, distrusting, self-interested, the kind of animal that never gives back, a creature that only takes …

Mr. Narrator (interrupts):  “Richard Edward, stop. You are denigrating an entire species of animal. It’s unfair and unsubstantiated, too. Additionally, you are anthropomorphizing, painting an entire species of animal with the broad brush of ‘identify’ classification. Don’t you realize how racist, how divisive and polarizing that kind of process appears?”

Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, wait, wait.  Zoologists always use the classification system when talking about animals. That’s what I learned in school. It is how we can discuss wonderful animals in general and then those other animals, like cats, in particular.”

Mr. Narrator: (sighs) “Richard Edward, you are so ‘not woke’. Critical Race Theory teaches us that everything you learned in school, every value you were taught to respect, everything in your everyday life is simply based in white privilege and formulated to support white supremacy. You think dogs are okay and cats are so-so? Racist! Why is the love of dogs racist? Dogs were used to hunt down escaped slaves. See, I am sure that’s why you like dogs. On the other hand, cats have independent attitudes, are owned by no one. Cats exhibit the ultimate anti-slavery, anti-racist animal attitude. Your white supremist attitude is really why you don’t like cats.”

“Your assignment of negative, humanlike traits to cats is nothing more than your effort to marginalize a noble species. You are so mired in white privilege that you cannot see beyond your white schooling and the old, white-designed scientific methods, promulgated by dead, white-guys with science degrees.”

Mr. Narrator is considerably younger than I and his school experience more recent. I’ll have to take his word that what is being taught in schools is quite different than my old curriculum. How in the blazes did this newfangled thinking get introduced into our culture and quite honestly, who is crazy enough to believe it?

Then it dawns on me. This is simply an extension of what I’ve been reading about in the news. White privilege is everywhere and it’s responsible for everything that is wrong.

Of course, with power like that, why wouldn’t CRT be used for framing our daily experience? Got to go to the doctor? Don’t worry about making an appointment. You will be seen, not in the order of your arrival at the office but based upon your race. My colleague Elizabeth Vaughn has written about the proposed new medical triage process.

Think its only happening here? If you are white, just try to get a vaccine appointment in the city of Hamilton, Ontario in Canada. Maybe that trip across the border needs to be delayed.

The new-think of CRT demands that white, privileged people remember their place at all times and in all circumstances. Don’t believe me?

Take sports (yes, please take them, especially football). The NFL, where the top four highest paid players (quarterbacks) are black, is now racist, according to some sport analyst. Why? Maybe white quarterback prospects are being scouted and drafted ahead of players of color because of the racist owners and team management. Really?

Race is certainly taken front and center stage in what’s left of the mind of the President of the United States, resulting in his comments about equity in the administration of COVID vaccines between white seniors of those seniors of color. Not to be outdone in the vaccine race (pun intended), the President is pushing for grants, through his department of education, that would fund the teaching of CRT in American schools. As reported by Fox news:

The rule would funnel federal grant money to help schools teach the New York Times’ controversial 1619 Project by controversial essayist Nikole Hannah-Jones and Boston University Director of the Center for Anti-Racist Research Director Ibram Kendi’s book, How to Be an Anti-Racist into K-12 school curriculums.

Wow, identify politics and race has seeped into the very fabric of our lives.

Mr. Narrator: “Be careful Richard Edward, you just made another racist reference; ‘cotton’, the material that commercially used to be known as the ‘fabric’ of our lives.  Remember who used to pick that cotton, Richard Edward. Now do you see how complete CRT can be? All you have to do is submit to seeing everything through the lens of race and assume that anything you know or understand is evil, and you really don’t have to go to school to learn this, all you need is attitude.”

Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, how do we unwind this? I know in my knower that the values I was taught are not bad, that my commitment to view people’s character instead of the skin color is the proper way to treat my fellow human beings. We’ve got to stop this crazy indoctrination.”

Mr. Narrator: “I am glad you asked Richard Edward. Once again, your editor and colleague Ms. Elizabeth is out in front on this. We are finally seeing a sane politician and geo-political entity pushing back on having this nonsense taught in our communities. You won’t be surprised or disappointed that it’s a red state. Who knows, maybe some other bastions of rational thought won’t be far behind once they see how Idaho fares. (Arizona, Governor Ducey, looking at you).

Richard Edward: “I hope the law passes Mr. Narrator. I want to see equality of opportunity in my beautiful America. I don’t like the radical actors in the U.S. pushing these irrational theories on everyone, trying to negate traditional conservative values, values of faith.”

So, as I sit back and ponder the sad state of race theory that’s undermining my beautiful America, the attack on my neighbors and fellow citizens by those who would divide and destroy based upon the insane radical theory of white supremacy and white privilege, I see from the corner of my eye my new cat walk by on her way to her food bowl, glancing disdainfully back at me from over her shoulder, slowly sauntering by my office, taking in the entirety of her new kingdom. Well, at least one of us in the house understands the concept of privilege.

If you think that the ideas of white supremacy, white privilege, CRT and other race-based politics are causing an American Crisis, please leave me a comment.

—  Richard Edward Tracy

Revenge of the ‘Very Liberal’ Artx Majors

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by F. Muhammad from Pixabay

If you have a degree in sociology, psychology or gender studies, it’s not my fault. This isn’t a knock on your choice. I know how it feels to waste my own money, personally carrying around a degree in philosophy. I told myself I would continue on to law school, but the new ‘lottery’ (apologies to Shirley Jackson) draft system and my amazingly low draft number altered my plans.

Imagine my surprise when reading the news today and stumbling across an article that details just exactly how I, specifically as a white person, am supposed to behave in public when visiting the newly erected shrine dedicated to George Floyd; a drug addict and thug who had a violent criminal history. I am so glad that some woke social studies major got that figured out. I just hate not knowing how to act.

What would I do if I found myself in George Floyd Square, previously known as the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago, and didn’t conform to dictated expected behaviors?

Now I can go and visit that hallowed ground and do exactly what the rioters, BLM racists and socially woke, useful idiots want me to do.

Mr. Narrator (interrupts):  “Richard Edward, stop!  You are being disrespectful to the memory of George Floyd. People are trying to build a shrine to the memory of a hero, a man who sacrificed his life on the altar of justice. Crazy Nancy said so just a couple of days ago and you know you can’t tell her she is wrong.”

Richard Edward: “What? (don’t you just hate being surprised all of the time?)  Shrine to? Social justice warrior?  I read in an article by my colleague Elizabeth Vaughn that he was high on fentanyl at the time of his arrest. He told the officers “I can’t breathe” and repeated “put me on the ground” several times before he was placed on the ground during his apprehension. You sure we’re talking about the same dude?”

Mr. Narrator: “Yes, Richard Edward. That was George Floyd in life. In death, he has been given an entirely different biography. In life, he was just another drug-addled thug in Minneapolis who resisted arrest for his latest suspected crime; but in death, he has become a civil rights icon, more than worthy of your obsequious genuflecting. The woke graduate sociology majors have declared it so.”

Wow, is there anything a liberal arts degree can’t do? Rewrite history? Dictate your behavior in public places, especially according to your race? Tell millions of your neighbors how to think and feel about current events? I never understood that the possession of a degree in social studies, sociology or any other of the ‘Liberal Artx’ would hold the answer to all of the world’s conundrums.

Mr. Narrator: “Don’t be snarky, Richard Edward. These folks are serious. White people need to be told how to act in a place of worship. Here, let me show you what is required of you if you visit.  Newsmax captured the woke folk’s instructions in a nifty little list:

White guests need to “decenter” and “come to listen, learn, mourn, and witness.”

“Remember you are here to support, not to be supported,” the sign instructs.

White people are then asked to “contribute to the energy of the space, rather than drain it.”

Any “processing” must be brought to “other white folks” so that “BIPOC” (an acronym for “Black and Indigenous people of color”) are not harmed….

Richard Edward:  “Well, that does it. I am going to plan my trip to George Floyd Square right away. But before I go, I’ll first need to decipher the social justice warriors’ instructions to ensure my behavior will be acceptable to their hall-monitors, whom I am sure will be on duty, cell phone cameras at the ready.  These instructions are so wonderfully today’s pop psychology, I am positive they were written by recent graduates from any woke, ivy league school.”

“Mr. Narrator, do you know where I can go to find out how to ‘decenter’? This is important to me. My balance isn’t as good as it used to be, so any ‘decentering’ might have significantly adverse effects on my health and ability to stand upright. If I can’t stand up right, how can I follow the rest of their instructions?”

“Support?  I love being a support. That’s something I can get right without any homework. I’ve raised and supported a family, been married four times and thus clearly understand the true meaning of support. Heck, I once single-handedly held up a section of fence until the last post was installed. I can easily go to the location of the Great Fentanyl Incident and hand-out money, along with my deepest personally sympathy, to the race grifters who will inevitably inhabit the sidewalks of said intersection.”

“Be a contributor? You bet. Didn’t I already say I’ve been married four times?”

“Keep my processing to myself or folks of my own race? (So much for reaching out to others.) I guess I can support and contribute to those in the George Floyd matrix without letting it upset me to the point where I become triggered and need to run off, screaming for my safe space. Processing? Well, I used to work in the tech industry and can understand a little about processing, so I guess I’ll be alright with that one, too.”

“I can do this trip, Mr. Narrator. I can make the hajj to George Floyd Square and prostrate myself before the alter of wokeness, asking for forgiveness for being a white, law-abiding citizen; one whose expectations used to be only to ‘treat others as I would like to be treated.’ That life approach is so passé.”

Mr. Narrator:  “Richard Edward, I knew you would get it. There is hope for you to fit somewhere towards the bottom of the new woke, world order. We are so lucky that the sociology majors of the world have shown you your path to redemption.”

If you think that having a Liberal Artx degree and a holier than thou attitude does/doesn’t give one the right to dictate other’s behavior, please make a comment and let Richard Edward and Mr. Narrator know your thoughts.

—-  Richard Edward Tracy

Democrats to Biden: Illegal Immigrants Are ‘American Heroes’ Who Deserve Amnesty

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by WikiImages from Pixabay

A group of 22 Democratic members of Congress sent a letter to President Joe Biden on Tuesday requesting that he include H.R. 1909/S. 747, the Citizenship for Essential Workers Act, as part of the administration’s legislative package on jobs and infrastructure. The lawmakers claim these “essential workers are American heroes — and they have earned the right to become American citizens.” So, they are asking Biden to grant amnesty to at least five million illegal immigrants.

The letter is signed by Reps. Joaquin Castro of Texas and Ted Lieu of California, Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Alex Padilla of California in addition to 18 other Democrats.

“For the past year, essential workers have further proven themselves to be a truly important part of our nation’s critical infrastructure and crucial part of the backbone of our society,” the lawmakers opine. “The U.S. Department of Homeland Security even designated essential workers as part of our nation’s critical infrastructure. … Over five million of these workers are undocumented immigrants.”

“The Citizenship for Essential Workers Act directly relates to the priority of rebuilding America’s economic infrastructure and aligns entirely with the administration’s priority on defeating COVID-19. If Republicans continue to refuse to advance immigration legislation supported by the overwhelming majority of the American people, the next reconciliation package on jobs and infrastructure should include citizenship for essential workers.

“Speaker Pelosi has already indicated her support for including immigration legislation in legislative packages advanced through budget reconciliation given the clear “case about the budget implications of immigration,” while the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and 100 members of the Democratic Caucus have also urged the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for essential workers in COVID-19 relief legislation. The upcoming legislative package on jobs and infrastructure is the best opportunity to recognize and reward the sacrifices and labor of essential workers.”

There are so many things wrong with this letter, I don’t quite know where to begin.

The economy picked up steam in March. The pace of vaccinations has increased and businesses are opening up again. The Labor Department reported that the U.S. added 916,000 (nonfarm payroll) jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to 6 percent, according to CNBC data. However, as of April 2, the date of the jobs report, there were still 8.4 million more unemployed Americans than there were in February 2020, before the effects of the pandemic put us into a recession.

The idea of granting amnesty to over five million illegals at this stage in our economic recovery is about as wise as raising taxes.

Democrats tried to add an increase in the minimum wage to the $1.9 trillion bloated boondoggle of a COVID-19 relief bill they passed without a single Republican vote in March. Fortunately, the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, objected to its inclusion. She ruled that “the inclusion of the $15 minimum wage hike in a reconciliation bill violated Senate rules.”

If raising the hourly wages of unskilled, low-income American workers were truly important to them, they wouldn’t be lobbying for an influx of new, cheap labor which will compete with lower income earners and depress hourly wages even further.

Illegal immigrants are not American heroes. They are neither American nor are they heroes. They have broken U.S. laws by coming into the country unlawfully. But they know that once they arrive, they need only register with immigration officials and ultimately, they will be given food, shelter, medical care and education for their children. They will become economic parasites of the United States for life.

I suppose one might call them heroic for making the arduous journey to the border, but that was not the context lawmakers were referring to in their letter.

If only the Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress were as interested in the health and prosperity of U.S. citizens as they are about the well-being of illegal aliens.

Why are Democrats pushing so hard to bring as many illegals into the country as they possibly can?

I’ve never heard anyone explain it better than conservative commentator Candace Owens did during an appearance on Fox News’ “Life, Liberty and Levin” last month. (Note: This episode of Life, Liberty and Levin originally aired on March 28. It can be viewed here. Owen’s segment begins at 17:30.)

Owens believes it’s all part of the administration’s plan to import a new class of voters.

An examination of the Democrats’ historical strategy with black Americans provides a clue into their current objectives.

Owens begins with an explanation of how the Democratic Party, which claims to help blacks through all of their social programs, has actually suppressed them. While it may appear on the surface that Democrats have supported blacks by providing for them financially and rhetorically, their “largesse” has actually been a mechanism designed to hold them back, preventing them from taking the reins and succeeding, from breaking out of the cycle of poverty. Most blacks see only that Democrats are more generous than Republicans and have loyally supported them at the polls for decades. Many of us have known this for a long time.

Owens larger point, however, is that the black population has not grown fast enough for the Democrats. So, they are now “importing” a new class of voters. Democrats will ensure these people receive health care and that they are housed, fed and even educated. The party will see to it that the illegals now flooding into the U.S. from Central and South America in record numbers will become completely dependent on them for their survival.

Just as the majority of blacks continue to vote Democratic, so too, will the Hispanics. The cycle of poverty will repeat itself.

“Everyone keeps calling this a border crisis Mark. This isn’t a border crisis, this is a border plan,” Owens tells Levin.

“They are trying to import a new class of voters. They are trying to say to the Mexican-Americans, to the South-Americans … ‘we will help you, we’ll give you free stuff like we gave black Americans free stuff after Jim Crow ended. We’re gonna welfare-ize you. We’re gonna give you handouts, we’re gonna marry you to the government like we married black Americans to the government.’ It’s pure evil.”

Levin spoke about the media’s coverage of last month’s mass shooting in Atlanta, Georgia, that left eight people dead (including six Asians) and the Boulder, Colorado grocery store shooting that left 10 ten dead. In each case, the media racialized the stories. Levin says, “They’re racializing these issues. Of course, they’re only racializing it in one direction. These people in the media, these people in the Democrat Party are tearing this country apart, don’t you think?”

“With intention, with pure evil intention, they are tearing this country apart because they realize that race gives them power. Because people get emotional about race, right? They don’t even know the facts of the story, but if they say, ‘this was a white supremacist attack,’ they know that black Americans will instantly get angry and that’s how they need them. They rely on emotion, because it suspends rationality,” replied Owens.

“They don’t want people thinking rationally, they don’t want them thinking clearly, they don’t want them actually pursuing the facts,” she said. “They don’t want them looking at the data.”

This culture of racism, Owens explained, “was not created by black Americans, that culture was created by Democrats. Systematically created by Democrats – by Lyndon Baines Johnson who is hailed as a hero in textbooks when he was anything but. He was an avowed racist who sought to make sure that black Americans were programmed, that their families were destroyed and that they turned to the government for every single answer. And that is why we have a rotten culture in black America today. It was orchestrated by the people that always were the racists and continue today to be the racists and that is the Democrat Party.”

Biden and Harris are very well aware of conditions at the border. From their perspective, everything is moving ahead according to plan. They knew it would be a little “messy” in the beginning. But as always with Democrats, and this is especially true for today’s Democrats, the end justifies the means. The (roughly) two million illegal immigrants who will likely flow into our country this year will be added to the millions more who preceded them.

(Note: No one knows how many illegals are currently residing in America. I have seen figures ranging from 11 million to 29 million. My guess is the true number is closer to the latter,)

Democrats are hoping to preside over a repeat of the same cycle of dependency that worked so well for them with black Americans from the 1960s on. They will meet their every need and taxpayers will foot the bill. They will grant amnesty and provide a path to citizenship for them.

They expect members of this demographic group to become loyal Democratic voters who will help cement their power for as long as possible. In the end, the story may play out differently with Hispanics than it did for blacks, but that’s fodder for a different post. The point is that this is all part of the Democrats’ larger strategy to ensure one-party rule in America for generations to come.

United Airlines’ Diversity Pledge: ‘50% of the 5,000 pilots we train in the next decade to be women or people of color’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Dirk Daniel Mann from Pixabay

Who’s the wokest of them all? United Airlines believes “Our flight deck should reflect the diverse group of people on board our planes every day. That’s why we plan for 50% of the 5,000 pilots we train in the next decade to be women or people of color.”

Last week, Delta Airlines’ CEO Ed Bastien denounced Georgia over their recently passed voter reform legislation. On Saturday, America Airlines followed suit by announcing their opposition to similar legislation proposed in Texas.

United Airlines was the last of the big three to weigh in. On Monday, the airline released a statement which read:

Some have questioned the integrity of the nation’s election systems and are using it to justify stricter voting procedures, even though numerous studies have found zero credible evidence of widespread fraud in U.S. elections.

Legislation that infringes on the right to vote of fellow Americans is wrong. We believe that leaders in both parties should work to protect the rights of eligible voters by making it easier and more convenient for them to cast a ballot and have it counted.

On Tuesday, the company took it a bit further with a diversity pledge.

Today, United has one of the most diverse pilot populations of any U.S. carrier with nearly 20% of our pilot group made up of women and people of color. We are working toward raising that number even higher by partnering with diversity-led organizations and continuing to remove gender and racial barriers. And we’re going one step further with plans for 50% of United Aviate Academy students being women and people of color to ensure our students reflect the diversity of the customers and communities we serve.

United announces they are continuing to remove gender and racial barriers. Yet, that is precisely what they are doing by putting quotas in place to guide their hiring decisions.

Considering that the safety of millions of passengers is at stake, why not be colorblind when making your hiring decisions? Why not choose your pilots on the basis of competence, experience and training rather than on gender and race?

A novel concept for the wokest among us, I know. But perhaps best from a safety point of view.

Candace Owens: For the Biden Administration, It’s Not a Border Crisis, But a Border Plan

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

President Joe Biden’s refusal to call the debacle which is unfolding on our southwest border a crisis has been an outrage. Despite the photos, the recordings and the reports that come to us on an hourly basis, neither he nor his lady in waiting, Vice President Kamala Harris, have visited to see firsthand the misery their policies have led to. But what if, rather than a denial that the crisis exists, it’s all part of the administration’s plan to import a new class of voters?

An examination of the Democrats’ historical strategy with black Americans provides a clue into their current objectives.

Conservative commentator Candace Owens joined Fox News’ Mark Levin to discuss the Democratic Party’s total betrayal of America and the strategy behind it. (This episode of Life, Liberty and Levin originally aired on March 28. It can be viewed below. Owen’s segment begins at 17:30.)

Owens begins with an explanation of how the Democratic Party, which claims to help blacks through all of their social programs, has actually suppressed them. While it may appear on the surface that Democrats have supported blacks by providing for them financially and rhetorically, their “largesse” has actually been a mechanism designed to hold them back, preventing them from taking the reins and succeeding, from breaking out of the cycle of poverty. Most blacks see only that Democrats are more generous than Republicans and have loyally supported them at the polls for decades. Many of us have known this for a long time.

Owens larger point, however, is that the black population has not grown fast enough for the Democrats. So, they are now “importing” a new class of voters. Democrats will ensure these people receive health care and that they are housed, fed and even educated. The party will see to it that the illegals now flooding into the U.S. from Central and South America in record numbers will become completely dependent on them for their survival.

Just as the majority of blacks continue to vote Democratic, so too will the Hispanics. The cycle of poverty will repeat itself.

“Everyone keeps calling this a border crisis Mark. This isn’t a border crisis, this is a border plan,” Owens tells Levin.

“They are trying to import a new class of voters. They are trying to say to the Mexican-Americans, to the South-Americans … ‘we will help you, we’ll give you free stuff like we gave black Americans free stuff after Jim Crow ended. We’re gonna welfare-ize you. We’re gonna give you handouts, we’re gonna marry you to the government like we married black Americans to the government.’ It’s pure evil.”

Levin spoke about the media’s coverage of the recent mass shooting in Atlanta, Georgia, that left eight people dead (including six Asians) and the Boulder, Colorado grocery store shooting that left 10 ten dead. In each case, the media racialized the stories. Levin says, “They’re racializing these issues. Of course, they’re only racializing it in one direction. These people in the media, these people in the Democrat Party are tearing this country apart, don’t you think?”

“With intention, with pure evil intention, they are tearing this country apart because they realize that race gives them power. Because people get emotional about race, right? They don’t even know the facts of the story, but if they say, ‘this was a white supremacist attack,’ they know that black Americans will instantly get angry and that’s how they need them. They rely on emotion, because it suspends rationality,” replied Owens.

“They don’t want people thinking rationally, they don’t want them thinking clearly, they don’t want them actually pursuing the facts,” she said. “They don’t want them looking at the data.”

This culture of racism, Owens explained, “was not created by black Americans, that culture was created by Democrats. Systematically created by Democrats – by Lyndon Baines Johnson who is hailed as a hero in textbooks when he was anything but. He was an avowed racist who sought to make sure that black Americans were programmed, that their families were destroyed and that they turned to the government for every single answer. And that is why we have a rotten culture in black America today. It was orchestrated by the people that always were the racists and continue today to be the racists and that is the Democrat Party.”

Biden and Harris are very well aware of conditions at the border. From their perspective, everything is moving ahead according to plan. They knew it would be a little “messy” in the beginning. But as always with Democrats, and this is especially true for today’s Democrats, the end justifies the means. The (roughly) two million illegal immigrants who will likely flow into our country this year will be added to the millions more who preceded them.

(Note: No one knows how many illegals are currently residing in America. I have seen figures ranging from 11 million to 29 million. My guess is the true number is closer to the latter,)

Democrats are hoping to preside over a repeat of the same cycle of dependency that worked so well for them with black Americans from the 1960s on. They will meet their every need and taxpayers will foot the bill. They will grant amnesty and provide a path to citizenship for them.

They expect members of this demographic group to become loyal Democratic voters who will help cement their power for as long as possible. In the end, the story may play out differently with Hispanics than it did for blacks, but that’s fodder for a different post. The point is that the Democrats are not in denial, it’s all part of their larger strategy to ensure one-party rule in America for generations to come.

April 7: Video taken down by Youtube. It can be viewed here.

VA High School Teacher Rebukes Student Who Refused to See Race in a Photo; Doesn’t End Well for the Teacher

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Hatice EROL from Pixabay

A high school teacher held up a photograph of two girls standing back to back, one of whom was white and the other black. The caption on the photo asks, “What is race?”

He asks his students what they see in the picture. The exchange that follows took place in an advanced English classroom in the very affluent town of Ashburn, Virginia.  It was caught on video and published by Fox News.

One boy replies, “Just two people chillin’.”

“Right, just two people,” the teacher says. “Nothing more to that picture?”

“Nah, not really. Just two people chillin’.”

“I don’t believe that you believe that. I don’t believe that you look at this as just two people,” the teacher tells him.

“It truly is just two people though, is it not?”

“I think you’re being intentionally coy about what this is a picture of,” the teacher replies.

This continues and finally the student says, “I’m confused on what you would like me to speak on…”

I don’t think you are, I don’t know why you do this…You act as if there’s noting noticeable about this apart from the fact there are two people.”

“Well, I’m confused. Are you trying to get me to say that there are two different races in this picture?” the student asks.

“Yes, I am asking you to say that,” the teacher says.

“Well, at the end of the day, wouldn’t that just be feeding into the problem of looking at race instead of just acknowledging them as two normal people?”

“No, it’s not because you can’t look at the people and not acknowledge that there are racial differences, right?

“But, if we’re looking for equality within all this, then why would we need to point out things such as that?

“Because those differences are real things.”

 

My parent’s generation was very cognizant of race. But as each new generation followed, race gradually began to recede into the background.

When my own children were going through school in the 2000s and beyond, I can honestly say it wasn’t an issue, at least from our perspective.

America had made great strides toward equality and I can’t think of a country in the world that offered greater opportunities to blacks and other minority groups than the U.S. If I’m wrong, please enlighten me.

It was when Democrats decided to use race as a political weapon against former President Donald Trump, and ultimately against anyone who supported him, that it exploded as an issue.

And now everything is racist – from the books we read to our children to the pancake syrup we use.

The teacher in this video is the problem. ‘How can this boy not see what I see? He must be lying.’

‘One girl is white and one is black, see, see!’

Sorry $#&^$%#, he doesn’t see.

The racial divide in America was closing up until liberals took a chisel and pried it open again.

This is on them.

USA Today Fires ‘Race and Inclusion’ Editor For Anti-White Tweet; She Blames Sean Hannity, Alt-Right Twitter in Public Letter

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

After catching a glimpse of the young man behind Monday’s Boulder, Colorado, grocery store shooting, liberals took to Twitter to express their rage at the evil white man. Most of these tweets were quickly deleted when the shooter was identified as Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, a Syrian-born Muslim.

Hemal Jhaveri, USA Today’s ironically named “Race and Inclusion” editor, was very upset after seeing that an angry white man had killed 10 innocents. In response to a tweet posted by Deadspin writer Emily Julia DiCaro, which said, “Extremely tired of people’s lives depending on whether a white man with an AR-15 is having a good day or not,” she wrote, “It’s always an angry white man. Always.” Once she realized she’d been mistaken, she promptly deleted it.

But the damage was done, and on Tuesday morning, Jhaveri was fired. She wrote a public letter which she published on Medium to tell the world about the great injustice she’d just suffered.

Here are some of the highlights:

“I am no longer employed at USA TODAY, a company that was my work home for almost eight years. On Monday night, I sent a tweet responding to the fact that mass shooters are most likely to be white men. It was a dashed off over-generalization, tweeted after pictures of the shooter being taken into custody surfaced online. It was a careless error of judgment, sent at a heated time, that doesn’t represent my commitment to racial equality. I regret sending it. I apologized and deleted the tweet.”

“There was social media outrage, threats and harassment towards me, and by the end of the day, USA TODAY had relieved me of my position as a Race and Inclusion editor. I wish I were more surprised by it, but I’m not. Some part of me has been waiting for this to happen because I can’t do the work I do and write the columns I write without invoking the ire and anger of alt-right Twitter.”

“I had always hoped that when that moment inevitably came, USA TODAY would stand by me and my track record of speaking the truth about systemic racism. That, obviously, did not happen.”

“My previous tweets were flagged not for inaccuracy or for political bias, but for publicly naming whiteness as a defining problem. That is something USA TODAY, and many other newsrooms across the country, cannot tolerate.”

“Like many BIPOC [black, Indigenous and people of color] writers in newsrooms, I’ve also dealt with the constant micro-aggressions and outright racist remarks from the majority white staff.”

“On two separate occasions, I was asked to edit a piece on young black golfers, but warned not to use language that would alienate white audiences.”

“There’s also the USA TODAY Sports editor, who, upon learning his daughter was going to marry an Indian man only spoke to me to ask questions about what it was like to be Indian never about my beat as an NHL writer.”

“This is not about bias, or keeping personal opinions off of Twitter. It’s about challenging whiteness and being punished for it. … Like many places, USA TODAY values ‘equality and inclusion,’ but only as long as it knows its rightful place, which is subservient to white authority.”

“White USA TODAY reporters have been able to minimize racialized people in print, our white Editor-In-Chief was thoughtless about black face, and a senior politics editor (also white) showed disregard for journalistic ethics by hosting a tax payer funded reception for Trump appointees. All kept their jobs. Sending one wrong tweet that ended up in the hands of Sean Hannity on Fox News though, was enough for this publication to turn tail. So many newsrooms claim to value diverse voices, yet when it comes to backing them up, or looking deeper into how white supremacy permeates their own newsrooms, they quickly retreat.”

Doesn’t sound like she’s learned anything from this experience, does it? Readers?

Black Leaders Take Aim at Sens. Sinema, Manchin Over Refusal to Nix Filibuster; ‘They Are, in Effect, Supporting Racism’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

The Senate website defines the filibuster as an “informal term for any attempt to block or delay Senate action on a bill or other matter by debating it at length, by offering numerous procedural motions, or by any other delaying or obstructive actions.” This device is meant to prevent the party in the Senate minority from being completely overpowered by the majority party.

Prior to the election, the Indivisible Project, a movement dedicated to advancing the election of progressive candidates, explained why the filibuster is bad news for Democrats:

“It’s simple: none of the progressive issues that Democratic candidates and congressional leaders are discussing today will become law unless we do something about the filibuster.”

“If [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell expects to be the Grim Reaper of progressive policies, the scythe he’ll use is the Senate filibuster. Unless we change the rules.”

With a 50-50 balance of power in the Senate, Democrats control the upper chamber by the slimmest margin possible.

Current Senate rules require a minimum of 60 votes to pass legislation. Some Democrats have hoped to abolish the filibuster so that only a simple majority of 51 votes (50 Democratic senators plus Vice President Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote) would be necessary to advance their progressive agenda.

Their latest challenge is that two Democratic Senators, Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, have both quite strongly announced their opposition to abolishing the filibuster.

Just two months ago, a representative for Sinema told The Washington Post’s White House reporter, Seung Min Kim, that “Kyrsten is against eliminating the filibuster, and she is not open to changing her mind about eliminating the filibuster.”

Up until then, conservatives had been counting on Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to save us from being overrun by leftist lesiglation. Manchin won re-election in 2018 in a state that went overwhelmingly for former President Donald Trump by nearly 40 points in 2020 and over 41 in 2016.

Shortly after the announcement from Team Sinema, Politico reported that Manchin was “emphatic” that he “will not vote to kill the filibuster.” Asked if there were any scenario in which he would change his mind, the senator replied: “None whatsoever that I will vote to get rid of the filibuster.”

Protecting the filibuster is essential to protecting us from the tyranny of the majority.

Even with the filibuster in place, Democrats can do and have already done a lot of damage. But their major radical initiatives, such as the Election Reform bill which passed the House earlier this month, granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, and stacking the Supreme Court, can be blocked by the Republicans.

Naturally, Democrats are trying to exert maximum pressure on Sinema and Manchin to change their minds.

Politico has interviewed several black civil rights leaders to find out what they plan to do about this. According to Politico, “top [civil rights] officials framed the choice as existential for a party that depends on Black and brown voters — and they are planning pressure campaigns privately and publicly to make that clear.”

Rev. Al Sharpton plans to hold town halls and rallies in Sinema’s and Manchin’s home states. He said, “The pressure that we are going to put on Sinema and Manchin is calling [the filibuster] racist and saying that they are, in effect, supporting racism. Why would they be wedded to something that has those results? Their voters need to know that.”

Sharpton cautioned Democrats that if they fail to end the filibuster, then “civil rights leaders might have less reason to help generate enthusiasm and turnout in the 2022 midterm elections without being able to point to actual laws Democrats passed.”

Sounds like a threat.

He added, “Many of us, and certainly all of us in the civil rights leadership, are committed to policies and laws and causes, not to people’s political careers. We’re not into that. We want to change the country. And if there is not feasible evidence that we’re doing that, it is not in our concern to be aggressively involved.”

Sinema and/or Manchin may yet flip, but I would be willing to bet it wouldn’t be because Al Sharpton and his merry band of civil rights leaders come to their states and call them racists.

Although politicians are famous for flip-flopping, after putting out such a strong statement of opposition as her representative did in conversation with the Washington Post reporter, I would be surprised if Sinema caved. Sharpton’s actions might just make her dig in her heels a little deeper.

Manchin, on the other hand, strikes me as less resolute than Sinema. However, he did say he was “emphatic” he wouldn’t vote to end the filibuster.

There is another option. The Senate could potentially create a carve-out specifically for voting rights legislation, a measure they’ve taken before. The Senate has created exceptions to the filibuster in the past for confirmations of Supreme Court nominees and for budget reconciliation (which is how the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill was passed).

Manchin is currently the only Senate Democrat who is not a co-sponsor of the voting reform bill known as S. 1.

On Wednesday, Manchin told reporters, “I think all of us should be able to be united around voting rights, but it should be limited to voting rights.”

But if the bill were to be limited to votings rights, according to CBS News, “it would strip provisions related to campaign finance and ethics reform, which are key priorities for progressives.”

In a Tuesday statement, “Manchin expressed concerns about S. 1, and said that he would support bipartisan legislation on voting rights.” The statement said:

As the Senate prepares to take up the For the People Act, we must work toward a bipartisan solution that protects everyone’s right to vote, secures our elections from foreign interference, and increases transparency in our campaign finance laws. Pushing through legislation of this magnitude on a partisan basis may garner short-term benefits, but will inevitably only exacerbate the distrust that millions of Americans harbor against the U.S. government.

He issued another statement on Thursday in which he reiterated his opposition to creating a carve-out to the filibuster rule specifically for voting rights. He noted that would be “like being a little bit pregnant.” You either kill the filibuster or you keep it.

Let’s hope that both he and Sinema stand by their pledges not to abolish the filibuster. All Republican senators, even those whose votes can’t always be counted on, such as Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, are unanimously opposed to ending the filibuster. They are also opposed to the voting reform bill.

Sinema and Manchin are the only thing standing between us and the enactment of the Democrats’ entire radical agenda.  Let’s hope they stand strong.