GOV/MIL Leftists Call For New "Secret Police" Force To Spy On Trump Supporters (AN ABSOLUTELY MUST-READ THREAD)


On TB every waking moment

Their Endgame For The Flag, The National Anthem, The Declaration Of Independence, & The Constitution

TUESDAY, JUL 06, 2021 - 04:20 PM
Authored by Michael Snyder via,

A huge national debate about our most important national symbols has erupted, and it is rapidly becoming one of our hottest political issues. But what most people don’t realize is that this isn’t really a debate about our past. Rather, it is a debate about what our future is going to look like. Those that are demonizing the American flag, the national anthem, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are not doing so for the purpose of winning a historical debate.

Their true goal is to “cancel” those symbols and replace them with new ones, because our existing national symbols represent values and principles that are diametrically opposed to the values and principles that they wish to impose upon society.

If they ultimately get their way, the United States will eventually become an extremely repressive high tech dystopian society where absolutely no dissent is tolerated.

In other words, we would look a whole lot like communist China does today.

When I was growing up, the “godless communists” on the other side of the globe were the “bad guys”, and I was raised to greatly love the flag and the freedoms that it represented. But now our flag is regularly demonized by the corporate media. For example, the New York Times just published an article in which the flag was described as “alienating”
What was once a unifying symbol — there is a star on it for each state, after all — is now alienating to some, its stripes now fault lines between people who kneel while “The Star-Spangled Banner” plays and those for whom not pledging allegiance is an affront.

And it has made the celebration of the Fourth of July, of patriotic bunting and cakes with blueberries and strawberries arranged into Old Glory, into another cleft in a country that seems no longer quite so indivisible, under a flag threatening to fray.
At one time, it would have been unthinkable for a major newspaper to publish such a statement, but times have changed.

And calls for our existing flag to be replaced with a new one are starting to grow louder. The following comes from a widely circulated opinion piece that singer Macy Gray authored last month
President Biden, Madame Harris and members of Congress: the American flag has been hijacked as code for a specific belief. God bless those believers, they can have it. Like the Confederate, it is tattered, dated, divisive, and incorrect. It no longer represents democracy and freedom. It no longer represents ALL of us. It’s not fair to be forced to honor it. It’s time for a new flag.
Of course it isn’t just the flag that they want to replace.

Right now, there is a petition that is calling for a new national anthem
The petition, started by Lawrence Johnson, cites three reasons why the national anthem should be changed:

The “Star Spangled Banner” contains “racism,” elitism and even sexism embedded in its third and fourth stanzas, which have no place in the national anthem of a democracy that claims that all men (and women) are created equal, the petition says.
That particular petition is suggesting that “American The Beautiful” should be the new anthem, but a lot of people are also now referring to “Lift Every Voice And Sing” as a “national anthem”
PBS has sparked tense backlash with its decision to have Vanessa Williams perform the “black national anthem” during its July 4 coverage — with critics blasting the move as divisive and un-American.
Williams’ performance on the station’s annual Capitol Fourth program Sunday evening is intended to celebrate the recognition of Juneteenth’s establishment as a federal holiday.
In the end, they aren’t going to be satisfied with changing just one or two things.
The goal is for all of the symbols of our founding era to be “canceled”, and this even includes our most important founding documents.

Earlier today, I was stunned to learn that NPR is now publicly claiming that the Declaration of Independence is filled with “flaws and hypocrisies”
In an online article, NPR stated: ‘Over the past 32 years, Morning Edition has broadcast a reading of the Declaration of Independence by NPR staff as a way of marking Independence Day.

‘But after last summer’s protests and our national reckoning on race, the words in the document land differently.’

In reference to the ‘flaws and hypocrisies’ within the historic document, NPR wrote: ‘It famously declares “that all men are created equal” even though women, enslaved people and Indigenous Americans were not held as equal at the time.’
And Congresswoman Maxine Waters is publicly attacking it as well
July 4th… & so, the Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal. Equal to what? What men? Only white men?
“All men are created equal” is a phrase that has been a beacon of hope for men and women all over the globe for more than two centuries, but now Maxine Waters would like us to believe that it is actually an insult.

Sadly, I am certain that it won’t be too long before someone out there comes up with a “new Declaration of Independence” to replace the old one.

Of course the U.S. Constitution is under relentless assault as well. When I was in law school, my liberal professors taught me that it was a “living, breathing document” that could be changed to make it say anything that we wanted it to say.

But these days that is not enough for many on the left. A lot of them now want to get rid of that “flawed” document entirely and start over.

The endgame is to create an entirely different country from the one that our founders originally established, and every year they make a little bit more progress toward that goal.

Of course there are still millions of patriotic Americans that are absolutely determined to keep them from winning, but the other side has far more money and far more power at this stage.

This is a point that Victor Davis Hanson made very well in one of his recent articles
Name one mainline institution that the woke left does not now control — and warp. The media? The campus? Silicon Valley?

Professional sports? The corporate boardroom? Foundations? The K-12 educational establishment? The military hierarchy? The government deep state? The FBI top echelon?

The left absorbed them all. But this time around, members of the left really believe that “by any means necessary” is no mere slogan.

Instead, it is a model of how to disrupt or destroy American customs, traditions and values.
All throughout our history, Americans have sacrificed so much so that future generations could live free.

But now all of our precious freedoms are on the line, and the other side is absolutely determined to permanently destroy everything that our founders worked so hard to build.

We have reached such a critical moment in our history, and America’s future hangs in the balance.


On TB every waking moment

The Genesis of Our American Collective Meltdown
Our adversaries can’t quite believe their good fortune. Had they thought up ways to divide and impoverish America, they could not have improved on our own collective meltdown.

By Victor Davis Hanson

July 4, 2021

This Fourth of July holiday we might pause for a moment from our festivities to ask how we collectively lost our minds over the last 15 months—and are we yet regaining any semblance of our sanity?

A pandemic caused by the leak of a Chinese-engineered virus and its coverup was cause enough for nationwide madness. But the spread of COVID-19 was followed by a nationalized and often politicized “flatten-the-curve” quarantine that soon ensured a stir-crazy nation. Tens of millions saw no people, and heard nothing human other than what was fed to them through television and computers. No wonder they grew paranoid, conspiratorial, and angry, and soon forgot the therapeutic nature of personal interaction and the shared humanity of being in the physical presence of others.

Our first self-induced recession came next and lasted over a year, destroying all the hard work of the prior three years. Next ensued the death of George Floyd and a subsequent 120 days of rioting, looting, and arson. The immediate costs were $2 billion in damage, over 25 deaths, 14,000 arrests, and a Lord of the Flies anarchy with no-go zones in our major cities. A McCarthyite frenzy followed, as remote-controlled America hunted down the supposed “racists” among us—while career agendas, personal grudges, and ideological hatred fueled the cancel culture.

All this was antecedent to our first election in which Election Day voting was incidental, not essential, to the outcome. This was also our first presidential campaign in which the incumbent was stricken by a pandemic virus. And his opponent, due to his age and infirmity, simply reverted to the 19th-century style of staying home and outsourcing the electioneering to the Democratic-media complex. Biden’s basement became the equivalent of the “front-porch” of homebound candidates of a century and more ago.

The derangement was then capped off, first, by a buffoonish riot at the Capitol followed by a Reichstag-fire style militarization of Washington, D.C., in a “never let a crisis go to waste” psychodrama. Then came a novel second and unprecedented presidential impeachment, without a special prosecutor, witnesses, or cross-examinations. It was based on the myth of a deadly “armed insurrection” fueled by President Trump, which purportedly led to the murder of a police officer. Later most of the writs of the House impeachment were proven fantasies, from the idea of “armed” and “well-organized” to “murderous” revolutionaries. The only mysteries were the identity of the unnamed officer who fatally shot an unarmed female protester and military veteran, and why the government has still not released thousands of hours of video detailing the riot.
That impeachment charade was followed by a trial in the Senate—without the chief justice presiding—of a president, who was no longer in office.

The finale was the promise of a “moderate” good ol’ Joe Biden from Scranton—the supposed correction to Trump. In reality, Biden’s first 150 days proved, as the cynics predicted, that he was mere cover and conveyance for the implementation of the most radical agenda since the 1930s.

So we can cut America some slack when we ponder why the entire country is now descending into a collective madness, given the amount of propaganda and media distortion pumped out during the quarantine, and since.

The Chaos of Daily Living
Within the space of about 6 months in 2021, the costs of the essentials of life have skyrocketed—food, gasoline, housing, appliances, cars and trucks, and building materials. Non-ending streams of stimulus money, huge deficits, and pent-up demand so far have ensured that Americans would pay such spiking prices. And soon radical inflation may trigger 1970s stagflation and then recession, as the “why-go-to-work?” checks and consumer zeal finally cease, but the government printing machine keeps going. What good is free government money if spiraling prices eat away the entitlement?

California is the worst run of our states. But it is also always a helpful bellwether of where we are descending. The state has plenty of oil and natural gas. There are still remnants of a once-thriving nuclear and hydroelectric industry. But power outages are now commonplace—to the point that, like Third-Worlders, we merely shrug when the lights go out as if it were a green way of reducing carbon emissions.

Forty million people driving on roads and highways intended for 20 million people—27 percent of them not born in America—becomes a “Road-Warrior”-like wildness intended to discourage the kind of driving to which we became accustomed in the 20th century. Any trip over 200 miles cannot be calibrated by traditional “arrival times.” Ad hoc repairs on ancient roads paralyzes traffic not already slowed by accidents. Speeding and traffic violations are commonplace. Either the population ignores or does not know the law, or a paranoid law enforcement is reluctant to enforce the laws, or there are simply too few patrol cars responsible for too many drivers.

Gas can range from $4.00 to over $5.00 a gallon; $100 fill-ups are common. To go to a California Home Depot or Lowes store is to be amazed at grades of plywood priced at nearly $90 a sheet.

Californians are leaving in droves, but housing costs are still soaring. Californians love nice houses. But those who have them don’t like to allow anyone to build new ones for others.

A horrendous drought has dried up reservoirs and dropped the water tables of most aquifers. Privately, Californians know that it was madness not to build reservoirs, all canceled over 30 years ago, or to allow the California Water Project’s infrastructure to decay, or to continue to allow scarce fresh water to flow into the sea, or not to invest in new technologies of underground water savings and storage.

But they also know that as long as the Bay Area’s activists have sufficient supplies of water (from their own early 20th century, far-seeing politicians who created the huge Hetch Hetchy transference and won first-dibs allotments from the subsequent California Water Project), they will continue to push green agendas, the disastrous consequences of which the elite avoid, given their own wealth and power.

High-speed rail is a tragic joke. It is inert and unfinished. The ostentatious half-built overpasses stand like modern graffiti-stained versions of Stonehenge. Its only ostensible purpose seems to have been a green plan to siphon money from road repair and expansion.

Mention San Francisco to a Californian, and the same, monotonous warnings arise: don’t go there! And if you must, don’t park there—since smashing into a car and stealing its contents are viewed as understandable redistribution rather than criminal acts. Others advise to check constantly the soles of your shoes: human and animal excrement is ubiquitous as the city’s sanitation regresses to something resembling Old Cairo or medieval London.

I drive often to the central Sierra. For the last four years the talk there was “Why don’t they do something about the millions of trees that have died from drought and bug infestation?” The locals now say of the incinerated forests “Why don’t they do something about the millions of those charred black trees?” Such sincere questions assume people matter more than ideology. They don’t.

In a state where defecation on the sidewalks apparently hurts no one, drought and fires consuming a forest are also OK—as long as it is likewise deemed a function of nature. In California, logging an acre of timber is insurrectionary; 400,000 acres going up in smoke is “stuff happens.”

Policies and Politicians
The truth is that the necessities of life—safety, affordability of the essentials, transportation, power, and fuel—are now iffy. If 15 years ago, Americans more or less saw each other as fellow citizens rather than as members of rival tribes, now they are resegregating into Dark Age bands. In place of oral bards and mythic sagas, we have dry and racist “critical race theory.”

There is no media credibility left after assuring us for years that the Steele dossier was the gold standard, that Robert Mueller’s dream team would prove “collusion,” that Donald Trump sicced the federal police on demonstrators for a cheap photo-op stunt, that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation, and that only conspiracists could make a looney connection between COVID-19’s ground zero origins in Wuhan and a nearby Level-4 virology lab, with ties to the Chinese military.

The current chaos of everyday life of course follows from national policy and politics. The streets are on a reverse trajectory into the 1970s, since crime is redefined as either tolerable collateral damage, “equity,” or a collective indictment of society rather than one of individual culpability. When mayors claim that burning a police precinct is a mere loss of “brick and mortar,” or taking over downtown Seattle is just part of a “summer of love,” or when the architect of the “1619 Project” claims looting is not violence, then crime is no longer crime.

The Left says it has not defunded the police because there are still police to be seen. But progressives have done something far more insidious: America has destroyed police deterrence by a year of anti-police venom, by prosecutors selectively and asymmetrically exempting the arrested, and by prompting police retirements, resignations or simple slowdowns. There is now in the minds of all big-city cops a constant cost-to-benefit calculation: going into the inner city has become a lose/lose/lose/lose/lose proposition in which a 911 call from the danger zone can get an officer killed, injured, fired, suspended, imprisoned, or rendered a fool, as the successfully arrested are summarily let go.

The country has gone mad with debt. Both parties are responsible for the massive spending. The Republican defense is that Democrats would spend even more—and, if they are lavishing entitlements to buy votes, why shouldn’t we?

The Left’s excuse is not just the old idea of redistribution, but a new revolutionary myth that money and debt are really irrelevant constructs. A novel economic pseudoscience has revised or discarded the oppressive idea of having to pay back what was borrowed.

Traditionalists and conservatives always assumed that the military, the intelligence, and investigatory agencies, and the prosecutorial industry were at least above politics, defenders of traditional and constitutional norms, and completely professional in their service.

No longer. There is now a new military-industrial-intelligence-legal complex. Its hierarchy is politically weaponized, and amply remunerated. The careers of John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, General Mark Milley, and a score of retired four-star officers, Robert Mueller and his dream team, and the Department of Justice are characteristically determined and calibrated by politics rather than competence.

The usual consequences follow: half the country no longer trusts its once esteemed FBI, CIA, or military. And when these agencies veer from their assigned tasks, it is no wonder that they miss impending signs of terrorism in Boston, Fort Hood, and San Bernardino, had little clue that the “JVs” of ISIS were expanding in Iraq, and never really informed the American people about the costs, the benefits, the stakes and the likely future of the two-decade Afghan war. In the 1960s the Left sought to tarnish the reputation of what they saw as hated government institutions and failed; in the 2020s, the Left diminished the reputation of what they now saw as useful and malleable institutions and succeeded.

America does not quite know what will follow from the first months of the Biden Administration. Already, it has managed to destroy the idea of a border, with an anticipated 2 million entering the country illegally over a 12 month period. It demolished the idea of the police and prosecutorial deterrence curbing crime. It is ending the trajectory of America’s natural gas and oil renaissance that enriched the country, and freed it from Middle East entanglements. And it killed off the notion that government should seek to ensure that race is not how we collectively define the content of our individual characters.

Meanwhile, our enemies and rivals—China, Iran, and Russia especially—are giddy at what America has become. The American Left, they believe, has done a much better job of denying Chinese culpability for a Chinese-engineered virus than had the Chinese communist media.

When billionaires, such as Michael Bloomberg, see China as essentially democratic (“The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China, and they listen to the public . . . Xi Jinping is not a dictator.”), when Charles Munger applauds their clampdown on outspoken capitalists like Jack Ma (“I don’t want the, all of the Chinese system, but I certainly would like to have the financial part of it in my own country, . . . Communists did the right thing. They just called in Jack Ma and say, ‘You aren’t gonna do it, sonny.’”), and when Bill Gates believes that in the midst of the pandemic, a lying China had done “a lot of things right in the beginning,” we can conclude America’s richest are placing their bets on a Chinese-Communist controlled 21st century, and will adjust accordingly.

Our adversaries can’t quite believe their good fortune. Had they thought up ways to divide and impoverish America, to see its cities burned, and looted, to weaken its economy and currency, to erode the unity of its once-feared military, and to entrench the most effective critics of America in America—not in Beijing, Moscow, Pyongyang, or Tehran, but in corporate boardrooms, campuses, newsrooms, Hollywood, Wall Street, and the Pentagon—they could not have improved on what has happened in 2020-21, the era of our collective meltdown.


On TB every waking moment

Equity: A High-Sounding, Seemingly Right Word-Fake that’s Utterly Racist
Photo credit: Jon Tyson

July 6, 2021
Patrick Luscri

As we finish our Independence Day celebration, consider this claim from USA Today regarding the need for equity:

“A house with a white picket fence and a big backyard for a Fourth of July barbecue may be a staple of the American dream, but experts and local politicians say multifamily zoning is key to combating climate change, racial injustice, and the nation’s growing affordable housing crisis.”

In other words, we should transform our suburbs into low-income housing zones at the expense of a staple of the American Dream. Why? Because people who can’t or won’t realize it shouldn’t be expected or encouraged to do so. If this is true, it’s only fair to force cities to replace zoning for suburbs with zoning for multifamily housing.

This is equity. It’s the great leveler being pushed by the president and party in power. In fact, it’s an essential component of their infrastructure bill.

Not equality
What is equity? It is NOT equality. It’s a federal push to foster (force) fairness by limiting some and lifting others. Its pushers seek to level the playing field in regard to opportunity, housing, employment, and a whole host of social justice issues.

Equity has nothing to do with Martin Luther King’s dream or the American Dream. In fact, it’s antithetical to both. Those who push it assume that poor people of one color cannot rise above their circumstances. This is racism. And it’s a false belief that doesn’t lift anyone.

In the days to come, we’ll hear more and more about equity. Let’s not confuse it with equality. Equality powers and enables people. Equity limits and discourages them.

Equity is an obstacle for all of us. It threatens to reduce opportunity for Americans in all income brackets. Equity doesn’t enable anyone; it enslaves them. It empowers no one except those in government.

Equity is neither fair nor just. It’s just a high-sounding word-fake—seemingly right, but utterly racist.


On TB every waking moment

Legal watchdogs battle CRT-inspired racial segregation in public schools, federal agencies

"This is not just a local school issue, the federal government is trying to mandate this throughout our country," said the Southeastern Legal Foundation's Kimberly Hermann.

By Natalia Mittelstadt
Updated: July 6, 2021 - 10:54pm

As critical race theory is being implemented in public schools and the federal government, the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a pro-limited-government legal watchdog organization, is fighting to preempt it through the courts.

Kimberly Hermann, general counsel for SLF, told the John Solomon Reports podcast on Tuesday about SLF's lawsuits against school districts and the federal government regarding critical race theory.

One of SLF's clients, a teacher in the Evanston, Ill., school district, filed a complaint with the Department of Education in 2019 saying that the district was violating the Civil Rights Act. After investigating it for 18 months, the department found in January of this year that the district was segregating students and teachers by skin color, which violates federal law.

When the Biden administration came in, they rescinded the department's letter of finding without explanation, Hermann relates, which is why SLF filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop the school district's implementation of critical race theory.

"n trainings, they're actually putting non-white teachers in one room, white teachers in another room, and training them with different lessons," Hermann said. "And then they're doing that in the classroom."

Hermann described one of the books used for pre-K through eighth grade, titled "Not My Idea: A Book about Whiteness," as picturing "a white person dressed as a devil, holding up what it calls a contract binding you to whiteness, and it says that whiteness gets you the opportunity to mess endlessly with the lives of your friends, neighbors, loved ones, and all fellow humans of color. And then it asks the students to sign this."

She said that according to a recent executive order, the Biden administration is going to require affinity groups in government agencies, where people are segregated.

"[J]ust this week, right, a new executive order came out where they're going to actually be requiring affinity groups in our government agencies," Hermann said.

"So what we're fighting here, the federal government is trying to actually federalize through all of our government agencies, and then trickle that down into the schools.

"So make no mistake about it: This is not just a local school issue, the federal government is trying to mandate this throughout our country. We have literally gone backwards, and I don't understand why they want it other than for power and money, to be honest."

The SLF has represented Just the News founder and Editor in Chief John Solomon in public records requests.


On TB every waking moment

School Board Recalls Nearly Double as Parents Fight CRT, Pandemic Policies
Community members hold signs that read, Equity Is Not Equality, at the Litchfield Elementary School District board meeting at Litchfield Elementary School on April 13, 2021.
Meg Potter/The Republic

With school efforts to indoctrinate children with Critical Race Theory (CRT) and the growing consequences of pandemic school closures, one thing is clear — parents have had enough.

There have been more school board member recall efforts in 2021 than in any year since 2006, Axios reported. This year alone, the organization has tracked 54 recalls with 135 members targeted. The typical year between 2006 and 2020 has seen an average of 23 recall efforts against 52 school board members.

While in the past, recalls have stemmed from “disputes over mismanagement, open meeting violations or allegations of corruption,” this year’s recalls “focus on efforts to snuff out teachings on critical race theory and displeasure about mask requirements.”

Grassroots efforts — which have been seen with frequency on the left — are now being adopted by conservatives and parents who don’t want their children learning from home indefinitely or who don’t want race explained through the lens of CRT.

As Breitbart News previously reported:
Critical Race Theory holds that the United States is racist by design, because its Constitution and all of its other institutions emerged in a context where slavery was legal. According to the theory, the very institution of private property in the U.S. is corrupt because it was enshrined in a system that saw black people as chattels.
… Race is to Critical Race Theory what class is to Marxism: a basic building block of society, which can only be defeated by a revolution that gives power to the formerly oppressed.
A groundswell from parents in places like Loudoun County, Virginia; Mequon, Wisconsin; and Litchfield Park, Arizona, is aimed at curtailing radical teachings from infiltrating places where young minds are shaped.

In Loudoun County for example, a political action committee led by former Trump Justice Department official Ian Prior is sponsoring a recall of school board members. Those board members are accused of being a part of a “Facebook group that created and shared a list of parents who opposed “racist” critical race theory in academia, Breitbart News reported.

Four out of seven members of the Mequon-Thiensville School District Board of Education in Wisconsin are being recalled “over the district’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and introducing critical race theory lessons,” according to Axios.

Two board members for the Litchfield School District are also facing recall efforts after the board approved an “equity” statement in December of 2020, Arizona Republic reported.

Parents in other counties are seeking to oust school board members for delaying a return to in-person learning.

In the Douglas County School District in Colorado for example, four of seven board members are facing recall efforts. A man named Nate Ormond organized a group called “Road to Recall” after he raised concerns about child suicide rates and child abuse enabled by the school board’s inability to decide between in-person and remote learning, according to ABC7 Denver.

Another board member in the La Mesa-Spring Valley School District in California is facing a recall because she reportedly did not want to make teachers return to school without a chance to get the coronavirus vaccine.

“That seems like a very white supremacist ideology to force people to comply and conform without thinking about all of the intersecting factors and barriers that exist for all families,”school board member Chardá Bell-Fontenot said at the meeting.

While parents fight for their children’s education in states around the country, some Democrats have denied that schools are even teaching CRT.

Simultaneously, the largest teachers’ union in the country just vowed to push CRT into schools despite growing opposition. The National Education Association (NEA) promised to “share and publicize, through existing channels, information already available on CRT– what it is and what it is not,” Breitbart News reported.

And while the devastating effects of lockdowns continue to unfold — more drug overdoses, increased suicide rates in young people, skyrocketing murder rates, and more domestic violence (to name a few) — the Biden Administration just Tuesday said the president would “certainly support” states reimposing coronavirus restrictions.

In response to Democrats’ leftist agenda, parents around the country have broken recall records by taking a stand at their local school board meetings — and the year is only half over.


On TB every waking moment

CNN: ‘Panic’ over Critical Race Theory Because White People ‘Afraid They Might Be Complicit in Racism’
Anti-Critical Race Theory (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP / Getty)
Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP / Getty
JOEL B. POLLAK6 Jul 2021122

CNN has found an explanation for what it calls the nationwide “panic” over Critical Race Theory: white people are “afraid that they might be complicit in racism” and that they will be “blamed for their ancestors’ crimes,” the network reported Tuesday.

CNN has been defending Critical Race Theory for nearly a decade, ever since Andrew Breitbart and Breitbart News brought it to national attention. Then as now, CNN portrayed opposition to the theory as the product of white people’s irrational fears, rather than reasoned objection.

In a story and video by New York-based correspondent Elle Reeve, and video producers Deborah Brunswick and Samantha Guff, CNN claims, without evidence, that conservatives use “Critical Race Theory” to mean “any instruction about the role of race in America, past or present.”

That is what Democrats claim conservatives want, usually as a straw man to deflect criticism, but what conservatives really object to is far more specific — as the story inadvertently reveals.

CNN interviews public high school teacher Keziah Ridgeway, who says that “race and racism are literally the building blocks of this country.”

That is what conservatives oppose, pointing instead to the principles of liberty and equality in America’s founding documents. Conservatives also oppose the idea that America is beset by “systemic racism,” which suggests the country’s institutions remain racist even after the civil rights era, the Civil War, and generations of change.

In interviews dripping with condescension, Reeve continues CNN’s tradition of targeting ordinary people for humiliation when their views conflict with the left.

At one point, Reeve challenges a parent named Elana Fishbein, who appears to be Jewish and an immigrant, and who says she fears for her children. Reeve asks scornfully: “Were your children beat up by Antifa kids?” Reeve does not mention recent antisemitic attacks, including several during Black Lives Matter protests.

Throughout, CNN refers to parents by race, as if to discredit them: “A White man in a suit said…”. (The three CNN staff involved appear to be of pale complexion.)

Reeve also argues with the people she interviews — claiming, for example, that the Constitution’s Three-fifths Compromise is evidence of racism (rather than a way to limit the power of the slave states) and that the 1994 crime bill treated crack differently from cocaine because of race (rather than fear of its potency).

The story claims that Critical Race Theory is feared because it puts “White people in danger of being blamed for their ancestors’ crimes.” No “crimes” are specified.

It also declares that Critical Race Theory is resented because “it could bring attention to the ways that White people today continue to benefit from racism,” as if that is an accepted fact.

The story concludes by predicting that new laws banning Critical Race Theory in some states will eventually be repealed.

The video version of the story aired on Erin Burnett Out Front.


On TB every waking moment

There Is An Existential Crisis In Conservatism

We love this country, but are growingly concerned with its top-down control. We love freedom, but that same freedom is abused by immoral and evil people, with an end result of far less freedom than before. The confluence of philosophy and reality weaves a complex – sometimes hopeful, sometimes bleak – future.

Lately, I have found myself holding mutually exclusive thoughts regarding the current status and prospective future of America. The problem for many conservatives, as I see it, is that we are resolute in our defense of many American principles but simultaneously recognize a growing problem with entrenched and seditious Deep State machinations. America as an idea is not America as practiced. In the end, too, only one side can win.

Most conservatives – at least the kind of conservatives we want to support – could better be called Constitutionalists. Donald Trump, Ron De Santis, Tom Cotton, Josh Hawley, Rand Paul, and others are each imperfect, but a uniting feature of them is their love and pursuit of individual liberty. The Constitution is pretty straightforward in its ideation of this nation: The federal government has basic duties like ensuring trade and defense, but otherwise directs individual states, who themselves should have limited power, to determine the structure of a community for citizens.

At the end of the day, people decide what’s best for them, not a ruling class or body. Our government derives their powers from the consent of the governed. Moreover, elected public officials should be representing and serving their constituents. On paper, it’s the best form of governance available.

At the same time, the United States is hardly recognizable as a country of true individual liberty. Without a doubt, we are still the best hope. Indeed, we are the last best hope, as Lincoln called us. He was as right then as he is now. Immigrants coming here by the millions, and every Trump-hating buffoon staying, are proof enough of the unique greatness of this nation. We are richer, fatter, and more materially satisfied than any group of people ever. That’s saying a lot, but the writing is on the wall.

Even discounting fraud, nearly half of the voting public has steadfastly and repeatedly chosen a political ideology so opposed to every American value that has heretofore delineated us from the rest of the ugly history known to all other human civilizations. It is hard to see how this voting pattern – fueled entirely by ignorance, arrogance, immaturity, and covetousness – changes, particularly as the government continues providing more money and services for “free.” They care not a whit that free entitlements only serve to lessen our freedom.

On top of individuals voting for our demise, nearly every critical institution, public and private, is helmed by indoctrinated zealots dedicated to the dismantling of society. They are succeeding before our eyes, reshaping peoples’ viewpoints on race, science, and whatever opinion needs shaping to serve a political goal. Even language is evolving in order to reduce our ability to fight back.

The question for me – and presumably other conservatives – is how do we reconcile these differences? We love this country and believe it is worth preserving, but at the same time we are seeing that in its current form cannot be trusted. We are lied to by a corrupt medical establishment, we are defended by a corrupt military establishment, we are censored by a corrupt technological establishment, we are kept poor by a corrupt central banking system, we are lied to by a corrupt media establishment, and we are governed by a corrupt political establishment. As if that weren’t bad enough, there are countless unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of every corrupt acronymized establishment.

Relatedly, conservatives’ general framework of a functioning society is to live and let live. We never have an adequate response to large cultural shifts because our nature is to focus on ourselves, our families, and our communities. If men want to prance around as women, for example, that is their prerogative. Even pretending that blacks are oppressed is a concept that one is free to hold, however ludicrous the notion might be. The large problem with unrestrained liberty is that these situations compound one after another and eventually bleed into mainstream consciousness, resulting in monolithic cultural degradations that we are often powerless to combat.

Whether in congenial and adversarial conversations, I find myself contradictorily defending and bemoaning the United States. When prompted to respond to Black Lives Matters lies, I quickly remark that American blacks are the most fortunate blacks in human history. Idiots like Bryan Stevenson suggest slavery merely evolved, but if that’s true, I have a lawn that needs mowing. He’ll be cheaper than the neighbor’s kid. Not a moment later, someone pushes back and says the Capitol Insurrection pushed our democracy to the brink.

Suddenly, I find myself saying things that just a few years ago would have put tin foil on my head – there was massive voting fraud that no one will admit to, they know how Ashli Babbitt died, there were false flag operations leading the charge, and for good measure I start talking about the media and political elites lying about Covid numbers and bizarre vaccination demands on previously-infected people. It’s all absurd. This practice of schizophrenic conservatism is neither healthy nor sustainable. I love this country and what it has represented, yet I reflexively seek to detach myself from it. It’s like a political Jekyll and Hyde.

Even then, though, America as an idea only functions as a reality when the majority of folks are a “moral and religious people,” as John Adams observed. It has remarkable upside, but the Constitution “is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Given the decline of Amercians in every sense of personal morality and responsibility, eliminating wasteful government bloat won’t suffice.

To be sure, contradictions are not unique to the conservative cause. Joe Biden said guns wouldn’t be enough to overthrow the government on account of F-15s and nukes, but at the same time the government is prosecuting and jailing unarmed visitors to the U.S. Capitol based on the premise that their very presence threatened to undermine democracy. Not that long ago, women were also to be believed one-hundred percent of the time. Hashtags like MeToo and BelieveAllWomen flourished. Despite the preponderance of social activity dedicated to leveling the playing field, suddenly a biological male could shower with women and young girls (as was evidenced in a Los Angeles spa), violent male offenders could be jailed with women if they felt feminine upon sentencing (as is happening in California), and athletes can break every record if they wake up thinking they were previously in the wrong body. Perhaps the most illogical contradiction is the cause du jour in America: Racism. American blacks are the most fortunate and successful in the world. They will even be allowed to represent a country that supposedly hates them, as they have for over one hundred years, at the Olympics. It’s almost like Germany letting Jews compete or China letting Muslim Uighers compete under their flags.

Leftist absurdity notwithstanding, their contradictions are rooted in purpose. In any given moment, they need to feed a narrative. The fact that Democrats can claim massive illegitimacy in Doinald Trump’s 2016 election over Hillary Clinton while simultaneously censoring anyone claiming concerns of widespread fraud in the 2020 election does not register as a contradiction. Only the narrative matters.

For the conservative movement, however, these contradictions are more deeply rooted. We love freedom, but that same freedom is being abused and weaponized against us. If we allow men to pretend they’re women, blacks to pretend they’re oppressed, and leftists to pretend Trumpers deserve the firing squad, suddenly their liberties are interfering with ours. Do we curtail liberty to preserve liberty? When has that ever ended well? But, if we do nothing, we can see the future quite clearly – and it too looks bleak.

For America to be preserved, it will take individual Americans to do the preserving. White suburban women turned off by Trump’s advertised loathsomeness must balance their distaste of a man with their abject horror of a dystopian future. Black voters turned off by lies of racism within the Republican Party must balance their ignorance with the reality that no black community is thriving – or has ever thrived, for that matter – under Democrat leadership. All Americans that have thrived in the best country on earth must recognize that freedom is one generation from disappearing. Once gone, our mighty Constitution might never come back.

I hope enough voters get that message in time.


On TB every waking moment

Disabled Combat Vet Blasts Woke Military

Our military exists to prevent anyone from imposing their vision of utopia on American citizens or its allies.

The meritocracy that defined America’s strength and excellence for almost 250 years may be breathing its last. This meritocracy is the US military, and its undoing is coming from within as leaders embrace wokeness at the highest levels.

Long before Gen. Mark Milley defended himself and other military leaders from being called ‘woke, the force he would someday come to lead was the standard of the very thing the woke crowd decries: a meritocracy. This is a rare place where nationality, skin color and even gender are secondary to one thing: An ability to perform at an exceptionally high level in environments where safe spaces don’t exist.

I was honored to be able to see this performance first hand as a Marine Corps combat correspondent, attached to units across all branches of the US military through multiple combat tours. Despite what politicians and some senior leaders would have us believe; skin color becomes irrelevant when rounds are coming in.

In combat, the only thing that mattered for us was the ability to execute our duties and count on teammates to execute theirs. Our performance, and not our diversity, is what got us promoted, accomplished our missions and kept folks alive.

Make no mistake, the troops I served alongside were diverse enough to please the wokest folks on the planet. They were black, white, Hispanic, and Asian. They were heterosexual, gay, and bisexual. However, their shared mission overshadowed any differences or history of discrimination. As our military becomes caught up in the same arguments facing the society they protect and defend, there is a group of people who are watching gleefully as we place our focus on whether critical race theory should even be on military reading lists, and those folks are America’s enemies.

Having met and interviewed many of them myself, I can attest that our adversaries are not concerned with diversity. They’re concerned with winning at all costs through the focused application of destruction and violence. We shouldn’t forget why our military exists. It’s not to eventually evolve into the utopia many in our country are trying to reshape our nation into. Rather, our military exists to prevent anyone from imposing their vision of utopia on American citizens or its allies. The meritocracy our troops come from could teach all of us about accepting diversity as they continue to put their differences aside to accomplish a greater goal. Meritocracy still has a place in America and her defense, and those who wield it best are the very same people who have to look past race, ethnicity and every other ‘ism’ in order to come together – a lesson every company could benefit from. The men and women I served beside faced adversity together not because they were trying to undo past wrongs, but because they love what America stands for and the promises she holds for each of us.

Shawn Rhodes is a disabled combat veteran, former sergeant in the US MarineCorps, TEDx speaker and CEO of Bulletproof Selling. He can be reached at


On TB every waking moment

Western Civilization Has Been Destroyed by Diversity


For decades liberal gentiles and jews have been lying to us that diversity within a single country is wonderful. Hiding behind this lie is an agenda to undermine every Western country by destroying its unity. The tool used was massive non-white immigration, supplemented in the United States with teaching blacks racial hatred of whites.

If you think blacks have not been taught to hate whites, watch the 13 minute video included in Fred Reed’s article and listen to blacks tell you how much they hate you ( Blackness Fatigue: Enough is Too Much ).

Not all blacks, of course, but the blacks who don’t hate us are “Uncle Toms.” The blacks who do hate white people tell us about it in the Black Arena Report: Freedom Rider: The Terrible Origins of July 4th | Black Agenda Report

Blacks learn to hate us from liberal gentiles and jews who brought America Cultural Marxism from Germany in the 1930s. Hatred of whites is institutionalized in American education—-critical race theory—-but also in entertainment such as movies, songs, and books. A new entertainment medium has emerged-—woke horror movies concerned with the rise of Trump supporters portrayed as white supremacists. In these movies white supremacists draped in the American flag wipe out black communities. Let ‘woke’ horror movies die: ‘The Forever Purge’ begs for liberal praise by devolving into anti-Trump fanfiction for CNN viewers

What most Americans know they have learned from movies and TV. Hardly any Americans read books, much less serious ones. Back in those days when I was a university professor, I recall a lecture I gave on the Russian revolution. A student interrupted me and said, “that’s not the way in happened in the movie.”

At first I thought he was making a joke, but he was serious. He was challenging my explanation based on years of study with a Hollywood movie.

As I have stressed for decades in my annual Christmas column, There is plenty of room for cultural diversity in the world, but not within a single country. A Tower of Babel has no culture. Without a culture there is no nation.

Western countries are no longer nations. There is no longer an American nation, a British nation, a French nation, a German nation. There are only multicultural hell-holes in which dwindling white majorities are so overwhelmed by guilt and self-doubt that they are unable to resist their disintegration and that of their country.

Fred Reed believes that white people, lacking leadership and a media, are slow to awareness, but that awareness is arriving with the consequence being a social explosion ( Blackness Fatigue: Enough is Too Much ).

Perhaps or perhaps not. The decades of propaganda and indoctrination have done their damage. Entire generations of white ethnicities have been brainwashed against themselves. In the United States critical race theory is institutionalized in the educational system. It has become the norm, and part of the enculturation of American youth. We can be assured that a similar process has long been underway in Europe. Jean Raspail identified it in 1973 in his novel, The Camp of the Saints. Except for Marine Le Pen in France and Nigel Farage in Britain, no European ethnicity has a champion. All European leaders are on the side of the immigrant-invaders.

It is ironic that during the decades that Western civilization was destroyed Western leaders were focused on “nation building” in former colonies.


On TB every waking moment

Biden Admin Expands Tuition Breaks For Future Teachers, Removes GPA Requirement To Provide Access To ‘Students Of Color’

By Chrissy Clark
•Jul 6, 2021

U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during the National Education Association's annual meeting and representative assembly event in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Friday, July 2, 2021. U.S. job growth accelerated in June, suggesting firms are having greater success recruiting workers to keep pace with the broadening of economic activity.
Samuel Corum/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The Biden administration announced a plan to expand tuition breaks for future teachers and remove GPA requirements for grant recipients in hopes of providing access to “students of color.”

The Department of Education oversees the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) grant program, which provides tuition breaks for students obtaining degrees in education who commit to teaching in “high-need fields and underserved schools” for four years after graduation. The Biden administration, with the support of Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, announced that the annual grant amount for third and fourth-year students will double to $8,000 per recipient.

Biden’s plan will also remove the existing GPA requirements for recipients in the hopes of increasing access for students of color.

“The proposed plan also aims to increase the access that students from low-income backgrounds and students of color have to comprehensive teacher preparation,” a press release from the Education Department reads.

The plan includes an additional $2.8 billion investment in programs such as “year-long, paid teacher residency programs,” which the Biden administration claims will help enroll more “teacher candidates of color” and will have a greater impact on teacher retention.

The administration claims that the requirement changes are “expected to increase the number of recipients by more than 50 percent to nearly 40,000 in 2022.”

Alongside tuition breaks, the Biden administration’s plan will put $400 million towards “teacher preparation” at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribal Colleges and Universities. The administration’s plan will continue to subsidize HBCUs despite their graduate’s poor loan repayment rate.

Per the Wall Street Journal, federal data found that black students who attend HBCUs were more likely to default on student loans than black students who attend other public or nonprofit colleges. The Daily Caller News Foundation reported that most graduates of black colleges owed more in student loans 12 years after college than they did following graduation, despite the perception that receiving a bachelor’s degree decreases a graduate’s debt load.

Zakiya Smith Ellis, a higher-education adviser to former President Barack Obama, called the discovery “the most shocking data of my career … We like to think of bachelor degrees as the Holy Grail.”

Biden’s plan also aims to “reduce the repayment burden” for TEACH grant recipients who do not complete their requirements.

Before the Biden administration, if grant recipients did not complete the mandated four years of coursework and four years of serving needy communities, their grants were converted into unsubsidized loans that recipients had to repay in full. Educators were given 120 days to certify that they were teaching at an underserved school following graduation.

Under the Biden administration, there is no requirement for recipients to certify their intent to teach within 120 days of graduation and those grants will not be converted into loans.

The new plan will also open a “reconsideration process” for any former TEACH grant recipients whose grants were converted to loans.


On TB every waking moment
[COMMENT: Isn't this like the program that let a black teen slide? A teen that eventually committed a school mass shooting in Florida?]


Austin School District To Cut Back On Discipline To Close The Gap


Steve Sailer

From the KXAN Austin:
AUSTIN (KXAN) — Beginning in the fall, the Austin Independent School District will be significantly scaling back the way it disciplines children who act up.
The goal is to reduce racial disparities, which show Black and brown students are being disproportionately punished compared to their white classmates.
According to data compiled by the district, Black children at AISD were nearly five times more likely than their white peers to receive disciplinary action, include suspensions, being placed at a disciplinary campus or being expelled.
These articles never cite other cities that Do It Better. I actually can imagine that Austin has a bigger race gap in discipline than, say, Huntington, WV because Austin attracts many successful, intelligent whites. Really bad racial gaps in school behavior are seen in places like Madison, WI because they have attracted academic and civil servant whites plus welfare mother blacks.

But I’ve been reading about these pushes for many years now and I never see one that says, “Sure, this plan may sound crazy, but it’s used over the last 6 years in Mobile, AL and it has been a success on multiple metrics.”
This is particularly true for middle schoolers. The top five campuses with the highest rates of discipline were middle schools.
Who ever heard of adolescents acting out?
Gloria Vera-Bedolla, an AISD mom of three, has been working with both the AISD police department and other district officials to draw attention to these disparities and help reshape the code of conduct.
“When a child is acting out, there is usually something else going on in the background that we are not aware of,” Vera-Bedolla said.
Beginning this fall, in-home suspensions cannot exceed two days.
Campus behavior support teams will be created, made up of parents, counselors and teachers, who will continually review the progress of students placed at a disciplinary campus to see if they can return back to school ahead of schedule. The goal is to reduce the amount of time a child is away from the classroom.
In other words, black bad boys are our most precious resource (e.g., George Floyd), and they must be coddled at the expense of black good boys, black girls, and nonblack children. Who cares if they learn less because some black bad boy is disrupting the classroom? They are part of the majority, while the black bad boy is in the minority and therefore he is sacred.

Our mindset is so warped these days, that nobody ever notices that blacks tend to thrive more under stricter discipline.


On TB every waking moment
12:12 min

Dad details the ‘scary’ indoctrination he witnessed at a California school

Jul 6, 2021

Glenn Beck

For a while Jeff Harper and his wife listened to their children’s wishes and did not confront Northwood High School administrators about political bias within the school. But they couldn’t ignore the sheer indoctrination displayed in the California school’s yearbook at the end of the year. So, Harper wrote an incredibly polite email to school officials, requesting an apology for using an inappropriate platform for blatant political bias. But he and his wife were ignored. Harper explains to Glenn what happened next, how his story went viral, and why this is an example of the ‘scary’ indoctrination kids are experiencing all over the nation…


On TB every waking moment

The Silent Emergence of Fascism in the USA – Pelosi’s Tuesday Announcement Should Send Chills Down Your Spine

By Jim Hoft
Published July 7, 2021 at 8:20am

Guest post by John L. Kachelman, Jr.

Vigilance has warned about the present danger but the alarms were shrugged off by the delusional thought “well THAT cannot happen in the USA!” Blatant events beginning with Obama’s administration shocked and caused consternation but all was forgotten under President Trump’s administration. Then November 3, 2020, came and ushered in the reality that the dream has become a nightmare.

Six months into the Biden administration Americans have witnessed the overt attacks upon our civility, utter contempt for our historical heritage, cursing for our once-envied culture, and ruin for our thriving economy. The bulwark of our Republic’s independence has been breached as the U.S. Constitution’s Rule of Law has refused to be upheld by the Courts. Those who uphold fidelity to the Constitution are imprisoned while those advocating anarchy are applauded.

The disintegration of our culture, history, and body politic is not new in civilization’s records. I have noted specific similarities of historical precedent in the godless French Revolution and the inhumane fanaticism of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (which we call the Nazis) that provide obvious education on the intent and the terminal fate of such movements. However, history’s instructions are ignored and the steady march toward devolution continues.

Illustrating how far down the path of disintegration of our nation’s once-proud statue in the world’s view is a shocking event announce on 6 July 2021 by the Los Angeles Times. “The U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday announced that the agency was opening regional field offices in California and Florida to investigate threats to members of Congress in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.”

Jim Hoft publicized this overt seizure of State’s Rights by the Federal Government in an article in The Gateway Pundit in the evening of July 6. The announcement of the flagrant overreach of Nancy Pelosi and her army of brownshirts came only two days after our nation had celebrated the Independence Day of our nation where tyranny was rejected and liberty and freedom were gained.

According to announcements, Pelosi will assign the Capitol Police to various “hot spots” throughout our nation for the purpose of confronting those deemed “radical extremists.” Informed readers know this is a term identifying those who believe the Constitution and not the extremists residing in Washington, DC is the Rule of Law.

While this view of Pelosi (and evidently ALL in Congress, the White House, and the SCOTUS since there is a deafening silence from their quarters regarding this action) is not unexpected, it is another historical illustration of how freedom is seized and tyranny becomes the Rule of Law.

The historical precedent is obvious. Although Adolph Hitler is synonymous with pure evil, he is not alone in civilization’s “Hall of Shame.” All despots share a behavioral pattern. This recent announcement of the deployment of Pelosi’s Capitol Police to eradicate radical extremists throughout the nation is clear behavior of despotic rule and ruin.

Listen carefully to history from the 1920s…Hitler’s rise to evil tyranny was carefully orchestrated. Beginning in small gatherings it amassed fanatical support through a cunning propaganda machine. The truth was twisted. Lies were polished. Minds were manipulated. But even with these accomplishments, not all would march in goosestep with the fascists. Hitler needed a force to quell any opposition.

Heinrich Himmler is forever etched in the chronicles of human civilization as the personification of evil. It was to Himmler that Hitler turned to secure silence to the radical extremists threatening Hitler’s delusional dreams. Himmler started in 1925 with a band of 300 “bodyguards” for Hitler. This group was established and named the “Schutzstaffel.” We know it simply as the “SS.” These were the black-uniformed, skull insignia enforcers of Hitler’s evil. This group grew to 50,000 when Hitler took control of Germany. Eventually, this group numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Initially, this group was the Furor’s personal bodyguards but evil knows no boundaries, and soon this group was assigned duties to control and exterminate all deemed “unsuitable.” The SS became the police for the nation of Germany and all of its conquered territories. This is the group tasked with the “Final Solution.” This is the group responsible for the institutional killing and genocide of more than 20 million people during the Holocaust, including approximately 5.2 million to 6 million Jews and 10.5 million Slavs.

This is the group involved in the daily operation of Hitler’s brutalizing and murdering individuals in territories occupied by the Nazis. This is the face of the terrorist in the death camps.

America…this is where YOU are on 6 July 2021! A national announcement has been made stating that there will be a national police force tasked with controlling and eradication of “radical extremists.” The Constitutional rights assigned to the individual States are nullified. The Federal Government has decided that the State knows better than the individual what “freedom” will include.

This is history’s lesson. The lesson could not be clearer. This is a mark of fascism that leads to tyranny that enslaves and not liberates.

Here is a previous report by John Kachelman, Jr. — History Repeats Itself: Democrats Are Using Tactics of the Marxists of 1917 in Russia to Steal 2020 Election


On TB every waking moment

LIVE STREAM VIDEO: President Trump Announces Lawsuits Against Twitter, Google and Facebook CEOs — Asks for Punitive Damages – Via RSBN on Rumble

By Jim Hoft
Published July 7, 2021 at 10:06am

President Donald Trump announced he is holding a press conference on Wednesday morning in his efforts to protect the First Amendment.

The press conference is set for 11 AM Eastern.


President Trump will announce that he is bringing a class-action lawsuit against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey sources tell Axios.

Brook Rollins
from the America First Policy Institute opened the presser today with a powerful speech.

President Trump announced that he will ask for punitive damages from the anti-American social media companies.

Trump called the tech giants the forces of “illegal, unconstitutional censorship.” And he’s right. The Gateway Pundit has been reporting on this for years now.

RSB on President Donald J. Trump Holds Press Conference; Announces Big Tech Lawsuit 7-7-21 52:55 min

Rumble — President Donald J. Trump Holds Press Conference; Announces Big Tech Lawsuit 7-7-21


On TB every waking moment

EXCLUSIVE: Capital One Cancels Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio’s Credit Card Over ‘Adverse Past or Present Legal Action’

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published July 7, 2021 at 1:05pm

Capital One has closed a credit card belonging to Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio due to the bank “discovering adverse past or present legal action involving an individual or entity associated with the account.”

Tarrio is facing a misdemeanor charge of destruction of property in connection to the alleged burning of a church’s Black Lives Matter banner in DC last year and local weapons charges.

On June 29, Capital One sent Tarrio a letter saying they are closing the account that he has had for approximately 12 years — and that there is nothing he can do about it.


Speaking to the Gateway Pundit, Tarrio expressed despair that Republican leadership is not doing anything to protect people from this type of overreach.

“I don’t know if I’m numb to getting banned off platforms already or this is acceptance to the way of the new ‘West’. I don’t know what it would take to finally get Republicans united in speaking up and legislating against this unconstitutional and inhuman practice of definancing conservatives. Maybe if it would happen to them…because it will…they’ll start doing something about it,” Tarrio said. “For now I will do what any entrepreneur would do…and that’s find a temporary solution to this problem until it gets fixed.”

As Tarrio was sending this comment to Gateway, he discovered that he was also banned from his credit card processor was while he was typing.

Those who wish to contribute to Tarrio while he tries to get around this blockade can do so on Zelle using the email “” At least until they cave to liberal pressure and do the same thing, that is.

You can also send him Bitcoin here:


Tarrio has become something of a boogey man for the left — constantly smeared and presented as a cartoon villain by the liberal media for his involvement with the pro-Trump male social group the Proud Boys.

The Gateway Pundit has reached out to Capital One asking if they will be banning everyone who charged with misdemeanors — like drug dealers or illegal aliens. We will update this story if a response is provided.

Banking bans have become the latest tactic being used against right wing voices that get a little bit too loud.

The National File reported in February that Gab CEO Andrew Torba said that his platform was banned from three different banks in three weeks alone for “political reasons.” One of the banks told Torba on Monday morning that they could no longer do business with the site because of “all the bad things the press has written about Gab.”

In June, Wells Fargo banned former U.S. House candidate and current American Greatness contributor Pete D’Abrosca and former Republican Senate candidate and America First activist Lauren Witzke.

Speaking to National File about the situation, D’Abrosca stated, “Clearly there’s been some kind of conspiracy within Wells Fargo to ban prominent right wingers from using their banking services. This is yet another reminder that major monopolies in both banking and tech are not operating within a purely free market capitalistic system. They must be broken up, and their CEOs and executive level employees and board members jailed until we can figure out how to stop discrimination from ‘private’ companies against the political right.”


On TB every waking moment

Nolte: Leftists Freak Out at the Thought of Cameras Exposing Fanatical CRT Teachers
Taylor Wilcox / Unsplash
JOHN NOLTE7 Jul 20211,498

The far-left HuffPost is freaking over Tucker Carlson’s suggestion that cameras be placed in public school classrooms.

“Tucker Carlson Goes Full ‘1984’ With ‘Cameras In The Classroom’ Proposal,” screams the left-wing outlet’s headline.

“The Fox News personality suggested police-style body cameras to check on what every teacher is telling their students,” the sub-headline reads.

“Carlson, in a rant reminiscent of something from George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel ‘1984,’” author Lee Moran bleats, “called the teaching that racism is at least partly systemic… a ‘civilization-ending poison’ and ‘B.S.’”

Before we go any further… I’ve read 1984 at least three times and am unfamiliar with anything Tucker said that is “reminiscent of something from George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel[.]”

In fact, Tucker’s suggestion is the exact opposite of “something from George Orwell’s classic dystopian novel[.]” Tucker is suggesting we monitor the government. 1984 is about (among other things) the government monitoring private citizens. So Moran got his metaphor exactly wrong, which tells me he’s probably a product of government-run public schools.

Regardless, he huffs on, “He warned ‘we can’t really be sure’ how far it is being spread until ‘we finally get cameras in the classroom, as we put them on the chests of police officers.’”

What I found interesting about this piece is that other than screaming 1984!!!, no case or argument is made against the idea of cameras in government-run public school classrooms.

Is there one?

Is there a good argument against this kind of accountability and transparency?

Carlson is specifically concerned with public school teachers indoctrinating innocent children to accept Critical Race Theory, which is the idea that white skin comes with some sort of genetic defect that makes it impossible for you not to be a racist oppressor, no matter how much goodwill you have toward all God’s children.

But as Matt Walsh points out, there might be an even more important reason. The chronic sexual abuse crisis in government-run public schools.

Doesn’t it seem like a good idea to allow parents, via their smartphone or computer, to check in on what’s happening in their child’s classroom?

We all know the teachers union, one of the evil-est institutions in America, will raise holy hell over this idea, but you have to ask yourself why. What’s wrong with monitoring what your children are being taught by government bureaucrats?

Classrooms are supposed to be professional places of learning. Nothing should ever go on in a classroom a parent can’t see. What’s more, cameras in classrooms might also force the kids to behave. If my parents could watch, I know my behavior might have been a little different, especially in high school.

The real issue here is just how brazenly public school teachers have become when it comes to teaching our kids pretty much everything but what they need to know. Leftists are never happier than when they’ve insinuated themselves between parent and child. Too many schools can’t teach kids to read or write, but they are sure teaching them to hate their country and all about “demi-sexuality.”

Tucker’s smart to bring this up, to make it part of the national conversation.

Teachers and their evil unions are going to have a hard time explaining why they oppose such a thing. They will be on defense, which is exactly where they belong.

Goddamn them all for not just sticking to reading, writing, adding, and subtracting.

Anything else should be coming from the parent at home.


On TB every waking moment

Leaked Docs Show Defense Contractor Raytheon Pushing Extreme Critical Race Theory Re-education On Employees

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

Internal documents obtained by activist Christopher Rufo show that behemoth U.S. defense contractor Raytheon is pushing a program of extreme Critical Race Theory re-education on its employees, with white workers being told to check their “privilege,” dismiss the notion of “equality,” and support the leftist move to “defund the police.”

The Daily Caller reports on Rufo’s findings, noting that Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes is behind the program which is dubbed the “Stronger Together” campaign.
The documents reveal that the program directs employees on “becoming an anti-racist today,” and includes a “corporate diversity” pledge that employees are asked to sign.



Rufo’s findings add to the litany of corporate, educational, government and even military entities adopting extreme woke directives and enforcing them on employees and members.

The activist previously revealed that another huge contractor, Lockheed Martin, recently asked white male executives to analyse their “privilege” and attempt to educate themselves on how white male behavior is “devastating” to racial minorities.

Part 1 of 2 due to picture limit


On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 2


In another viral monologue, Fox News host Tucker Carlson warned Tuesday of the divisiveness and dangers of such efforts, noting that ‘If you question critical race theory, crazed ideologues will attack you and hurt your children’.


On TB every waking moment
[COMMENT: Yes, we are a silly, silly people.]

Is French Cuisine A Gateway Food To White 'Dominance'?

WEDNESDAY, JUL 07, 2021 - 03:30 AM

Authored by Jonathan Turley,
In recent years, there has been an explosion of academic work declaring everything from meritocracy to math to be racist or vehicles of white dominance.

Offering statistical analysis to support such claims is itself problematic since statistics have also been declared racist.

Now however Law professor Mathilde Cohen of the University of Connecticut have found an untapped area of white dominance. In a talk at Sciences Po Paris and the University of Nanterre, Cohen explained how “French eating habits reinforced the ‘dominance’ of white people over ethnic minorities.”

Presumably, the French themselves are allowed to continue to eat their own food without violating the Civil Rights Act.

However, Cohen explained that the cuisine is used “to reinforce whiteness as a dominant racial identity.” The reason is the white people value it and thereby force minorities to “act white” by eating it:
“The French meal is often presented as the national ritual to which every citizen can participate equally. But French food ways are shaped by white middle- and upper-class norms … and the boundaries of whiteness are policed through daily food encounters.”
The remarks are based on Cohen’s paper “The Whiteness of French Food Law, Race, and Eating Culture in France,” which explores the “neglected area” of “food studies, critical race theory, and critical Whiteness studies.” Cohen works “to identify and critique a form of French food Whiteness (blanchité alimentaire), that is, the use of food and eating practices to reify and reinforce Whiteness as the dominant racial identity.” It also allows you to go to France to present such theories like going to Medellín, Colombia to discuss the scourge of the drug trade.

As an Italian, I am happy to note that our cuisine is not viewed as a vehicle for white dominance.

However, I must confess that I am skeptical. Indeed, it would suggest that President Joe Biden and the First Lady were coopting Vice President Kamala Harris and the second gentleman by recently taking them to Le Diplomate. If the Bidens were “policing” the “boundaries of whiteness . . . through daily food encounters” there were cheaper ways to do it. Having eaten at the restaurant, it is a lot less expensive to do your policing with a baguette at Le Pain Quotidien.
It would also make Julia Child the Bull Connor of cooking.

Then again maybe people of all races just enjoy good cooking. The rest is . . . well . . . just tripe.


On TB every waking moment

IRS gives nonprofit Christians Engaged tax-exempt status after saying efforts favor GOP

Reversal came as congressional Republicans ask Treasury Department’s inspector general’s office to look into the matter.

Updated: July 7, 2021 - 2:34pm

The First Liberty Institute said Wednesday the IRS has granted tax-exempt status to the nonprofit group Christians Engaged after denying the request on the argument that Bible teachings are typically affiliated with the Republican Party and candidates.

"This is truly great news for our client, as well as religious organizations and churches across America," said Lea Patterson, counsel for First Liberty Institute, whose clients include Christians Engaged. "We are grateful the IRS changed course to bring its decision into line with the Constitution and its own regulations."

The reversal comes amid backlash from congressional Republicans who have asked the Treasury Department’s inspector general’s office to look into the IRS having originally denied the group’s tax-exempt status.

"The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) appears to be engaging again in viewpoint discrimination," GOP Reps. Jim Jordan, James Comer and Mike Johnson said in a June 30 letter. "Over ten years after the IRS began targeting Tea Party groups, it seems the IRS could be up to its old tricks."

Christians Engaged said it incorporated in July 2019 as a nonprofit "exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, or scientific purposes."

The Texas-based group also said its goal was to provide nonpartisan religious and civic education, focusing on encouraging and educating Christians to be civically engaged as a part of their religious practice.

The group applied for tax exempt status in late 2019. IRS Exempt Organizations Director Stephen A. Martin on May 18 denied the application, arguing Christians Engaged participates in “prohibited political campaign intervention” and “operate for a substantial non-exempt private purpose and for the private interests of the [Republican] party.”

After the appeal, Martin granted the application for a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status.


On TB every waking moment
10:17 min

Military WHISTLEBLOWERS are exposing its far-left BIAS
Jul 7, 2021

Glenn Beck

The military is targeting Trump voters, spreading critical race theory throughout its ranks, and teaching troops about climate change. So, now, whistleblowers are speaking out. Senator Tom Cotton recently joined Glenn to discuss the website he helped create to expose the radical policies the military continues to enforce and why its vital we protect our nation's most important institution: 'I bet China is not teaching its mid-career officers about climate change...'


On TB every waking moment
31:05 min

Trump Launches MAJOR Class Actions Lawsuits Against Big Tech over Censorship, Democrats Mock Attempt

Jul 7, 2021

Tim Pool

Trump Launches MAJOR Class Actions Lawsuits Against Big Tech over Censorship, Democrats Mock Attempt. Trump is also suing the Ceos Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey and Sundar pichai Republicans are also launching antitrust legislation to break up big tech and stop censorship. Democrats meanwhile say this is doomed to fail and they may be right but it takes the effort to make the change and eventually the courts may side with those fighting against big tech censorship.


On TB every waking moment

Almost Overnight, Standards Of Color-Blind Merit Tumble Across American Society

WEDNESDAY, JUL 07, 2021 - 11:25 PM
By Richard Bernstein, of RealClearInvestigations

A broad revolution is underway in the United States as traditional standards used to measure achievement and provide opportunity are being rejected by schools, corporations, and governments in favor of quotas based on race and gender.

On taking office, President Biden signaled that the nation’s long-held principle of equality for all had come to an end, signing executive orders to advance racial equity "across the Federal Government” -- equity referring to the idea that merely treating everybody the same is not enough, and that an equal outcome for all people has to be the goal.

Over the last few months, many Ivy League and flagship state universities have moved away from a seemingly neutral measure long used to assess applicants – standardized test scores – to give minorities a better shot at admissions.

In May, Hewlett-Packard, the technology company with 50,000 employees worldwide, decreed that by 2030 half of its leadership positions and more than 30% of its technicians and engineers have to be women and that the number of minorities should “meet or exceed” their representation in the tech industry workforce.

That same month, United Airlines announced that half of the 5,000 pilots it would train at its proprietary flight school between now and 2030 will be women or people of color, with scholarships provided by United and JPMorgan Chase helping with tuition. There was nothing in the United announcement showing that there were enough qualified blacks and women in the pipeline so that a black/female quota of 2,500 new pilots could be filled, and nothing about what the company would do if there weren't enough qualified candidates.

Delta Airlines, Ralph Lauren, and Wells Fargo are among other major American companies to announce hiring quotas recently as a way to redress racial imbalances, according to Bloomberg News.

These are just some of the many “woke” initiatives embraced by many of the pillars of American society in the year since social justice protests erupted across the country in response to the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer.

Supporters argue that racial preferences and quotas are necessary to end deeply entrenched disparities. Critics say that they are a new form of discrimination, no more justified than old forms that are widely rejected. And while the stated goal of affirmative action was to simply eliminate unfair discrimination, the equity movement is rooted in a far more expansive and pessimistic view of the United States as irredeemably white supremacist, a view meant to continually challenge American institutions and values.

The rapid transition from equality of treatment to equality of outcomes tests one of the basic post-civil rights principles of American life, namely that the same standards should be applied to all people. Once a measure is applied, not to the unique individual but to that individual's group identity, the idea that there are neutral, common, universally applicable standards gives way to something else, something subjective and political, with different measures applied to different people, depending on their sex, race, or other characteristics.

The issue of standards, moreover, is not just a matter of values or fairness. With the United States falling behind other countries in math and science, most notably China, standards are matters of competitiveness and national security -- even as the military, CIA and other federal agencies embrace equity.

From the President's Jan. 26 remarks explaining his racial equity orders.

But discontent over the pace of racial progress, fueled in the past year by the Black Lives Matter movement, has led to an explicit rejection of meritocracy and a call for old standards to make way for new ones. Explaining the company’s adoption of quotas, Hewlett-Packard Chief Diversity Officer Lesley Slaton Brown said the COVID-19 epidemic and the George Floyd murder has “really allowed us to do the double-click down on racial equality and the systematic and structural discrimination that exists.”

In the recent past, that effort often involved working with the existing ideological framework of equality of opportunity and merit to identify worthy candidates.

Now, the trend is to reject and redefine those standards.

“As a community, we need a more comprehensive framework for what constitutes 'best' in hiring faculty and staff,” Gregory Washington, the president of George Mason University in Virginia, wrote in an email sent recently to the entire school. Washington, who is GMU's first ever black president, denied that his call for greater diversity amounted to a quota system; instead, he said, “it is a recognition of the reality that our society's future lies in multicultural inclusion.”

Certainly it is true that the American future is multicultural. Still, to say that the concept of “best” needs to be redefined in racial terms is already a significant departure from the idea of neutral standards. To go from there to the notion that meritocracy is a racist stratagem is a sea change, but there is a lot of evidence that that is exactly where society is going, in both small ways and large.

In May, the Princeton University classics department announced that in an effort to combat “systemic racism,” it would no longer require classics majors to take Latin or Greek. This may be a good thing or a bad thing, but certainly it says that what was until recently a foundational qualification for the study of “the classics” -- the ability to read texts in their original language -- no longer applies, because some students, especially minority ones, didn't have the opportunity to study Latin or Greek in high school. But is it really OK for future professors of classics not to know Latin? Is that simply a new standard or a decline in standards?

From a very different area of American life, none other than the very august American Medical Association announced in May a new Strategic Plan to Embed Racial Justice and Advance Health Equity in medical education and practice.

The 80-page plan calls for, among other things, an expansion of “medical school and physician education to include equity, anti-racism, structural competency, public health and social sciences, critical race theory, and historical basis of disease.” It doesn't say whether adding those subjects to the medical school curriculum, which sounds a lot like instruction in the indelibly racist nature of America, will take away time from such other subjects as anatomy, microbiology, and genetics that are clearly more germane to the practice of medicine.

“Scientific evidence tells us that racism has caused significant harm to people – and their health – throughout our nation’s history,” Gregory E. Harmon, M.D., the AMA's president elect, who is white, said in an email to RCI, explaining the initiative.

Perhaps the most striking passages in the AMA document are those that have to do with equality and meritocracy, which it calls “malignant narratives.”

“Seeking to treat everyone the 'same' ignores the historical legacy of disinvestment and deprivation,” the document says of equality, while meritocracy is “a narrative that attributes success and failure to individual abilities and merits.

It does not address the centuries of unequal treatment that have historically robbed communities of the vital resources needed to thrive.”

Some critics have noted that the Strategic Plan says nothing about competency; several doctors posting to the blog Legal Insurrection asked if members of the AMA would be comfortable allowing them or their families to be treated, as one of them put it, “by those who have MD attached to their names solely in the name of equity ... not because of meritocracy or qualification.”

The AMA rejects that view. “Not only must we follow our oath to do no harm,” Harmon said in his email to RCI, “we must also prevent the harm that that inequity inflicts on communities and our nation.”

There is, of course, some truth to the assertion that standards have been misused in the past. There was a time not that long ago when social connections, a genteel manner, even just having an Anglo-Saxon name, not to mention being white, were deemed to be qualifications in themselves, while to be black, female, or gay was disqualifying.

But what the AMA document, like “woke” doctrine in general, ignores is that the national effort to redress past wrongs has been going on for a long time in American life, making the matter of racial advantage and disadvantage more a matter of multivariable calculus than simple arithmetic. To be sure, there are racial imbalances. Only 3.2% of senior corporate executives, for example, are black. It's easy to see the demand for this number to increase, but there are many questions, involving both practicality and principle, about the use of racial quotas to achieve that goal.

Blacks are just 5% of those in engineering and sciences. How can that share rise dramatically?

On the practical side are the people hurt by them, both those unprepared for the roles as well as the qualified passed over. There is also the question of whether efforts like those at United and HP may simply run into the inconvenient fact that, for many complicated reasons, there simply aren't enough qualified minority candidates around to meet goals for rapid increases in their representation.

Part 1 of 2


On TB every waking moment
Part 2 of 2

According to the National Science Foundation, black men and women, who are 12% of the general population, make up just 5% of working engineers -- this despite affirmative action programs and numerous other efforts over the years to recruit minorities into engineering programs in colleges and universities. How dramatic increases in a very short period can happen now remains unexplained.

As for American medicine, it's been a very long time since it was a white male preserve, as just about any visit to a large urban hospital, with their many Filipino and Indian physicians both male and female, will show. For several years now, more women have been accepted to medical schools than men, but while the numbers of blacks going to medical school has also increased, only 5% of physicians in the country are black or African American.

This is the case even though black students are now accepted into medical school at almost the same rate as whites, 41% of black applicants compared to 45% of whites. Medical schools, like other professional schools, have, moreover, been eager to increase these numbers for years, so that blacks, whites, and Asians are already being admitted under different criteria. In 2018, Princeton Review reports, blacks accepted at medical schools scored an average 505.7 on the MCAT, the standardized med school admission test – putting them in the 69th percentile of all test takers. By comparison, the average score for admitted whites was 512.2 (the 86th percentile) and 513.8 for Asians. Average undergraduate GPAs: 3.53 for blacks, 3.77 for both whites and Asians.

The Strategic Plan offers no concrete suggestions for further increasing the numbers of blacks in medical school, and it makes no analysis of whether it's even possible to do that. Is there a pool of qualified candidates that, somehow, is not being considered? Should medical school admission committees admit some of the applicants rejected in the past, even though that would increase the gap in test scores and GPAs between them and other students? Will teaching critical race theory to existing medical students increase minority representation?

Asked about medical school admissions, Harmon pointed to studies showing that medical students with “midrange” scores on the MCAT “mostly succeed in medical school,” though “there is a tendency to overlook these applicants in favor of those with higher scores.”

The authors of the studies argue that admitting students with lower MCAT scores would “diversify the physician workforce.” But given that black students are already being admitted at a significantly lower standard, at least as defined by MCAT, than whites and Asians, how much lower can the standard go? The studies give no answer to that question.

The AMA Plan also fails to address the question of principle raised by applying different standards to different groups. Is it fair to effectively prevent some qualified individuals from becoming doctors because their gender or race requires them to score higher than other genders or races? It's the same question that applies to the different standards applied to Asians, compared to both whites and blacks, in school admissions, a matter that is the subject of several lawsuits.

“We are taught to study for the test, to get good grades,” Kenny Xu, author of a forthcoming book “An Inconvenient Minority: The Attack on Asian American Excellence and the Fight for Meritocracy,” said in an email. “Why? Because those good grades and test scores will, and should, lead to rewards in the future.

“How would you feel if someone who studied a third as much as you did got an opportunity you've been wanting for years? That would be absolutely unfair. And yet, that is what woke ideology does.”

In Alexandria, Va., an
anti-Asian bias suit over who gets into elite Thomas Jefferson High.

Despite views like those, standardized tests have been under assault for years as obstacles to minority advancement, especially tests for elite high schools in such cities as New York, Boston, and San Francisco, and the SAT used for college admissions.

Elite schools including Lowell High School in San Francisco have dropped their admissions test in favor of a lottery system. This may increase racial diversity, but will the school be able to maintain its high academic standards? The same question applies to other elite schools such as the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia, rated by U.S. News as the best high school in the country, which is also jettisoning its former standardized test in favor of “holistic” admissions.

Similarly, last year, in what might prove to be a watershed decision, the regents of the University of California voted to phase out the SAT in admissions for the entire system, whose nine campuses make up the largest public university in the country.

All of this raises the possibility that the elimination of common, neutral standards will bring an end to the existence of elite schools for very gifted, very high-achieving students of the sort who will ensure American competitiveness in the future.

“I wouldn't be surprised if in two or three years standardized testing is eliminated altogether,” William Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell who runs the Legal Insurrection website, said in a Zoom interview. “You see people saying that the whole concept of meritocracy is a device to maintain white supremacy. But if you eliminate testing that has commonality to it, how do you judge people?”

A similar rejection of the idea of merit lies behind another initiative in California, where the state Board of Education has adopted a “Framework” proposing that all gifted programs in math instruction be eliminated, along with all “acceleration” and “tracking” – that is, grouping students in different classes according to their math aptitude.

“The subject and community of mathematics has a history of exclusion and filtering rather than inclusion and welcoming,” the Framework states. “We reject ideas of natural gifts and talents ... and the cult of genius.” Very early on, women and minorities get “fixed labels of 'giftedness' and are taught differently” in a system “designed for privileged white boys,” the Framework says.

No doubt, there's truth to the idea that some children are discouraged early when it comes to math, and that that holds them back. But the idea, as the Framework puts it, that “all students are capable of becoming powerful mathematics learners and users” seems utopian at the very least. Can all students become great mathematicians, violinists, or professional athletes, or is the very difference in natural abilities due to labels arbitrarily applied to children largely on the basis of their sex or race?

Moreover, the assertion that the system is “designed for privileged white boys” runs into someinconvenient facts: one is that plenty of “privileged white boys” can't do math to save their lives; another is that Asians, both boys and girls, many of them immigrants from very modest circumstances, outperform these privileged white boys by considerable margins. In addition, overall, girls get at least equal or higher grades than boys in math from elementary to high school, despite the stereotyping “labels” that, according to the Math Framework, hold them back.

As for gifted programs favoring whites while keeping minorities out, according to the very statistics included in the Math Framework, 32% of Asian boys and girls in California are in “gifted” programs, compared to 8% of whites and 4% of blacks. So it would seem indisputable that to eliminate these programs would have the effect of placing many Asians, but not many whites, in slower classes.

The solution to math disparities, according to the Framework, is to group all students of all aptitudes in the same class and for teachers to give “differentiated work and more open math questions” to all of them.

The Framework doesn't say exactly why this would be better than grouping more proficient math students in their own classes. Emails asking that and other questions were acknowledged by the Board of Education press office, but it did not respond to the actual questions.

American high school students have steadily been falling behind their Asian and European counterparts in math and science, most recently ranking 37th in the PISA, the Program for International Student Assessment, which gives a test to 15-year-olds in countries around the world. China's Shanghai ranks No.1.

The California Math Framework does not acknowledge that in Shanghai, the entirely opposite ideas about testing and standards are followed and implemented, with students tested early and often and placed into classes in accordance with their scores.

“Regarding minorities in particular, public K-12 education all too often produces students unprepared to compete, thus leading to large disparities in admissions at universities, graduate programs and faculty positions,” three math professors recently wrote in the online journal Persuasion.

“This disparity is then condemned as a manifestation of structural racism. Resulting in administrative measures to lower the evaluation criteria. Lowering standards at all levels leads eventually to even worse outcomes and larger disparities, and so on in a downward spiral.”


On TB every waking moment

The rise of a generation of censors: Law schools the latest battlement over free speech


The rise of a generation of censors: Law schools the latest battlement over free speech

© Getty Images

Free speech on American college campuses has been in a free fall for years. From high schools through law schools, free speech has gone from being considered a right that defines our society to being dismissed as a threat. According to polling, the result is arguably one of the most anti-free-speech generations in our history. The danger is more acute because it has reached law schools where future judges and lawyers may replicate the same intolerance in our legal system.

A recent controversy at Duke Law School highlights this danger. “Law & Contemporary Problems” is a faculty-run journal that recently decided to do a balanced symposium on “Sex and the Law” — including transgender issues — and asked Professor Kathleen Stock of the University of Sussex (who has criticized transgender positions) to participate.

Protests erupted over allowing such intellectual diversity.

The new set of student editors demanded that Stock be removed from the symposium. The faculty board issued a statement explaining the importance of freedom of speech and academic freedom, particularly on a journal that serves as a forum for debates on contemporary issues. Students resigned rather than associate with a journal offering both sides of such issues.

Some legal columnists echoed calls to ban those with opposing views. The legal site “Above The Law” (ATL) published an article denouncing the faculty for supporting free speech. ATL editor Joe Patrice ran a factually inaccurate tirade against Duke for using academic freedom as “a shield for professors to opine and behave in ways that marginalize others.”

The ATL criticism of Duke was illustrative of the new anti-free-speech movement that is now taking hold in law schools and legal publications. Academic freedom and free speech are denounced as tools to “marginalize others.” Patrice sums up why both the student editors and the Duke faculty must be condemned: “A ‘vigorous and open exchange of ideas’ is valuable only to the extent it improves the academic mission of improving the human condition. Is Trans skepticism within that field? It shouldn’t be, but here we are.” In other words, you are entitled to free speech so long as you cannot be accused of “marginalizing” others.

While calling for professors like Stock to be barred from the publication for “marginalizing” others, ATL editors and other writers often stigmatize and denounce whole groups as requiring containment and condemnation. Elie Mystal, who writes for ATL and is The Nation’s justice correspondent, for example, lashed out at “white society” and how he strives to maintain a “whiteness-free” life. On MSNBC, Mystal declared, without any contradiction from the host, that “You don’t communicate to [Trump supporters], you beat them. You do not negotiate with these people, you destroy them.”

In such campaigns, there is little time or patience with trivialities like free speech.

Mystal was celebrated for his declaration: “I have no intention of waiting around for them to try to kill me before I demand protection from their ‘free speech.’”

Dangerous thoughts are ill-defined beyond being rejected by these writers. Under this approach, free speech becomes like pornography under the famous test of Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material … and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it.”

Of course, free speech demands bright lines so that professors are not chilled in what they write or say. However, that is precisely the point. Whether Patrice and others can block the publication of Stock is immaterial. The fact is that most students and faculty do not want to be the subject of such a public campaign.

Academics are notoriously risk-averse. They need conferences and publications to advance their careers.

The threat is to lose everything that academics need to be active intellectuals.

This is the one-year anniversary of the move to force a criminology professor named Mike Adams off the faculty of the University of North Carolina (Wilmington). Adams was a conservative faculty member with controversial writings who had to go to court to stop prior efforts to remove him. He then tweeted a condemnation of North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper for his pandemic rules, tweeting that he had dined with six men at a six-seat table and “felt like a free man who was not living in the slave state of North Carolina” before adding: “Massa Cooper, let my people go.” It was a stupid and offensive tweet. However, we have seen extreme comments on the left — including calls to gas or kill or torture conservatives — be tolerated or even celebrated at universities.

Celebrities, faculty and students demanded that Adams be fired. After weeks of public pummeling, Adams relented and took a settlement to resign. He then killed himself a few days before his final day as a professor.

Law schools have seen repeated disruptions of conservative speakers with the support or acquiescence of faculty. CUNY law school dean Mary Lu Bilek insisted that law students preventing a conservative law professor from speaking was itself free speech. She also insisted that a law student threatening to set a man’s Israel Defense Forces sweatshirt on fire was simply “expressing her opinion.”

Recently Bilek actually cancelled herself and resigned after she made a single analogy to acting like a “slaveholder” as a self-criticism for failing to achieve equity and reparations for black faculty and students.

Last year, the acting Northwestern law school dean declared publicly: “I am James Speta and I am a racist.” He was followed by Emily Mullin, executive director of major gifts, who announced: “I am a racist and a gatekeeper of white supremacy. I will work to be better.” Such public declarations can fuel demands for more mandatory demonstrations by others or intolerance for those who dissent. At Rutgers this year, the student government ordered all groups to hold critical race theory and diversity programs as a condition for receiving funds. At the University of North Carolina, student Sagar Sharma, who is a student of color, faced a recall election as the first-year class co-president for simply stating that he did not consider an argument between two fellow students to be racist.

Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views.

Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll has denounced the “weaponization” of free speech, which appears to be the use of free speech by those on the right. So the dean of one of the premier journalism schools now supports censorship.

Free speech advocates are facing a generational shift that is now being reflected in our law schools, where free speech principles were once a touchstone of the rule of law. As millions of students are taught that free speech is a threat and that “China is right” about censorship, these figures are shaping a new society in their own intolerant images.

For now, the Duke symposium will include the offending article — but the resignations and condemnations show why this small degree of diversity in viewpoint is increasingly rare on our campuses.

This is a single (and close) victory for free speech, but make no mistake about it: We are losing the war.


On TB every waking moment
57:53 min

Trump: "We Must Act Before It's Too Late" (CRT is "National Suicide")

Streamed live 15 hours ago

Man In America

Imagine arriving at school and being told that, because you're WHITE, you're RACIST. Or being so bogged down with gender and sexuality studies that you can't read or write. This is what our kids are facing every day across America, and if Biden has his way, it's only going to get worse. Trump recently called this left-wing brainwashing of our kids "a program for national suicide", and he urged us to act before it's too late. Join me today for a deeper look at what's going on in our schools, what's behind "critical race theory", and how American parents are fed up and fighting back.


Has No Life - Lives on TB
The end result of these teachings in schools and the omission of teaching is
the theft of a Presidential election by a voting machine company.
Although there is enough circumstantial evidence that elections have been rigged and stolen for some time. First, we had the nomination of the two losers McCain and Romney. Second, we had four years of constant haranguing of Trump.

Notice I said "The end result . . . "

It is too late.


On TB every waking moment

‘China Was Correct’: Biden Advisor Applauds CCP-Style ‘Monitoring And Speech Control’ Of Speech.
A top legal advisor to President Joe Biden argued that the Chinese Communist Party’s approach to internet censorship was “largely correct,” insisting that the U.S. “government must play a large role” in the “monitoring and speech control” on Big Tech platforms.

Harvard Law School Professor Jack Goldsmith, tapped for the president’s exploratory commission on reforming the U.S. Supreme Court, argued in an August 2020 Atlantic op-ed that “in the debate over freedom versus control of the global network, China was largely correct, and the U.S. was wrong.”

Throughout the piece, Goldsmith calls for the U.S. government to play a more active role with internet and social media censorship, appearing to invoke the Chinese Communist Party as a model:

The public internet in its first two decades seemed good for open societies and bad for closed ones. But this conventional wisdom turned out to be mostly backwards. China and other authoritarian states became adept at reverse engineering internet architecture to enhance official control over digital networks in their countries and thus over their populations.

“Significant monitoring and speech control are inevitable components of a mature and flourishing internet, and governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with a society’s norms and values,” Goldsmith, an alum of the George W. Bush administration, asserts.

Goldsmith also praises big tech’s handling of COVID-19 – which includes the covert installation of tracking programs and censorship of stories promoting the now widely-accepted link between the virus and the Wuhan Institute of Virology – as demonstrating an “enormous public good”:

The response to COVID-19 builds on all these trends, and shows how technical wizardry, data centralization, and private-public collaboration can do enormous public good. As Google and Apple effectively turn most phones in the world into contact-tracing tools, they have the ability to accomplish something that no government by itself could: nearly perfect location tracking of most the world’s population. That is why governments in the United States and around the world are working to take advantage of the tool the two companies are offering.


On TB every waking moment

Section 230 Facially Violates 1st Amendment by Sub-Contracting Censorship

By Jim Hoft
Published July 8, 2021 at 10:07am

Guest post by Mark Langfan

The government has granted the power to censor the entire USA to Twitter, Facebook, and Google, but that power is unconstitutional. Op-ed.

In Kurt Vonnegut’s epic novel Cat’s Cradle, Felix Hoenikker, a character who co-created the atomic bomb in the novel, also created another military weapon called “Ice-Nine.” Ice-Nine is an alternate crystalline structure of water that is solid at room temperature, and acts as a seed crystal upon contact with oridnary water, causing it to “freeze” up and become a solid crystal.

The novel ends when some Ice-Nine accidently falls into the ocean, and causes the entire world’s oceans, rivers and groundwater aquifers to apocalyptically freeze up into one huge solid crystal of Ice-Nine.

Why am I talking about Ice-Nine when writing on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act? Because Section 230 is the “Ice-Nine” of free speech, and of democracy itself. Big Tech has used Section 230 to begin to “freeze out” certain free speech, and if allowed to continue, will destroy the very core of democracy.

Thus, Section 230 has become the enemy of the United States and of democracy, and it must be destroyed; or it will destroy the 1st Amendment, free speech, and the United States – in that order.

Imagine that you are an average residential consumer of electricity from your utility. Suppose you are politically motivated and send out emails to your friends, family, and your email list containing non-violent unquestionably 1st Amendment-constitutionally-protected speech. How would you feel if a newly created person called the “Human content monitor” of your supposedly neutral electric utility unilaterally decided that you were engaging in “objectionable” activities, and without notice or hearing turned off all power to your apartment?

You’d sue the electric company and the government on the basis that the electric company is a quasi-government-empowered entity that is violating your 1st Amendment right to free speech.

Unfortunately, many people don’t have to imagine this scenario. Their supposedly neutral quasi-governmentally- empowered social media companies have “discovered” they were posting “objectionable” tweets against Democrats, and based on that alone ordered a shut-down of their social media service.

One should be able to sue the social media company on the basis that the social media company is a quasi-government-empowered entity that is violating your 1st Amendment. But guess what? The “Good Samaritan” Section 230 of the “Communications Decency Act” (“CDA”) empowers all the left-wing tech companies to quash your platform access merely because they believe “in good faith” that your posts are “otherwise objectionable.”

The supposed “good Samaritan” provision has, in fact, become the incarnation of the Orwellian 1984 Ministry of Truth. The United States Government has unconstitutionally “sub-contracted” the infinite power of total censorship to quasi-governmentally-empowered companies in clear facial violation of the 1st Amendment.

Here is 47 U.S. Code § 230 of the CDA – “Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material,” which states, in full:

(c)Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material

(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

(2)Civil liability

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—

(A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).

This is legalese, so I’m going to parse it for you. This current US law states that no internet company “shall be liable” to any of its users if the internet company has “voluntarily” censored “in good faith” any material it deems to be “harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not the censored material “is constitutionally protected.”

You are probably asking the obvious question: Why doesn’t Congress just strike out the “whether or not such material is constitutionally protected” part of the statute? Section 230 will never be amended because it is worth trillions to the small group of people who own those companies and they will pay off Democrats and Republicans alike to keep it from being changed, leaving them with the monopoly on censorship.

The billionaires who own these companies will fight to keep Section 230, so the only recourse is for it to be found unconstitutional. Only the 1st Amendment, and a real Supreme Court that wants to uphold the Constitution, can save our democracy, and with it, the United States.

Let’s go back to the electric utility hypothetical scenario for a second. If unbeknownst to the electric utility, a terrorist was using the utility’s electric power to build a bomb, we would not want people to be able to sue the electric utility for providing electricity to terrorists. Thinking of the internet as a “utility” is the legitimate part of section 1 of Section 230, where the CDA doesn’t want the owners of the “pipes” of the internet, that merely act as conductors, to be sued if a user uses the pipes improperly.

The key legal point here is that section 1 of Section 230 makes the qualifying internet companies into quasi-governmentally authorized entities, essentially no different from electric, water, or gas utilities. On the flip side, however, the government would be hard-pressed to claim it was constitutional under the 1st Amendment for the governmentally empowered electric utilities, even with notice and hearing, to proactively turn off someone’s electricity because the person was engaging in “constitutionally protected” behavior that the government found “harassing” or “otherwise objectionable.”

The essence of section 1 of Section 230 means that the internet companies’ pipes act merely as “pipes,” and that they don’t discriminate what goes through them. For example, in Zeran v. AOL, 129 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 1997), the immunities section of the Good Samaritan protections of Section 230 protected AOL when it allowed material that harmed people to be published.

But Zeran v. AOL constitutionally validated the Section 230 immunities only when the internet company published harmful material, not when the internet company censored what it defined as “harmful” but “constitutionally protected” material. The 1st Amendment doesn’t prohibit the government’s allowing any kind of speech, it prohibits the government from censoring speech. Zeran found the immunity of Section 230 to be constitutional only when information was published by the internet company, not when the internet company censored constitutionally protected speech.

In section 2 of Section 230, the government is subcontracting out the unconstitutional power to censor “constitutionally protected” speech to the quasi-governmentally-mandated internet companies. However, if under the 1st Amendment, the United States does not have the right to censor “constitutionally protected” speech in the first place, how is it constitutional for the government to sub-contract the power to censor to a quasi-governmentally-empowered private company?

It doesn’t. And that is the core of why Section 230 is facially unconstitutional as to its empowering internet companies to censor speech in stark and clear violation of the 1st Amendment.

There are other arguments that I will attend to in later articles. Those issues include the claim that the internet companies who politically tilt the scales of content are, de facto, becoming “publishers” in violation of Section 230. In addition, a tri-partite monopoly has developed between Google, Facebook, and Twitter. The result is that not only is Section 230 facially unconstitutional, it is, as applied, unconstitutional in that the government has sub-contracted the power to censor the entire United States of America to a single three-headed monopoly.

In conclusion, Section 230 will never be amended to cure the gross constitutional defect because people with unlimited funds will pay many millions of dollars to Congress to protect the billions that depend on Section 230 staying exactly how it is.

Therefore, the only way to defeat this existential threat to democracy and the United States is for the Supreme Court to find the censorship provisions of Section 230 facially unconstitutional. Otherwise, we will have just appointed Facebook, Google, and Twitter as George Orwell’s 1984 ‘Ministry of Truth,’ and this three-headed monster will rule America instead of its 360 million people.

This article appeared originally in an OpEd on Israel National News.
Last edited:


On TB every waking moment

We Are Entering The Age Of "Full John Galt"

THURSDAY, JUL 08, 2021 - 04:20 PM
Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

We are entering the age of "Full John Galt." This is a time where society and politicians are rapidly dismantling the rights of ownership. This transfer of rights constitutes a transfer of wealth whether we wish to call it by that name or not.

This is a time when people can just walk into a small privately-owned convenience store, then, without paying walk out with an arm full of merchandise with little or no ramifications. This is a time when government deficits have lost all meaning and people are being paid not to work. This is a time when saying what you feel can garner you massive negative attention and ruin your life.

The idea the economy can be planned by a central force has yet to succeed anywhere. The failings and ills of such programs are rooted in the fact that central planning tends to produce enormous unintended malign effects owing to erroneous incentives and price signals. The new mechanisms of socialist control often created to guide the economy are generally not up to the task of maintaining control. In the old Soviet Union, for instance, nail factory managers got measured and rewarded by the tonnage produced. The story goes that one enterprising factory started massively exceeding its quota by producing only ten-ton nails.

Social Unrest May Be Unavoidable
A slew of news headlines give the impression we as a society are on the verge of becoming unhinged and totally dysfunctional. We, as a population have become polarized and poisoned by the decisive messages flowing from those with self-serving agendas. With governments and various agencies busy issuing mandates and ordering things like a halt on evictions while they lock down cities, it is difficult to argue this is business as usual. Big tech seems to be guiding much of what we see and even the government appears under its spell. Add to this the constant flow of propaganda from mainstream media and the drumbeats of war that are growing louder and it is easy to claim, we do indeed live in interesting times.

Recent headlines such as the condo collapse in Florida and hints that many other towers may also be in a precarious condition sends shivers down the spine of those living there. Signs of poor construction or architectural incompetence does little to comfort those that have invested their savings in these buildings. The financial ramifications that could flow from this event are enormous. It may reshape or massively increase the cost of getting a mortgage or insurance on many buildings.

Another concern is the lack of concern about political corruption. Even the recent headlines about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) disclosing that her investor husband made several now-profitable trades in various securities brought hardly a stir or screams of insider trading. Her husband bought Amazon calls on May 21 when it closed at $3,259.05. This was just six weeks before the Pentagon suddenly pulled the rug out from under Microsoft's $10 billion JEDI cloud computing deal. This has caused Amazon's stock price to soar by giving Amazon and Bezos a good chance of landing this very lucrative contract.

Debt Is Now Above 28
Like so many people linked to Washington decision-makers, it seems Paul Pelosi has done very well in the markets, according to Fox Business, "The speaker has no involvement or prior knowledge of these transactions," and "The speaker does not own any stock." Yes, this is a time when such thinking is not only common but acceptable, and yes, this is a time when many of the hard-working people and savers that made America famous are being thrown under the bus.

The Government-Financial complex, a combination of the Fed, the too big to fail, and the government has become a great threat to our freedom.

Following the 2008 global crisis, the authorities acting primarily to prop up governments and the economy took actions to save the financial system by bringing big banks deeper into the fold. Over the years, as the Government-Financial complex and big tech came together the mix of concentrated power they now yield has become toxic. All this has resulted in a false economy and a soaring national debt that is now over 28 trillion dollars.

Their argument that it is better to intervene heavily in markets rather than do nothing repeats the mistakes that created the Great Depression. Lawyers and politicians historically garner rather low marks when it comes to ethics. Ironically, we allowed these same people to pound out the 2,300 plus pages we call the Dodd-Frank Act. This is said to be our new shield from abuse. With this in mind, we should not be surprised the steps taken over recent years to save the financial system have resulted in destroying true price discovery and led to the creeping nationalization of markets.

A Symbol Of Despair And Hopelessness

What does it mean when someone says ' Who is John Galt'? The website Quora - A place to share knowledge and better understand the world came up with the following answer;

In the classic book “Atlas Shrugged”, the phrase Who is John Galt is a cry of despair and hopelessness. It describes a situation wherein the pistons are removed from an engine making that whole metal mass of a car useless. The pistons form a small part of a vehicle’s mass, but provide the entire reason for a (petrol) car’s existence. Similarly, most great organizations and societies are moved by a small group of people — the innovators. When those are removed, the entire thing falls apart.

They go on to note that the engine is usually among the last parts of the car to give up. When the engine gives up, it usually marks the vehicle's end. While we may not be at, our end, or the end, it is understandable why so many of the most capable contributors of our economy are now moving towards the sidelines. Capable and smart people do not have to work hard to make ends meet and are proving this by going out and enjoying life rather than working to support those that won't. When people decide to remove themselves from a game they see as rigged in favor of those far less deserving it is an indication that at some point even Atlas will shrug and let the world fall.


On TB every waking moment

Google Sued By 36 States, DC Over Alleged Antitrust Violations

THURSDAY, JUL 08, 2021 - 02:39 PM
Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times,

Google on Wednesday was hit by a lawsuit from a group of state attorneys over alleged violation of antitrust laws by its Android app store.

Attorneys general for 36 states and the District of Columbia sued the Big Tech company in a 144-page complaint filed in a Northern California federal court. The group alleges that Google’s Play store for Android apps violates antitrust laws.

The complaint centers on the control Google is able to exert on its Play store, allowing it to collect commissions of up to 30 percent on digital transactions within apps installed on Android-powered smartphones. Those devices represent more than 80 percent of the worldwide smartphone market.

Led by Utah, North Carolina, Tennessee, New York, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, and Nebraska, it marks the fourth major antitrust lawsuit filed by U.S. government agencies against the company since October 2020.

Other lawsuits filed against Google include a complaint filed by a bipartisan coalition of states, and one filed by the Department of Justice. It echoes allegations made against the company by mobile game maker Epic Games in August 2020. That case is awaiting trial.

The complaint contends that Google has deployed various tactics and set up anticompetitive barriers to ensure it distributes more than 90 percent of the apps on Android devices—a market share that the attorneys general argue represents an illegal monopoly. It also alleges Google has been abusing that power to reap billions of dollars in profit at the expense of consumers, who wind up paying higher prices to subsidize the commissions, and the makers of apps who have less money and incentive to innovate.
“Google must be held accountable for harming small businesses and consumers,” Utah Attorney General Sean D. Reyes said in a statement.
“It must stop using its monopolistic power and hyper-dominant market position to unlawfully leverage billions of added dollars from smaller companies, competitors, and consumers beyond what should be paid.”
Responding to the lawsuit, Google called the allegations “meritless.”
“We don’t impose the same restrictions as other mobile operating systems do,” Wilson White, Google’s senior director of Public Policy, wrote on Wednesday.

“So, it’s strange that a group of state attorneys general chose to file a lawsuit attacking a system that provides more openness and choice than others.”
Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment by The Epoch Times.


On TB every waking moment

Wednesday, July 07, 2021
Trump lawsuit will protect lefties as well as conservatives

Remember when President Donald John Trump did what every other Twitter user does and blocked people? The media went ape-doodoo over it. Somehow the inability of reporters to mock his tweets was a violation of their First Amendment rights. Some Obama judge agreed and they were unblocked.

But when Twitter banned President Trump, the media was silent. Many reporters congratulated Twitter.

Free speech means nothing to these dummies. They believe being Pravda somehow protects them from the gulags once a post-constitutional regime takes over.

Their hero, Mao, put anyone with a college degree in the labor camps. Dictators take no chances. The thought of Maureen Dowd working a rice paddy amuses me. In the labor camp, there is no red hair dye.

Now Donald Trump announced he will file a class-action lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook, and Google for censorship. Yes, there is such a thing as non-governmental censorship. Its legality deserves judicial review.

Axios reported, "The filing, Trump said, seeks immediate injunctive relief to allow the prompt restoration of his social media accounts. He also said he is asking the court to impose "punitive damages" on the three social media giants.

"Trump's legal effort is supported by the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a non-profit focused on perpetuating Trump's policies, through a new legal entity called the Constitutional Litigation Partnership.

"AFPI's president and CEO and board chair, former Trump officials Linda McMahon and Brooke Rollins, accompanied him during the announcement."

The Axios report was focused and fact-based.

The New York Times was its usual bloviating self.

Its headline shouted, "Trump announces a lawsuit against tech firms for censoring him, and fund-raises off it."

And NYT used the story to fund-raise.


Of course, NYT fund-raises off every story it posts. Its paywall is down to $1 a week.

The story said, "Former President Donald J. Trump announced on Wednesday plans to sue three tech giants — Facebook, Twitter and Google — and the firms’ chief executives after the platforms have taken various steps to ban him or block him from posting.

"Mr. Trump, speaking from his Bedminster, N.J., golf club, announced he will serve as the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit, arguing he has been censored wrongfully by the tech companies. Speaking about 'freedom of speech' and the First Amendment — which applies to the government, not private-sector companies — Mr. Trump called his lawsuit a 'very beautiful development.'

"His political operation immediately began fund-raising off it."

Well, that is how things go today.

Not only have we politicized everything, we have commercialized it as well. I don't do fund-raising. I do ads. President Trump does fund-raising, but not ads.
NYT does both.

The story said, "Social media companies are allowed, under current law, to moderate their platforms and remove postings that violate their standards. They are protected by a provision, known as Section 230, that exempts internet firms from liability for what is posted on their networks and also allows them to remove postings that violate their standards."

The problem with those standards are that they are vague and ever-changing.
Social media outlets have shown a pattern for silencing conservatives and working in concert to silence individuals. Online services such as PayPal also work to kneecap conservative social media startups.

President Trump told reporters, "Our case will prove this censorship is un
unlawful, unconstitutional and completely un-American. If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone."

Those last 13 words are ominous because if a president of the United States is not safe from these corrupt and incorrigible corporations, no one is.

NYT reporters, editors, executives, and investors are being naïve if they believe they are safe.

No one is. Not me. Not you.

Internet oligarchs should consider Jack Ma. He purportedly was the richest man in Red China. He fell out of favor in October. No one has seen him since March.


On TB every waking moment

Wednesday, July 07, 2021
Now they call being a Republican treason


Abe Lincoln was the first Republican president. A Democrat assassinated him. Now Democrats and Fake Republicans are using Lincoln's name to assassinate the Republican Party.

The Lincoln Project recruited and hired Joe Trippi, a longtime Democrat activist, to derail Republican efforts to win back Congress next year. His conservative credits include Ted Kennedy's 1980 presidential bid and John Edwards in 2008.

Trippi wrote in USA Today, "There are no longer two healthy parties in America.
The catastrophic mistake for our nation is to continue to see the fight as Democrats vs. Republicans, left vs. right. We are at war with an authoritarian movement fueled by former President Donald Trump. It includes many of the 147 Republicans who signed on to treason with their Jan. 6 votes objecting to Joe Biden's win, and it has grown since then."

Trippi is calling for One People, One Nation, One Leader!

His argument is that President Trump is an authoritarian, when the opposite is true. A real strongman would have used covid 19 as an excuse to postpone the 2020 election indefinitely. A real authoritarian would jail dissidents indefinitely for minor crimes without trial -- as Josef Biden is doing with the people who entered the Capitol on January 6. A real authoritarian would have had the military shut down the real insurrections last summer by Antifa and BLM.

Naming this anti-American project after Lincoln is an old communist trick. In the 1930s, communists recruited the Lincoln Brigade (also known as the Lincoln Battalion) of Americans to fight alongside the communists in the Spanish Civil War.

Trippi wrote, "Every American, every corporation, the news media and the social platforms need to understand that there are no longer two functioning political parties in our country. Straddling between them is failing to understand our circumstances and the threat of an authoritarian movement that seeks to take power by any means. It’s time for all Americans to join this fight. Not one party over another. But all Americans against an authoritarian movement and its poison until it dies and another generation of Americans ensures that our democracy lives."

What Trippi is calling for is an authoritarian government to coerce Americans into having but one political party with no opposition, While we mock Never Trumpers, they seem to have the upper hand. No major media outlet -- not even Fox -- supports any review of the irregularities in the 2020 election. Indeed, the media silences those who dare raise questions.

Social media outlets already are working in concert to de-platform conservatives.

Republicans voting against Democrats in the House is now treason. The left no longer is satisfied with going after Trump voters. The left is after all the opposition. Are you now or have you ever been a Republican?

This smacks of the desperation facing Democrats who know that Donald Trump upset them on November 3 so badly that they had to Xerox off thousands of mail-in ballots at the last minute to make it appear they won. Mind you, this came after their cheating.

That they got away with it disturbs me.

We are close to losing our nation to government of the government, by the government, and for the government.
Under Lincoln's banner.


On TB every waking moment

Biden Does Not Need A Domestic ‘Terrorism’ Agenda Unless He Is About To Violate American Rights

by Brandon Smith
July 8, 2021

Biden Does Not Need a Domestic 'Terrorism' Agenda Unless He Is About to Violate American Rights (1)

The federal government is a kind of self perpetuating blob; a cannibalistic creature that must continue to feed on the public and the systems around it in order to survive, but it also must create reasons for its existence so that it may go on feeding uninterrupted. Now, don’t get me wrong – I realize that the apparatus in Washington DC is nothing more than a tool for the power elite to grow their scope of control as well as grow their wealth. That said, without a large federal government the establishment oligarchy would have no ability to project the force they need to compel the population to comply with their agenda.
There are only two real mandates for the government, only two reasons for its existence in our republic: To secure America’s borders from invasion and to protect the freedoms of the citizenry. That’s it.

It is not the job of the government to compel you to take an experimental and questionable covid vaccine over a virus that 99.7% of people will easily survive. It is not the job of the government to create artificial “social equity” by favoring one group or ethnicity over another. It is not the job of the government to spy on millions of Americans because they do not agree with the leftist ideology. It is not the job of government to make war on the very people it is mandated to protect.

Yet, this is exactly what the government is doing today while its totalitarianism is disguised as “humanitarianism”. In other words, they are essentially arguing that they must make war on the people in order to protect the people from themselves.

One of Joe Biden’s first actions upon entering the White House was to initiate a 100 day review of the government’s domestic terrorism policies, and I think this says a lot about what path his presidency is bound to follow. Yes, the media continually argues that the Capitol protest on Jan 6th was a vast conspiracy on the part of conservatives to “overthrow” the democratic process and commit insurrection. In fact, all it really amounted to was a large protest which was less violent than the majority of Black Lives Matter protests across the nation over the past year.

The media also incessantly mentions the five deaths that occurred on the day of the protest while continuing to ignore the fact that NOT ONE of those deaths has been attributed to the direct actions of protesters, and at least three of the deaths were due to natural causes.

Why does the mainstream media keep lying by omission? Because they have to keep the narrative alive that the capitol protest is a sign of some underlying conservative “evil” that must be contained or destroyed. We don’t really give them much to work with, so they have to create reasons out of thin air to convince people to hate us.

Biden’s review of domestic terrorist policy was finally released last month and the propaganda has been building ever since. It has now culminated in Big Tech conglomerates like Facebook calling for people to report family and friends that might be exhibiting “signs of extremism”. The is the Soviet Cheka or the Est German Stasi all over again.

Two of the administration’s primary findings in their report included the assertion that domestic threats are “motivated by racism and white supremacy”, and that they are driven by anti-authority. For many this might sound like bizarro world.
What the hell does racism have to do with the capitol protests or anything else that conservatives have been fighting for the past year? Biden is a white guy, after all, so protesting his entry into the White House is hardly race motivated. And, if you ask the majority of patriots why they are angry you will find that most of them have grown tired of the pandemic restrictions and medical tyranny, which they know will only continue to get worse under Biden. Is this viewpoint “anti-authority”, or just anti-authoritarianism?

Keep in mind that these days almost anything can be labeled racist or extremist. The interpretation is wide open and arbitrary. This is how informant culture works. Anyone can be a target for any reason and one is treated as guilty until proven innocent.

Obviously Biden and his handlers are not concerned with what is ACTUALLY causing Americans to rebel by the millions. They already know that THEY are the real cause, along with their attempts to undermine American civil liberties. What this is really about is gaslighting.

Yes, that classic strategy used by narcissists and psychopaths; the method an abuser uses to make his victims think they deserve the treatment they are getting. The establishment takes away your freedoms and abuses your rights, then if you react to defend yourself they call you a racist and a terrorist. It’s a tried and true maneuver.

First, I would point out that the racism issue is irrelevant at its core. No one except crazed social justice warriors thinks that institutional racism is a legitimate issue in America in 2021. There’s no proof whatsoever to support the incoherent ramblings of critical race theorists. By extension, it’s also not illegal to be a bigot.

In America, you are welcome to dislike any group of people you want and the government cannot punish you for it. There is no such thing as “hate speech”, there is only speech which some people hate.

This is a strategy by leftists to create a weakness in the armor of free speech laws and grind them down. If they can regulate some speech, they can eventually regulate ALL speech. Biden is merely acting as a conduit for the critical race theory agenda, and he is attaching it to every single policy in the hopes that it will stick somewhere.

Second, let’s all be honest and acknowledge who the real target of Biden’s domestic terrorism policies is: Conservatives in general. And, it’s not just because of the capitol protests.

Here is my concern: Whenever psychopathic regimes are about to pursue an egregious action that will degrade freedoms and enrage the public, they have a tendency to preemptively demonize (and often disarm) the people they are about to abuse. To put it another way, Biden is obsessed with attacking conservatives as “racists” and “extremists” not because of what we have done (we haven’t done anything), but because of what we are ABOUT TO DO.

And how does Biden know what we are going to do in the future? He knows because he is going to take actions that he and his handlers know will piss us off. Biden is clearly planning to enforce more policies which will directly violate the constitutional rights of Americans and he is preparing in advance for the fallout by making it appear as if conservatives and patriots are the aggressors.

As I have noted in previous articles, this is the common mantra of the tyrants:
“Those that disagree with me are wrong because I will never allow them to prove they are right. Those that defend themselves against my attacks are evil because if they fight back they might harm me. Those that demand the truth do not understand how important my lies are to the stability of the world I have built for them. Why would I engage in battle when I can get others to fight my battles for me? When people are free, it means they are free to criticize or ignore me, so I must take away their freedom, so that they are made to revere me and recognize my importance. Morals are relative and principles are for suckers. The ends justify the means, and the greater good of the greater number is paramount – And as long as I am the one that determines what the definition of the “greater good” is, then I am the one that controls everything else.”

It is hard to say what Biden is about to do that requires so much preemptive demonization of liberty minded people. Forced vaccinations and vaccine passports are a hard line in the sand for the majority of conservatives, and we simply won’t allow such policies to remain. We will fight if we have to in order to stop them.

Disenfranchisement of conservatives from the economy or from the internet is another line that we will not back away from. The leftist mob is already attempting to make it acceptable to “cancel” conservatives on social media simply for being conservative, and by extension they are also seeking to normalize the punishment of conservatives for their views by threatening them with joblessness.

This sort of ideological cleansing of America is not going to end well. Eventually, yes, conservatives will go to war over this because if we don’t our values of freedom, individualism, voluntarism and meritocracy will be erased from the public square and there will be no meaningful future for generations not yet born.

New gun control measures and gun bans are not going to fly, either. There is no chance that conservatives will comply with a Biden gun control plan, red flag gun laws, gun buybacks, etc. It’s not going to happen. Biden and the establishment knows this, so perhaps gun confiscation is next on the agenda?

Finally, it is possible that the establishment will go for broke during the next crisis event and Biden will seek to implement martial law. It might be an economic crash or a crash of the dollar. It might be a major cyberattack (look up the World Economic Forum’s “Cyberpolygon” event happening this week). It might be a new “variant” of covid that they use as an excuse to bring back nationwide lockdowns. Whatever the case may be, any attempt at martial law by Biden will be met with immediate and explosive resistance from conservatives, and frankly, I doubt that the Biden Admin would survive the duration.

So, yes, in a way Biden is right. The biggest threat to the system today is a domestic conflict, IF the system intends to attack the citizenry and their liberties.

That said, the establishment is not sacrosanct, and when a government violates the rights of the people the people have a duty to overthrow it. We would only be “terrorists” in the eyes of the people who started the conflict to begin with.

At this point we have to ask ourselves, “Who does the federal government actually represent when they do these things?” Do they represent us? Or do they represent special interests, such as globalists and career Marxists? Are they tearing away our freedoms at record pace for our benefit, or the benefit of people with malicious intentions?

If they are acting in the interests of evil people, then isn’t rebellion inevitable? And who is to blame for that inevitable conflagration? Them, or us?


On TB every waking moment

BREAKING: Tennessee Judge Sends Another Racist Biden Policy Down in Flames

July 8, 2021
by Kyle Becker


Written by Kyle Becker

The Biden administration suffered yet another legal defeat for one of its race-based policies.


“Breaking WIN: Tennessee federal district court halts the USDA racially discriminatory farm loan forgiveness program that excludes white farmers,” the Southeastern Legal Foundation announced. “HUGE win for equality and the Constitution!”

The court issued a preliminary injunction to stop the farm loan forgiveness program from discriminating against white farmers.

“Therefore, the only way to preserve the status quo is for the Court to issue a nationwide injunction,” the ruling states. “Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED, and Defendants are hereby enjoined from implementing Section 1005.”

The July 8th decision buttresses earlier defeats for the Biden administration’s race-based farm aid program. In June, a Wisconsin judge put a halt to the program.

Milwaukee District Judge William Griesbach issued a temporary restraining order, noting the White farmers “are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim” that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) “use of race-based criteria in the administration of the program violates their right to equal protection under the law,” according to NBC News.

“The obvious response to a government agency that claims it continues to discriminate against farmers because of their race or national origin is to direct it to stop: it is not to direct it to intentionally discriminate against others on the basis of their race and national origin,” Griesbach continued.

The USDA said it disagreed with the restraining order.

“We respectfully disagree with this temporary order and USDA will continue to forcefully defend our ability to carry out this act of Congress and deliver debt relief to socially disadvantaged borrowers,” a USDA spokesperson told Fox News.

“When the temporary order is lifted, USDA will be prepared to provide the debt relief authorized by Congress.”

It looks like another judge disagrees. It continues a string of legal defeats for Biden’s race-based policies.

In May, racialized elements of the COVID-19 pandemic response, including a restaurant aid program within the American Rescue Plan, were defeated in the Sixth Circuit.

“This case is about whether the government can allocate limited coronavirus relief funds based on the race and sex of the applicants,” Judge Thapar ruled.

“We hold that it cannot.”

“The Small Business Administration has injected explicit racial and ethnic preferences into the priority process,” the ruling continued. “Under a regulation that predates the pandemic, the agency presumes certain applicants are socially disadvantaged based solely on their race or ethnicity. Groups that presumptively qualify as socially disadvantaged—and thus get to jump to the front of the line for priority consideration—include ‘Black Americans,’ ‘Hispanic Americans,’ ‘Asian Pacific Americans,’ ‘Native Americans,’ and ‘Subcontinent Asian Americans.’ If you are in one of these groups, the Small Business Administration assumes you qualify as socially disadvantaged. Indeed, the only way not to qualify is if someone comes forward ‘with credible evidence to the contrary’.”

As the SBA’s funding proceeded past the initial emergency funding phase, it continued to implement racial and sexual bias in its decisions.

“There is an obvious solution to this of course: The agency can simply fund grants in the order they were received—without regard to priority status, and without regard to the processing head start that many applications received on the basis of race and sex,” the ruling noted.

Judge Thapar’s conclusion is particularly stinging.

“It has been twenty-five years since the Supreme Court struck down the race-conscious policies in Adarand. And it has been nearly twenty years since the Supreme Court struck down the racial preferences in Gratz. As today’s case shows once again, the ‘way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.’”

It looks like the Biden administration hasn’t quite yet got the message. Slowly, with enough court defeats, one would think that it might.


On TB every waking moment

Whistleblower reveals Albuquerque Public Schools reading list is almost all about race, queerness, or revisionist American history

In the public schools in Albuquerque, New Mexico, the indoctrination of our children is in full swing. A whistleblower revealed the recommended reading list for social studies and, according to James Lindsay, it’s almost all about “race, queerness, or derived from Howard Zinn (Critical Historian, revisionist).”

SCOOP: A whistleblower has provided me with the complete list of books for Albuquerque Public Schools in New Mexico. Almost everything is about race, queerness, or derived from Howard Zinn (Critical Historian, revisionist). This isn't education. It's Critical Theory programming.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
Here’s just one of the pages Lindsay posted in his tweet (click to enlarge):

Lindsay continues:
*social studies curriculum only. Don't be alarmed that no math or science, etc., is on there. It's not meant to be.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
Nearly all of the proposed social studies curriculum in Albuquerque, NM, schools is geared around Critical Theory interpretations of American history and social life. The goal would obviously be to make students think negatively about their country and state.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
“The goal is, yet again, to criticize the existing society (per Marx’s “ruthless criticism of everything that exists”) to demolish faith and support for it.”
I should also point out how much of the recommended reading list is feminist, which will serve the same Critical agenda. The goal is, yet again, to criticize the existing society (per Marx's "ruthless criticism of everything that exists") to demolish faith and support for it.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
Many of these books will be defended as "providing a different perspective/voice," and people will be challenged to say what they think is wrong about alternative perspectives/voices. That's a trap. It's the leveraging of all curricula to Critical Theory ends, which is wrong.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
There is a limited time in the curriculum in schools, and everyone knows that. Virtually every book on that list short of the core textbooks is either Critical or easily leveraged to Critical ends. Core civics competency and understanding of the state/nation should be the goal.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
Critical Pedagogy regards its mission to indoctrinate for "social justice" and "democratic citizenship" in line with Gramsci's openly communist vision. You can see that here, from Henry Giroux, On Critical Pedagogy. Giroux is one of the most influential Marxian-Leftists in ed.
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
As I explored here in tremendous detail, for Marxians like the Woke, "democratic citizenship" means "in favor of communism/equity and taking up social activism on its behalf." This school district's curriculum is in line with this Maoist objective.The Woke Manipulation of Democracy
— James Lindsay, uncitable (@ConceptualJames) July 8, 2021
This is probably the biggest reason why Democrats love public schools and loathe homeschooling and private schools, because they can control and thus indoctrinate masses of children in public schools as you see above, fomenting a revolution in the hearts of those who will grow up and run this country. This is why parents fighting back, as we’ve recently seen, against CRT being taught in schools is so important. They are truly the ones who can make a difference here.


On TB every waking moment

9 Years Ago, Andrew Breitbart Revealed Obama’s Ties To Critical Race Theory ‘Godfather,’ And Corporate Media Waved It Away

'It was like shouting into a dark room in the early years,' Joel Pollak said.

Gabe Kaminsky

By Gabe Kaminsky
JULY 8, 2021

Critical race theory has blossomed in the United States into a culture war between institutions and those they purport to serve. As usual, legacy media have colluded to delegitimize any objections by either minimizing the dogma, re-defining it, or denying its existence. Americans ought to consider the media’s frenzy to smear writers exposing CRT in 2012 when examining the reality of today.

After Andrew Breitbart indicated at the Conservative Political Action Conference that he had footage to substantiate that President Barack Obama maintained a relationship with a prominent critical race theorist, it led to a news storm.

Breitbart’s fiery speech led to a now all-too-familiar CRT battle between two opposing media forces. released footage of Obama speaking at a diversity protest in support of a professor named Derrick Bell, whom the outlet’s former editor Ben Shapiro referred to in an explainer column as “the father of Critical Race Theory (CRT).” Heritage Foundation fellow Mike Gonzalez told me in an email he is more like the “godfather” of CRT.

A Familiar Media Smear
Bell, a Harvard University Law professor at the time, was overwhelmingly defended by left-leaning pundits, as was Obama. If you can picture it, and hopefully you can given how investigative journalist Christopher Rufo and others have been treated by media today, Breitbart’s writers were lambasted as conspiracy theorists.

Joel Pollak, the editor-in-chief at the time and now the current Breitbart editor-at-large, was implicitly called racist on CNN by host Soledad O’Brien, a “smear artist” in The New Yorker, and told in The Nation he was unreasonably rebuking “intellectual leaders in a long tradition of calling on America to address racial unfairness.”

“The approach is to turn every last human gesture into evidence in an ongoing character trial conducted by the most zealous members of an ideological tribe,” declared The Atlantic. “The people in charge of belong on a 1990s college campus chanting ‘the personal is the political’ and fighting with their far-left analogs. Instead they’re running a popular conservative Web site, which tells you just how intellectually bankrupt movement conservatism has become.”

Rolling Stone rejected CRT’s radicalism, declaring, “Anyone who thinks power and race don’t figure in how the law is applied or that racism is a thing of the past is not paying attention.”

The narrative construction was equally apparent in Slate, which railed against Breitbart’s claim that CRT means tearing down meritocracy, or the American system. The key was to normalize it — just like today.

“And many of [Bell’s] ideas are not radical today in the sense of being outside the mainstream: Critical race theory is widely taught and studied, not only in law but in sociology, education, and other fields,” wrote Slate’s Will Oremus. “And it is part of the mainstream debates over affirmative action, immigration, and hate-crime laws.”

Pollak told me, “It was like shouting into a dark room in the early years,” noting the difficulty in years past with getting media to adequately focus on CRT. Just as Rufo recently credited himself and others with having “successfully frozen” the left’s CRT into the American psyche, the media in 2012 launched a campaign to instill the idea that Breitbart and the “right-wing radicals” were promoting nonsense.

However — and this is the important part — it turned out to be a sham. Media Matters, the far-left George Soros-backed group, admitted as much last week. While displaying a clear reluctance to acknowledge the obvious, Media Matters claimed while Breitbart’s reporting “failed” at the time, it has led to conservatives “dust[ing] off the same playbook from 2012.”

“Nearly a decade later, Breitbart News’ failed smear of critical race theory is back — and this time it appears to be working,” the group stated.

Corporate Media Loves to Downplay Critical Race Theory
Clearly, legacy media is paying attention nowadays to CRT. But how they do is the kicker. While it is true MSNBC’s Joy Reid told Rufo last month CRT is “made up” and merely “Christopher Rufo theory,” it’s the same old tune.

The left has sought for a decade to bury conservative media’s findings on CRT. Today’s commentators are engaged in a schizophrenic-like frenzy to protect their institutional allies. It is as if Vanity Fair, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Atlantic, NBC News, and others have turned back the clock to 2012, with the targeting of Breitbart, Pollak, Shapiro, and all the rest mirrored in the young journalists who have taken this stuff on.

The only difference is that CRT is much more mainstream now than it was then. It’s ubiquitous. And the media is now faced with a reckoning. Can it truly hide something right in front of the people’s eyes like it did last time? Where will it end?

Just this week, Reid ventured to say conservative backlash to CRT is equivalent to far-right extremism. It is “an all-out war for power,” she said, as well as the effort is “steeped in…white nationalism.”

1:41 min

“Making it ‘Christopher Rufo theory’ is a way of personalizing it. The old [Saul] Alinsky method of personalizing something. And if they can demonize him enough, maybe this will go away and people will stop talking about it,” Pollak also told me.

Americans See The Truth
What we are witnessing today is the culmination of years of independent and conservative media reporting that validates what many people have come to realize: Corporate media will do whatever it can, however, it can, to hide the truth in order to appease party allies and mold narratives consistent with their political ideology.

CRT’s emergence into the public consciousness — albeit more widespread given its application in schools — is nothing new. But deceitful elites would have you think so. The media has been fortunate to be able to mold what Americans think of their history for decades.

But unlike 2012 — when parents did not overwhelmingly deal with CRT-infested curricula and employees could clock in and out without hearing the word “equity” — it is all too real.

At this point, the more corrupt outlets decry CRT as just another right-wing conspiracy, the more Americans will recognize the truth. Too many leftists who read teleprompters in soulless studios and craft editorialized theses crave nothing but power. Even if it means destroying America with manufactured racial tension to get it.