Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for the ‘Opinion’ Category

Commentary: As a former Muslim, I believe in faith in the public square


Commentary By Hedieh Mirahmadi, Exclusive Columnist| Thursday, July 29, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/as-a-former-muslim-i-believe-in-faith-in-the-public-square.html/

Hedieh Mirahmadi
Courtesy of Hedieh Mirahmadi

When I first became a Christian, I looked forward to a quiet life, basking in the love and beauty of having met my Lord and Savior.

Since I spent most of my adult life deeply engrossed in political battles over one issue or another, and serving my country in ways that were quite dangerous, the prospect of serenity was quite appealing. It was not more than three months that went by before the Lord gave me the vision for my ministry so others could experience the redemptive power of Christ.

At first, I wanted to ignore the call and pretend I didn’t hear it correctly. Starting a ministry and being public with my Christian faith meant I could be attacked or even physically harmed by Muslims seeking to impose the penalty of apostasy. It meant I was going back into battle. However, the Lord was relentless.

The inspirations came to me like a flood nearly every day, and then I heard the words, “Hedieh, you are battle-tested, combat-ready.” It made me laugh out loud because it was so true. My whole life and career were preparing me for this new mission to spread the Gospel at a time when being a follower of Christ is increasingly under attack. 

I have lived and worked in places where I escaped the outbreak of civil war, was shot at in the marketplace, and nearly lost my toes from frostbite because the heating in our compound turned off.  The Lord took all the inner fortitude and discipline of my past and combined it with the courage and strength that comes from being in relationship with Him.

He was using it all so I can serve the Kingdom. Whether it is writing columns and doing radio interviews, or witnessing to my hairstylist and speaking out at a School Board meeting, my faith in Christ is at the forefront of all that I do.  I often remember the Scripture, “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops,” (Mathew 10:27).

Some would say my enthusiasm stems from being a relatively new Christian, but I beg to differ. I had the good fortune of listening to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at church last week, and he made it so clear why all Americans should think of our faith in this way.

Mr. Pompeo talked about being an openly devout Christian during his time as Secretary of State, and how it informed all he did.  Though being asked ‘how does being a Christian impact your life?’ often had a negative connotation, that was irrelevant to him.  He responds with conviction and recounts his words that are clearly meant to inspire us:

“[Our faith] impacts everything you do; it informs every action that you take. It impacts how you think about the world, how you interact with people, and every day in your work life. Our founders believed deeply this was right and that the capacity to exercise our religion freely was important, and it mattered. …My oath was to the nation, I raised my right hand and swore that I would support defend the American Constitution, but I knew that if I did that with the Lord in my heart, I’d be more successful at delivering on that very outcome.”

Whether it was President Sisi in Egypt or Chairman Kim of North Korea, world leaders respected him for it, and there is nothing un-American or unbiblical about it. In his seminal speech in Cairo, he began the remarks saying, “I’m Mike Pompeo, and I’m an evangelical Christian.” His speechwriters tried to remove it, but he insisted on keeping it in.  He knew it was essential not because he wanted to talk about Christianity in a Muslim nation, but he wanted them to understand that the believers of Christ wanted good things for people everywhere and that it’s our responsibility to be faithful, no matter where we are. There is not one line that gets him more questions or comments about even to this day. Leaders of every faith, Christians, Jews, and Muslims worldwide, say they appreciated his honesty. They appreciated that he kept faith in the public square. They admired the discipline with which he practiced his faith. They appreciated his courage to talk about his values so they could better understand how our nations could work alongside each other to deliver better lives for people across the world.

Though some US officials criticized his openness, it never deterred him. Unfortunately, many government representatives wrongly interpret that the First Amendment prohibits talking about faith, but it does not. The freedom of religion is meant to protect the rights of people of all faiths to practice their religion without encroachment from the government. In my experience, it is a lack of religious conviction in our government officials that has led to disastrous policy decisions.

I will never forget being in a closed-door meeting at the White House during the Obama Administration, where a small group of us was invited to address the President on “countering violent extremism.” After nearly an hour of our passionate pleas and recommendations for stricter policies towards state sponsors of terrorism and other stringent measures, the President says he didn’t “get religion” and would not let people drag him into a war over it. Quite frankly, this sentiment explains why he did virtually nothing about the explosion of violence in the Middle East during his tenure. Suppose many of our senior US diplomats cannot appreciate the impact religion has on the way people live their lives and determine their priorities. How then can we properly represent our country as a nation founded on Judeo-Christian values?

Secretary Pompeo went on to say, “There’s no separation between faith and country because God governs in the affairs of men. Our success depends on virtuous people. Wherever that is— volunteering in the parking lot at church or serving in government. Our faith should form our character and inform our opinions.”

Being a Christian should be part of whatever we do. It’s not proselytizing; it is a belief that whatever religion someone believes in, they should be allowed to practice it freely. Hopefully, they will find the power of Christ revealed to them.   If our faith is not public and visible, how can we call others to faith in Christ? It is not just about being a good person.

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? (Romans 10:14)

I am eternally grateful for receiving salvation after practicing Islam freely in the US for decades.  I also cherish the freedom to share my new faith with others. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, forit is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes,” (Romans 1:16).

Hedieh Mirahmadi was a devout Muslim for two decades working in the field of national security before she experienced the redemptive power of Jesus Christ and has a new passion for sharing the Gospel.  She dedicates herself full-time to Resurrect Ministry, an online resource that harnesses the power of the Internet to make salvation through Christ available to people of all nations, and her daily podcast LivingFearlessDevotional.com.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Vaccine Karens


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 28, 2021 5:24 PM

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/28/the-vaccine-karens—p–n2593262/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

The Vaccine Karens

Source: AP Photo/Marta Lavandier

If I weren’t already staunchly pro-vaccination, the vaccine zealots would turn me against the COVID shot. The proof that they’re practicing religion and not science is their refusal to acknowledge the great heaping hunks of immunity a person gets from natural infection.

Obviously, you don’t want to contract COVID just to get all that boffo immunity, but lots of people have already been infected, so why can’t we count them the same as vaccinated?

The current research — and that’s all we have for the vaccines, too — indicates that natural immunity is not as good as vaccine immunity — it’s better! Study after study keeps finding that the previously infected have stronger, broader and longer-lasting immunity than people who’ve received the vaccine.

When the vaccinated, with their pipsqueak immunity, stop browbeating the already-infected, I’ll believe this is something other than a cult.

Why is the only proof of virtue — I mean, “Trusting the Science(TM) — a vaccination card and not a positive COVID test? Why don’t sports teams, concert halls and foreign countries accept proof of prior infection the same way they accept proof of vaccination?

Nope. Your prior infection is no good here! We are accepting ONLY vaccination cards.

Whatever that impulse is based on, it’s not “science.”

Despite earlier reports showing that antibodies declined rapidly after infection, in May of this year, scientists at the Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, Missouri, released a study showing that “robust” antibodies were still present at least 11 months after infection. (France accepts proof of prior infection not older than six months. If they trust the science, they’ll soon be accepting prior infection for a year.)

Then in June, the Cleveland Clinic produced a gigantic, perfectly controlled study finding that people who’d already had COVID received no benefit from vaccination.

The clinic had tested its 52,238 employees throughout 2020. At one point or another, 2,579 tested positive. By mid-December, 46% of the recovered COVID patients had taken the vaccine, but more than half (54%) had not.

Five months later, none of the previously infected had been re-infected — including the 1,359 who did not take the vaccine. (Among clinic employees who were vaccinated, but not previously infected, 15 got COVID.)

The authors concluded: “Our study … provid[es] direct evidence that vaccination does not add protection to those who were previously infected.”

Great news, right?

NO! This was terrible news for the vaccination Karens! Their position is: Everyone must get the vaccine. Even if you live alone on a mountaintop and eat leaves and beetles to survive, even if you’re a burbling infant, even if you’ve had COVID, YOU MUST GET THE VACCINATION!

In short order, the Cleveland Clinic was bullied into submission. The authors of the report issued what sounded like a retraction, but, on closer examination, was just a lot of airy nonsense.

E.g.: “This is still a new virus and more research is needed. …”

Duh. Same for the studies showing how fantastic the COVID vaccines are.

“It is important to keep in mind that this study was conducted in a population that was younger and healthier than the general population. …”

This study SUCKS. It only applies to the entire working-age population of the U.S.!

“In addition, we do not know how long the immune system will protect itself against re-infection after COVID-19. …”

Ditto for the vaccine.

“It is safe to receive the COVID-19 vaccine even if you have previously tested positive …”

Presumably, it’s also “safe” to use Gwyneth Paltrow’s healing crystals if you have previously tested positive. The question is: Do you need to?

” … and we recommend all those who are eligible receive it.”

Perhaps, someday, there will be a study establishing that the previously infected should get the vaccine, but your study didn’t, Cleveland Clinic. Everyone knows you’re only telling the previously infected to get vaccinated so the loons will leave you alone.

Just this week, a study out of the Emory University Vaccine Center, led by “world renowned immunologist” (as he is known) Rafi Ahmed, found “durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection.” And get this: The researchers also found that a natural COVID infection protects against a range of other coronaviruses, too.

What’s so impressive about these studies is that they are going against the woke mob. After a year of seeing scientists and scientific journals irredeemably corrupted, any study that won’t be cited in Teen Vogue carries extra credibility. Worse, the results support Sen. Rand Paul! Nobody’s going to lie about that.

This isn’t just a matter of policy not catching up to the science. The vaccine Karens positively disdain the previously infected. Instead of being treated like the superhumans that they are, recovered COVID patients are scorned, treated like smokers or AIDS victims. (No, sorry — the latter were revered as “angels.”) We’re simultaneously told that COVID is WILDLY contagious and … it’s your own damn fault for not wearing a mask, socially distancing or getting a vaccine.

The dismissal of people who’ve developed their own antibodies springs from the same totalitarian mindset of gun control activists: You cannot protect yourself! Your body cannot protect you! Only the government can protect you. Or, as Mussolini said: “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”

This abject refusal to acknowledge the existence of natural immunity proves that the vaccine Karens don’t care about the health of their fellow human beings. They just want to boss us around.

Opinion: ‘Unmasking’ critical race theory


Commentary By Richard D. Land, Christian Post Executive Editor| Friday, July 23, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/unmasking-critical-race-theory.html/

Last week I shared a quote from a very important column “How Adherents See ‘Critical Race Theory’” by William A. Galston, a former Clinton administration veteran (1993-95) who is currently a fellow with the Brookings Institution (a liberal “think tank”) and a weekly columnist with the Wall Street Journal.

Richard Land
(Photo: The Christian Post/Katherine T. Phan)

I know Galston and have participated on various panels with him in Washington, D.C. I like Bill. He is liberal but he’s honest and a “straight-shooter” as we would say in Texas. That common sense, patriotic streak may be attributable to his having served a four-year stint in the United States Marine Corps when he was a young man. 

In that July 14th column, Galston concludes with the following observation:  “But, one thing is clear:  Because the Declaration of Independence – the founding document of the American liberal order – is a product of Enlightenment rationalism, a doctrine that rejects the Enlightenment, tacitly requires deconstructing the American order and rebuilding it on an entirely different foundation.”

It took the courage of a Marine to write that column in the face of a withering propaganda barrage in favor of critical race theory in the progressive media. After this week’s column, “A Deeper Look at Critical Race Theory,” it would be wise for Bill to employ a food taster at Capitol Hill receptions and D.C. dinner parties. Why? It is quite simple – he has told the truth to the progressive elites, and they often react viscerally and violently to such effrontery.

Galston “unmasks” CRT as a mortal threat to the American constitutional and judicial system and he does so in no uncertain terms. 

Having dived into the original sources, Galston reports several devastating facts about CRT.

  • First, “Critical Race Theory denies the possibility of objectivity.”
  • Second, CRT makes “race the center of our focus,” which is in direct opposition to Dr. King’s focus and vision. As such, CRT harshly critiques the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s as making only “symbolic” and “token” solutions for systemic racism. 
  • Third, Galston notes that CRT “is an explicitly left-wing movement inspired by the thinking of an Italian neo-Marxist Antonio Gramsci.”
  • Fourth, CRT’s founders “identified with Black Power movements much more than with those who were working for integration.”
  • Lastly, CRT “rejects the principle of equality of opportunity” and asserts that the real goal must be “equality of results,” measured by the “black share of income, wealth and social standing.” CRT rejects policies such as affirmative action as mere “diversions” meant “to make the mythology of equal opportunity plausible.” 

Galston concludes his exposé and critique by quoting Ibram X. Kendi, the author of the best-seller, How to Be an Anti-Racist, where he asserts that “the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” This would condemn America to a perpetually racist future in perpetuity. 

Bill Galston has committed the unpardonable progressive sin. He has told the plain, unvarnished, democracy-destroying truth about CRT. The counter-culture lynch mob will be out in force in full-throated rage.

We need more Americans and especially more progressives to display this kind of extraordinary courage and intellectual honesty.

I hope you will join me in applauding Bill Galston’s courage, and his intellectual honesty. Please also join me in praying for him in the days ahead, because the proto-fascists and black shirts masquerading as progressives will be out to destroy him.

Dr. Richard Land, BA (magna cum laude), Princeton; D.Phil. Oxford; and Th.M., New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, was president of the Southern Baptists’ Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (1988-2013) and has served since 2013 as president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, NC. Dr. Land has been teaching, writing, and speaking on moral and ethical issues for the last half century in addition to pastoring several churches. He is the author of The Divided States of AmericaImagine! A God Blessed AmericaReal Homeland SecurityFor Faith & Family and Send a Message to Mickey.

MORE POLITICAL INCORRECTNESS July 22, 2021


Ann Coulter Op-ed: What’s Dumber Than CRT? CNN


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 21, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/21/whats-dumber-than-crt-cnn—p–n2592908/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

What's Dumber Than CRT? CNN

Source: AP Photo/Ron Harris

As we discussed last week, “critical race theory” is a subtle philosophical construct where the answer to everything is: THAT’S RACIST! Teachers hawking this glop are being defended by their journalist allies, who sneer that CRT critics are too stupid to understand the nuances of the theory. The Aristotelian ideal of this sneer was Elle Reeve‘s “special report” for CNN — pre-taped to eliminate any danger of Elle being contradicted by someone smarter, such as a 10-year-old.

CNN’s Brianna Keilar introduced the segment by asking her: “Do these vocal opponents of critical race theory actually understand fully what it is?”

(That’s what’s known as a “rhetorical question,” kids!)

Elle: “No.” [Bored] “And why should they? It’s an academic theory taught mostly at the grad student level. But what they think it means is teaching white kids that all white people are bad and racist. And so, of course they’re afraid of that.”

They’re afraid!!! Wait — remind me: Who’s banning books, again? Who’s flipping out about “microaggressions”? Who’s demanding that Big Tech censor people? Who’s demanding “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” from speech they don’t like?

Parents aren’t “afraid”; they’re incensed. They’re paying the salaries of people who spend all day telling their kids that America is racist. (Elle didn’t give that explanation. Perhaps it frightens her.)

The “vocal opponents” of CRT who “don’t actually understand fully what it is” seem to be mostly billionaire investment bankers — at least judging by the articles in the Daily Mail. Elle’s conclusion: A “theory” that consists of going around shouting “RACISM!” is too complex for those guys to understand.

The format of Elle’s pre-taped report consisted of her interviewing opponents of CRT … then nailing them with her brilliant comebacks! Except even with CNN doing the editing, the CRT opponents sounded perfectly reasonable, while Elle’s comebacks kept revealing her yawning stupidity.

Early in Elle’s report, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is shown saying, “Critical race theory says America’s fundamentally racist.” What a dope!

About 60 seconds later, Elle deferentially asks a hijab-wearing high school teacher to explain CRT. The teacher exclaims: “Race and racism is literally the building blocks of this country!” (Were I the editor of Elle’s piece, I think I would have cut that part of her answer.)

Next, Elle talks to a parent fighting CRT, who says: “Don’t force on our kids a particular worldview. Taking a wide brush and painting this country as structurally racist, it’s insane … it’s a lie.”

To this, Elle patronizingly informs the parent that America’s racism “isn’t distant history.” Her evidence of contemporary racism? “In the ’90s, the crime bill gave much more severe sentencing to crack cocaine versus powder cocaine simply because black people were perceived as doing crack cocaine and white people weren’t …”

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS? The reason crack penalties were so severe is because the Congressional Black Caucus demanded it. (And as long as I’m correcting Elle’s false facts, the crack penalties were passed in 1986 and 1988, not “in the 1990s.”)

Black churches, black leaders and black members of Congress were enraged by what the crack epidemic was doing to their neighborhoods. A 1986 New York Times article reported on “all-night vigils” held by the leaders of 60 black churches, who called the crack epidemic “a new form of genocide.” Urban League President John Jacob railed against communities “held hostage by crack dealers,” saying “drugs kill more blacks than the (Ku Klux) Klan ever did.” Running for president in 1988, Jesse Jackson spoke of the scourge of crack cocaine and told a cheering crowd, “When I become president, the drug pusher is in trouble.”

White supremacists — right, Elle?

This has been patiently explained roughly 1 million times. But why bother knowing stuff when smug arrogance is good enough for CNN?

Elle’s next big “gotcha” was even more embarrassing, if that is possible. She rolled out the old chestnut about blacks being considered “three-fifths” of a human being in our Constitution. Yes, she really did that.

Here’s her exchange with a college Republican:

COLLEGE REPUBLICAN: To paint the country as an inherently racist country from its founding I think is dangerous.

REEVE: The three-fifths compromise is written into the Constitution in which slaves are counted as three-fifths of a person.

SCORE!

How can you be in journalism and have no idea what the three-fifths clause means? No research is involved, Elle! Just read it.

The three-fifths clause means exactly the opposite of what Elle thinks it means. This was not a general statement on the slaves’ humanity: It was about congressional apportionment. The slave states wanted to count slaves as full “persons” in order to increase the number of their representatives in Congress.

If you adored slavery, you’d want the Constitution to count each slave as a full person — as 20 people! The slaves still couldn’t vote, but their slave masters would get more votes in Congress. It’s the same idea behind California’s demand that illegal aliens be counted when determining that state’s congressional apportionment.

I can’t even believe there’s anyone in America who needed that explained again. (Next time, I’ll just say: Get a home-schooler to explain it to you, Elle.)

It must have been embarrassing for everyone at CNN to watch this bimbo misstating well-known facts in a network “special report” that was supposed to show what cretins CRT critics are.

So how did the CNN hosts react? They were gobsmacked by the genius of Elle’s report!

JOHN BERMAN: That was so great.

KEILAR: Right?

BERMAN: I mean, that was just so great, and just the way the questions are asked. Just by asking simple questions you revealed so much. I mean, that was just fantastic.

ELLE: Thank you.

My idea of hell is being condescended to by an idiot, forever and ever, with no respite. In other words, watching CNN.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Critical Race Theory Is a Complex — Oh, Who Are We Kidding?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 14, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/14/critical-race-theory-is-a-complex–oh-who-are-we-kidding—p–n2592557/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

Critical Race Theory Is a Complex -- Oh, Who Are We Kidding?

Source: AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File

One of the unintended consequences of teachers using COVID to refuse to do their jobs in 2020 is that their students suddenly had to take classes remotely — within earshot of Dad. A mother at a fancy New York City private school told me that the wokeness curriculum was nothing new, but mothers never made a fuss about it. Then the fathers overheard their kids’ remote classes — and all hell broke loose.

Now that the teachers’ anti-white agenda has been exposed (thank you, fathers of America!), the left is spinning a series of increasingly hilarious defenses of “critical race theory,” which is just a more boring version of the left’s usual hatred of Western civilization.

Their current position is that they simply can’t discuss CRT with you because it’s too complex and can only be understood by high-level graduate students after years of study.

Paul Begala on CNN: “It’s a graduate-level construct.”

CNN’s Anderson Cooper: “It started in the ’70s, as I understand, in sort of academic circles, law schools.”

“Dr.” Ibram Kendi — who is a “doctor” in the same sense that Jill Biden is — explaining his position on CRT:

“I’m not a legal scholar. So I wasn’t trained on critical race theory. I’m a historian. … Critical race theory is taught in law schools. I didn’t attend law school, which is where critical race theory is taught.”

Oh, cut the crap. The “theory” is: Everything is based on racism.

The preposterous conceit that CRT rises above the level of a child yelling “THAT’S RACIST!” has the advantage of allowing liberals to refuse to debate it.

Here’s MSNBC’s Joy Reid dismissing Christopher Rufo, a Manhattan Institute scholar, brought on her show putatively to debate CRT: “Are you like an expert in race or racial history? Are you a lawyer? Are you a legal scholar? Is that part of your background?”

How else could Rufo possibly understand a “theory” that says:

America is racist!

Criminal law is racist!

Policing is racist!

Arrests are racist!

Incarceration is racist!

Standardized tests are racist!

Mortgages are racist!

Oh my gosh, how am I ever going to master this complex theory? I thought the quantum field theory of subatomic particle forces was tough, but THIS? I guess I’ll be hitting the books tonight.

CRT is like the Monty Python sketch, “Anne Elk’s Theory on Brontosauruses“:

Anne Elk: “My theory, that belongs to me, is as follows … (throat clearing) This is how it goes … (clears throat) The next thing I’m going to say is my theory. (clears throat) Ready?”

Presenter: (whimpers)

Anne Elk: “My Theory, by A. Elk (Miss). This theory goes as follows and begins now …

“All brontosauruses are thin at one end; much, much thicker in the middle and then thin again at the far end. That is my theory, it is mine and belongs to me, and I own it and what it is, too.”

Presenter: “That’s it, is it?”

CRT advocates talk in hushed tones about where the “theory” was “invented,” like they’re describing the apple falling on Newton’s head.

In fact, CRT grew out of black student protests in the 1970s, forcing universities to hire more black professors. That’s literally how the father of critical race theory, Derrick Bell, got his job. Black students protested the lack of black professors, so Bell was given a professorship at Harvard Law School.

How’d you like to be hired by the (then) premier university in the world, not based on the excellence of your scholarship, but because of students threatening to burn the campus down? Instead of being embarrassed and hoping no one ever asked how he got his job, Bell rationalized his hiring by accusing Harvard of … well, I’d tell you, but it’s too complex for you to understand. On the other hand, I don’t know how else to convey the intricacies of this deeply intellectual theorem, except to just state it:

Bell accused Harvard of … RACISM!

And thus a new academic discipline was born. (I guess all the new hires had to teach something.)

The idea that our country is steeped in white supremacy is laughable. Most of what built this country had nothing to do with race — conquering the West, the invention of electricity, the telephone, the automobile, airplanes and steamboats, bringing drinking water to Manhattan, smashing the Nazi war machine and on and on and on.

I’m sorry, Black America, but all this was happening with or without you.

Yes, slavery was an abomination, the worst thing that ever happened within the borders of the United States. But there are whole vast areas of the American economy that didn’t have anything to do with slavery.

In fact and to the contrary, the slave economy had turned the South into a backwater. If the South had won the Civil War, not only would slavery have continued, but half the country would have had a primitive third world economy.

No need to feel bad about it. The main players in America’s explosive growth weren’t women, immigrants, Hispanics or Asians, either. Somehow we got over it. On the plus side, we get to live in the best country in the world.

Jealousy and obsessive self-regard are not the stuff of an intellectual movement. The daily denunciation of white men is more akin to the tantrum of a 4-year-old.

Which, by the way, is exactly how liberals think of black Americans. If there were an international symbol for liberals, it would be one adult patting another on the head. Otherwise, liberals would just come out and say: CRT’s not a theory! It isn’t complex, it isn’t interesting, and it isn’t true. (Also: We think you’re capable of getting a voter ID.) Instead, liberals coo to the CRT devotees, It IS your birthday every day!

Wallace B. Henley Op-ed: Re-imagining America: So, this is what it looks like? (pt 1)


Commentary By Wallace B. Henley, Exclusive Columnist | Wednesday, July 14, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/re-imagining-america-so-this-is-what-it-looks-like.html/

One day in the 1980s I drove along a frenetic Houston freeway listening to talk radio frenzy. Gabbers went over again and again how America Is changing for the worse.

Wallace Henley
Wallace Henley, former Senior Associate Pastor of 2nd Baptist Church in Houston, Texas. | Photo by Scott Belin

I was coming from a meeting where I had watched an in-your-face media presentation about the way our civilization is collapsing. And I wondered: When will be the climactic moment of this change—or “re-imagining” as some call it now?

More important: What will the new nation look like?

Mark Steyn, in a recent speech at Hillsdale College, pondered the same question. To some extent he answered it in the title of his speech: “Our Increasingly Unrecognizable Civilization”.

Steyn recalled a starry-eyed commencement speech John Kerry gave on the graduation circuit years ago. The former Vietnam veteran, presidential candidate, senator, and secretary of state told the students: “You are going to be the first generation to live in a borderless world.”

And therein lie some of the causative factors of America’s identity crisis.

Borders are definitive, be they sexual and moral boundaries, political or national borders, or the great spiritual wall denoting good from evil. Even the line of our profile distinguishes us from others.  

To paraphrase the Apostle Paul in his Second Letter to the Thessalonians, when the “restrainer” who establishes and sustains protective bulwarks is removed, lawlessness bursts in and wreaks havoc at its chaotic worst.

And so, the insanity of Portland, Minneapolis, Chicago, New York and other cities as mobs rampage while police departments are defunded, religion discredited, and voters keep electing the same people who build policy on the myth that the less restraint there is the better people will behave.

Intense change has been pressing in on America and the West for a long time. It starts out by degrees, then intensifies to what I called in one of my books, a “Globequake.”

One of the ways we mark the degrees of alteration in national identity is by contemplating the music of given eras.

Elvis became the image of change in America in the 1950s as the minstrel of the age. Back there in the pre-Elvis past was the big band music of the 1940s. Waiting behind the wall of the future were Peter, Paul, and Mary. And out there ahead of that trio was Bob Dylan, itching to tell us straight-out: “The Times, They Are A-Changin’.”

Bob Dylan was the hard-news guy, but Peter, Paul, and Mary were the romantic idealists… the dreamers who stirred us with the need to “re-imagine”—a word not part of the casual lingo of their time, but a buzzword now.

In the fullness of time came John Lennon, who put the “imagine”-word and concept right under our ears with his song, “Imagine.”

There he beckoned us to imagine a world of no heaven, hell, countries, religion, or possessions, among other things.

However, as we approached the 21st century I wondered if the “times” would continue to be ‘a-changin’, or would our nation and civilization reach the end toward which all those changes were moving us, like the Niagara River inevitably carrying everything to and over the Falls.

What would the “re-imagined” country look like? Everything Lennon wanted to get rid of constitutes a vital boundary. Unless there is some restraint, Lennon’s world would be in a state of perma-chaos—a hellish anti-civilization characterized by antinomianism, a hatred of law.

In fact, Jesus had long ago prophesied that the end-times would be characterized by the “increase” of lawlessness. (Matthew 24:12)

The Bible’s prophetic and historic passages reveal that the fundamental struggle in the fallen world is between chaos and cosmos.

Chaos is the goal of Lucifer. Its aim is de-creation, taking apart what God has put together. Critical Race Theory and similar exercises of the Woke movement show that dividing ethnic races and other categories of humanity constitute a major ploy in the fragmentation of human beings, separating people from God, themselves, and one another. Chaos is rending disorder, the ugly snarl of evil.

Cosmos is God’s order. But it is not the harsh mandate handed down by a cruel despot, or constricting legalism. Rather, as Romans 14:17 describes it, cosmos is the order of righteousness and justice, peace, and Spirit-given joy. It is the order manifested in the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. (Galatians 5:20-23).

Such beauty compels British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to call Christianity “a superb ethical system,” and to lament that he considers himself “as a kind of very very bad Christian.”

So how does the “re-imagined” America look after the rejection of this “superb ethical system” by elite establishments, and decades of manipulation, titillation, experimentation, and alteration?

Chaotic, that’s how.

“It is always hard to see the purpose in wilderness wanderings until after they are over,” wrote John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim’s Progress.

So, the big question now is this: “Is the ‘end’ near… or has the journey at least reached a point from which we can look back and see the whole of where we have been and a glance at the future towards which we are moving, and what we ought to do?

We will take a closer look at the nature of this chaos and its impact on us, our families, and institutions in Part II. In Part III we project what the future might hold, and, most important, the Bible’s guidance for us “pilgrims” (apologies to John Bunyan).

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

Wallace B. Henley’s fifty-year career has spanned newspaper journalism, government in both White House and Congress, the church, and academia. He is author or co-author of more than 20 books. He is a teaching pastor at Grace Church, the Woodlands, Texas.

For media inquiries, contact:  ChristianPost@pinkston.co

Opinion: Gender and sexuality of our youth: Natural or deliberate indoctrination?


Commentary By Hedieh Mirahmadi, Exclusive Columnist| Thursday, July 01, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/deliberate-indoctrination-of-gender-and-sexuality-of-our-youth.html/

Hedieh Mirahmadi
Courtesy of Hedieh Mirahmadi

As the battle rages on in our society about gender identity and the treatment of same-sex relationships under the law, the church is not immune from addressing these issues head-on – even at the dinner table. If you are like me, these questions are a constant source of debate with teenage children who are bombarded with social media and classroom discussions on the topic that challenge our Biblical views on sexuality, marriage, and gender.

Alarming statistics from a recent Gallup poll show that the onslaught of LGBTQ messaging directed at our youth is working. The report states, “younger generations are far more likely to consider themselves to be something other than heterosexual. This includes about one in six adult members of Generation Z (those aged 18 to 23 in 2020)…and more than half of those claim they are bisexual.”  The fact that the rise is most pronounced in young people and the majority is not experiencing same-sex attraction, indicates that the deliberate indoctrination of our children not to accept traditional gender roles is increasingly successful. 

When it comes to gender identity, the drastic rise in young people that identify as “gender fluid” has generated fierce debate. Prominent academics and health professionals advocate for a gender affirmative model, claiming that gender is determined by an “interweaving of biology, development and socialization; and, culture and context, with all three bearing on an individual’s gender self.”  Therefore, parents should accept the “gender” as stated by the child, regardless of their anatomy. Juxtapose that to the stance of child advocates, researchers, and Christians who firmly believe the rapid onset of gender confusion in our youth results from underlying emotional disorders and manipulation from schools and other institutions that are engaged in some form of conversion therapy on our children.  If you are not familiar with this debate, I encourage you to read these resources and understand the extent of the battle for our youth’s identity and emotional well-being.

Surprisingly, the church as a whole is not of one opinion on the issue of sexual preference and God’s condemnation of same-sex relations. The acceptance of openly gay members and clergy are on the rise. Some denominations that ordain homosexual pastors and worship leaders defend their stance by claiming Jesus loves everyone, and research shows that a significant number of Christians find no conflict between their religious beliefs and homosexuality. Thankfully, many evangelical Pastors do not legitimize same-sex couples and instead encourage the individual to rebuke the sin and lean on the power of the Holy Spirit to fight the urges of same-sex attraction just as one would other sins like fornication or adultery. In His Image, the movie does a beautiful job describing just how a Bible-honoring Christian can convey the message of the love of Christ to someone struggling with same-sex attraction. Organizations like Changed Movement help people find community with others struggling with similar issues but who left the LGBTQ lifestyle for freedom in Christ.

Even as a new believer, I knew the Lord did not intend to condone same-sex relationships based on Scripture (1 Corinthians 6:91 Timothy 1:10) , but I struggled with how I could convey these principles to my daughter in a spirit of love and compassion. Last month, I was fortunate to attend an event for Living Stone Ministries at my church to hear from other parents of children struggling with gender identity and same-sex attraction. It was a wonderful time of support and worship with other parents, but the most amazing part of the evening was listening to former gay believers talk about their journey and the impact their parents had on their road to freedom in Christ.

Two of these young men and women empathically said their parent’s unwavering commitment to the Gospel stuck with them the most when deciding to leave the homosexual lifestyle. As one young man put it, “no matter how I tried to manipulate my mom or convince her that she was wrong and just didn’t want to support me, she never wavered on the truth that Jesus wanted a better life for me and I would never find true happiness in a same-sex relationship.”  It was the truth of his mother’s words that rung in his ears when he survived an attempted suicide and finally gave his life to Christ for healing and restoration. Another young woman said her Christian mother took the opposite approach and went to gay bars with her to make her feel accepted. It ultimately backfired and made her resent her mother for not helping her leave the lifestyle. Hearing these stories brought me so much peace because it was a truth I knew in my heart but hearing it from someone with lived it affirmed my conviction.

So despite the arguments and accusations that my stance is homophobic, outdated, or just “my truth,” I continue to tell my young daughter that Jesus loves all sinners but despises the sin. It is no different than if she came to me wanting to do drugs or engage in premarital sex. I would warn her that a life of sin will never bring happiness or the freedom that comes from a life in obedience to God.

In light of all that is coming against our children to draw them into a life of death and depression, it is unfortunate that any church would condone same-sex couples and even allow openly gay pastors to lead a congregation. How can we teach our young people to follow any of the Bible’s commandments if we compromise the one that destroys the sanctity of creation and monogamy between a man and a woman in marriage? It is just one more example of how liberalism is unraveling the fundamental principles of the Gospel. Ultimately, it is a massive disservice to people who want to break the strongholds of addiction and be restored through the love and redemption of Christ.

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

Hedieh Mirahmadi was a devout Muslim for two decades working in the field of national security before she experienced the redemptive power of Jesus Christ and has a new passion for sharing the Gospel.  She dedicates herself full-time to Resurrect Ministry, an online resource that harnesses the power of the Internet to make salvation through Christ available to people of all nations, and her daily podcast LivingFearlessDevotional.com

Wallace B. Henley Op-ed: Will America still be America? The dangerous altering of America’s DNA


Commentary By Wallace B. Henley, Exclusive Columnist| Wednesday, June 30, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/the-dangerous-altering-of-americas-dna.html/

“There is nothing exempt from the peril of mutation,” said Elizabethan sage Walter Raleigh.

Or, as an anonymous patriot of his period put it to would-be agitators in his nation: “You will chip away and chip away until nothing is left that makes Scotland Scotland.”

Wallace Henley
Wallace Henley, former Senior Associate Pastor of 2nd Baptist Church in Houston, Texas. | Photo by Scott Belin

One looks now at the drastic alterations of America’s spiritual, psychological, social, and political DNA, and the mutating dynamics they set loose upon the nation’s very being, and wonders if America will be America for the present generation’s grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Scientists like Francis Collins taught us much about the human genome and the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) that carries the information and genetics forming the nature of a person.

Collins led the task force that decoded the human genome. On the day of the announcement, President Clinton said: “We are learning the language in which God created life… We are gaining ever more awe for the complexity, the beauty, and the wonder of God’s most divine and sacred gift.”

On this July 4th it would be a good idea for Americans everywhere to reflect on the beauty and wonder of the “DNA” that formed the best of America.

Ages ago God led Moses and his people into the Sinai wilderness and to the foot of Mount Sinai. God summoned Moses up the mountain to renew His Covenant with the people. Receiving that Covenant would give birth to the nation, Israel. God made it clear that Israel must not worship the gods of the Canaanites lest they become like the Canaanites. (See Exodus 34)

So, to worship the “gods of the land” is to take on the spiritual “DNA” of the people of the land, and to take on the identity of the people of the land is to adopt their gods.

For example, previous generations in America—including people and churches identifying as Christian—embraced slavery, in conformity with their culture.

Thomas Jefferson, a slaveholder, nevertheless could not quiet the voice of judgment within his mind and heart: “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

And it did not.

A nation-rending war resulted. Succeeding generations learned little and perpetuated discrimination through officially sanctioned racism and segregation.

God warned that If Israel worshiped the “gods of the land” when it arrived in Canaan, then Israel would cease to be Israel and lose its purpose and destiny.

America is by no means the “new Israel,” but she has had remarkable blessings of liberty, prosperity, and security.

God’s aim in history is for the good news of His beautiful Kingdom to be proclaimed to all the inhabited earth. This is the business, not of the state, but of the church within the nation. For this mission to be carried out there must be freedom of religion so the church can go about its business, and have the material means to take the gospel globally.

Any nation that permits such freedom will be blessed. The health of a nation, therefore, is in direct ratio to the health of the church within the nation.

Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington explored what we refer to here as America’s “DNA” in his book, Who Are We? There he discussed the American “Creed” comprised by these and other “DNA” components:

  • Liberty
  • Equality
  • Democracy
  • Individualism
  • Human rights
  • The rule of law
  • Private property

Huntington did not shy from crediting the Judeo-Christian worldview as the source of these elements of America’s spiritual “DNA”.

If there is socio-cultural sin in our past and present it is not because these principles were corrupt but because sinful human beings of all persuasions corrupted the “DNA”. We have too often worshiped the “gods of the land” and in the process defiled the Source of our blessings, to the hurt of many and alteration of our national character.

The present struggle in American society and culture spans the past, present, and future. All the generations are at stake: We are ashamed of the sins of the past, hopeless in the conflicted present, and anxious about an uncertain future.

Therefore, this Fourth of July we must reflect on the sobering truth of what will happen as America’s “DNA” is altered. The nation will go…

  • From the conviction that God is Transcendent—above all and to Whom all must give an account, including government—to the belief that there is nothing Transcendent but ourselves and ultimately our rulers
  • From the freedom not to believe to enforced state or cultural religion
  • From churches to re-education centers
  • From schools pursuing knowledge to schools indoctrinating
  • From the Bible as God’s revelation to us and the source of our formative worldview to the displacement of the Bible from public life
  • From constitutionalism to tyrannical edict
  • From healthy individuality to collectivism
  • From a free market economy to a state-controlled economy
  • From democracy to oligarchy through the elite establishments of Information, Entertainment, Academia, Politics, Corporations
  • From mature independence to socialist dependency
  • From a healthy respect for just law to antinomianism
  • From unity to fragmentation
  • From freedom of religion to bondage to the secular humanist religion of the state
  • From nuclear family to state-determined family

If all that happens our national “DNA” will be altered so drastically that America will no longer be America.

A violent revolution will not save America. The matter at the core is spiritual and only a spiritual revolution, “great awakenings,” will save us.

Pulpits must once again reach into the depths of biblical revelation and proclaim the Kingdom of God rather than the therapeutic or prosperity “gospels”.

Congregations must learn anew the importance of going to their knees… standing in the “gap” … for their nation before God.

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

Wallace B. Henley’s fifty-year career has spanned newspaper journalism, government in both White House and Congress, the church, and academia. He is author or co-author of more than 20 books. He is a teaching pastor at Grace Church, the Woodlands, Texas.

For media inquiries, contact:  ChristianPost@pinkston.co

Jason Whitlock OP-ED: Fearless: Jason Whitlock’s letter to black America explaining the real purpose of made-for-TV racial conflict


Commentary by JASON WHITLOCK | June 25, 2021

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/ready-fearless-jason-whitlocks-letter-to-black-america-explaining-the-real-purpose-of-made-for-tv-racial-conflict/

Dear Black People:

We are being lied to and set up. The mainstream media, Democratic politicians, social justice activists, and perhaps even your church pastor have led you to believe America is in the midst of a racial conflict similar to the Civil War and the civil rights movement.

They have pitted us against the Proud Boys, the KKK, rural militia groups, and Trump supporters in a made-for-TV race war. Just five years after Barack Obama completed two terms as president of the United States, we’re supposed to believe America has been overrun by violent white supremacists determined to reinstate segregation, Jim Crow laws, and maybe even slavery.

Evidence of this massive wave of 1920s-style bigotry amounts to three things:

  1. Republicans want all voters to show a government-issued ID;
  2. On January 6, unarmed Trump supporters crashed the Capitol and took pictures inside Nancy Pelosi’s office;
  3. Across the nation, police kill on average 250 black men and 450 white men per year.

Oh, I almost forgot. There’s a fourth piece of evidence. Colin Kaepernick failed to land a job as a starting quarterback after pissing off a large segment of football fans by taking a knee during the national anthem.

Those are the main smoking guns proving that white supremacy is the most dangerous domestic threat America faces. George Floyd, a habitual criminal and drug addict, is the Crispus Attucks of this raging race war. He is our rallying cry and hero.

It’s a setup. We’re being used as decoys and distractions in a war that has nothing to do with race.

The real war is about global power and the future of America’s system of government. This country’s elite, global citizens, and corporations prefer communism over capitalism and democracy. They prefer China’s system over our system.

America has been the world’s leader in racial progress and fairness. The mainstream media are not allowed to explain this to you. Advertisers, aka major corporations, will no longer support media outlets that back our current democratic and capitalistic systems of governance.

You say, what about Fox News? Turn it on. It’s filled with a bunch of MyPillow and wounded soldier commercials. America’s big, global corporations, the ones looking to improve their market share in China, are not financially supporting Fox News. The most popular voices at Fox News dislike China.

The faux race war the mainstream media have promoted is a tool being used to convince you and non-black Americans that our system of government has been a giant failure. They want you to believe that a great reset is necessary to achieve fairness.

The reset is communism, which starts with the gateway drug of socialism and ends in full-blown Marxism. China is run by the Communist Chinese Party. Communism has no respect for individual freedom or religion of any kind. Communism has no tolerance for political dissent.

Your religion and free speech will not survive the reset. Communism is racial oppression’s best friend. When a nation is stripped of religious faith and free speech, few people have the courage to defend the rights of minorities. The elites cozying up to China do not care about you. They are aware of how despicably China treats black people. They are aware of how China squashes dissent.

Do your own research on communism and what it stamps out and how it oppresses. Don’t take my word.

You might be wondering why Oprah Winfrey or LeBron James or some other super popular black celebrity isn’t telling you what I am. They’re global elites. The reset won’t hurt them or their loved ones. Communism favors wealthy elites far more than capitalism and democracy do. Oprah, LeBron, and the other uber-wealthy black tokens will thrive under socialism and communism.

You won’t. Unless you’re a 6’6″ basketball star or some other black entertainer capable of entertaining the people in power. That’s a tiny percentage of black people.

Why won’t your favorite white cable newsman or newswoman tell you what I’m telling you? Rachel Maddow, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Joe Scarborough, aren’t they our allies? No. They’re not. They’re political lobbyists working on behalf of the corporations and politicians pushing the reset.

OK. What about me? You might think I’m a political partisan working on behalf of conservative Republicans. That is certainly how I’ve been painted by left-leaning media outlets and social media platforms. And I’m now partnered with Blaze Media, a platform that leans right.

Judge my career. I have been at this for more than 30 years. I have been equally despised by the left and the right. I have publicly feuded with Bill O’Reilly and Keith Olbermann. I’ve been a guest on their old Fox News and MSNBC shows. I’ve worked and/or written for ESPN, Fox Sports, the Huffington Post, Playboy Magazine, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal. I spent years bashing Sarah Palin.

I don’t play for any political team. I’ve never voted. I go wherever I believe I can speak, follow, and write the truth. The truth I believe the most is that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior. I believe Jesus is under attack. That’s why I’m at Blaze Media. You can’t defend Jesus at corporate media outlets. Advertisers won’t allow it. You can discuss the religion of racism every day at ESPN, CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox Sports. But it’s taboo to discuss the cure for racism — Jesus — on those platforms.

I’m not saying any of this because there’s a big paycheck for black men espousing my views. The money for black broadcasters and journalists is connected to preaching the race-bait religion.

Let me be clear. I’m not broke by any stretch. I’ve earned and saved a substantial sum of money. But I’ve bypassed far more money than I’ve earned with the choice I’ve made to follow the truth wherever it leads and my refusal to support the racial groupthink dictated by global elites.

My faith won’t allow me to jump on board with the lunacy, racism, and sacrilege of Black Lives Matter, a movement founded by three lesbian self-admitted trained Marxists. BLM is an atheist movement in support of LGBTQ issues and the reshaping of America into a communist country. BLM is part of the deception.

Black people tell me all the time: “I don’t support the BLM organization, but I support the slogan and sentiment.”

Let me translate that. You despise the devil’s tree but love the fruit it produces. That’s some Don Lemon-Lori Lightfoot-Van Jones-Colin Kaepernick level of hypocrisy. You know, all the Malcolm X-wannabe, anti-white radicals in relationships with white partners. They hate the white tree but can’t live without the white fruit.

We have to stop letting everyone use us. We’re being played. We’re all being played, black and white working-class people. It’s all a giant setup. Look at what they did to Trump supporters. They were manipulated into storming the Capitol, and then the corporate media portrayed it as a bloody, violent KKK rally intended to overthrow democracy. The so-called “insurrection” is an excuse for the government to seize more power and crush dissent.

We, black people, have been convinced the crushing of working-class white people is good for us. It’s not. Working-class white people, Christian white people, are our true allies, not the elites. We can’t see that because of the made-for-TV hyper-focus on racial conflict.

The defunding and demoralizing of police are tactics deployed to increase violence in major cities. Local media outlets are focusing on this rise in crime, national media outlets have followed suit, and social media platforms are generating viral videos exposing the crime wave. Guess who are the stars of this content. Black perpetrators.

It’s all a massive setup. The stirring of racial animus between Obama worshippers and Trump worshippers is orchestrated by billionaire elites, executed by trained Marxists, promoted by millionaire influencers in the media, sports, and entertainment worlds, and co-signed by religious leaders pursuing popularity.

Black America, print this letter and share it with family, friends, co-workers, and, most importantly, your pastor.

My critics will tell you: “Oh, Jason Whitlock is a sellout. He hates black people.”

That’s laughable. It’s part of the deception. I despise the people deceiving us, manipulating us to participate in a racial clash that will be used to destroy the religious and individual freedoms that liberated us.

There’s a reason black and brown people across the globe fight to get into this country and excel when they do. They love the American tree and the fruit it produces.

Thanks for reading, Jason Whitlock

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Don’t Stop at Juneteenth!


Ann Coulter

Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 23, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/23/dont-stop-at-juneteenth—p–n2591486/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Don't Stop at Juneteenth!

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Happy Juneteenth! I hope you all had a lovely week celebrating the nation’s newest federal holiday, which commemorates the end of slavery throughout the Confederacy.

How could you not? The media was chock-a-block with commentators telling us what a fantastic, transformative event for our nation this was. But the media ignored the best part of all!

What Juneteenth commemorates is not technically the abolition of slavery, but the notification thereof to a particular group of slaves.

Although President Lincoln officially ended slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation on Jan. 1, 1863, it wasn’t until two years later, on June 19, 1865, that the slaves of Galveston, Texas, got the news, when Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger rode into town and issued a series of proclamations announcing that the hideous institution had been abolished and, henceforth, slaves would be considered hired labor.

This takes Juneteenth to a whole new level. Think of all the new federal holidays we could create using Juneteenth as our template! (Anyone who’s dealt with the federal government knows that those workers well deserve another paid day off.) We just need horsemen to ride around the country, correcting the errors of those who falsely believe something bad about America.

Thus, for example, next month we should have some bright young fellow gallop up to a BLM rally, Gen. Granger-style, dismount and announce:

I come with good news! Systemic racism no longer exists! It was done away with by the 1964 Civil Rights Act and parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act! Any victims of racism today can demand remedies in federal court!

And with a hardy “Hi-De-Ho,” our hero would ride off to the next BLM rally, as the march participants disband and hold a celebratory brunch. The date would be remembered each year as the Julyteenth holiday.

Then in August, we’ll send men on horseback to MSNBC with this proclamation:

Trump isn’t going to run for president again! Republicans aren’t afraid of him! They don’t kiss his ring half as much as Democrats kiss Al Sharpton’s ring and parts posterior. As soon as you guys denounce Sharpton, they’ll denounce Trump. Please calm down.

It’s not the fault of MSNBC that they operate on this glaring misconception. Not unlike the slaves, they’ve been kept in the dark, fed lies by people in whom they placed their trust: reporters. The day they learn the truth should live forever in history as Augusteenth — and, of course, federal workers would get that day off, too.

Next, we’ll need some volunteers to saddle up and head over to The New York Times building to proclaim:

Good news, New York Times! Your repeated claim that 1 in 5 women will be the victim of rape is FALSE!

First, my friends, all “in their lifetimes” statistics are a scam. They make any crime sound rampant. More than 8 out of 10 Americans will be the victim of a violent crime “in their lifetimes,” and 9.9 of 10 will be a victim of personal theft “in their lifetimes.”

Second: Even by this ridiculous measure, it’s not “1 in 5.” According to an extensive study by Obama’s Department of Justice examining 18 years of data, 1 in 10 women will be raped “in their lifetimes.” About 2 in 10 will be robbed and 4 in 10 will be injured during a robbery.

Third: The annual rate of rape victimization isn’t close to “1 in 5.” Instead, it’s 1.75 per thousand raped each year.

Fourth: This is including rapes that never happened, but are threatened or attempted.

Isn’t that terrific news, New York Times? Instead of 1 in 5 women succumbing to the awful crime of rape this year, fewer than 1.75 per thousand will be!

Let’s call this holiday Septemberteenth, to commemorate the joyful day Times reporters realized they are not living in a dystopian world of sexual predators. Cheers will erupt! (Some from federal workers.)

In October, our ersatz Gen. Granger and his trusty steed will ride south to the Capitol and proclaim:

I come bearing good news: No one’s vote is being “suppressed”! It’s a bait and switch! Last year’s preposterous voting rules were instituted because of COVID-19! Remember? They told us: IT’S A WORLDWIDE PANDEMIC! WE MUST ALLOW UNIVERSAL EARLY VOTING, NO IDENTIFICATION AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS! DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO DIE? We can go back to pre-pandemic voting rules without fear of returning to the dark days of Jim Crow! Now, if some of you would be kind enough to give my trusty steed some water?

The late-breaking discovery that Republicans aren’t “suppressing the vote” might be called Octoberteenth.

The slaves of Galveston were understandably ecstatic to be freed of the yoke of slavery — as no doubt will be the misinformed BLM protesters, New York Times reporters and other recipients of our horsemen’s good news. Think of their unbridled joy to be free of these false notions about America! They will shout to the heavens, giving thanks to the bounty of this land, their joy surpassed only by that of federal workers.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The John Lewis Act Is the Dems’ Path to Permanent Power


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 16, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/16/the-john-lewis-act-is-the-dems-path-to-permanent-power—p–n2591101/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

The John Lewis Act Is the Dems' Path to Permanent Power

Source: AP Photo/Chuck Burton, File

The official position of Fox News is that the Democrats’ John Lewis vote-stealing bill is “narrower” than the Democrats’ “For the People” vote-stealing bill. (This will be an exhibit in my museum titled, “Stupid People Can Never Help Your Cause.”)

Yes, it’s “narrower” in the sense of being 1 MILLION times worse. The John Lewis bill will do everything the “For the People” bill does — and so much more! They just don’t tell us what, exactly. The language of the bill is full of anodyne, uplifting language about equal voting participation — but the details will be turned over to left-wing zealots at the Department of Justice, suddenly empowered to enforce voting rules so insane that no elected official would dare vote for them.

Inasmuch as nearly every congressional Democrat is fine with the provisions in the “For the People” bill — which are ludicrous — imagine how much worse the “You Can’t Blame Me” bill is.

It will be faceless bureaucrats at the Department of Justice who give meaning to the happy words in the John Lewis bill. Federal government employees — i.e., the people actually making the rules — cannot be voted out of office. (Or fired — this is government work.) Indeed, these are people who could never be elected to any office on account of their repellent political views and, often, repellent physical appearance.

This is how Democrats impose fascistic rules on the citizenry without ever having to cast a dangerous vote: They write laws with vague statements of high principle, then dump the actual rule-making onto a government agency, where refugees from the ACLU issue edicts outlawing private property, due process, free speech and honest elections.

Recall:

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who ordered a nice Idaho couple to halt work on their home because it was allegedly on a protected wetland (in the middle of a subdivision with many other homes). That was environmentalist wackos at the EPA.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who required universities to deny basic due process rights to students accused of rape. That was feminist loons at the Department of Education.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who directed Obama’s IRS to target groups with “tea party” or “patriots” in their names. That was liberal ideologue Lois Lerner and other civil service functionaries.

The lunatics at these agencies look like Reason Personified compared to the DOJ’s voting rights attorneys.

In 2013, author Charlotte Allen described one fair-minded DOJ staffer, whose job it was to rewrite state voting laws:

“On the morning of January 21, [2013] just before President Obama’s second inauguration, Rep. Paul Ryan … was roundly booed by the gathered crowd as he left the Capitol to attend the ceremonies …. Within minutes Daniel J. Freeman, a young career trial lawyer with the Voting Section of the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division … took credit in a Facebook post for instigating the anti-Ryan derision.”

1. Paul Ryan? Pencil-necked, open borders, Never-Trump Paul Ryan? That’s the guy who got Freeman so riled up?

2. The obnoxious Freeman is no longer a young career trial lawyer at the DOJ. Now he’s a senior career trial lawyer at the DOJ.

Among the innovations dreamed up by fanatics like Freeman, Arizona was informed it could not ask for identification from people delivering more than 10 early ballots. Nothing fishy about that!

Arizona’s voting laws were subject to federal oversight because of its well-known history as a slave state and avid practitioner of Jim Crow. (I may have to check my notes on that.)

Actually, Arizona was bossed around by liberal activists at the DOJ for 40 years because back in 1972, it didn’t have bilingual ballots. Those weren’t instituted until 1974. They may as well have donned white hoods and burned crosses!

Oddly, Mississippi’s election laws were also subject to approval by the DOJ — despite the fact that blacks already voted at far higher rates than whites in that state. By contrast, Massachusetts did not require oversight of its voting laws, although in that fancy liberal state, black people voted at far lower rates than whites.

It’s almost as if only red states have their voting laws nitpicked by left-wing lawyers in Washington. I wonder if that would help Democrats win presidential elections?

Ironically, meaning totally predictably, the original 1965 Voting Rights Act was necessary because Democrats were trying to prevent black people from voting. Today, Democrats are using these new “voting rights” bills to ensure that 110% of black people vote, even if they are convicted felons, don’t live in the state, didn’t actually fill out a ballot or are dead.

It wasn’t until 2013 that the Supreme Court mercifully overturned key portions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. (Citing the overwhelming Senate vote for the wonderfully named Voting Rights Act, Justice Antonin Scalia remarked at oral argument: “This is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress.”)

While it’s great that ideologues like Dan Freeman had their wings clipped by the Court, the previous 40 years of their harassment tells you what they want to do. The John Lewis voting rights bill will put them back in the saddle!

States will be ordered to keep dead voters on the rolls, give violent felons the right to vote and jettison any voter I.D. requirements. (Interestingly, even after all the media demagoguery, black people still overwhelmingly support voter I.D. laws.)

There’s no disincentive to government lawyers pursuing frivolous cases to the end of the Earth. Even if they eventually lose, they don’t have to worry about court costs or legal fees. They don’t pay ’em. You do.

The “For the People” voting rights bill is the floor of what these petty bureaucrats will require. Those are the bare-minimum “voting rights” that will be imposed on the states by the DOJ. That’s the level of absurdity Democrats are willing to vote for in plain sight. What great ideas does Dan Freeman have that even Democrats couldn’t endorse on the record?

What is the voting “rights” equivalent of the EPA’s relentless persecution of homeowners, the Duke lacrosse case or the IRS’s abuse of power? Because that’s what the John Lewis voting rights bill will deliver.

COMMENTARY: Lindsey Graham Says Unemployment Benefits Are So High People in His Own Family Aren’t Working


Commentary by C. Douglas Golden June 9, 2021

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/lindsey-graham-says-unemployment-benefits-high-people-family-arent-working/

When the disastrous April jobs report came out, President Joe Biden was asked by a reporter whether or not the Democratic push to keep expanded $300 weekly federal unemployment checks contributed to the historic miss.

“No, nothing measurable,” Biden said during a media briefing on May 7, according to a transcript.

“I know some employers are having trouble filling jobs. But what this report shows is that there’s a much bigger problem. … It is that our economy still has 8 million fewer jobs than when this pandemic started. The data shows that more — more workers — more workers are looking for jobs, and many can’t find them. While jobs are coming back, there are still millions of people out there looking for work.”

That’s still the official administration line after two months of disappointing jobs numbers. The fact that the federal government is paying people not to work has nothing to do with the promised economic rebound falling flat, at least when it comes to jobs.

During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina wasn’t having it. As he questioned Shalanda Young, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, he said he had relatives who weren’t working because unemployment benefits were so high. Graham was arguing that the benefits should be killed before they’re set to expire in September.

“There’s a lot of jobs out there that are unfilled and will never be filled until you change the benefit structure. Does that logic make sense to you, given where we’re at in our economy?” Graham asked Young.

“I understand the logic, but I’ve also not met Americans who would prefer not to work,” Young replied. “There’s a dignity to work in this country.”

A chuckling Graham used his relatives to show why this is problematic. “I got a lot of people in my family that ain’t working because they’re getting — I’ll show you some of my family,” Graham said.

“Bottom line is I think there are people out there, they’re not bad people, but they’re not going to work for $15 an hour if they make $23 unemployed,” he added.

“That doesn’t make you a bad person. If you’re working for $15 an hour, that makes you almost a chump.”

The expanded benefits have been part of a tug-of-war between the White House and Republicans on Capitol Hill and in governor’s mansions. As part of the American Rescue Plan, Biden kept the $300-a-week checks going through Sept. 6. As The New York Times reported last week, the administration has promised not to renew them, but has no plans to cancel the additional aid early.

However, many Republicans have seen enough, with 25 states having already ended the benefits starting this month.

In a Friday media briefing, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that’s OK,” although the Biden administration still sees the $300 payments as an “extra helping hand.”

“Every governor is going to make their own decision,” Psaki told reporters.

That decision should become markedly easier when staring down two months of dreadful jobs reports. April is the month that sticks out; that’s when economists were expecting a million new jobs and the total was 278,000. And let’s not forget May. The 559,000 jobs added still came in below expectations of 675,000 jobs. Let’s also not forget that a roaring economy was set to be a Democratic talking point going into 2022.

Even though the Biden administration inherited a strong economy before lockdowns shuttered businesses, and even though the beginning of mass vaccinations was felicitously timed with Biden’s inauguration, the massive bounceback the White House was counting on hasn’t quite happened yet. But the weekly $300 checks have nothing to do with it, they swear. After all, who wouldn’t choose the dignity of work over getting paid to sit on the couch?

It isn’t just Shalanda Young making this argument — during the May 7 media briefing on the April jobs numbers, Biden claimed “most middle-class, working-class people that I know think the way my dad did.

“He used to say — and I know I’m repeating myself, but I’m going to continue to because I think it’s critical. ‘A job is a lot more than a paycheck,’ he’d say. ‘Joey, it’s about your respect, your dignity, your place in the community.’ More than a paycheck. It’s people’s pride. It’s about being able to look at your child in the eye and say, ‘Honey, it’s going to be OK.’”

I know, empurpled prose like that makes the tears well up in your eyes. However, if you stay at home for $23 an hour instead of working for $15 an hour, it’s a lot easier to look your child in the eye and say, “Honey, it’s going to be OK.” Yes, a job might be “people’s pride.” It’s not the kind of pride that goeth before the fall, but it’s the kind of pride that, in this case, goeth before making considerably less money for doing actual work.

Now, was Graham making a rhetorical point, throwing his family under the bus, or both? Whatever the case, one hopes they — as well as millions of other Americans — get off the dole with all due rapidity.

In a country where anyone over 12 can get a vaccine with ease and employers are desperately looking for workers, the federal government needn’t be throwing $300 a week at the unemployed in the name of recovery.

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

C. Douglas Golden, Contributor,

C. Douglas Golden is a writer who splits his time between the United States and Southeast Asia. Specializing in political commentary and world affairs, he’s written for Conservative Tribune and The Western Journal since 2014.@CillianZeal

Facebook


Voting Rights: It’s ‘Racist’ Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 09, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/09/voting-rights-its-racist-not-to-let-democrats-cheat—p–n2590760/

Voting Rights: It's 'Racist' Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Why aren’t Republicans screaming from the rooftops about the Democrats’ plans to change voting rules to give themselves an advantage? Their sleazy election bills, HR 1, the “For the People Act,” and HR 4, the “John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” are intended to help Democrats win majorities in both houses of Congress, at which point they will ignore Republicans entirely, end the filibuster, and pass everything in AOC’s Dream Journal — amnesty, gun control, a wealth tax, and a rainbows and unicorns energy bill.

So it’s kind of important for Republicans to kill these bills in the crib. It shouldn’t be hard. All they have to do is tell people what’s in them.

Are Republicans counting on Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to save them? The GOP defeated Hillary Care in the 1990s far more decisively … then it came roaring back a few years later as Obamacare.

Currently, Manchin opposes the For the People bill, but supports the even more execrable John Lewis bill. Both will completely rewrite state election laws to favor Democrats, but at least For the People will be done by Congress. The John Lewis bill will give unelected bureaucrats at the Justice Department vast power to impose voting rules on the states. Based on previous such exercises of unaccountable power, 10-year-olds will soon have the right to vote. (See Title IX.)

Unless Republicans agree to ludicrous voting rules that give Democrats a partisan advantage, they’re racist. That’s the full argument. Republicans are trying to “suppress the vote” of black and brown people! John Lewis risked his life for the right to vote!

If that’s why Republicans don’t want to talk about these bills, they better get used to it. They’re going to be called “racist” a lot more if that’s all it takes to stifle the opposition.

Of course, Democrats’ own voters respond to John Lewis’ touching story by saying, Good for him, but — when is the election again? Tuesday? Yeah, that’s not going to be convenient for me.

And that’s the nub of the problem. The Democrats have a lot of what we call “unmotivated voters.” Risk their lives to vote? They won’t risk missing a couple hours of TV.

These are people who don’t pay attention to the news (that’s why they’re Democrats); don’t speak English (that’s why they’re Democrats); or don’t have a fully developed pre-frontal cortex because they’re under the age of 26 (that’s why they’re Democrats). And so on.

Consequently, Democrats have to mobilize armies of volunteers to carry their voters on gurneys to the polls on Election Day.

Wouldn’t it be easier if they had a few months to get their voters to the polls? What if their voters didn’t have to show up at all?

Why, yes! That would be much easier.

This is why the For the People bill mandates universal mail-in voting. Asking people to show up to vote is a dirty trick to “rig our democracy,” according to the left-wing group Indivisible. Litter the countryside with mail-in ballots months before an election — or you’re a Nazi.

In fact, apart from a worldwide pandemic, there’s no reason for mail-in voting. Studies show it increases voter turnout only modestly. But mail-in voting sure presents a lot of opportunities for fraud! It’s almost like Democrats consider that a feature, not a bug.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Election Data and Science Lab cited two main avenues for mail-in ballot fraud:

— “First, the ballot is cast outside the public eye, and thus the opportunities for coercion and voter impersonation are greater.”

In other words, instead of filling out a secret ballot in the presence of election officials, you will be out and about, at home, at the office, at the ballpark with your ballot, able to prove to others how you voted — to impress them, or perhaps because you’re being paid or threatened. And that’s assuming it’s you holding the ballot.

— “Second, the transmission path for [mail-in] ballots is not as secure as traditional in-person ballots. These concerns relate both to ballots being intercepted and ballots being requested without the voter’s permission.”

Not to worry! The Democrats deal with the possibility of imposters requesting mail-in ballots by … prohibiting the states from requesting voter I.D.

Huh, that’s odd. If you wanted to ensure that only eligible voters are voting, wouldn’t you want to — oh wait, I see.

Liberals will not rest until convicted felons — a key Democratic constituency — are fully participating members of our democracy. Or at least have ballots that can be filled out for them.

Unfortunately, some of our more unenlightened states believe that a person who has been convicted of violating society’s laws should be denied the right to choose who writes them. The For the People bill fixes that by forcing states to give felons the right to vote.

Speaking of felons, the For the People Act requires states to automatically register people to vote whenever they provide information to state agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, public universities, and, off the top of my head, state welfare bureaucracies, unemployment offices and prison facilities.

That’s a lot of ballots for Democratic volunteers to mine!

In 1994, in response to the stalking and murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer by a crazed fan who got her address through the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Congress passed the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, prohibiting state DMVs from releasing personal information to the public. One of the main sponsors was Sen. Barbara Boxer, who recited case after case of women stalked, harassed, raped and killed by men who had tracked their victims with information provided by the DMV.

With the automatic voter registration in the For the People bill, federal law would require states to release that information. Simply by getting a driver’s license or unemployment benefits, your name, address and phone number would be available to your stalker through the voting rolls. (Also to bill collectors, parole officers, process servers, etc.) Voter registration lists are publicly available for electioneering purposes.

The Democrats’ “voting rights” bill is a stalkers’ delight. But at least no one will have his vote “suppressed” by having to engage in the monstrously difficult task of registering to vote or showing up on Election Day. Your choice, America: A few pesky stalkers kill their victims, or Democrats call you “racist.”

AnnCoulter Op-ed” Why Is Ancestry.com Protecting White Serial Killers?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 02, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/02/why-is-ancestrycom-protecting-white-serial-killers—p–n2590390

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Why Is Ancestry.com Protecting White Serial Killers?

Source: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File

This week, The New York Times reported on new laws in Maryland and Montana that restrict law enforcement’s use of genealogy databases to catch serial killers. (Maryland I can understand, but Montana? Has someone kidnapped Gov. Greg Gianforte?)

Some of the largest DNA databases — Ancestry, 23andMe and Helix — already refuse to share their databases with the police without a court order.

I’m sorry, but why? What is their argument? Ancestry doesn’t want to lose the business of skittish serial killers?

Everyone agrees that these pro-criminal rules were a direct response to the “controversy” of law enforcement catching the Golden State Killer in 2018.

Yes, it’s apparently controversial that the monster who terrorized California for decades, killing at least 13 people and raping dozens of women, was finally captured — with 100% accuracy — thanks to brilliant detective work and the miracle of DNA.

Sheriff’s investigator Paul Holes and FBI lawyer Steve Kramer created a fake profile on GEDmatch using DNA from a rape kit of one of the Golden State Killer’s victims. This produced distant relatives of the rapist, allowing them to build a family tree, leading to Joseph James DeAngelo, then living in a Sacramento suburb. Officers began surveilling DeAngelo, collected his DNA from a car door and discarded tissue and — bingo! — it matched the Golden State Killer’s semen sample.

My entire life I’ve had to listen to liberals wail about all the “innocent” people on death row. (There is no credible evidence that any innocent person has been executed in this country since at least 1945.) They pretended to be against murder, just deeply horrified by the idea that we might execute “the wrong man.”

Now we have the technology to make identifications that are infallible — and liberals say we can’t use it because of their concern about maintaining the serial killer’s privacy.

As put by The Hill — since you won’t believe me otherwise:

“Questions intensified after law enforcement officials in California used an ancestry database to help identify the Golden State Killer, a serial killer and rapist who eluded authorities for decades.”

Yeah, that sucks. The white ex-cop — catch that, #BLM? — who tortured and raped women while their partners were forced to listen in the next room, then made obscene phone calls to his victims, was finally captured after a 40-year search, whereupon: “Questions intensified.”

WHAT “QUESTIONS”? My only questions are:

1) When are the triumphant awards dinners?; and

2) Will #BLM be taking the side of a white cop in this one case?

The Hill continued:

“Following the controversy [of catching a serial killer — for liberals, that’s controversial], the largest ancestry companies said they wouldn’t allow police to access their databases without a warrant.”

What on earth, Ancestry? It’s more important that the ACLU likes you than that a majority of Americans do?

How about taking a poll of your members? Should we allow law enforcement to submit DNA into our database to solve rapes and murders without the necessity of obtaining a court order first?

“Yes” would be a 90% winner, and the other 10% would be ACLU types suddenly signing up just to vote. Even criminals would say, Yeah, for a killer, sure, that’s fine. Only a few law professors and, of course, the Times’ Charles Blow, would be against it, which is formidable competition, but I still think we can win this baby!

The objections to allowing police access to genealogical websites consist of vague invocations of “privacy.” University of Maryland law professor Natalie Ram [Email her] for example, told the Times that law enforcement’s use of genealogical databases was “chilling, concerning and privacy-invasive.”

Many people find serial killers breaking into their homes, tying them up and raping them to be “chilling, concerning and privacy-invasive,” so we seem to be at an impasse.

As with the Golden State Killer, the majority of criminals captured through these databases are going to be white. (Good news for “Forensic Files”!) Don’t be fooled by Ancestry’s woke television ads: The vast majority of their members are white. Israeli researchers estimate that public genealogy databases can now identify 60% of all people of European descent.

Is Ancestry trying to protect white killers? They’re OK with innocent black men being arrested, while the actual white murderers remain hidden in their database? Have we finally found the beating heart of white supremacy in America?

Or are they just sniveling cowards? Let me guess: Some small group of fanatics wrote a bunch of letters to Ancestry and law enforcement didn’t.

OK, let’s add up the letters … 28 from law professors who oppose allowing law enforcement to use our databases, and no letters in support.

[Ancestry wets pants.]

Law enforcement officers wouldn’t be scrolling through personal genetic information. Indeed, they can’t view information about specific individuals at all. They submit a DNA profile and, if there’s a match to a criminal, an alarm goes off. Nothing comes back unless there’s a hit.

There’s an easy solution to any privacy concerns. If you don’t want the police finding you through a genealogical database, don’t leave your DNA at a crime scene.

But some jackass Democratic lobbyist formed the Coalition for Genetic Data Protection and bullied Ancestry, 23andMe and Helix into withholding their databases from law enforcement without a warrant, adding a pointless obstacle to bringing killers to justice.

Steve Haro [Email him], executive director of the coalition: Hey, congratulate me! I just hamstrung the police in their ability to catch the provably guilty!

If Democrats really gave a crap about privacy, how about a “coalition” to prevent businesses from selling our names and addresses to third parties? How about prohibiting Google, Facebook and Apple from spying on us? Can we start there, rather than blocking law enforcement from using genealogical websites to catch criminals with 100%, absolute, dead-on accuracy?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: ‘Florida Woman’ Saner Than Media


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 26, 2021 4:15 PM

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/05/26/florida-woman-saner-than-media—p–n2590056

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org

l'Florida Woman' Saner Than Media

Source: AP Photo/Gerald HerbertTrending

Last week, we discussed Rebekah Jones, the crazy lady who wrote a 342-page telenovela about her ex-lover, Garrett Sweeterman, then went on to fame and fortune by claiming Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was faking his state’s spectacularly low COVID numbers.

Before the media turned Jones into their next Erin Brockovich, they might have done 10 seconds of Googling to find out that Jones’ past includes stalkingbattery on a police officer, repeated incarcerations, an institutionalization, an ankle monitor, a restraining order and court-ordered medication. And that’s long before the DeSantis administration hired her as a web designer.

These infractions are contained not only in police reports and court filings, but in her prolix manifesto about her ex-lover that she herself posted all over the internet. Jones seems to think it’s a point in her favor that during Florida State University’s investigation of her obsessive behavior toward her former student, “Garrett didn’t even bother bringing any evidence — no copies of texts or calls … I brought more than 200 pages worth.”

That sounds normal.

Even after multiple demands that she stay away from Sweeterman, the still-married Jones writes:

Did you know that I would have given anything, truly anything to make things right between us?

Did it matter to you at all that I loved you?

Did it, Garrett?

If the genders were reversed, Jones’ obsession with a former student would be a movie on “Lifetime: TV for Women.”

Instead, she attacked DeSantis and became Forbes magazine’s “Technology Person of the Year,” Fortune magazine’s “40-Under-40” in health care, and cable news’s go-to source for dirt on the DeSantis administration.

No TV personality lavished more attention on Jones than MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell, featuring her on his show on Dec. 8, Dec. 9, Dec. 16 and Dec. 22, 2020. As is common at MSNBC, O’Donnell jumped on the horse and rode off into the sunset without a map, directions or a compass.

In the first of his blockbuster reports, O’Donnell used a law enforcement raid on Jones’ home for one of his anti-police screeds, informing viewers that they were about to see a video of “outrageous conduct by American police officers” — and I have this hot MILF on my show to talk about it. If she wants, I’ll take her on my sailboat.

The MSNBC host scoffed at the basis for the raid, saying: “They were going after the person who sent what they considered, I suppose, some criminally dangerous text.” Ho ho ho. Jones — or at least her lawyer — knows damn well that the charge is serious, which is why, to this day, she stoutly denies sending the text.

According to the search warrant affidavit, six months after Jones was fired by the Florida Department of Health, she hacked into the state’s medical emergency notification system from her home computer, obtained the private information of thousands of people, and sent out a mass text, pleading: “it’s time to speak up before another 17,000 people are dead. You know this is wrong,” and so on. She signed the deranged missive as if it were an official communique from Florida Department of Health.

Comcast determined that the text came from Jones’ Tallahassee home. Perhaps in addition to cuckolding him, she plans to pin the hacking felony on her husband. (Then she could run off with Garrett!)

On the day of the raid, as infinitely patient law enforcement officers banged on Jones’ front door for 22 minutes, she was inside, setting up a video camera. Donations to her GoFundMe page must have been flagging.

O’Donnell introduced her video, saying: “What you’re about to see is almost as bad as American policing gets.”

What we see is Jones (finally) opening the door and exiting the house. An officer enters, unholsters his gun, and calls out for anyone else in the house to come downstairs. In other words, standard operating procedure for executing a search warrant.

Although no one is pointing a gun at anyone, Jones can be heard in the background screaming, “He just pointed a gun at my children!”

This is classic hysterical woman behavior.

YOU’RE HURTING ME! STOP HITTING ME!

I’m not touching you. I’m 7 feet away.

But O’Donnell and the rest of the media repeatedly played Jones’ video while informing viewers that it showed something it plainly did not: officers “pointing” guns at Jones and her children.

“The only thing that could have made this worse,” O’Donnell said, “is if one of those recklessly aimed guns killed someone in that house. If one of those guns aimed at Rebekah Jones’ children fired.”

O’Donnell on the Zapruder film: As you can see in frame 187, President Kennedy is firing at Lee Harvey Oswald from the convertible.

Jones is like the white woman captured on video in Central Park, calling 911 on a black male birdwatcher. As he calmly speaks to her from 20 yards away, she shrieks to the dispatcher, “An African American man… [is] threatening myself and my dog.”

O’Donnell voiceover: The only thing that could have made this worse is if the birdwatcher had killed the woman.

My voiceover for the entire American media: As you can see, they are liars.

Richard D. Land Op-ed: The First Amendment religion clauses: ‘Full-throated’ freedom or ‘mere’ toleration?


Commentary By Richard D. Land, Christian Post Executive Editor| Friday, May 21, 2021

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/first-amendment-on-religion-full-throated-or-mere-toleration.html/

Richard Land
(Photo: The Christian Post/Katherine T. Phan)

Last week I wrote my column on “The First Amendment: Alive and well?” in which I noted the revolutionary impact of the Amendment on religious freedom in particular and on human rights in general. 

The First Amendment has indeed proven itself to be a magnificent legal and political engine driving the cause of soul freedom and freedom of conscience in America first, and subsequently as a shining beacon of light and hope to a suppression-weary world.

This week I want to address the current tension that has arisen among various groups of Americans over what was the Founding Father’s ‘original intent,’ and how should the First Amendment be applied to today’s ever-more ethically and religiously diverse populace.  Columnist Judd Birdsall has conveniently and helpfully divided and labeled the two camps as “First Freedom” and “Article 18,” personified by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (2018-2021) and current Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

Pompeo was the most openly evangelical Secretary of State since William Jennings Bryan (1913-1915) in the Woodrow Wilson Administration. Pompeo, as Secretary of State, took virtually unprecedented actions and initiatives to promote religious freedom worldwide. His unprecedented efforts yielded encouraging results with two very well attended ministerial events at the State Department, including one that was hailed as the largest meeting promoting religious freedom ever held at the State Department.

Pompeo and then-President Trump were leading exponents, along with the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, of the First Freedom view that argues that religious freedom is not just first sequentially because it touches on questions of “ultimate significance and the freedoms of speech, press, and assembly are there to aid and buttress the ‘first freedom’.”

Proponents of the Article 18 view, vocalized by current Secretary of State Blinken, argue that religious freedom, while crucially important, is “co-equal” with the freedoms of speech, press, assembly and peaceful redress of grievance.

I believe, however, based on my observation and experience, that there is disagreement on an issue of fundamental importance at stake in this debate.

I had the privilege of serving as a Commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom from 2001-2012. This Commission, set up by the passage of the International Religious Freedom Act, is an independent, federal government commission, not under the State Department or Congress, charged with monitoring the state of religious freedom in every country in the world. They are required to write an annual report about the state of religious freedom in each country, followed by recommendations to both the President and the Congress on ways in which American foreign aid can, and should be, used to promote religious freedom.

The Commission is structured to be extremely bi-partisan. When you have a Democrat president, for example, he appoints three commissioners and the Democratic leader in the House and in the Senate nominate one commissioner each and the Republican leaders in the House and Senate nominate two each. So, the President’s party has a one-vote majority (5-4) and it takes six votes for the Commission to act.

During my years there, we would periodically undertake fact-finding trips to various countries around the world to measure for ourselves how much religious freedom was actually afforded to citizens in those countries. Undoubtedly the most memorable fact-finding trip we undertook during my tenure on the Commission was an almost two weeks visit to Communist China and Tibet in 2005.

This visit took place during what turned out to be a temporary “spring of hope” when the Chinese Communist government appeared to be relaxing many of its very oppressive policies against Christians in that country. Alas, the promised reforms were still-born and the situation has degenerated drastically for all religious faiths in China, with the Uyghur Muslims suffering what can only be called a genocidal policy.

Invariably, on these site visits, we Commissioners went to great lengths to make it crystal clear to the host country that the USCIRF standard was not America’s First Amendment standard that guaranteed complete religious liberty and freedom from government interference with people’s religious free expression rights. We often said that we would recommend it, but we could not demand it because that would interfere with the host nation’s sovereignty.

The USCIRF standard was the international one – the one codified in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18, which reads:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion, this right includes freedom to change his religious belief, and
freedom, either alone or in community with others, and in public or
private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice,
worship and observance.

So, what is the difference between the First Amendment and the Universal Declaration’s Article 18? The First Freedom position legally restricts the government from interjecting itself into the religious experience and practice of its people.

Quite simply, the First Amendment guarantees people from government interference with their religion. The Article 18 position merely guarantees some level of toleration for dissenting faiths in a society where Islam or Communist oppression may take over and rescind government support or toleration. 

For example, when we were in China it became apparent that the Chinese officials were increasingly irritated that we were not more impressed with the comparatively greater toleration they had been granting people of faith.

In our final exit dinner with the Chinese officials, I was designated to explain the Commission’s position. I did so in the following way: “It has become apparent to us that you are frustrated that our team has not been more impressed with the greater degree of toleration you have been affording many religious groups in your country. We have noticed.  However, while it is a bigger cage, and it is a gilded cage, it is still a cage. And that is toleration, not freedom.”

Sadly, history has proven our position correct since the Chinese have cracked down drastically and have made the cage very small.  

Under Article 18, each country could make Islam or some other religion, the official state religion supported by the people’s taxes. Under the First Freedom system that would not or could not happen.

In other words, under the First Freedom position, the people are sovereign and no religion can discriminate against them or hamper their mission. 

As Justice Arthur Goldberg wrote over a half-century ago in the famous Supreme Court prayer decision (School District of Abington, Pennsylvania et.al V. Schemp et.al):

“The fullest realization of true religious liberty requires that government neither engage in, nor compel religious practices, that it effects no favoritism among sects or between religion and nonreligion. . .”  then Justice Goldberg went on to declare that “the attitude of government toward religion must be one of neutrality.” Justice Goldberg then went on to say that even “untutored devotion to the concept of neutrality can lead to approval of results which partake not simply of that non-interference and non-involvement with the religious which the constitution demands, but of a brooding and pervasive devotion to the secular and a passive or even active, hostility to the religious. Such results are not only not compelled by the Constitution, but it seems to me “are prohibited by it.”

Justice Goldberg warns, quite correctly, that even with the government neutrality required by the First Amendment freedom from government interference in religion must be carefully monitored. With mere toleration, you will always have government abuses against religion.

The conflict between First Freedom advocates and Article 18 supporters is clearly a “full-throated” freedom vs. “mere” toleration debate. Those who deny that this is the case either fail to comprehend the problem, or they support mere toleration.

ABOUT THE COMMENTATOR:

Dr. Richard Land, BA (magna cum laude), Princeton; D.Phil. Oxford; and Th.M., New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, was president of the Southern Baptists’ Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (1988-2013) and has served since 2013 as president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, NC. Dr. Land has been teaching, writing, and speaking on moral and ethical issues for the last half century in addition to pastoring several churches. He is the author of The Divided States of AmericaImagine! A God Blessed AmericaReal Homeland SecurityFor Faith & Family and Send a Message to Mickey.

Op-ed: Why racial justice is distinctly different than racial reconciliation. And why it matters


Commentary By Terence Lester, Op-ed Contributor

As racial division widens, the Church must shift from solely talking about racial reconciliation and incorporating racial justice discussions. If COVID-19 has taught us anything; it is that that we have ignored the apparent disparities that persons of color have faced in the U.S. and the Church has been divided on these discussions.

Courtesy Terence Lester

Black history and black struggle have been left out of the White American evangelical story in many ways. Most white churches have little or no understanding of the ways black and brown people have turned to their faith and churches in times of significant racial discrimination and suffering. According to a recent study, the Barna Group revealed “a significant increase in the percentage of practicing Christians who say race is ‘not at all’ a problem in the U.S. (19%, up from 11% in 2019).”[1]

I believe the disconnect and breakdown stems from inappropriately conflating two distinct conversations in a way that prohibits understanding and progress: racial justice and racial reconciliation.

Over the past years, the white evangelical Church has engaged in safe conversations surrounding racial reconciliation, using the gospel as its primary source to carry this conversation forward. Often, these conversations are led by white men, who pastor significantly large churches who invite black and brown people into these spaces to talk about how we all need to come together and forgive another because of the sins of racism that has created division and disunity in the Church and the world.

Many of these conversations are well-meaning and even encourage believers that unity is possible. I have even been a part of many of these conversations. However, most white churches forget there is a long line of systemic, oppressive, and marginalizing structures that have disadvantaged black and brown people disproportionately in economics, employment, healthcare, housing, wage income, and even clean water in cities like Flint, Michigan, and Newark, New Jersey.

Moreover, while forgiveness is what we need, the racial reconciliation conversation leaves out how a White supremacist system created the oppressive structures that disadvantaged people of color, who have had to overcome and are still overcoming to this very day. This is where the racial reconciliation and racial justice conversations differ. Simply because you can’t forgive yourself out of oppression, you must be liberated from it.

Societal issues cannot be solved through peace, unity, and racial reconciliation conversations alone. We must deploy thoughtful racial justice, love, mercy, and solidarity. The Church holds an advantageous position in the conversation about racial justice and racial reconciliation because it can embody both to achieve liberation and a sense of togetherness. The Church universal has every nation, tongue, and tribe in it as John writes about in the book of Revelation.

We need to see the gospel as empowering us to forgive one another and also pushing us show up like Jesus on the frontlines having good news for the poor, weary and oppressed.

Jesus said, “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, (Luke 4:18)

What if the Church modeled how to be about both forgiveness and liberation of the oppressed? It was the great Howard Thurman in his book Jesus and The Disinherited that reminded us that Jesus himself identified with those who were minorities and under oppression.[2]

Reconciliation without justice to correct the systems that created the injustices and separation is a form of racial trauma and even abuse. It asks for the person who had been disproportionately affected by racism, white supremacy, and other forms of psychological and emotional trauma to forget what they have experienced and forgive the system that was designed for their failure, without correction.

Our focus for the near future should be on racial justice, rather than skipping steps to rush to racial reconciliation. Many White Christians think that racial reconciliation solves many of the injustices that persons of color face. I think there needs to be a robust education of the differences between the two because they are not the same. Making the distinction between the two is vital because reconciliation and progress cannot organically come without first acknowledging and rectifying the historical systems that have disadvantaged black and brown people. There can be no forgiveness without lament and repentance. When overlooked or hastened as a way to assuage guilt, this can result in more significant harm through putting a superficial Band-Aid on issues that require more extensive surgery to achieve long-term change.

While the racial reconciliation conversation is an important one to have, it cannot happen while ignoring the injustices that affect black and brown people in communities across the country. One conversation cannot happen apart from the other. Both are needed.

It is my hope and desire to see brothers and sisters walk together in the garment of destiny that MLK Jr. spoke about, and it is also my deep desire for the Church to lead this charge.

The responsibility for this lack of awareness sits with the Church. As one holding Good News, the Church must lead the conversation of both faith in a God of forgiveness and justice for God’s children who are oppressed. It was James Cone that eloquently penned in his book, God of the Oppressed, “The scandal is that the gospel means liberation, that this liberation comes to the poor, and that it gives them the strength and the courage to break the conditions of servitude.”

God honors all stories of creation equally, including black and brown stories that systems have oppressed. When Jesus entered the world, he did not do it for a specific group; his purpose and salvation were incorporated into each group of the world.

Jesus himself modeled what it meant to be proximate and engage in stories and conversations untraditional to a Jewish Rabbi. He demonstrated this many times by taking longer routes on his way to Galilee to connect with the Samaritan woman at the well, breaking social norms to bring healing and salvation to a woman who was an outsider. Like Jesus, the Church must listen, stand in solidarity with the oppressed, go out of its way to embrace the marginalized, and take on the responsibility of educating its majority members on how to do this wholly.

The Church must be about reconciling, with justice in mind. What better way to honor God during black history month than to lean in and embrace the full stories of those who have a hue that matches the skin of Jesus.


[1] “White Christians Have Become Even Less Motivated to Address Racial Injustice.” Barna Group. Accessed February 14, 2021. https://www.barna.com/research/american-christians-race-problem/.

[2] Thurman, Howard. Jesus and the Disinherited. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1996.

Terence Lester is the founder of Love Beyond Walls, a nonprofit organization focused on poverty awareness and community mobilization. He is the author of I See You and the forthcoming title When We Stand.

Op-ed” The dangerous cult of neo-segregation The dangerous cult of neo-segregation


Commentary By Ryan Bomberger, Exclusive Columnist 

Ryan Bomberger is the co-founder of The Radiance Foundation.

We see it everywhere. Thanks to Corporate America, mainstream media, so-called civil rights groups, academia and a relevance-worshipping Church, we are a nation increasingly judging one another and separating ourselves by the color of our skin. We’re surrounded by marketing that elevates one group while excoriating another. It’s okay, we’re told. It’s all in a day’s work toward “diversity” and “inclusion.”

Funny thing how so many get excluded in those pursuits. Racism is evil. Exploiting it, marketing it, and expanding it is too.

The racial messaging is loud and clear: if you’re not the right hue, there’s obviously something wrong with you. And those reminders are relentless. From Hollywood babble to pandering politicians to Big Tech Tyrants to Institutions of Higher Mislearning to euphemistic bridges to nowhere in woke churches, we’re barraged by an unending stream of color conscious craziness that demands society sees hue before they see you.

As with all things rooted in human frailty, today’s celebrated form of segregation is immensely profitable, especially for those peddling the victimhood. There’s no scarcity of New York Times bestselling authors reminding us to define ourselves by our “whiteness” or “blackness,” and to assess every situation, every word, every interaction with others through the broken narratives of Critical Race Theory. It’s exhausting. That’s not living.

At every turn we’re being commanded to check our color, check our privilege, check our to-do-lists of guilt-oriented tasks. Corporate America has taken genuflection to a whole new low. Remember when Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy got on his knees and started shining hip-hop artist Lecrae’s shoes in a seriously cringey display of reconciliation-gone-wrong? He told other white people to do the same. If you ever try to shine my shoes, I will kick you. I repeat. I. Will. Kick. You. This doesn’t erase racism. This doesn’t change the past. This just makes someone feel really uncomfortable.

Guilt is a powerful thing. And when it’s coupled with racism, it’s a cash cow, especially for the groups that rely on victim evangelism. The Black Lives Matter movement raked in millions while cities and businesses burned last summer. The NAACP, in full denial of the massive violence and destruction wrought by many #BLM “peaceful protests,” was the recipient of millions more in pledges from Corporate America.

Apple has turned up the volume on its social justice rhetoric with its Racial Equity and Justice Initiative and its “Black Unity” branded watch. Why not a “Unity” collection that celebrates us all? Never mind these same corporations closed and boarded up their businesses to protect their assets during BLM protests. They sent out press releases that sounded like an abused spouse making excuses for the abuser.

Taxpayers get to be force-fed the Cult of Neo-Segregation even in our museums. Remember when the Smithsonian posted an infographic about “whiteness” and “white culture” claiming that having a “protestant work ethic” was a “white thing.” So, as someone with brown skin, I don’t believe in working hard? The Smithsonian got fierce pushback and removed the infographic, but (of course) kept the racist “whiteness” section on their website.

We’re siloing, and it’s toxic. I’m all about expressions of diversity and learning others’ cultures. We are a beautifully diverse nation, and that diversity exists even within the same shades of pigmentation. But we don’t make up for the suppression of some cultures by demonizing everyone else. We don’t bring people together by constantly obsessing over our hues, our past, and our assumed “privileges.”

I’m all about addressing inequality…real inequality. I’m all about taking steps to dismantle systemic racism where and when it actually occurs (let’s start with Planned Parenthood  —the leading killer of black lives). I’m all about criminal justice reform and law enforcement accountability, but I won’t embrace a lie (BLM, CRT, DNC) to achieve it. I’m all about more healthy dialogue, more relationships and more unity around the fact that we’re one human race.

Church, can you help me out on this? Acts 17:26 if you’ve forgotten.

I’m not about living in the past. I’m not about mainstream media’s and academia’s revisions of the past. And I’m not about a mindset that certain people can never escape the past. Thank goodness this doesn’t apply to us in the spiritual sense. We’re forgiven by a God who loves us and redeems our past. But a broken worldview wants us to hold someone responsible for something they may or may not have done. Some want perpetual penance for wrongs someone’s ancestors have committed.

Are we responsible for the crimes of even our parents? Am I responsible for the crime of my biological father because I was conceived in rape? Too many times the past is weaponized and used to justify present behavior. If African-Americans, who lived in the horrific oppression of slavery, could forgive and move forward, what’s holding our modern society back?

The Civil Rights Act of 1871 (aka the Ku Klux Klan Act) was a piece of legislation that addressed the horrific KKK violence that terrorized black Americans and their white allies. No surprise, but zero Democrats in the House and Senate voted for the bill. A group of African-American Congressman (they were all Republicans) had a profound take on the legislation which alarmingly allowed pardons for former Confederates. The trailblazer legislators were Senator Hiram Revels and Representatives Robert Elliott, Robert De Large, Benjamin Turner and Joseph Rainey — all born into slavery. They proclaimed: “We have open and frank hearts toward those who were our oppressors and taskmasters. We foster no enmity now, and we desire to foster none for their act in the past to us, nor to the Government we love so well.”

We have a lot to learn from our past. But the most powerful lesson that benefits all of us, regardless of our beautiful hues, is how (especially as Christians) we can choose to have a more loving, more forgiving and more unified future.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Ryan Bomberger is the Chief Creative Officer and co-founder of The Radiance Foundation. He is happily married to his best friend, Bethany, who is the Executive Director of Radiance. They are adoptive parents with four awesome kiddos. Ryan is an Emmy Award-winning creative professional, factivist, international public speaker and author of NOT EQUAL: CIVIL RIGHTS GONE WRONG. He loves illuminating that every human life has purpose.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: NYT: Was He Innocent? ANSWER: No.


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 17, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

NYT: Was He Innocent? ANSWER: No.

Source: AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews

Trending

Here is this week’s installment of “The New York Times is ALWAYS lying about criminals (and probably everything else).”

The Times desperately wants you to believe that there are actual cases of innocent people being put to death in America. Their current poster boy for the cause is Sedley Alley, executed in 2006. But the Criminal Lobby is hoping a post-mortem DNA test — on evidence that has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence — will allow them to howl that an INNOCENT man was executed!

I knew nothing about this case, but I knew the Times’ description of the facts was a lie. How did I know?

1) No jury would have convicted a man, much less sentenced him to death, much less had that sentence repeatedly upheld, on such a flimsy record; and

2) There is no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in this country for at least 75 years.

Here are the facts the about the Criminal Lobby’s latest baby seal.

On the night of July 11, 1985, two Marines from a naval base in Millington, Tennessee, reported a possible kidnapping after they heard a female jogger screaming, “Don’t touch me!” “Leave me alone!” They ran in her direction, but just as they got close, a station wagon peeled off the side of the road. A gate guard also reported seeing a station wagon, which he said was being driven by a man constraining a woman.

All three witnesses described the car as a late-model green or brown Ford or Mercury station wagon with wood paneling, Kentucky tags and a loud muffler.

Alley, who owned a dark green 1972 Mercury station wagon with wood paneling and a Kentucky license plate, was brought in for questioning at 1 a.m. that night. The Marines who’d reported the kidnapping identified Alley’s vehicle as the one they’d seen, both by sight and by the roar of the muffler.

But Alley and his wife gave a satisfactory explanation for their whereabouts and were released.

At 6 a.m. on July 12, the body of 19-year-old Marine Lance Cpl. Suzanne Collins was found in a nearby park. Alley was arrested and promptly confessed to murdering her — claiming it was an “accident.”

He told his wife, “Yes, I killed the gal at … Orgill Park.”

In his lengthy, tape-recorded confession, Alley tried to soft-pedal his barbaric crime, claiming he’d hit Collins with his car by accident, and only decided to savagely beat her to death because, as he was driving her to the hospital, she threatened to turn him into the police.

Alley then took investigators to the precise spot where he’d murdered Collins and even showed them the tree where he’d broken off the branch that he’d jammed inside of her.

At trial, Alley admitted he did it, but pleaded insanity. The jury didn’t buy it, convicted him and sentenced him to death.

Here is what the Times’ Emily Bazelon tells that paper’s clueless readers about Alley’s case:

     “[T]wo Marines … reported crossing paths with Lance Corporal Collins while she was running. They said that moments after they saw her, they dodged a brown station wagon with a blue license plate … [L]aw enforcement officers stopped Sedley Alley, then 29. He was driving a dark green station wagon with a blue plate.”

Times readers are led to believe that although witnesses said it was a BROWN station wagon, Tennessee yokels picked up a guy in a GREEN station wagon!

Except that’s not true. The BOLO alert (“be on the lookout”) put out by the Naval Investigation Service identified a “a brown or green Ford or Mercury station wagon with woodgrain on the sides.”

Bazelon:

     “When the investigators began interrogating him, Mr. Alley, who had been drinking, denied knowing anything about Lance Corporal Collins and asked for a lawyer. But 12 hours later, he signed a statement confessing to the murder.”

Times’ readers are supposed to think these backwoods Nazis interrogated Alley without a lawyer for 12 hours until he confessed!

In fact, the only reason he signed a statement “12 hours later” was that, after being questioned the night of the crime, he was sent home. Alley wasn’t arrested until after Collins’ body was discovered the next day, whereupon he quickly confessed.

Bazelon:

     “Mr. Alley’s admission, which he later said was false and coerced …”

Yes, “later” in the sense of “20 years later.” For two decades, Alley never denied he’d murdered Collins. He only recalled that his confession was “coerced” in 2004, when he was trying to delay the hangman’s noose.

Bazelon:

“But the location he gave for the collision didn’t line up with the witness accounts.”

There were no “witness accounts” for “the collision” for the simple reason that there was no collision. “My car hit her by accident” was Alley’s attempt to mitigate his barbarous crime.

You know what else, Emily? His car wasn’t seen driving in the direction of the hospital, either!

Somehow, his lies not matching the facts is supposed to be a point in Alley’s favor.

Bazelon:

     “[Alley’s confession] did not match the physical evidence. … He said he … stabbed her with a screwdriver and killed her with a tree branch. … And the autopsy report showed that Lance Corporal Collins was not hit by a car nor stabbed with a screwdriver.”

Again: There was no collision.

I’m not sure what Bazelon’s point is about the screwdriver and the tree branch, but here’s the evidence presented at trial:

“The pathologist, Dr. James Bell, testified that the cause of death was multiple injuries, [many] of which could have been fatal. … He testified that the injuries to the skull could have been inflicted by the rounded end of defendant’s screwdriver that was found near the scene … He identified the tree branch that was inserted into the victim’s body. It measured 31 inches in length and had been inserted into the body more than once, to a depth of twenty inches …”

Bazelon:

     “Tire tracks found at the crime scene didn’t match Mr. Alley’s car, shoe prints didn’t match his shoes, and a third witness who saw a man with a station wagon, close to where Lance Corporal Collins was killed, described someone who was several inches shorter than Mr. Alley, with a different hair color.”

Times readers are perfectly prepared to believe that a jury of toothless hicks looked at evidence overwhelmingly clearing Alley and convicted him anyway.

But that didn’t happen, because having seen the evidence for themselves, Alley and his lawyer decided his best course was to admit he did it and plead insanity. All this alleged evidence is post-hoc nonsense invented by defense lawyers that has not been admitted under the rules of evidence, has not been subjected to cross-examination, and would not prove his innocence.

Seventy-five years and counting with no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in America.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: My Nation-Unifying Impeachment Solution


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 10, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

My Nation-Unifying Impeachment Solution

Source: AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Senate Republicans should offer to convict Donald Trump in return for Democrats agreeing to fund the wall. Trump is not going to run again anyway. In four years, he will be as viable a presidential candidate as Hillary was in 2020. You wouldn’t have guessed that, either, from all the gnashing of teeth about the MOST QUALIFIED WOMAN EVER TO SEEK THE PRESIDENCY immediately after she lost. 

The reason elected Republicans, Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and a hundred talk radio hosts are terrified of supporting conviction is that they don’t want to look like Mitt Romney and incur the wrath of the Trump base (whatever remains of it).

Trading conviction for a wall solves that. It will remind Trump loyalists that he betrayed them on his central campaign promise, and also will actually fulfill that promise.

Democrats, if they have half a brain, will leap at the offer. They are about to destroy Biden’s presidency by defining themselves — as The New York Times’ Frank Bruni put it — as “antonyms to Trump.” Trump was for a wall. Ipso facto, Democrats are for open borders.

Trump was lying, liberals! Even President Obama was for border security. Great socialist hope Bernie Sanders has denounced open borders as a gift to the Koch brothers.

They don’t care. Trump supporters wanted a wall, so we’re going to punish them by throwing open the border!

If Biden continues with his tsunami of open border executive orders: 1) COVID-19 cases will multiply, as untested, unvaccinated third-worlders pour in at breakneck speed; 2) Black and Hispanic unemployment will go through the roof; and 3) crime — already reaching mind-blowing proportions — will become as potent a political issue as it has ever been.

Good luck in 2022, Democrats!

But if Democrats were to trade wall funding for the holy grail of a Trump conviction, they could save Biden’s presidency, humiliate Trump, and explain to their nut base, We know, we know — walls don’t work — but we had to trade it to convict Trump! Aren’t you happy?

It’s win-win-win all around.

Sitting on a nation-unifying idea like that, I never should have tuned into the impeachment trial. I knew the Democrats would somehow manage to turn me against conviction. I’m still not pro-Trump — that’s a tall order. But could Democrats please ease up on the hysterical weeping?

The president is not supposed to be organizing protests at all, much less against his own vice president. Isn’t that enough? You don’t need to juice up the story, Democrats.

Impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin:

“All around me, people were calling their wives and their husbands, their loved ones to say goodbye ….

“[My] kids, hiding under the desk, placing what they thought were their final texts and whispered phone calls to say their goodbyes. They thought they were going to die.”

Yes, being forced to listen to the Trump “shaman” gas on about organic food could have annihilated legions!

Trump is a selfish, ignorant child. But he is not responsible for the reactions of neurotic liberals.

It would be as if Raskin’s neighbor smashed into his parked car, then drove off. Raskin has a perfectly good case without having to wail, I WAS AFRAID HE WOULD COME TO MY HOUSE AND MURDER MY ENTIRE FAMILY!

Raskin’s most precious argument was this:

“Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw … watching someone use an American flagpole, the flag still on it, to spear and pummel one of our police officers ruthlessly, mercilessly, tortured by a pole with a flag on it that he was defending with his very life.”

First, give me a break, Democrats, pretending to give a crap about the American flag.

Second: “Tortured”?

Impeachment managers apparently used a thesaurus to write their speeches:

Siri, give me a synonym for “poke” or “strike.”

Siri: jab, punch, prod, thrust, wallop … TORTURE.

Really?

Yup, it’s right there in Roget’s!

Curiously, even the teary-eyed Raskin didn’t allege that Officer Brian Sicknick was killed by the protesters, a claim being made hourly on MSNBC.

Raskin: “People died that day. Officers ended up with head damage and brain damage. People’s eyes were gouged. One officer had a heart attack. One officer lost three fingers that day. Two officers have taken their own lives.”

Jeremy Bash, later that day on MSNBC: “They killed a cop, Nicole!”

If Officer Sicknick’s death truly resulted from injuries sustained at the hands of the mob, it would be the case in chief against the protesters. (We’re not counting heart attacks, much less suicides that occurred days, or weeks, later.) But no one in the media has been able to scare up a single eyewitness to the attack on Brian Sicknick?

Unlike defund-the-police liberals, I actually am heartbroken about the death of a Trump-supporting law enforcement officer.

But the media are lying about his death. First, they claimed he was hit on the head with a fire extinguisher. Then they said he was dragged into the crowd and beaten. All that is known for sure is that after Sicknick returned to headquarters, he collapsed and later died.

Last week, CNN nonchalantly inserted this into a story on Officer Sicknick: “Medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true.”

There’s no hope for our media, who are irredeemable liars. But there’s still a chance for everyone else to come out a winner here! Trade conviction for a wall, Republicans.

Op-ed: Why does the media give a pass to Biden’s faith?


Commentary By Jason Jimenez, Op-Ed Contributor

Biden, the 46th president, is America’s second Catholic President. The first was John F. Kennedy — when he became President in 1961.  From the start of his campaign, Biden wanted everything to be about his faith. A favored campaign slogan for the Biden camp was the “battle for the soul of the nation.”

(Courtesy of Jason Jimenez)

It didn’t matter the media outlet. They all loved reporting on how Biden was a “deeply devout Catholic” and that his faith is a huge factor in “shaping his politics.” Even Speaker Pelosi publicly praises Biden’s faith and willingly admits that his Catholic faith has shaped his career and public policies. An article in The New York Times stated, “President Biden, perhaps the most religiously observant commander in chief in half a century, speaks of how his Catholic faith grounds his life and his policies.”

Interesting, isn’t it? How the media and every single big-time progressive politician have no problem mixing Biden’s faith with politics. But suppose you are a Christian who is pro-life and not in favor of the Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage. In that case, the response you get from the Left is the complete opposite. How was Judge Amy Coney Barrett (also a deeply devout Catholic) treated during the Senate confirmation hearings? Senator Dianne Feinstein and her colleagues didn’t praise Judge Barrett for her faith. Instead, Senator Feinstein expressed her concern about how Judge Barrett’s faith might influence her decisions by stating, “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.” But if the Left is so concerned about a person’s faith interfering with their public service, why isn’t the Left disparaging Biden from talking about how his faith shapes his public policies?

The main reason? Because President Biden is as much of a progressive as he is a Catholic. He is what I refer to as a “Progressive Catholic.” Don’t believe me? Listen to what he said in his book, Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics, “I’m as much a cultural Catholic as I am a theological Catholic.” Biden continues, “My idea of self, of family, of community, of the wider world, comes straight from my religion. It’s not so much the Bible, the beatitudes, the Ten Commandments, the sacraments, or the prayers I learned. It’s the culture.”

Because Judge Barrett is a conservative Catholic and not a progressive, liberal Democrats are concerned about her “dogmatic” positions embedding on her judgment. Therefore, she must be censored at all costs. However, in President Biden’s case, he gets a pass because he’ll keep on advancing progressive policies like the Equality Act (which will eviscerate religious freedoms in America), government funding of abortion, and the Green New Deal.

It’s not a question of whether President Biden has a right to express his religious beliefs. He has that right under the Constitution. It’s really about charging the media for being inconsistent by not allowing conservatives to do the same.

Let’s hope the media will admit to their intolerance and learn to be more receptive to Americans who hold conservative viewpoints.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jason Jimenez is president of Stand Strong Ministries, a faculty member at Summit Ministries, and a best-selling author who specializes in apologetics and biblical worldview training. Check out www.standstrongministries.org.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Liberals ‘Heart’ Murderers


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 03, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Liberals 'Heart' Murderers

Source: LightFieldStudios/iStock/Getty Images Plus

I assume it’s overkill to continue listing the evidence against death row inmate Kevin Cooper, duly convicted of committing a quadruple murder back in 1983. The blinding proof of his guilt was covered in last week’s column. To review, this included shoeprint evidence, footprint evidence, cigarette and tobacco evidence, blood evidence and DNA evidence, proving that this violent rapist and mental hospital escapee:

— hid out in a house next to Doug and Peggy Ryen’s Chino Hills, California, home for two days after escaping from prison;

— used a hatchet and hunting knife taken from his hideout to hack to death two adults and two children at the Ryen home and critically wound a third child;

— stole the family’s station wagon and later abandoned it in Long Beach, along with his DNA on prison-issued cigarettes, before escaping to Mexico;

— returned to California, where he raped a woman at knifepoint, leading to his capture.

This week, we’ll consider the specific claims made by The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof purporting to raise doubts about Cooper’s guilt.

Kristof’s special pleading proves that no one on death row is innocent. I didn’t pick this case. The anti-death penalty zealots picked it, splashing it across the “Newspaper of Record.” I have to believe they didn’t choose their worst example to showcase, so let’s look at the honesty of their arguments about Kevin Cooper.

KRISTOF:

“Although Josh [the 8-year-old who miraculously survived the hatchet attack] had indicated that the attack was committed by several white men, the sheriff announced just four days after the bodies were found that the sole suspect was Kevin Cooper …”

First of all, eyewitness testimony is the least credible evidence, particularly in the case of children — as the child molestation hysteria of the 1980s demonstrated — and even more particularly in the case of a child who’s found lying in a bloody mess surrounded by his murdered family members after having his throat slit and being attacked with a hatchet.

In any event, Josh never said he saw three men. He said he initially “thought” it must have been the three “Mexicans” who had stopped by the house looking for work earlier in the evening. But even in his initial interviews from his hospital bed, he said he only saw one assailant in the house: “a man with bushy hair.”

KRISTOF:

“Sadly, a tan T-shirt believed to have been worn by one of the killers didn’t produce enough DNA to provide a profile. …”

That IS sad. Luckily, it’s also not true. The Department of Justice DNA lab at UC Berkeley did find Cooper’s DNA on the tan T-shirt discarded near the murder house, which also contained partial DNA profiles of two of the victims, Doug and Peggy Ryen.

KRISTOF:

“Could the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Office really have planted evidence, including placing Cooper’s blood on the tan T-shirt? We do know that the sheriff’s office had a history of going rogue. Floyd Tidwell, the sheriff, was himself later convicted of four felony counts for stealing 523 guns from the evidence room” … [further denunciations of the sheriff’s department].

The “planted evidence” ruse is a popular one for springing murderers, except — oops! — the T-shirt tested by the Berkeley DNA lab wasn’t in the possession of the sheriff’s office. The tan T-shirt, along with the cigarette butts from the Ryens’ station wagon, had been in the custody of the San Diego Superior Court Evidence Clerk from the end of the trial right up until 2001, when they were shipped directly to the Berkeley DNA Laboratory for testing.

KRISTOF:

“Likewise, hairs found clutched in the victims’ hands weren’t Cooper’s (no hairs from an African-American were found at the crime scene) but didn’t lead to a match with a suspect, either.”

While I love the idea of a 10-year-old girl ripping an African American’s hair out by the root as he came at her with a hatchet, the “clutched hair” nonsense has already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed by the courts.

A team of DNA experts spent weeks testing hairs from Jessica’s hands, as well as two hairs found on Doug Ryen’s right hand and one hair from Christopher Hughes’ arm. Their conclusion? “The testing failed to identify another assailant and confirmed that all tested hairs most likely came from one or more of the victims.”

As U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn L. Huff explained:

“This should not be surprising. The hairs adhered to the victims’ bodies, including their hands, because there was a large amount of blood on the victims and a large amount of hair on the debris-ridden carpet. Also, the victims each sustained hatchet wounds to the head, causing clumps of cut hair to fall to the ground. Both animal and human hair were recovered from the hands of the victims. Just as with the animal hairs, the cut and shed human hairs adhered to the bloodied victims’ hands because the victims came in contact with the carpet when they were dying on the floor.”

Finally, Kristof tries to pin the murder on other “suspects” (whom we know aren’t guilty or he’d be defending them).

KRISTOF:

“A different longtime suspect in the case recounted, not long after the murders, how he had killed the Ryens and Chris Hughes.”

I guess “confessions” are only questionable in the case of the Central Park rapists. Kristof doesn’t say who the confessor is specifically, but it sounds like the one repeatedly put forward by Cooper’s lawyers. Courts have characterized this so-called “confession” as “a mental patient’s secondhand version of a confession.”

KRISTOF:

“This other suspect is a white man whom I’ll identify just by his first name, Lee, for he must be presumed innocent …

“Lee came to the attention of the authorities during the investigation after his girlfriend, Diana Roper, fingered him as the killer: She reported that he had returned home late on the night of the killings wearing bloody coveralls, in a car that resembled the Ryens’ station wagon.

“Roper turned Lee’s bloody coveralls over to the sheriff’s office — which eventually threw them away without testing them. By then, the sheriff’s office had arrested Cooper, and deputies didn’t want a complication.”

Don’t be fooled by Kristof’s fake humility — “he must be presumed innocent” — all that blather about what Roper said was invented by defense attorneys.

Roper was not technically Lee’s “girlfriend”: She was his bitter ex. Far from “bloody,” the few red splotches on the coveralls were most likely paint (along with manure and dirt). Roper told investigators that she didn’t even know if the coveralls belonged to Lee.

But let me quote from the court that reviewed the coveralls evidence: “[I]ssues of guilt, innocence and sentence should never be decided on information obtained from persons who believe they are witches and believe an article of clothing is connected to a crime because of a ‘vision’ they receive during a ‘trance.'” (Emphasis mine.)

Yes, Roper’s evidence was based on a vision she had during a trance because she believed she was a witch. These facts are exhaustively detailed in court orders and opinions — but are entirely absent from the vast news coverage of Cooper’s case. Might distract from the claim that the sheriff’s office tossed the coveralls only to avoid “a complication” in their single-minded pursuit of the wrong man — as Kristof claims.

No one on death row, not one person, is innocent. Believe nothing you read in the media about their putative “innocence.” It’s always lies and nonsense, as with Kristof’s pet murderer, Kevin Cooper.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Quadruple Murderer Is NYT’s Profile in Courage


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 27, 2021 5:00 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Quadruple Murderer Is NYT’s Profile in Courage

Source: AP Photo/File

Having run out of international con women to promote or innocent biological weapons researchers to accuse, The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof is banging on about a spectacularly guilty quadruple murderer who — according to Kristof — is very likely innocent.”

In this belief, he is opposed by more than a dozen courts, including the California Supreme Court, the infamous 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. Joining Kristof’s crusade are Kim Kardashian and the usual pro-criminal misfits. (At least Ivanka is no longer making criminal justice decisions for the White House!)

On June 4, 1983, a Chino Hills, California, couple and two children were hacked to death by a perpetrator using a hatchet, an ice pick and a hunting knife. Doug and Peggy Ryen, both 41 years old, had been chopped, slashed and stabbed 37 and 33 times, respectively. Their 10-year-old daughter, Jessica, had 46 wounds, and a visiting neighbor, 11-year-old Christopher Hughes, had 25. Some of the victim’s body parts had been fully amputated. The Ryens’ 8-year-old son, Josh, miraculously survived, despite a slit throat and hatchet blows to his head.

Christopher’s father discovered the nightmarish scene the next morning, when he came to pick up his son for church.

In 1985, a unanimous jury convicted Kevin Cooper, a violent rapist, career criminal and escaped mental patient, of the murders and sentenced him to death. His story illustrates why more prisoners on death row die of natural causes than execution.

One year before the Chino Hills slaughter, Cooper was released from a Pennsylvania prison, where he’d been serving time for a string of burglaries. In short order, Cooper violently kidnapped and raped an underage girl who’d interrupted him in the middle of yet another burglary, stabbing her in the eye with a screwdriver.

He was sent to a state psychiatric hospital, escaped and fled to Los Angeles, where he was soon convicted of two more burglaries and incarcerated in a men’s prison in Chino. Unaware of his criminal and psychiatric history, prison authorities mistakenly housed Cooper in a low-security wing. He escaped on June 2, 1983, and made his way to a furnished, unoccupied house just 50 yards from the Ryens’ home. There, he spent two days hiding out, watching the news about his escape, and calling friends, asking for money to get out of Chino.

On June 4, the night of the murders, Cooper fled to Mexico, checking into a hotel in Tijuana, about 130 miles south of Chino Hills, at 4:30 p.m. the next day. A few days after the murders, the Ryens’ stolen station wagon was found in a church parking lot in Long Beach, California. Cigarette butts in the car were identified as prison-issued Role-Rite tobacco and rolling papers, unique to the Chino prison. The butts also matched those found in Cooper’s hideaway house.

In Mexico, Cooper introduced himself to an American couple as “Angel Jackson,” and became a deckhand on their sailboat for a trip up the California coast. At a stop in Pelican Cove, near Santa Barbara, the three of them joined another couple for dinner on their sloop. Later that night, “Angel” returned to their hosts’ boat and raped the wife at knifepoint.

The rape victim and her husband called the police, and “Angel” was arrested. (He said the sex was consensual.) While at the sheriff’s office to give her statement, the wife noticed a “Wanted for Murder” poster with a picture of her rapist. “Angel Jackson” was identified as Kevin Cooper and sent back to San Bernardino to face charges for the Chino Hills massacre six weeks earlier.

Among the hundreds of pieces of evidence used to convict Cooper for the Ryen murders were:

— Shoe prints on a sheet in the Ryens’ master bedroom and on a spa cover outside the house. The prints, in Cooper’s shoe size, were made by a Pro-Ked Dude shoe — the shoes issued to Chino prison inmates and not available to the general public. They matched footprints in the unoccupied house where Cooper had been squatting for two days before the murders.

— A bloody hatchet found near the Ryens’ home that was identified by two of the absentee homeowners as having come from their house. The sheath to the hatchet was still in the bedroom where Cooper had slept for two nights.

— A drop of blood in the Ryens’ hallway that was consistent with Cooper’s rare blood type, establishing that the murderer was an African American.

— Luminol tests revealing a large quantity of blood in a shower where Cooper had been hiding.

Cooper’s groupies ignore all this evidence — and more! — and invent fanciful alternative theories of the crime. As always, they demand endless DNA testing.

Why not? DNA’s use for identification purposes wasn’t discovered until 1984. The first time DNA evidence was ever admitted in an American courtroom was in 1987. Consequently, if a single piece of evidence that was merely “consistent” with the defendant’s profile in the 1980s turns out not to match the defendant under more rigorous testing 40 years later, it’s a cheap Get Out of Jail Free card. And if the DNA matches? No harm, no foul.

So, in addition to nonstop frivolous appeals, Cooper’s advocates took up the cry for DNA testing, insisting that the DNA would prove him an innocent man, “framed” for murders he did not commit! Asked by CBS News if he would stop fighting and submit to his execution if the DNA was his, Cooper said, “That’s right. Because see, I say this with all the confidence in the world: I, Kevin Cooper, was never inside the home that I now know is the Ryen home.”

Guess whose DNA it was?

The California Department of Justice DNA Laboratory at Berkeley definitively established that Cooper’s DNA was in:

— a bloodstain inside the Ryen home;

— the cigarette butts found inside the Ryens’ stolen station wagon;

— a bloody T-shirt found near the Ryen home, which also contained Doug Ryen’s DNA.

And guess who hasn’t given up demanding more tests, more appeals and more investigations of their preposterous theories of the crime? Well, yes, obviously Kevin Cooper, the mass murderer himself, but also, Nick Kristof, the most easily fooled man in America.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: First Duty of the Press: Make It About Race


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 20, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

First Duty of the Press: Make It About Race

Source: AP Photo/Julio Cortez

Why can’t liberals ever just let Trump hang himself? Isn’t what he’s actually done bad enough? No, the media always have to punch up the story, layering lie upon lie, until normal people are forced to say, I don’t want to defend the guy, but that didn’t happen.

This was the whole point of my book “Resistance Is Futile,” written at the outset of the Trump administration:

“[M]y advice to the Resistance is: Get Trump on the worst thing he’s actually done, and stop running off with Wouldn’t it be great if he raped and murdered a nun? You’re right: If Trump had done that, he would be finished, done, put a fork in him. Unfortunately, he hasn’t committed that particular crime.”

Even after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, the media felt the need to pile up the false accusations.

Their first order of business was to turn it into a story about race.

The Trump riot has as little to do with race as any story in 21st-century America. COVID, immigration, tax cuts, the stimulus — I could come up with a racial angle for any of those.

Your assignment: Make the siege at the Capitol a story primarily about race relations.

You, a normal person, one week later: I’m stumped.

But to our media, the main point to be made about the riot was: Can you imagine what would have happened if black people had done that?

An unarmed Trump supporter crawling through a window at the Capitol was shot dead. Please name the black protester killed by the police throughout 2020’s incessant BLM riots, lootings and arsons. He’d already be on a postage stamp.

During the 2015 BLM riots in Baltimore after a heroin dealer, Freddie Gray, died in the back of a police van, the mayor announced that she was giving “those who wished to destroy space to do that as well.”

If you look at a mob storming the Capitol to protest Biden’s certification as president and immediately think, This is a story about black people!, you’ve got racism on the brain.

— Renee Zellweger Wins Oscar for Best Actress

     Oh like she would have gotten if it she were black. I don’t think so!

— Nobel Prize for Physics Awarded to Reinhard Genzel and Andrea Ghez for “Discovery of a Supermassive Compact Object at the Center Of Our Galaxy”

     Does anyone seriously believe that the prize would have been awarded if the discovery had been made by Black Lives Matter?

— Denver beat the Knicks 114-89

     Can you imagine Denver intentionally running up the score like that on a white team?

I’m beginning to suspect that conservatives are the only people who were genuinely appalled by Trump supporters storming the Capitol. The left’s consistent reaction has been: OK, what do we have to do to make it look bad?

     It must be awkward to have to work up a high dudgeon about the Capitol protest after spending half of 2020 saying “mostly peaceful” protests were OK, even if beyond the “mostly” there was a lot of arson and looting.

SOLUTION: A riot is not bad unless it can be denounced as “racist.”

Liberals were indignant with Sen. Tom Cotton for saying Trump should send in troops to restore order during the George Floyd riots. His New York Times op-ed making this point was slapped with a disclaimer from the editors that’s nearly as long as the original column.

Today, there are more troops on patrol in D.C. than in actual war zones.

But, this time, instead of calling the militarization of our nation’s capital “fascist” — as the Times’ Michelle Goldberg dubbed Cotton’s proposal — the very presence of troops is cited as proof of how awful the Jan. 6 riot was.

Liberals have got to learn that their neuroses are not proof of their opponents’ perfidy. The hysterical deployment of more than 20,000 troops to Biden’s inauguration says something about them, not the rioters.

Similarly, cable news has been featuring Democrats giving long, emotional TV interviews describing their fears during the storming of the Capitol. I was afraid they’d kill us all!  What if they’d started lynching senators? They could have taken hostages! I fully expected a mass shooting. I thought the building would collapse on top of us! What if they’d had a nuke?

Oh my gosh! What did they actually do?

They broke four windows, took selfies and threw papers on the ground.

     How many people died?

     Four — all Trump supporters.

     The “Your Neurosis Proves My Malfeasance” argument is a specialty of the feminists. If I wasn’t sexually harassed, then please explain why I gained 30 pounds? You want proof that Trump is a monster? I can’t sleep at night! Do you want to see my psychiatrist’s bill?

     No, no! We believe you! But it’s not evidence that anyone did something bad to you. Your mental anguish comes in during the penalty phase, not during the guilt-finding phase.

     The winner of the “You want proof? My skin has broken out!” argument was this NBC headline last week: “Some Democrats in Congress are worried their colleagues might kill them.”

The raid was disgusting, appalling, sickening, but it’s not a license for concocting imaginary accusations. Trump is bad. The thugs who stormed the Capitol are bad. You don’t need to manufacture evidence against them, media.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 06, 2021 3:00 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.

Source: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Now that the Georgia runoffs are over, let’s talk about Donald Trump.

When we really needed all hands on deck in Georgia, Trump was a wrecking ball. He went down to Georgia and insulted everyone, refusing to talk about anything but himself. Based on his rally speech this week, Trump apparently thinks he won the November election because there was a red wave for everyone except him. How else could all those Republicans win congressional seats on his “coattails,” while he lost?

There are other ways to interpret the election results, such as that Trump didn’t have any “coattails.” In Texas, for example, Trump won, but Sen. John Cornyn got more votes — the first time a Texas senator has bested a Republican president in a couple of decades.

Maybe Americans are terrified of the Democrats, but also sick of Trump.

From the moment the election was over, Democrats were single-mindedly focused on winning the Georgia runoffs. By contrast, Republicans indulged in their usual circular firing squads, while Trump kept the base distracted with his petulance about the November election. (Yes, the Democrats cheated. They always cheat. Maybe somebody should have done something about it before the election.)

With Republicans facing these two crucial runoffs, Trump was too narcissistic to care about anything but his personal issues, and he busily set landmine after landmine for the candidates.

After Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue had triumphantly voted for the coronavirus relief bill, Trump began attacking it as a “disgrace” and ridiculing the paltry $600 individual payments.

Let’s see, who had negotiated this “disgrace” again? Trump’s own Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin. But Trump was too busy denouncing the November election to pay attention to the negotiations.

For a week, Trump pretended he wasn’t going to sign the bill. In the end, he signed it, but waited so long to do so that instead of Georgia voters receiving their checks days before the runoff, they’ll be getting their checks sometime later this week.

Fantastic.

Then Trump launched vicious attacks on the (admittedly ridiculous) Georgia governor and secretary of state, blaming them for his loss in the state. Republicans needed every vote in this election, and surely there are some Georgians who prefer those guys to Trump. But Trump forced Loeffler and Perdue to choose between him and their own elected Republican leaders.

It also didn’t help that we’re in the middle of another COVID surge. You can’t blame Trump for the coronavirus, a gift from China to the entire world. Trump did better than most world leaders, especially with Operation Warp Speed.

The usual problem with Trump is that he’s all talk, no action. He talked about the massive fraud that would ensue with mail-in ballots … but did nothing. He talked about “LAW & ORDER” as cities burned to the ground … but did nothing. He talked about the wall … but built only about dozen miles of it.

With COVID, it was the reverse. Trump did the right things, but wouldn’t shut up. Worst of all, he talked to Bob Woodward.

To Woodward: I could curl your toes with some of the stories about this virus! See, I get these briefings every morning …

An hour later to the public: It’s gonna be great. This will be over by Easter.

That’s not a strong leader rallying the country. It’s a con artist telling you to put all your money on a stock that’s about to tank. Worst of all, it shows you who he is that Trump so desperately wanted Woodward to like him and was stupid enough to think he could win him over.

For all that, Trump had it all! He won the presidency by running on wildly popular issues that no other candidate would touch. He had devoted followers. For the first two years of his presidency, he had a Republican House and Senate.

     Oh grief that Earth’s best hopes rest all with Thee!

Trump could have been a massively popular president and won reelection comfortably, if only he’d kept faith with his voters. Even people who abhorred him would have had to say, I thought he was a coarse vulgarian, but he was right about China ripping us off, he was right about the border, and he was right about standing up to crazy woke culture.

The 2020 election should have been like Ronald Reagan’s 1984 reelection (49-state landslide). Like Trump, Reagan ran on popular issues left on the ground by other candidates — primarily his vow to destroy the Soviet Union and reignite the economy by slashing government.

But — and here’s the big difference — Reagan kept his promises.

Not Trump! Instead — in the greatest bait-and-switch in American history — he promptly turned his presidency over to nimrods Jared and Ivanka, while he watched TV and tweeted. Suddenly, the populist hero was replaced with two idiots, who were all about being friends with the Kardashians and sucking up to Goldman Sachs.

Why don’t we have a wall? Why didn’t Trump impose a tax on remittances to make Mexico pay for it? Why are American workers still training their cheap labor replacements?

Answer: Stephen Miller, Trump’s crucial immigration aide during the 2016 campaign, survived his first year in the White House only by convincing Ivanka he was working on “Women’s Issues.” He spent his remaining three years with his nose up Jared’s butt.

We knew about the hucksterism. There was no warning about the kids.

The Republican Party’s only hope is to become a populist party, but without a shallow, narcissistic ignoramus as its head.

What is the point of being slavishly loyal to a person who is loyal to no one (except his numbskull kids)? Trump has sold out everyone who was ever faithful to him — Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach, Chris Christie, Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys, Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, and, of course, his own voters.

Half of the betrayed are still desperately seeking Trump’s favor by signing onto the futile “Stop the Steal” effort. Not good enough for the administration! But good enough to humiliate themselves in Trump’s final days in office. At the first Stop the Steal rally in Washington, Trump didn’t even show up. He went golfing.

Give up the cult of personality, Trumpsters, or at least find someone with a better personality.

Jason Whitlock Op-ed: Whitlock: Ignoring the concerns of Trump supporters will destroy America


Wednesday afternoon, angry, unarmed, mostly peaceful protesters stormed the Capitol. They caused hundreds of dollars in damages to “The People’s House,” the taxpayer-funded building where elected lawmakers work.

They took pictures seated at Nancy Pelosi’s desk. They shoved furniture out of place. They pushed their way past unprepared and overwhelmed law enforcement. They shattered a window or two.

If not for police shooting and killing an unarmed, female 14-year Air Force veteran, the protest staged by Trump supporters would have more in common with a 1950s fraternity panty raid than political riot.

Here, I guess, I should apologize for not joining the rest of the media in feigning outrage and calling for the trespassers to be tried for treason. But I’m neither outraged nor feeling vengeful because of their act of civil disobedience.

I understand it. It was an inevitable repercussion from 2020 and what we’ve all witnessed the last decade. It was Sir Isaac Newton’s third law come to life.

“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

For four years now, the billionaire and millionaire elites who control academia, the mainstream media, politics, popular culture, and the sports world have framed Trump supporters as racist deplorables worthy of elimination from society.

These same elites spent the past decade elevating Michael Brown, George Floyd, Jacob Blake, Rayshard Brooks, Eric Garner, and other resisting criminal suspects to icon status while simultaneously raising bail money for protesters willing to riot, loot, burn, and vandalize in the name of racial justice.

This blatant hypocrisy will not go unchallenged. You cannot ignore the desires, concerns and feelings of 74 million citizens. You cannot write them off as Nazis and answer all their complaints with allegations of racism or sexism. That’s fascism.

At this point, the Deplorables should be commended for their restraint. Antifa and Black Lives Matter search, burn, and destroy well into the wee hours. The Deplorables returned to their hotel rooms by nightfall and watched our lawmakers return to work inside the Capitol by 8 p.m.

The critics say President Trump provoked Wednesday’s political “violence.” His refusal to concede a corrupt election baited his followers to overrun the Capitol with flags, put Ashli Babbitt in harm’s way, and do enough property damage to delay the Electoral College confirmation three or four hours.

Fine. Guilty as charged.

But our president for the next two weeks was not Lee Harvey Oswald, a lone provocateur. He had plenty of collaborators. They work on all the major and cable news and sports networks. They play in the NFL and NBA. They represent both political parties, hold high positions in Hollywood, at Netflix, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

The people wagging their fingers the hardest at Trump and the Deplorables sanctioned, financed, and promoted political violence throughout all of 2020 and for much of the past decade.

Ashli Babbitt’s blood is on the hands of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg as much as, if not more than, on President Trump’s. That’s why Dorsey and Zuckerberg rushed to silence Trump on their respective platforms, Twitter and Facebook.

Political tension and violence are fomented, planned, and monetized on Silicon Valley’s social media platforms. Wednesday’s “violence” hit the wrong target. The Capitol is where global elites exchange cash for influence and privilege. It’s where $150,000-a-year politicians become multimillionaires building cozy relationships with Big Tech lobbyists and American corporations looking to curry favor with China.

The Capitol is sacred ground for elites. The way you might revere a church edifice is the way millionaires and billionaires revere the Capitol.

The NBA multimillionaires said they played with “heavy hearts” Wednesday night after seeing the Capitol desecrated. They made twisted, illogical analogies between nonviolent civil disobedience and the rioting, looting, and violence that occurred in Minneapolis, Atlanta, Kenosha, and across this country all summer.

“It reminds me of what Dr. Martin Luther King has said, that there’s two split different Americas,” Boston Celtics star Jaylen Brown told reporters. “In one America, you get killed by sleeping in your car, selling cigarettes or playing in your backyard. And then in another America, you get to storm the Capitol and no tear gas, no massive arrests, none of that.”

Brown is right. There are two different American realities. There’s the false reality world created by and for elites and their groupies. In this world, progressive elites feign concern for poor black people by championing the cause of a tiny handful of black resisting criminal suspects harmed by white police officers tasked with subduing them. The elites have no interest in the thousands of black men and boys killed annually due to random gang, street, and drug violence. Those black lives do not matter. Progressive elites live inside a social media matrix where they call the Crips and the Bloods to protect them from the police.

The rest of America lives in an alternate universe driven, at least partially, by reality, facts, and common sense. We don’t see the norms of Western Civilization as the root of all evil. We have no interest in disrupting the nuclear family. We don’t think the storming of the Capitol is analogous to the months of looting, arson, shooting, rioting, and anarchy we watched throughout 2020.

Philadelphia 76ers coach Doc Rivers, a man I greatly respect, lives in a different reality than I do. His interpretation of Wednesday’s chaos baffles me.

“No police dogs turned on people, no billy clubs hitting people. People peacefully being escorted out of the Capitol,” Rivers told reporters Wednesday. “So it shows you can peacefully disperse a crowd. It basically proves a point about a privileged life in a lot of ways. I will say it, because I don’t think a lot of people want to: Can you imagine [Wednesday], if those were all black people storming the Capitol, and what would have happened? That, to me, is a picture worth a thousand words for all of us to see, and probably something for us to reckon with again.”

What is he talking about? We’ve watched buildings burned to the ground this summer. We’ve seen “protesters” prowling the streets of Atlanta with semi-automatic weapons. We’ve seen protesters berate and spit on police officers. David Dorn, a 77-year-old, black retired cop, was assassinated. Parts of Portland have been under attack from Antifa and Black Lives Matter for months.

There have been no dogs, no billy clubs.

We don’t have to imagine how law enforcement would react to black, lawless protesters. It has aired on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News all summer. The police have been remarkably restrained.

The media, athletes, and celebrities have treated black protesters as heroes. Politicians have taken knees and worn kente cloth to show allegiance with black protesters. Every national sportscaster and head coach has gone along with the facade that police pose a greater threat to black men than black men. We’re inundated with television commercials promoting Black Lives Matter. The NFL has celebrated criminals involved in drive-by shootings. A laundry list of media personalities have taken turns rationalizing every violent, lawless action taken by Antifa or Black Lives Matter. No one cares that George Floyd stuck a gun in a pregnant black woman’s belly or that Jacob Blake sexually assaulted a black woman. The New York Times commissioned a group of black female reporters to rewrite American history to fit the narrative of the critical race theory taught at our academic institutions.

The concerns propagandized by the ministers of black victimhood are a high priority in American society. Sinners are excommunicated from their employment. There is so much money, fame, and adulation from joining the Church of Black Victimization that white people such as Shaun King and Rachel Dolezal have disavowed their natural heritage to identify as black.

A Trump supporter? He or she is an American pariah. A racist. A coon. An idiot. A sellout. Someone to be silenced or ignored.

Trump supporters will not go away quietly or peacefully. It’s their country, too. Their concerns are legitimate. The lawmakers they chased to the basement of the Capitol sold out the American working-class man and woman.

They sold out my mom and dad and the way of life that allowed me to rise from poverty to a life of comfort and privilege. My dad was a small businessman in Indianapolis who owned a tavern that catered to hourly, union factory workers. My mother was a factory worker in Indianapolis and Kansas City.

The black people I grew up with, the ones who frequented the Masterpiece Lounge and went on bowling trips with my mom, were not global citizens. They were hardworking high school graduates who wanted their kids to move up the economic and social ladder.

They had a lot in common with Trump supporters. We can’t see that common ground now because the mainstream media and social media have us so irrationally polarized that we think skin color explains everything.

Skin color does not explain the Trump phenomenon, the passion of his followers. Trumpism is rooted in a rejection of the elitism, idolatry, and secularism pervasive in modern American culture.

In September 1620 — four hundred years ago — 102 passengers boarded the Mayflower, fleeing southern England and the elitist society constructed there. They were the original Trumpers, the dregs of European society in search of freedom of religion and expression.

Trumpism is the cry of American citizens uninterested in adopting the cultures and customs of France, China, Italy, Cuba, Venezuela, Canada, or any of the other places global elites romanticize. Trumpism is the cry of the working class who believe the Big Tech billionaires are building an America that cuts them out of the American Dream. Trumpism is the cry of Americans who value authenticity over the fraudulence of political correctness.

The price of ignoring their cries will be war, a civil war.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.


Commentary by Ann CoulterAnn Coulter | Posted: Jan 06, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.

Source: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Now that the Georgia runoffs are over, let’s talk about Donald Trump.

When we really needed all hands on deck in Georgia, Trump was a wrecking ball. He went down to Georgia and insulted everyone, refusing to talk about anything but himself. Based on his rally speech this week, Trump apparently thinks he won the November election because there was a red wave for everyone except him. How else could all those Republicans win congressional seats on his “coattails,” while he lost?

There are other ways to interpret the election results, such as that Trump didn’t have any “coattails.” In Texas, for example, Trump won, but Sen. John Cornyn got more votes — the first time a Texas senator has bested a Republican president in a couple of decades.

Maybe Americans are terrified of the Democrats, but also sick of Trump.

From the moment the election was over, Democrats were single-mindedly focused on winning the Georgia runoffs. By contrast, Republicans indulged in their usual circular firing squads, while Trump kept the base distracted with his petulance about the November election. (Yes, the Democrats cheated. They always cheat. Maybe somebody should have done something about it before the election.)

With Republicans facing these two crucial runoffs, Trump was too narcissistic to care about anything but his personal issues, and he busily set landmine after landmine for the candidates. After Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue had triumphantly voted for the coronavirus relief bill, Trump began attacking it as a “disgrace” and ridiculing the paltry $600 individual payments.

Let’s see, who had negotiated this “disgrace” again? Trump’s own Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin. But Trump was too busy denouncing the November election to pay attention to the negotiations. For a week, Trump pretended he wasn’t going to sign the bill. In the end, he signed it, but waited so long to do so that instead of Georgia voters receiving their checks days before the runoff, they’ll be getting their checks sometime later this week.

Fantastic.

Then Trump launched vicious attacks on the (admittedly ridiculous) Georgia governor and secretary of state, blaming them for his loss in the state. Republicans needed every vote in this election, and surely there are some Georgians who prefer those guys to Trump. But Trump forced Loeffler and Perdue to choose between him and their own elected Republican leaders.

It also didn’t help that we’re in the middle of another COVID surge. You can’t blame Trump for the coronavirus, a gift from China to the entire world. Trump did better than most world leaders, especially with Operation Warp Speed. The usual problem with Trump is that he’s all talk, no action. He talked about the massive fraud that would ensue with mail-in ballots … but did nothing. He talked about “LAW & ORDER” as cities burned to the ground … but did nothing. He talked about the wall … but built only about dozen miles of it.

With COVID, it was the reverse. Trump did the right things, but wouldn’t shut up. Worst of all, he talked to Bob Woodward. To Woodward: I could curl your toes with some of the stories about this virus! See, I get these briefings every morning … An hour later to the public: It’s gonna be great. This will be over by Easter.

That’s not a strong leader rallying the country. It’s a con artist telling you to put all your money on a stock that’s about to tank. Worst of all, it shows you who he is that Trump so desperately wanted Woodward to like him and was stupid enough to think he could win him over. For all that, Trump had it all! He won the presidency by running on wildly popular issues that no other candidate would touch. He had devoted followers. For the first two years of his presidency, he had a Republican House and Senate.

     Oh grief that Earth’s best hopes rest all with Thee!

Trump could have been a massively popular president and won reelection comfortably, if only he’d kept faith with his voters. Even people who abhorred him would have had to say, I thought he was a coarse vulgarian, but he was right about China ripping us off, he was right about the border, and he was right about standing up to crazy woke culture.

The 2020 election should have been like Ronald Reagan’s 1984 reelection (49-state landslide). Like Trump, Reagan ran on popular issues left on the ground by other candidates — primarily his vow to destroy the Soviet Union and reignite the economy by slashing government. But — and here’s the big difference — Reagan kept his promises.

Not Trump! Instead — in the greatest bait-and-switch in American history — he promptly turned his presidency over to nimrods Jared and Ivanka, while he watched TV and tweeted. Suddenly, the populist hero was replaced with two idiots, who were all about being friends with the Kardashians and sucking up to Goldman Sachs.

Why don’t we have a wall? Why didn’t Trump impose a tax on remittances to make Mexico pay for it? Why are American workers still training their cheap labor replacements? Answer: Stephen Miller, Trump’s crucial immigration aide during the 2016 campaign, survived his first year in the White House only by convincing Ivanka he was working on “Women’s Issues.” He spent his remaining three years with his nose up Jared’s butt.

We knew about the hucksterism. There was no warning about the kids.

The Republican Party’s only hope is to become a populist party, but without a shallow, narcissistic ignoramus as its head. What is the point of being slavishly loyal to a person who is loyal to no one (except his numbskull kids)? Trump has sold out everyone who was ever faithful to him — Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach, Chris Christie, Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys, Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, and, of course, his own voters. Half of the betrayed are still desperately seeking Trump’s favor by signing onto the futile “Stop the Steal” effort. Not good enough for the administration! But good enough to humiliate themselves in Trump’s final days in office. At the first Stop the Steal rally in Washington, Trump didn’t even show up. He went golfing.

Give up the cult of personality, Trumpsters, or at least find someone with a better personality.

Joshua Lawson of the Federalist Op-ed: Giving 2021 A Fighting Chance Requires We All Choose To Do What Is Hard


Commentary by Joshua Lawson JANUARY 5, 2021

Even before the horrible year that was 2020, New Year’s Eve celebrations have long been filled with the near-certain expectation that things will definitely get better. Generally speaking, it’s a fine sentiment. Optimism is good; hope is good; and striving to improve the future from where we are today led us from the cave to the fields, across vast oceans, and into the limitless of outer space.

But nothing magical happens when the calendar year flips over. There’s no unexplained scientific phenomenon that shifts the incalculable number of atoms in our known universe into undaunted forces for good simply because we’ve reached the conclusion of this year’s cycle through the Gregorian calendar. Instead, history tells us things can always get worse.

After the stock market crashed in 1929, the Great Depression didn’t reach its darkest days until 1933. The 1938 Nazi annexation of Austria was followed by the invasion of Poland in 1939, then the steamrolling of France and near-defeat of Britain in 1940.

Yet while there’s no iron-clad guarantee that 2021 will be great, every one of us can contribute to the effort to make a redemptive year a reality.

No government action will make 2021 better than what we just went through in 2020. As with most positive change, any meaningful, lasting shifts in the trajectory of our towns and our nation will stem from individuals choosing to do good.

World events of a grand nature will remain outside our ability to master. Pandemics, wildfires, and — unless you live in one of a handful of swing states — presidential elections involving more than 158 million votes are things almost entirely beyond our control. Yet, even in the worst of times, we can control how we interact with our fellow Americans, and a shift in the right direction in this regard is one of the simplest — albeit difficult — steps we can take.

It’s within the grasp of each of us, as individuals, to decide if what we both consume and contribute is life-affirming or malevolent, restorative or toxic. In our workplaces, online using social media, with our families, and interacting with total strangers, we are responsible for how we live amongst one another.

In our current rancorous political environment, we’ll have a chance at a better year if we realize most genuine conversations or debates aren’t best served in a tit-for-tat on Facebook or Twitter but in person over coffee, lunch, or a drink after work. This doesn’t mean surrendering our principles or allowing ourselves to be walked over. It does, however, require we prudently recognize whose minds are open to change, and those who refuse to be unconvinced of what they believe; which arguments may bear fruitful discussion, and those that will only lead to more frustration and anger this country can do without.

Regardless of one’s faith, there is wisdom in the instructions given in the Bible’s 2 Timothy:

Again I say, don’t get involved in foolish, ignorant arguments that only start fights. A servant of the Lord must not quarrel but must be kind to everyone, be able to teach, and be patient with difficult people. (2 Timothy 2:23)

As the author of the epistle to Timothy later notes, being honest doesn’t mean being needlessly hurtful or tactless, and he reminds us to “Gently instruct those who oppose the truth.” There’s an Aristotelian golden mean between failing to state a necessary truth and being an overly blunt jerk about it.

Similar valuable cautions are given in Titus 3:2 not to slander, to “avoid quarreling,” and to “show true humility to everyone.” Later in the chapter, we’re also reminded it may be best to walk away from those who continue to engage in foolish controversies:

If people are causing divisions among you, give a first and second warning. After that, have nothing more to do with them. (Titus 3:10)

Admittedly, it’s hard to do, especially in a climate that often mistakenly views the last person who responded in a Facebook fight as “the winner” or politeness as a sign of “weakness.” Even so, it’s one of the few ways to lower the temperature to the point where authentic, amiable exchanges and healthy debates are possible. We’ll be a better nation in 2021 if Americans take time to ask and reflect, “Will this truly make things better?” before acting.

Furthermore, giving 2021 a fighting chance will involve constantly “checking one’s priors” at the door. Or, as Jordan Peterson has phrased it, we’d do well to “Assume that the person you are listening to might know something that you don’t.”

As more Americans limit their media consumption to voices and opinions they already agree with, ideological and philosophical blind spots pose an increasingly higher risk. Yet rarely are things as simple as either the “left” or “right” (antiquated terms to begin with) being absolutely correct or absolutely wrong.

Taking in the views of only a small territory of the political spectrum is one of the contributing factors that led us to a place, never more evident than in 2020, where one half of the country can’t even stand being in line next to the other half — six feet apart, no less. We don’t have to agree, but we have to be able to at least relate to where those we disagree with are coming from. This begins with the humility to acknowledge we may be wrong about something, or, at least, not as correct as we think we are.

“Genuine conversation is exploration, articulation, and strategizing,” Peterson writes, “When you’re involved in a genuine conversation, you’re listening.” This may also require mingling outside a safe, “bubbled,” friend group, especially if that group is comprised of similarly like-minded folks.

It means not assuming to know the totality of someone’s beliefs and values based on their stance on a single issue. It means being OK with someone thinking, even acting, in a way we personally disagree with (as long as it doesn’t directly infringe on anyone’s rights to life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness). A tolerance of true intellectual diversity will be a key factor in helping 2021 rebound after the past year.

In what could be the most important New Year’s resolution we make, by exercising humility, patience, and grace, we can each take responsibility in helping make 2021 the year we all need it to be, one individual choice at a time.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Joshua Lawson is managing editor of The Federalist. He is a graduate of Queen’s University as well as Hillsdale College where he received a master’s degree in American politics and political philosophy. Follow him on Twitter @JoshuaMLawson.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 30, 2020 3:35 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI

Source: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Pool

Vice President-elect Kamala Harris recently tweeted:

“Our Kwanzaa celebrations are one of my favorite childhood memories. The whole family would gather around across multiple generations and we’d tell stories and light the candles. Whether you’re celebrating this year with those you live with or over Zoom, happy Kwanzaa!”

Post some pictures, Kamala! We’d love to see your Brahmin and Jamaican grandparents sitting around the Kwanzaa candles recalling celebrations way back when they were three or four years younger. (Would that The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” would start counting Kamala’s lies!)

Kwanzaa, celebrated exclusively by white liberals, is a fake holiday invented in 1966 (when Kamala was 2 years old) by black radical/FBI stooge Ron Karenga — aka Dr. Maulana Karenga, founder of United Slaves, the violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers. Liberals have become so mesmerized by multicultural gibberish that they have forgotten the real history of Kwanzaa and Karenga’s United Slaves.

In what was ultimately a foolish gambit, during the madness of the ’60s, the FBI encouraged the most extreme black nationalist organizations in order to discredit and split the left. The more preposterous the group, the better. (It’s the same function MSNBC serves today.)

By that criterion, Karenga’s United Slaves was perfect.

Despite modern perceptions that blend all the black activists of the ’60s, the Black Panthers did not hate whites. Although some of their most high-profile leaders were drug dealers and murderers, they did not seek armed revolution.

Those were the precepts of Karenga’s United Slaves. The United Slaves were proto-fascists, walking around in dashikis, gunning down Black Panthers and adopting invented “African” names. (I will not be shooting any Black Panthers this week because I am Kwanzaa-reform, and we are not that observant.)

It’s as if David Duke invented a holiday called “Anglika,” which he based on the philosophy of “Mein Kampf” — and clueless public school teachers began celebrating the made-up, racist holiday.

In the category of the-gentleman-doth-protest-too-much, back in the ’70s, Karenga was quick to criticize Nigerian newspapers that claimed that certain American black radicals were CIA operatives.

Now we know the truth: The FBI fueled the bloody rivalry between the Panthers and United Slaves. In the annals of the American ’60s, Karenga was the Father Gapon, stooge of the czarist police. Whether Karenga was a willing FBI dupe, or just a dupe, remains unclear. The left has forgotten the FBI’s tacit encouragement of this murderous black nationalist cult founded by the father of Kwanzaa.

In one barbarous outburst, Karenga’s United Slaves shot two Black Panthers to death on the UCLA campus: Al “Bunchy” Carter and John Huggins. Karenga himself served time, a useful stepping-stone for his current position as the chair of the Africana Studies Department at California State University at Long Beach.

(Speaking of which, the cheap labor lobby certainly was right about how the GOP could easily win over “natural conservative” Hispanics. Look at how California has swung decisively to the right since Hispanics became the largest ethnic group there! Good luck winning California now, Democrats!)

The esteemed Cal State professor Karenga’s invented holiday is a nutty blend of schmaltzy ’60s rhetoric, black racism and Marxism. The seven principles of Kwanzaa are the very same seven principles of the Symbionese Liberation Army, another invention of The Worst Generation.

In 1974, Patty Hearst, kidnap victim-cum-SLA revolutionary, famously posed next to the banner of her alleged captors, a seven-headed cobra. Each snakehead stood for one of the SLA’s revolutionary principles: Umoja, Kujichagulia, Ujima, Ujamaa, Nia, Kuumba and Imani. These are the exact same seven “principles” of Kwanzaa.

Kwanzaa praises collectivism in every possible area of life. It takes a village to raise a police snitch!

When Karenga was asked to distinguish Kawaida, the philosophy underlying Kwanzaa, from “classical Marxism,” he essentially said that, under Kawaida, we also hate whites. (And here’s something interesting: Kawaida, Kwanzaa and Kuumba are also the only three Kardashian sisters not to have their own shows on the E! network.)

While taking the “best of early Chinese and Cuban socialism” (Is that the mass murder or the seizure of private property?), Karenga said Kawaida practitioners believe one’s racial identity “determines life conditions, life chances and self-understanding.”

There’s an inclusive philosophy for you!

Sing to “Jingle Bells”:

Kwanzaa bells, dashikis sell

          Whitey has to pay;

          Burning, shooting, oh what fun

          On this made-up holiday!

Kwanzaa emerged not from Africa, but from the FBI’s COINTELPRO. It is a holiday celebrated exclusively by idiot white liberals. Black people celebrate Christmas.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Is There a Vaccine Against Pandering?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 23, 2020 4:48 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Is There a Vaccine Against Pandering?

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky  

Trending

It now appears that the greatest threat to black Americans isn’t COVID, it’s being pandered to death.

As the distribution of vaccines got underway last week, the Centers for Disease Control was trying to ensure that black people would get the vaccine before the elderly (too white!), while the media were focused on rationalizing black people’s opposition to taking the vaccine at all.

— NPR’s “Weekend Edition”:

Scott Simon: “Help us understand why many black Americans may be skeptical of a vaccine.”

Liz Walker: “Well, Scott, you know, black people have been traumatized by a betrayal of the system forever for generations. … We have all now talked about the experiment that used people with syphilis in Tuskegee. We all know about Henrietta Lacks.”

— ABC’s “Good Morning America”:

Zachary Kiesch (voiceover): “From the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, where scientists deliberately infected men and withheld treatments, to Henrietta Lacks, a young black mother of five who, in 1951, unknowingly had cells taken from her that biomedical research led to breakthrough cancer treatment.”

— MSNBC’s “The Reidout”:

Joy Reid: “And then the other piece is, when it comes, particularly in our community, black people, they might be like, I don’t trust science, the science. We — Tuskegee experiments, etc. There’s just not a lot of trust. And it was developed during the Trump era.”

Yes, because black people have a long track record of trusting the government …

A New York Times/WCBS-TV poll found that 70% of African Americans believed that “the government deliberately makes sure that drugs are easily available in poor black neighborhoods to harm black people.”

A CNN/Essence poll found that 88% of African Americans think the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. was part of a “larger plot.”

A survey of more than 1,000 black church members by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference showed that 35% believed that AIDS was a form of genocide, and another 30% were unsure.

Although vaccines are one of Western medicine’s greatest inventions, I think people should be free to refuse to take the COVID vaccine for any reason, such as, off the top of my head, they’re young and healthy.

But liberals don’t! Anti-vaxxers are one of the media’s most despised groups — provided they’re affluent white women.

When people like Jennifer Biel and Jenny McCarthy opposed mandatory vaccinations, they were universally reviled for hawking scientific nonsense. Los Angeles Times: “Jenny McCarthy: anti-vaxxer, public menace.” The New York Times headline: “When Did We Start Taking Famous People Seriously?” Even “Saturday Night Live” ridiculed McCarthy for her anti-vaccine stance.

But now that it’s African Americans who are reluctant to take the COVID vaccine, they’re treated like children. Who can blame them? It’s because of Tuskegee and Henrietta Lacks!

I know about Tuskegee, but what did the bad white doctors do to Henrietta Lacks? Answer: Johns Hopkins Medical School provided this poor black woman with the most advanced treatment available for her aggressive cervical cancer — gratis.

Her rapidly reproducing tumor cells were then studied around the globe, advancing cancer research by leaps and bounds. But apparently, it was a violation of Mrs. Lacks’ “black body” for her cancer cells to be used to benefit mankind. Maybe she wanted to display them on her mantle!

But the runaway winner for patronizing black people is … director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci! This media darling recently announced: “So, the first thing you might want to say to my African American brothers and sisters is that the vaccine that you’re going to be taking was developed by an African American woman. And that is just a fact.”

Wha …? So far, we’ve got vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, and soon may have one from AstraZeneca.

Pfizer’s CEO is a Greek businessman. The company has no black women in its executive leadership.

Moderna’s chief executive is Frenchman Stephane Bancel. The president of the company is the translucently white Dr. Stephen Hoge.

AstraZeneca hasn’t had its vaccine approved yet, but it’s a British-Swedish company, and the chief executive is Frenchman Pascal Soriot.

Each one of these companies had hundreds of people working on a vaccine, so who’s the “African American woman” who single-handedly “developed” it?

She’s a government bureaucrat with the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Kizzmekia Corbett. The NIH, you see, “worked with” Moderna during the vaccine approval process. Corbett made the invaluable contribution of accusing doctors of allowing black people to die of COVID, calling the pandemic a black “genocide” and condemning “systematic oppression” of black people. Among the oppressors was one … Anthony Fauci, whom she directed to “check” his “privilege.”

How could we ever have come up with a vaccine without her?

First, it was racist not to put black Americans at the head of the line for the vaccine. Once again, black people have to go to the back of the bus!

Then the CDC decided minorities would get it first, before the elderly. True, those over 70 make up the lion’s share of COVID deaths, but they’re mostly white, so screw them. Oh wait — black people are getting the vaccine first? You see! They’re using us as guinea pigs!

Just tell me when black people get the vaccine, so I’ll know what the explanation is.

This Weeks Ann Coulter Op-ed: Have a Historically Accurate Thanksgiving!


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 25, 2020 2:30 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Have a Historically Accurate Thanksgiving!

Source: AP Photo/Stephan Savoia  

Trending

As every public school child knows, the first Thanksgiving took place in 1621, when our Pilgrim forefathers took a break from slaughtering Peaceful, Environmentally Friendly, Indigenous Peoples to invite them to dinner in order to infect them with smallpox, before embarking on their mission to fry the planet so that the world would end on Jan. 22, 2031. (Copyright: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)

Consider this description of the Pilgrims’ treatment of the Indigenous peoples:

“They were the worst of conquerors. Inordinate pride, the lust of blood and dominion, were the mainsprings of their warfare; and their victories were strained with every excess of savage passion.”

Except that’s not a description of the Pilgrims’ treatment of Indigenous peoples. It’s a description of some Indigenous people’s treatment of other Indigenous peoples, written by the late Francis Parkman, Harvard professor and the world’s foremost Indian scholar.

The Wampanoag, who joined the Pilgrims at the first Thanksgiving, had a lot to celebrate. Contrary to Hollywood’s American-hating rendition of “Pocahontas,” in which the Indians feared the “White Demons,” the Wampanoag were thrilled with their well-armed white allies, who helped them repel the hated Iroquois and Narragansett.

The whole reason the Wampanoag were clustered so close to the coast where the Pilgrims encountered them was that the Iroquois had “pursued them with an inveterate enmity. Some (Wampanoag) paid yearly tribute to their tyrants, while others were still subject to their inroads, flying in terror at the sound of the Mohawk war-cry.”

Parkman describes a typical Iroquois celebration following one of their attacks on their fellow “Native Americans” (an absurd term, inasmuch as no Indians were “native” to America because there was no “America” until white Europeans got here and created it):

“(M)en, women and children, yelling like fiends let loose, swarmed out of the narrow portal, to visit upon the captives a foretaste of the deadlier torments in store for them … (W)ith brandished torch and firebrand, the frenzied multitude closed around their victim. The pen shrinks to write, the heart sickens to conceive, the fierceness of (the captive’s) agony … The work was done, the blackened trunk was flung to the dogs, and, with clamorous shouts and hootings, the murderers sought to drive away the spirit of their victim.”

The Iroquois “reckoned these barbarities among their most exquisite enjoyments.”

Here’s another charming Iroquois practice:

After killing “a sufficient number of captives,” Parkman says, the Iroquois “spared the lives of the remainder, and adopted them as members of their confederated tribes, separating wives from husbands, and children from parents, and distributing them among different villages, in order that old ties and associations might be more completely broken up.”

And for the feminists: The Iroquois humiliated conquered tribes by making the men take women’s names.

Because of the Iroquois’ barbaric attacks, by the time the Pilgrims arrived, “Northern New Hampshire, the whole of Vermont, and Western Massachusetts had no human tenants but the roving hunter or prowling warrior.”

Hollywood’s “White Demons” were “White Saviors” to the Wampanoag.

The Pilgrims also had much to be thankful for on that first Thanksgiving. Of the approximately 100 passengers on the Mayflower, only half survived the first winter, felled by scurvy, malnutrition and the bitter cold. And the ones who made it did so largely thanks to the friendly Wampanoag, who shared their food with the Europeans and taught them how to till the land.

The woke version of American Indians makes them just another victim group, like the transgenders. Their honor and bravery is drained from the PC stories. To better smear our country, Indians have to be made big, fat losers.

The truth told by Parkman shows the savagery and superstition, but also the courage and honor of American Indians. The Hurons, for example, “held it disgraceful to turn from the face of an enemy,” and even when being tortured alive, a Huron would raise his voice in “scorn and defiance.”

Doesn’t anyone wonder why we name our sports teams and military armaments after Indians? We don’t name them after weaklings or whiners. Americans love to boast of having Indian blood, real or imagined — and not just to score a professorship at Harvard like Elizabeth Warren.

Real Americans honor Indians and also honor the courageous European settlers who brought Christian civilization to a continent, a miraculous union that we celebrate on this wonderful holiday.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Without President Trump, On Whom Will The Left Blame Their Failures?


Without President Trump, On Whom Will The Left Blame Their Failures?

There is honor among thieves. There has to be, if they are to be successful. Even lawbreakers require some sort of law, both in reality, where organized crime requires organization, and in fiction, where it is a standard trope that the Guild of Assassins (or whatever) has rules. The wicked still need some virtue to be effective, although it must be severed from the whole of virtue.

This explains a lot about politics. The rules and organization necessary for societal or group survival and success are not the same as justice; indeed, they may be nothing more than a predatory morality that enables cooperation in oppression.

Governments often begin as the biggest band of brigands around, and many never rise much beyond that. As Augustine put it in “The City of God,” “Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies?” He illustrated this point with the tale of a captured pirate who told Alexander the Great that the difference between piracy and Alexander’s empire was only of scale.

Adherence to the norms and manners of the ruling class does not assure personal virtue or political justice. This is obvious to those on the outside, but members (and aspiring members and hangers-on) of the ruling class have an interest in not seeing it. This willful blindness also explains a lot about the recent election.

The Biden campaign told us that the election was about the soul of the nation. A multitude of Democrats, media figures, and Never-Trump leftovers told us that it was about restoring decency to the White House. Even now, in apparent victory, they remain appalled that anyone voted for President Trump, let alone more than 70 million Americans—don’t we know how indecent he is? But it is not that we think Trump is decent, it is that we doubt that his opponents are.

We suspect that by decency they mean nothing more than the professional civility of the educated class, and we know that true decency is more than civility. It is certainly more than not being Donald Trump.

This is not to say that civility does not matter. Conservatives know that manners matter. Manners can force us to be restrained, to at least make a show of treating political opponents with respect, and by inculcating these habits, they can make us better.

But manners can also be weaponized. They can become tools of exclusion that keep those with different beliefs and backgrounds out. They can conceal great wickedness behind a pleasing mask.

There is a persistent temptation to focus on the superficial form of decency (as manifest in politeness) over the substance of virtue. So we are treated to lectures on decency from men who have cheated on a succession of wives or traded in the wife of their youth for a young research assistant—and from a presumptive vice president who slept her way into politics.

Nor is such wickedness confined to personal sins; it extends throughout political positions. Consider the Democratic Party’s fanatical support for abortion. There is nothing decent about tearing a baby limb from limb and displaying her still-beating heart on a tray—if decency encompasses support for unrestricted, taxpayer-funded late-term abortion, then to hell with decency and the decent.

Likewise, the bipartisan establishment embrace of China is indecent, unless decency merely means civility in the service of ruling-class interests. There is nothing decent about closer bonds with the Chinese Communist Party and the genocidal totalitarian slave state that it runs. All the civility and cheap consumer goods in the world cannot wash away that guilt.

The pretense of decency also asks us to ignore that our ruling class is neither civil nor trustworthy. The same people who spent years suggesting that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election are now outraged that he has not conceded this one. And remember when Senate Democrats accused Brett Kavanaugh of being a high-school gang-rape mastermind?

Remember when the media tried to destroy a high school student for smiling awkwardly while wearing a Trump hat? Remember when they told you the most expensive riots in American history were mostly peaceful? Remember all the times they’ve called you and your friends and family ignorant, racist bigots—as epitomized by Hillary Clinton’s consigning you to an irredeemable basket of deplorables?

The response to this litany of leftist indecency is predictable—what about this and that and the other thing Trump did and said? Well, what about them? People who have concluded that our leaders are corrupt and indecent will not support them just because Trump is also indecent.

Furthermore, Trump will soon be out of office, while our elites will remain in their positions in media, academia, entertainment, business and government. Without President Trump, what excuse will they then have for their failures of virtue and justice?

Trump leaving office will not make America more decent if it just returns power to those whose garb of civility covers corrupt hearts. What is needed is not further recriminations over Trump, but a commitment to seek justice and the common good. This renewal must be led by those who have the power to shape institutions and culture.

I don’t say this to deny the need for all of us to repent of our sins. I merely state the obvious, which is that those with the power to shape the culture bear the most responsibility for it. If we are as indecent a nation as they say, then perhaps the likes of New York Times writers, Ivy League professors and pop stars should spend less time lecturing Trump voters and more time in sackcloth and ashes.

Nathanael Blake is a Senior Contributor at The Federalist. He has a PhD in political theory. He lives in Missouri.
Photo Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Gee, Why Can’t Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 18, 2020 4:00 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Gee, Why Can't Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?

Source: AP Photo/Harvey Georges

Trending

In 1980, Democratic President Jimmy Carter lost in a landslide to Ronald Reagan, 489-49 in the Electoral College. So naturally, Democrats concluded that Reagan had committed treason in order to steal the election, to wit: His campaign had conspired with Iranian ayatollahs to prevent 52 American hostages from being released until after the election.

And who can blame them? Carter’s economic policies had produced a 21% interest rate, a 17% mortgage rate and a 15% inflation rate in the coveted “hat trick” of presidential incompetence. His brilliant strategic ploy of abandoning the Shah of Iran had led to a 154% spike in oil prices and Islamic lunatics seizing our embassy and holding Americans hostage in Tehran, where they remained for 444 days, until Carter was safely removed from office.

With all that going for them — plus that old Mondale magic –Democrats were dumbstruck that they lost the 1980 election. What other than a dirty trick could explain it?

The Democrats’ theory was that a month before the election, members of Reagan’s campaign had clandestinely met with representatives of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Paris and offered to sell him weapons in exchange for a promise not to release the hostages, thus denying Carter a huge election eve triumph.

In other words, liberals believed the Islamo-fascist cutthroats who had been toying with Carter like a cat with a ball of yarn wanted Carter replaced by someone stronger, like Reagan. How else to explain the fact that, minutes after Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released?

A more plausible theory was given in a Jeff MacNelly cartoon showing Khomeini reading a telegram aloud: “It’s from Ronald Reagan. It must be about one of the Americans in the Den of Spies, but I don’t recognize the name. It says ‘Remember Hiroshima.'”

The lunatics behind the “October Surprise” conspiracy theory might have spent their days in obscurity, talking to super-computers of the future — as one theorist claimed she did — except that, after a decade of periodic eruptions in disreputable publications like The New York Times (Flora Lewis, August 1987), The Nation (Christopher Hitchens, July 1987), and Playboy magazine (September 1988), the Times began flogging the story in 1991, beginning with a lengthy op-ed by Columbia University professor Gary Sick.

Sick had been President Carter’s principal aide on Iran during the hostage crisis, which would be like being FDR’s chief adviser on “sneak attacks” in December 1941. Columbia hired Sick as a professor, apparently unable to find Carter’s aide in charge of gas prices.

Soon, other news outlets such as PBS’s “Frontline” and ABC’s “Nightline” began treating crazies howling at the moon as if they were serious intel sources. Carter himself called for a “blue-ribbon” commission to investigate, saying, “it’s almost nauseating to think that this could be true.” (Which is ironic because that was my reaction, word for word, upon learning that Carter had been elected president.)

The theory that Reagan had arranged to keep our hostages in captivity until after the election was originally hatched by Lyndon LaRouche, the second-most ridiculous person named “Lyndon” to ever run for president.

One of the key American “witnesses” to the conspiracy — and Hitchens’ main source — was paranormal expert Barbara Honegger, who said she heard voices from the future and that satellites were directed to part the clouds during Reagan’s inauguration so that the sun would shine only on him. Years later, Honegger promoted the theory that clocks stopped at the Pentagon at 9:32 a.m. on 9/11, proving that the plane could not have hit at 9:37.

So she was a credible source.

Another major player was fake CIA agent Richard Brenneke, who was about to be fired from his lucrative job with a left-wing think tank for failing to substantiate a different conspiracy theory: that Vice President Bush was running an Israeli-backed drugs-for-arms operation in Central America. To stave off his firing, Brenneke suddenly remembered that not only had he heard of the October Surprise, he had been there! A LaRouchite confirmed that he had seen Brenneke at the meeting — something Brenneke himself had not remembered until that very moment.

One by one, each of the Reagan campaign aides allegedly at the imaginary Paris meeting had their precise locations proved for nearly every minute of the crucial dates of Oct. 17-19, when the sources claimed the secret meeting had taken place.

Then it turned out Brenneke wasn’t at the nonexistent meeting, either. Signed credit card receipts proved he was at a Star Trek convention in Seattle on Oct. 17-19. Just kidding! It was a martial-arts tournament.

These were among the nuts behind the “October surprise” fable pushed by the major media and the Democratic Party for more than a decade after Reagan’s trouncing of Carter in 1980. Democratic-led congressional committees spent millions of dollars investigating the nutzo conspiracy theory, eventually concluding there was nothing to it, which I could have told them for say, $300,000.

At the conclusion of the House’s investigation, Rep. Lee Hamilton, the House Democrat who had chaired the October Surprise Task Force, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times, saying: “The task force report concluded there was virtually no credible evidence to support the accusations.”

On the same day, the Times published a rebuttal op-ed by Gary Sick.

And that, kids, is how you concede a presidential election with grace and dignity.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Democrats’ Guide to Losing Gracefully


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 11, 2020 2:15 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Democrats' Guide to Losing Gracefully

Source: AP Photo/Richard Drew  

Trending

Here are the times Democrats have conceded a presidential election with grace and dignity:

OK, now on to my column.

I hope someone is recording the media’s demands that Trump supporters ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION! inasmuch as the Democrats refuse to accept the results of any presidential election they lose, unless it’s a landslide, and sometimes even then.

After George W. Bush won the 2000 election — despite the media depressing Bush turnout in Florida by calling the state for Gore when polls were still open in the conservative panhandle — Gore contested the election until Dec. 13, the day after the Supreme Court called off the endless recounts (in only certain Florida counties) demanded by Gore.

The night of the court’s ruling, Laurence Tribe, the Harvard law professor who’d argued one of Gore’s cases before the court, and Ed Rendell, general chairman of the Democratic National Committee, went on TV and said it was time for Gore to concede.

Both were immediately attacked by their fellow Democrats and forced to retract their statements. Gore’s deputy campaign manager, Mark Fabiani, for example, told The New York Times that Rendell “seems to be more interested in getting his mug on TV than in loyalty.”

The next day, Gore conceded, telling his supporters he had “congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States,” adding, “while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it.”

But that still wasn’t the end of it! Weeks later, the Congressional Black Caucus tried to prevent congressional certification of the Electoral College for Bush, raising objection after objection on the House floor.

Over the course of the next year, the Florida ballots were painstakingly recounted by an independent investigative firm at a cost of nearly a million dollars, paid for by the same media outlets currently telling you to shut up and accept the results — including The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post and the Associated Press, along with several others.

The year-long, million-dollar recount led to this shocking conclusion: Bush still won. As the Times put it, contrary to the claims of Gore partisans, “the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore.”

And yet, to this day, Democrats claim Bush was “selected, not elected,” as so wittily put by Hillary Clinton.

Hillary was still harping on Bush’s stolen election when she ran for president in the 2008 cycle. At a 2007 primary presidential debate, she delighted the Democratic audience by remarking, “Well, I think it is a problem that Bush was elected in 2000. (APPLAUSE) I actually thought somebody else was elected in that election, but … (APPLAUSE).”

At a subsequent primary debate in 2008, Hillary said that she and President Clinton had been making great progress “until, unfortunately, the Supreme Court handed the presidency to George Bush.”

In 2006, Michael Kinsley claimed in The New York Times that the 2000 election was “actually stolen.”

And so on.

When Bush was reelected in 2004, Democrats again refused to accept the results of the election, and again attempted to block Congress’ counting of electoral votes, this time with the connivance of Sen. Barbara Boxer.

Their smoking gun? The election results in Ohio didn’t match the exit polls! If that’s not enough proof for you, and I can’t imagine why it wouldn’t be, the voting machines were manufactured by Diebold, and Diebold’s CEO was a Bush supporter. Yes, apparently, the voting machines in Ohio were rigged to flip votes from Kerry to Bush.

This crackpot theory was pushed assiduously by Vanity Fair (Michael Shnayerson in the April 2004 issue, and Christopher Hitchens in the March 2005 issue), Rolling Stone magazine (Robert F. Kennedy Jr., June 15, 2006), and in books: John Conyers’ “What Went Wrong in Ohio” — introduction by Gore Vidal — and “Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?” by Steven F. Freeman and Joel Bleifuss. (You’ll have to read it to find out!)

I haven’t even mentioned the craziest of the Democrat media complex’s attacks on the results of an election: Reagan’s 489-49 electoral landslide against Jimmy Carter in 1980. (Stay tuned!)

Election results, according to Democrats:

— 1960: Kennedy wins a razor-thin victory after a surprisingly high turnout of dead voters in Texas and Illinois — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1964: Landslide election for Lyndon Johnson — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1968: Nixon won with his racist (and mythical) “Southern strategy.”

— 1972: Nixon landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1976: Carter won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1980: Reagan won by traitorously colluding with Iran to prevent the release of American hostages before the election!

— 1984: Reagan landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1988: Bush 41 won in a landslide because of his racist Willie Horton ads.

— 1992: Clinton won with 43% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1996: Clinton won with 49% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2000: Bush 43 was “selected, not elected” after the Supreme Court stole it for him.

— 2004: Bush won because of Diebold hacking the voting machines in Ohio.

— 2008: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2012: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2016: Trump won after colluding with Russia to persuade them to purchase $200,000 in Facebook ads.

If that’s how we’re supposed to “accept the results of the election,” then WOW — game on!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: What Now?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 04, 2020 5:33 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

What Now?

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Trending

This may be the strangest election in history in that there is no evidence that any sizable group of people want Biden for president.

It’s his fourth time running for that office. This year, Biden lost three primaries in a row, coming in fourth in the Iowa caucus, fifth in New Hampshire a distant second in Nevada. At the end of February, he had accumulated a paltry 14 delegates — compared to 45 for Bernie Sanders and 26 for Pete Buttigieg.

Then James Clyburn said, Vote for Biden and African Americans in South Carolina voted for Biden. (Although the black vote is NOT monolithic, they decided to make an exception this one time and vote monolithically.)

Democrats never looked back.

Biden has nothing going for him — no constituency, no fanatical supporters, just a career in politics that stretches back 50 years.

Bill Clinton had Southern Democrats and baby boomers. Gore had the global warming zealots. George Bush had conservative Christians and Texans. Even Hillary had fanatical supporters. Remember the PUMAs (Party Unity My A$$)? How about the weeping loons at the Javits Center on election night 2016?

Will anyone weep that Biden lost? No, they’ll weep because Trump won. Yes, much of Trump’s vote hated Hillary, but surely at least 70 percent of them actually supported Trump. Ninety-nine percent of Biden’s vote is: “I Hate Trump.”

How did Joe Biden become the nominee? Because he was the candidate most acceptable to black people. Why? Because he was Obama’s vice president. There’s a coalition built on rock.

Combine the empty suit from Delaware with Kamala Harris, who was polling at about two percent among Democrats before she dropped out of the primaries. Harris added nothing to the ticket — except Biden’s ridiculously narrow, self-imposed requirement that his vice president be a woman of color.

Unfortunately for him, there just aren’t a lot of massively impressive black women who are elected Democrats right now. Barbara Jordan is dead. Shirley Chisholm is dead. Either of them would have been chosen over Kamala.

When Harris’ campaign crashed and burned, I thought I’d embarrassed myself by predicting she would be the Democrats’ 2020 presidential nominee back in 2016 before I’d ever heard her speak — before she’d even won her Senate race.

But on this, I was right: She strokes all the media’s erogenous zones.

— She’s got the Hollywood glamour!

Why, I think she’s even better looking than Michelle Obama! Not as gorgeous as Beyonce, but beauty like THAT only happens once a century.

(Harris will be in a dozen Vogue fashion shoots.)

— She’s so cool!

She wears sneakers, and cited Tupac as the “best rapper alive.” (Wait, what? Oh, we didn’t know Tupac was murdered in Las Vegas 20 years ago, either.)

— She’s presentable in Hollywood and the Hamptons.

Poor Al Sharpton has been lurking around for 30 years, but Kamala is someone we can invite to our apartments.

Harris isn’t a huge hit with the Democratic base. She’s a hit with the people who make decisions for the party. My prediction is redeemed.

If voters had been forced to focus on Harris, Trump would’ve won in a landslide. But this election was entirely a referendum on Trump. It’s irrelevant who he’s running against. Maybe if they had dug up Hitler to run against him other issues would have come up, but even that’s not a sure thing.

Harris sent out a tweet the day before the election saying, “There’s a big difference between equality and equity,” along with a video demanding that “we all end up at the same place.”

Is anyone listening? She’s not saying everyone should have an equal opportunity, but that everyone should get the same stuff.

Hello? Suburban women? Harris wants to move poor people next door to you whether they can afford the house or not. It’s as if Harris was running a test: Do people even care what we’re running on?

Democrats could come out for vivisection of little children. No one cares! A significant share of the electorate was voting for Anyone But Trump.

The media had whipped enough of the population into such a blind Trump hatred that the Democrats’ vetting process for Biden was: “What’s your name? OK, you’ll do.”

What happens if this bland, place-holding figurehead is sworn in as president? Assume on Jan 20th, Trump’s gone. Now what?

The media can’t blame the next black man killed by cops on Trump and they can’t turn off the coronavirus panic. Does the virus suddenly go away because someone new is in the White House? The toughest job for the media is going to be coming up with an excuse to put Trump on the front page once he’s gone.

Have they thought about what happens next?

My Own Two Cents November 3, 2020


Morning, Election Day, November 3, 2020

I have kept silent so far in the run up to this mess of an election. I have added comments, but I have not stopped to express my thoughts about this critical election. Jesus is my Lord and Savior, so any comments I give will be consistent with that testimony, so I do not dishonor Him.

Considering all we know about Joe Biden, cutting away “political speak” from all parties, what’s left is seriously concerning. Our nation is indeed on the precipice of remaining the country God created for Himself and the free spreading of the Gospel, or forcibly changed into a European style Socialist/Marxist governance.

Of all the examples I could give, none is more glaring than Joe Biden himself. Joe Biden has always been the one that gets opposing politicians to votes the way Joe’s leaders desire. You do not need to be a medical professional to see how compromised his mental acuity (dementia) has become. I have a 94 year old dad still living. I know what I am talking about.

I have worked with Seniors for over 30 years. Dementia is a slow advancing mental condition that cannot be stopped or reversed. For many (like my dad) dementia produces hallucinations, diminished cognitive thought processes and serious mood swings.

Therefore, my number one concern about a Joe Biden Presidency is that it will be a Presidency by COMMITTEE. All COMMITTEE governance is COMMUNISM. Considering the intense radical thoughts, ideas, and goals of the radical Left he has surrounded him, moderate does not describe.

Another thing. What does it say about a political party that produces so much terrorism and destruction that businesspeople have to spend thousands of dollars protecting, and boarding up their businesses in anticipation of extreme violence should that party not get their way in this election?

What does it say about that same political party that they have to buy the illegal votes of people they have encouraged to enter our country illegally? Isn’t that encouraging foreign interference in our elections?

I will stop right there. You all are too intelligent for me, or anyone to have to detail any more.

If you have not voted, please do. Whatever you can do morally, legally, and honest to get others do vote, please take the time to do so.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: ‘Ask Not What Your Country Is’: The Biden Inaugural Address


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 28, 2020 6:20 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

'Ask Not What Your Country Is': The Biden Inaugural Address

Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster  

Trending

I’m not at liberty to reveal my sources, but I have obtained a draft of President Joe Biden’s inaugural address. (Trump, unfortunately, won’t be there to hear it. He will be holding a competing rally at RFK Stadium, also starting at 12 noon on Jan. 20.)

EXCLUSIVE CONTENT! MUST CREDIT COULTER!

Ladies and gentlemen, members of the fairer sex, the unfair sex, the transgenders, queers, what have you.

Women and gentlemen!

I’ve known women — my wife, my sister — no, that’s my wife! I mean my wife over here. The fat one.

I mean: The fact is, they switched on me!

Anyway, standing here today on the steps of the capitol of Wilmington — I should say, standing here today on the steps of the Capitol in the state of Washington, as we do every year, we have this peaceful transfer of power — I should say, every four years.

Which is a Big F—ing Deal! I used to say that to Barack all the time.

I see him out there! He’s the articulate, bright and clean one.

As I was coming over here on this brisk June day, I started thinking, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? My ancestors, Welsh coal miners, would come up after 12 hours underground and play cricket for hours. Were they not smart? Were they not strong, mate?

And so, as I look out at this wonderful crowd — what’s that from the fella in the back? You say I’m not Welsh and my father was a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington?

Listen, you lying dog-faced pony soldier — I have a much higher I.Q. than you do! I went to law school on a full academic scholarship and ended up in the top half of my class. I got three degrees in college and was voted the “outstanding student” in the political science department.

What I mean to say is that it was a financial scholarship, I wasn’t voted the “outstanding student,” and I was only in the top half of the bottom 10 students.

No, I haven’t taken an I.Q. test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man. That is like saying you — did you take a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not? What do you think? Are you a junkie?

Look, folks, kids today have advantages I didn’t have. Their parents play the radio, make sure they have the record player on at night. My parents couldn’t play the record player. They were in the mines.

And I remember my pop, a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington, telling me in 1962, as I was going off to work at an African American swimming pool — we called them “African Americans” back then — and we saw two guys kissing each other. He said to me: “Joey, they love each other.”

I shouldn’t say it. I’m going to say something I probably shouldn’t say …

Anyway, today, I stand before you to announce my candidacy for president of the United States!

Wait — I won! That’s a Big F—ing Deal, as I used to say to Barack.

Oh look! Here’s the guy from Burisma! Good to see you, man! Look, the Biden administration will be monitoring Kiev prosecutors like you’ve never seen before. Clean government in Ukraine will be the No. 1 priority of my administration. When I’m president, this country won’t be cozying up to the totalitarian regimes of Poland and Hungary. It’s gonna stop with us.

I shouldn’t say it. I’m going to say something I probably shouldn’t say …

Anyway, on this crisp September day, I vow to you we’ll not only have a Green New Deal, but a Purple New Deal, a Yellow New Deal, a LBGTQXYZ New Deal — a whole rainbow of New Deals!

You have my word as a Biden, folks.

Anyway, as I stand here in the rotunda — I mean the steps of the Capitol — just as the great Democratic president Franklin Delano … uh, I should say, as FDR did — well, he wasn’t standing because he couldn’t stand.

And to all of you in wheelchairs, you don’t need to stand either! Oh, God love you! What am I talking about? I’ll tell you what, we’re making everybody else stand up, though. Let’s give the wheelchair-bound a big round of applause!

Look folks, as FDR said, we hold these truths to be self-evident … You bet and corn pop. Pop goes the weasel! And I’m your pop, as I always say to Hunter. I’m your pop, but I’m not a weasel, pal.

As we celebrate this peaceful transition — oh, I see Adam Schiff out in the crowd! As I always say, he reminds me of my son, Hunter.

Whoa — I almost forgot, let’s give a big hand to my vice president … Anita Hill!

What am I talking about? Anita ain’t black!

Everybody give a big hand to my vice president … Cardi B!

Oh sorry, buddy — my vice president, Al Sharpton!

But I promise you, Cardi and Anita and Al and Stacey and Jesse will all have positions in my Cabinet.

That’s cabinet, not cabin, folks. Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” and, as she always said: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” I know this because I got three degrees in college and was voted the “outstanding student” in the political science department.

I should say, I wasn’t actually voted the “outstanding student,” but it was an honor just to be nominated.

Anyway, I never served with John F. Kennedy — but he was no Dan Quayle! He said, “Ask your country to do things for you. Ask or not! The choice is yours.”

I’m pro-choice, although I’m personally opposed. But the important thing is, it’s your choice!

And so as I stand here today, asking for your vote — hold on! — you gave me your vote! That’s why I’m here, man!

This is a Big F—ing Deal, as I used to always say to Barack. Good night and God bless. Wear a mask!

Image

FOUND IN MY INBOX


Ann Coulter OPED: Simple Ideas to Ensure a Trump Victory


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 16, 2020 5:30 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Simple Ideas to Ensure a Trump Victory

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci  

Trending

MEMO TO HIS EXCELLENCY, PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:

1) Extend Daylight Saving Time.

COVID, the shutdown, riots, looting, wildfires — we’re depressed enough. Do one small favor for the nation in 2020 by giving us another hour of sunlight. The next president can punish us again. (But why would we ever want to lose an hour of daylight in the afternoon? Why? Why? Why?)

During World War II, the long-suffering Britons left their clocks one hour ahead at the end of summer, then added an extra hour ahead when spring came along again. You’ve compared the Wuhan flu to war. Steal this great wartime idea from Britain!

2) Try To Go Seven Weeks Without Being a Fanboy to the Liberal Media.

Ordinary, middle-class people would never have made the mistake of talking to Bob Woodward. Only a massively insecure social climber would say: “OMG! OMG! It’s Bob Woodward!!!”

Honey, guess who I’m talking to? A little reporter by the name of … BOB WOODWARD!

Woodward’s job is to get people to tell him what they don’t want to tell him. It sounds like he didn’t even have to break a sweat with you.

TRUMP: How about this letter from Kim Jong Un? Pretty cool, huh? You see the way he says “your excellency.” You know who he’s talking about, right? That’s me! Oh and by the way, I printed up a laminated copy for you.

WOODWARD: Really? I can keep this? I’m allowed to take it with me? Thank you, kind sir, thank you!

Working-class people are busting their butts to keep you in office, while you go off and blather a lot of nonsense to Woodward to feed your ego months before the election.

3) Round Up Antifa Criminals, Jail and Prosecute Them.

As badass as your “LAW & ORDER” tweets have been, they don’t seem to have done the job. You can’t keep warning voters about widespread lawlessness if Biden is elected president when there’s already widespread lawlessness and you’re the president. Right now. That’s you. (And congratulations on that again, your excellency.)

4) Open the Country, Close the Border.

Remember how there was going to be a two-week shutdown to “flatten the curve”? Guess what? We’ve flattened it!

It’s been almost six months of everyone staying home, socially distancing and wearing masks. COVID isn’t lurking out there like a back-alley rapist ready to pounce. There aren’t a lot of human carriers left.

In early May, about a third of all COVID deaths in the nation were in New York. But by now, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has already killed off everyone who was ever going to die of it. Throughout April there were more than 500 deaths a day in New York City alone. In the last seven days, a total of 44 people died of COVID in the entire state.

Other states have passed through their much milder peaks. On Monday of this week, more than 2,000 Americans died of cancer, another 2,000 died of heart disease and, according to The Not-Hysterical-At-All New York Times, 450 died of COVID. Things have gotten so good that the Times’ creepy COVID obituaries are forced to feature 101-year-olds dying from “complications of COVID-19.”

The six-month nationwide shutdown has largely cleared COVID from the body politic. Now the main danger is if we start importing other countries’ body politics.

5) Denounce the Pedo Film That’s All the Rage With Our Elites.

The exact same people who been freaking out about Confederate statues have suddenly became oh-so-bored sophisticates about the Netflix pedophilia movie “Cuties.”

Movie shows little girls writhing on the floor in soaking wet panties, trying to seduce their relatives, watching porn, discussing oral sex, dancing sexually for strangers as the camera zooms in on an 11-year-old’s derriere …

Liberals: These uptight conservatives are freaking out about a film. Yawn.

Hey, there’s a statue to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee that’s been standing in a public park for the past century.

Liberals: BURN IT DOWN! DECAPITATE IT! GET THIS MONSTROSITY OUT OF MY SIGHT! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Unfortunately, the left’s studied complacency about a pedo movie seems to be petering out. One tweet from you could get them going again.

6) Fire Jared and Ivanka.

You won by 80,000 votes across three states, mostly cast by non-college-educated Americans who’ve been betrayed by both parties for 40 years. They didn’t want tax cuts — they don’t have jobs. They wanted manufacturing back, safe neighborhoods, and (like your neighbors on Fifth Avenue and in Palm Beach) schools that aren’t overwhelmed with Somalis or Mexicans.

Thanks to the political acumen of your whiz-kid son-in-law, you gave them tax cuts, “criminal justice reform” (i.e. you released criminals) and a moved embassy. These are people who voted Obama, Obama, Trump. You gave them another Bush.

Maybe Jared is right about the MAGA base having “no place else to go,” and it was a shrewd political move to betray them. But it wouldn’t take a lot of former-Trumpers to stay home for you to lose.

To convince your voters that, in a second term, you really will get around to the promises you made in 2016 — about immigration, bringing manufacturing home and ending pointless wars — you have to fire your amnesty-supporting, pro-criminal, Israel-obsessed son-in-law.

We want to see moving trucks.

ANN COULTER OPED: Where’s ‘The Talk’ When We Need It?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 02, 2020 4:55 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Where’s ‘The Talk’ When We Need It?

Source: AP Photo/Noah Berger

Trending

For many years now, we’ve gotten mountains of press about “The Talk,” the rite of passage lecture that black parents feel obliged to give their sons so that they won’t end up getting shot by the police. Apparently, unlike white people who are always fighting with cops and resisting arrest, young black men must be purer than Caesar’s wife.

The main points of “The Talk,” according to Wikipedia, are the following:

— Pulling over your vehicle right away

— Keeping hands visible on the steering wheel and not making sudden moves

— Not reaching for items in your wallet or glove compartment without informing the law enforcement officer first

— Being as polite as possible, using “Yes sir, officer”

— Not arguing, even if you are right

Having seen video footage of the arrests of George Floyd (fighting with cops), Rayshard Brooks (fighting with cops) and Jacob Blake (fighting with cops), it looks like at least some black men in America could use a refresher course on “The Talk.”

What we need is a BLM-administered version of “The Talk,” requiring a notarized certificate of completion, acknowledging that the participants: 1) took the course, 2) understood it and 3) pledge to act in accordance with it.

True, it’s unfair that white people are allowed free rein to curse cops, lunge at them with knives and reach into a car as the police are yelling at them not to move. White people get to play fun “Surprise!” games with the police: I could be reaching for a glock — or it could be a strawberry push-pop! You’ll just have to wait and see, officer. 

A Slate article about “The Talk” complained that white people protesting Michigan’s lockdown “could arrive, armed and screaming, in government buildings and be afforded unending patience by law enforcement.”

Of course, it’s generally not against the law (in an open carry state) either to be armed or to scream. Some Black Lives Matter protesters have even been known to scream.

This is despite the media’s firm conviction that any armed white man is, ipso facto, a marauding racist. Reporting on an anti-Obamacare rally in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2009, MSNBC zoomed in on guns slung on a man’s body, as Contessa Brewer ominously warned: “A man at a pro-health care reform rally … wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip … there are questions about whether this has racial overtones … white people showing up with guns.”

There was a reason MSNBC never showed the man’s face: He was African American. And yet, he wasn’t arrested or harassed — other than by MSNBC.

The only places where white privilege is truly on display are lily-white, left-wing redoubts like Seattle, Kenosha, Wisconsin, and Portland, Oregon. The latter was recently described by the New York Times as “one of the whitest big cities in America.” In these pale cities, white anarchists are permitted to commit arson, vandalism, assault and even murder with abandon.

Why no antifa activity in mostly black cities, like Baltimore, Ferguson, Missouri, or Chicago?

Evidently, these bad-ass antifa are too afraid to riot in any majority black cities. They claim to be destroying public and private property on behalf of their black brethren, but are terrified of being around actual black people.

White antifa have been rioting in Portland (super white!) for more than three months now. On the rare occasion when they get arrested, they’re immediately released, often bailed out with funds provided by white celebrities like Seth Rogen, Abbi Jacobson and Steve Carell.

Now that’s “white privilege.”

It’s such a wonderful, cost-free way to serve black people. Leftists won’t work to end the mass immigration that drives down black wages or to abandon trade deals that send their jobs out of the country. But they’ll fly the BLM flag and fight with police in overwhelmingly white cities.

Antifa is following the lead of their corporate allies. Every part of a Nike sneaker is made in a third-world country. It’s as if the top minds in the nation got together to solve the problem “How can we ensure that no American jobs are created to manufacture this shoe?”

Corporate titans would love to do something to help African Americans (like employ them, maybe?), but then they remember, WAIT! I HAVE MUTUAL FUNDS! So instead they smugly proclaim “Black Lives Matter,” run a commercial with Colin Kaepernick, and they’re done.

Antifa cretins are spoiling for a fight with police — but not near any large groups of black people. They could get hurt!

There’s been an all-out war on Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old who shot three antifa in Kenosha in what seems clearly to be self-defense, based on The New York Times’ reconstruction of events. Rittenhouse was in Kenosha to protect people and property from violence; he rendered first aid to the protesters; later ended up being chased by antifa goons, heard a gunshot behind him, nearly had his head beat in with a skateboard and was threatened with a gun.

The people he killed were: a convicted child molester and a convicted domestic violence repeat offender, both of whom had served time in prison. (It takes a lot to get prison time in America — especially if you’re white, right BLM?) The guy Rittenhouse shot in the arm had a firearms conviction and was coming at him with a gun.

But this was an all-white affair, so liberals had to look at other facts to assign blame/heroic status. Not irrelevant factors, like self-defense, reasonable fear or possibility of escape, but relevant factors like: Who was antifa and who was a Trump supporter? Rittenhouse: GUILTY!

With the verdict in, liberals have lost their minds about Rittenhouse. They tell outrageous lies about him, lionize the ex-cons he shot and aggressively censor anyone who takes his side. Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Sen. Chris Murphy called Rittenhouse a “white supremacist” and “white nationalist,” respectively (in non-congressionally immunized tweets, for any lawyers who might be interested). Meanwhile, for suggesting that Rittenhouse may be innocent, both Rittenhouse’s attorney and I have been suspended from Twitter.

Oh by the way, over the weekend, an hour away in Chicago, 54 people were shot; 10 are dead. Woke media: Everyone involved was black, right? No big deal.

Ann Coulter OPED: Are the Media Trying to Throw the Election to Trump?


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 26, 2020 5:26 PM

Are the Media Trying to Throw the Election to Trump?

Every day is a reenactment of my book, Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind. Trump does something stupid (or many things) and the media say, We can top that! Trump fumbles the ball, followed by the media throwing an interception, then Trump commits a personal foul, but the media blows the field goal, then Trump throws the ball out of bounds.

Does anyone want to win this election?

As the country burns, Trump (the president) sits in his bed sending out gratuitously bad-ass tweets … followed by utter spinelessness. He talks like he’s Yosemite Sam, then does nothing. This is the worst of everything. How about saying sweet nothings — then stunning them with force!

Trump claims he’s the antidote to the mass riots in cities across the country, but what powers will he have after being reelected that he doesn’t have right now, while he’s already president?

Our only alternative is the party that “embraces Black Lives Matter,” as The Washington Post admitted, calling Democrats’ cuddling up to BLM a “remarkable development in American politics, as a major party sought to associate itself fully with an emerging protest movement.”

So your choice is: a president who denounces riots, looting and violence in the streets, but does nothing, or a president who actively supports the people doing the riots, looting and violence in the streets.

And what can the media say? They denied the riots were even happening, then blamed “white supremacists” for the violence they said didn’t exist. (Is it the Boogaloo Boys or QAnon?) Now the media are calling the riots “peaceful protests” again, so I guess they know it’s their side doing the arson and destruction.

Democrats could wallop Trump if the media would just stop lying constantly.

FIVE Trumps spoke at the Republican Convention. You got anything to say about that, media? No, they’re too busy claiming “ethics” violations because Trump’s secretary of state spoke at the convention. That may have violated a norm! A norm, I tell you!

And the media’s No. 1 standby for any occasion is to repeat the lie that Trump called neo-Nazis “fine people.”

That one, they won’t give up. The neo-Nazi lie is even crazier than the one about Trump, an incompetent buffoon, orchestrating a vast international conspiracy with Russian intelligence to steal the 2016 presidential election. The Russian collusion story was merely preposterous. The neo-Nazi lie is on tape.

But that lie is the centerpiece of Biden’s campaign. When he announced his candidacy, Biden said he was propelled into the race when he saw Trump call neo-Nazis “fine people.”

Why not because Trump didn’t end the carried interest loophole giving billionaire hedge fund managers a minuscule tax rate? Or because Trump never produced an infrastructure bill? Or because he’s put his incompetent son-in-law in charge of everything?

Regular people had to post the true Trump quote, including this part: “… and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists …”

Can Joe withdraw now?

No, he doubled-down, repeating the lie in his taped convention speech. Then regular people produced the quote all over again.

The media regularly invoke the neo-Nazi lie in some sort of weird sacramental ritual. And regular people have to keep posting the truth over and over and over again.

If Trump could be locked in the basement like Biden, he’d probably be reelected just to spite the media.

There are plenty of things for the media to dunk Trump on, by which I mean things he’s actually done as opposed to things the media wish he’d done. But no, they have to tell huge stinking lies about him. Even a guilty person can be framed, and that’s what’s happening to Trump.

The media hysterically denounce Trump for opposing vote-by-mail, smugly announcing that vote-by-mail is exactly the same as absentee voting, as Chuck Todd emphatically stated on MSNBC this week. Look up the absentee voting requirements in your state right now and see if it’s the same as having ballots dumped on your doorstep because you — or someone who once lived there — ever registered to vote.

In New York state, for example, to receive an absentee ballot, you have to fill out an official form stating:

1. Name and date of birth of the voter

2. The address where you are registered

3. An address where the ballot is to be sent

4. The reason for the request, and

5. The signature of the voter

By contrast, with vote-by-mail schemes, ballots are automatically mailed to every eligible voter without any request at all. Ballots will be piled up outside apartment buildings, college dormitories and homeless shelters.

Usually, it’s conservatives who instinctively lunge for the worst possible argument —nah, leave those AK-47s behind, I’ve got the water balloons! — but with Trump, liberals can’t help themselves. They’d be better off being fairer to him, but their hatred makes that impossible.

The media are forcing people to say, “I don’t like the guy, but if it will upset The New York Times, NPR, The New Yorker and MSNBC, I have to vote for Trump.”

Ann Coulter OPED: The Jared Kushner Achievement Award Goes to … Kamala!


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 19, 2020 3:07 PM

The Jared Kushner Achievement Award Goes to ... Kamala!

Kamala Harris / Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

Trending

As has been duly noted, The New York Times’ front page celebrating Biden’s announcement of Kamala Harris as his running mate rivaled its moon landing coverage. A gigantic photo of a saint like Harris took up half of the space above the fold, under a 2-inch headline: “HARRIS JOINS BIDEN TICKET, ACHIEVING A FIRST.” Specifically, the “first” was: “Woman of color in No. 2 slot of major party.”

History was being made! “It was historic most of all, and especially sweet for many Black women” … Harris “is the first Black woman and the first person of Indian descent to be nominated for national office by a major party” … “It’s a stand-alone milestone, irrespective of who the opponent is.”

(That last quote was from Vanita Gupta, who was head of the civil rights division in Obama’s Justice Department. As I keep telling you, Black America, immigrants are getting all the good diversity jobs.)

No offense, but Harris was picked because she’s a woman of color. So it’s not really that amazing that she’s a woman of color. She didn’t swim the English Channel. She didn’t even win a primary. She’s not Margaret Thatcher. She’s Jared Kushner. (Including the Jewish spouse!)

Hey, New York Times! How about devoting three-fourths of your front page with a 2-inch headline to Trump’s picking a young real estate investor as his chief White House adviser? At 34, Jared Kushner Is Youngest Top White House Aide in History

Jared Kushner, Shatterer of Ceilings

For Jared Kushner, The Impossible Just Takes a Little Longer

(Me screaming in the corner: “He’s the son-in-law of the person who picked him!!!”)

If Democrats wanted us to treat Kamala’s selection as an historic achievement, the process needed to be color-blind. All the gushing about THE FIRST WOMAN OF COLOR AS VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE is like the articles every year gushing about the Nigerian who got into ALL EIGHT IVY LEAGUES!

Ever heard of affirmative action? In the same year, a thousand white and Asian kids with the exact same credentials didn’t get into any Ivy League schools.

Biden made perfectly clear — as did his supporters and sponsors — that he would be considering only women of color. Oh my gosh! A woman of color has somehow climbed to the top of the greasy pole!

Kamala’s big achievement is that she was better than the other women of color with visible positions in the Democratic Party. Of which there were five — maybe seven, as long we’re counting Jamaican Indian Americans as “African American”: a mayor, some representatives and a member of Obama’s administration who’d never run for office.

Whatever Harris’ selection represents, it’s not a triumph. Harris didn’t swim fastest, climb highest, run farthest. (She didn’t even pass the bar exam on her first try, a failure she shares with the other most-admired liberal women, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama.)

The fix was in. Biden announced an extremely limited set of qualifications that only Harris had.

But liberals are standing in their kitchens sobbing about Kamala’s “historic” achievement. The dream, so long deferred, has finally been attained!

This would be like Jared’s father bragging about his boy getting into Harvard. We all know Jared was a middling high school student and had mediocre SATs, but his dad greased the skids for him. Maybe don’t bring up his getting into Harvard. Let the conversation drift to something else.

Not liberals!

ABC’s “Good Morning America”: “It is an historic morning. Kamala Harris joining Joe Biden on the Democratic Party ticket. … History will be made again today when Kamala Harris joins Joe Biden … Kamala Harris will be speaking out, now, as the first black woman, the first Asian American tapped to be vice president.”

NBC’s the “Today” show: “… the first black woman and first Indian American to be picked as a vice presidential candidate. … As Joe Biden’s newly minted running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris has already made history.”

Trying to force the facts to fit the frenzy, Harris’ every utterance is treated as incandescent brilliance. The New York Times was still swooning over this incomprehensible remark Harris made to the paper last summer:

“Policy has to be relevant. That’s my guiding principle: Is it relevant? Not, ‘Is it a beautiful sonnet?'”

Confused, I submitted that quote to WokeTranslate.com and got this response:

We analyzed your selected phrase from: [KAMALA HARRIS] using our proprietary SayWhat software, and it translated as:

“OK look, I am one-trillion percent an empty suit, surviving entirely on identity politics and media complicity. So when I burp anything whatsoever out my cackling pie-hole, it’s vital you not only pretend I’m making sense but making history.”

Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.

We’re supposed to treat this privileged woman living the life of Riley like she’s the reincarnation of James Meredith. Yes, the daughter of a professor and surgeon rose through the Berkeley, California, school system in the 1970s, then moved with her cancer researcher mother to Montreal.

That’s not exactly Selma, 1962.

Congratulations to Harris, but please stop gaslighting us with claims that she has achieved something amazing, stupendous, historic.

We’re not gushing about Jared, either.

Ann Coulter OPED: How Do I Tell My Friend She’s Not ‘African-American’?


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 12, 2020 6:45 PM

How Do I Tell My Friend She’s Not 'African-American'?

Source: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Pool

My wonderful readers often have questions for me, particularly in what every TV commercial calls “these uncertain times” when we’re all “in this together” and must give hourly thanks to “our heroes.” So, as I have in the past, I wanted to take a moment to reply to questions that have been pouring in from, again: no one.

1) What do you think of Joe Biden’s pick of Kamala Harris as his V.P.?

I think Susan Rice or Keisha Lance Bottoms would have been better, but inasmuch as I predicted Kamala as the Democrats’ next presidential candidate back before she’d even won her Senate seat, I strongly support his decision for making me almost, kind of, in the ballpark right.

2) That’s an amazing prediction — but what on earth made you predict her?

Because the Democratic Party is entirely about identity politics these days, meaning race, ethnicity, immigration status, gender and sexual orientation, but having absolutely nothing to do with economic class, social standing, occupational category or geographic location.

They already had Obama, so what’s better than the first black president? The first black woman president, of course!

3) But she’s half-Indian and half-Jamaican, not a foundational black American. No reparations for her! In fact, her Jamaican father admits their family owned slaves.

Yeah, yeah. The only people who care about foundational black Americans are Tariq Nasheed and me. As described in my book Mugged, Democrats were always annoyed by the idea that civil rights should have anything to do with black people. That’s why “civil rights” quickly came to mean abortion rights, gay rights, the right not to see construction signs that say “Men at Work.” (That’s according to the Kentucky Commission on Civil Rights .) Black Americans should breathe a sigh of relief that Biden didn’t pick a transsexual and expect their gratitude.

4) Wait a minute! Are we going to have to engage in Nazi-era genetic coding to determine who gets slavery reparations?

Not at all. We have very reliable census records back to at least the 1870s, so we can count foundational black Americans to their grandparents. One American grandparent and the rest Nigerian — you get 25 cents on the dollar.

5) Oh, that’s too complicated! Why not just say: Everyone who’s black gets a check?

Fine, then give me one. Prove I have no black blood. You’re going to have to do the genealogical research one way or another.

6) Why don’t we have the concept of foundational WHITE Americans?

EXCELLENT POINT. I can’t help but notice that most of the people denouncing Confederate monuments are neither foundational black Americans nor foundational white Americans. Of course recent immigrants don’t care about Confederate monuments! They weren’t here. That’s our issue. We don’t respect the South’s cause, but we do respect their honor. It’s OUR history. Not yours.

We ought to have the same rule on tearing down the nation’s history as for reparations: You have to have at least one American grandparent to denounce our traditions, statues and monuments. Nikki Haley, for example, can take down monuments to Bush, Facebook or “American Idol” — all of which she was present in the country for.

7) Speaking of tearing things down, why are all the antifa girls fatties?

Because attractive girls know that all the talk about “toxic masculinity” and “patriarchy” is nonsense. Good-looking girls, even average-looking ones who bathe semi-regularly and don’t resemble elephants, know that they rule the world.

8) And why are antifa boys scrawny beta males?

White men who go around denouncing other white men as “fascists” are wimpy losers who think they’ll attract women with suck-up speeches about racism. But even stupid left-wing girls prefer alpha males. Sissy boys should drop the left-wing politics and try lifting weights and making money. Freud was a fool and reductionist, but sexual strategizing by losers is the source of nearly all left-wing ideology.

9) That’s total crap! And I know what I’m talking about because I had a show on MSNBC for 20 years and —

Look, Chris, everyone thinks you got screwed when you were fired from “Hardball,” but could you please not crash this Q&A?

 10) Do you think Trump will replace Mike Pence with Nikki Haley as his vice president to win the Asian women’s vote?

The crucial industrial Midwest can’t stand her and of course, in February 2016, Haley compared Trump to a Klan member and vowed never to stop fighting him:

“I will not stop until we fight a man that chooses not to disavow the KKK. That is not a part of our party. That is not who we want as president. We will not allow that in our country.”

So the answer is, yes. Yes, I think he will.

Ann Coulter OPED: Antifa’s A Laugh Riot – Until It Comes For You!


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 01, 2020 6:55 PM

Antifa's A Laugh Riot – Until It Comes For You!

Source: AP Photo/Gillian Flaccus

I wonder if Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Charles Murray and Heather MacDonald are reacting to these antifa riots the same way I am.

I mean, not that anyone of us would enjoy the sight of reporters being trapped, chased through the streets and physically assaulted by antifa goons. Or liberal Democrats having to defend their homes with guns in Saint Louis, MO. Or the president hiding in the White House bunker as antifa lays waste to Lafayette Park. Or the mayor of Seattle WA, finally shutting down the CHAZ “summer of love” when the mob came to her house.

They’re all “peaceful protesters”until they come near you.

Imagine that instead of being a president, mayor or reporter in the vicinity of mentally unbalanced, historically illiterate, thuggishly violent lunatics … imagine that you, personally, are the window they want to smash.

Now you know what it’s like to be a conservative trying to give a speech on a college campus today. (Thanks for all the help, guys!)

Neither the conservative media nor elected Republicans gave a crap about the left-wing paramilitary force that’s been mobilizing since Trump’s election.

Through it all, conservatives stuck their heads in the sand and rationalized insane liberal violence. It was the path of least resistance — and also a smart business move. Cowards could pitch themselves as the “reasonable” ones, then sit back and watch as their more popular conservative competitors were deplatformed, shadow-banned and outright canceled.

Over and over again, conservatives made excuses for doing nothing. They told themselves:

It’s only Milo — he’s shocking, not the kind of nuanced conservative thinker I am.

It’s only Gavin McInnes and his “Proud Boys” — he’s funny, whereas I am aggressively humorless, so I’m safe.

It’s only Heather MacDonald and Charles Murray — they write about crime rates and I.Q. I steer well clear of any topic that might trigger liberals!

And thus were the most interesting and popular personalities on the right scrubbed from the public square by violent, low-I.Q. criminals. How tiny is the circle of speech and behavior you’ve permitted yourselves, conservatives?

Now, hordes of these cretins have taken control of the streets, and the only pushback is the president cowering in the White House, tweeting “LAW & ORDER!” Yes, Churchill retreated to a basement, too — in Whitehall, where he planned a war that saved the world. He didn’t tweet out “HITLER! BAD!”

For 3 1/2 years, antifa was never punished for anything it did. To the contrary, they were praised. Private citizens who fought back were defamed as “white supremacists” and imprisoned.

Hundreds of masked antifa traveled interstate to riot at Trump’s inauguration, breaking windows, assaulting Trump supporters, burning stretch limousines and smashing the windows of SUVs — including Larry King’s! As a result, more than 200 of the rioters were placed under “arrest,” (a police technique in use at the time). Prosecutors had mounds of evidence, including video, undercover agents and law enforcement witnesses.

But D.C. judges Lynn Leibovitz and Robert E. Morin made sure almost all charges were dropped. Only one rioter, facing 70 years for felony rioting and assault on a cop, served any time in prison. Judge Leibovitz suspended all but four months of his sentence.

No congressional push to impeach the antifa-friendly judges, no separate federal prosecutions of the out-of-state rioters, no segments about this outrage on Fox News.

When Yiannopoulos was to speak at Berkeley in February 2017, 1,500 protesters, including more than 100 antifa, set fires, smashed windows and threw rocks. In reaction to this, Berkeley punished Milo and canceled the speech. (Not to brag, but 2,000 antifa tried to shut down my Berkeley speech last fall but it went off without a hitch! This was mostly thanks to the Bay Area Proud Boys. Hahaha, antifa!)

There was only one arrest. Soon, Milo was completely deplatformed and disinvited by the toothless, collaborationist CPAC.

President Trump responded to the Berkeley riots by sending in the National Guard to protect free speech at a public university. JUST KIDDING! He tweeted: “If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view — NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” … and then of course did nothing. Positively Churchillian!

That was at least better than Sens. Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio, who praised antifa for raining violence on protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017. The senators called the masked psychotics anti-fascist, apparently unaware that by “fascist,” antifa means them.

Can anyone remember what that protest was about? Oh yes, the tearing down of a Confederate statue.

No punishment. Heaps of praise. Lesson learned.

In 2018, the night before Vice magazine founder McInnes gave a speech at the Metropolitan Republican Club on the Upper East Side, antifa smashed the club’s historic windows and spray-painted the anarchist “A” on the front door. Sadly for antifa, when they showed up to shut down the event the next day, they were met by McInnes’ Proud Boys — a multiracial social club for patriotic men who don’t mind a good scrap.

The speech went off, the attendees were protected, and the Proud Boys walked away. But antifa loons circled back for a sneak attack, hurling a bottle of urine at the Proud Boys. Although well outnumbered, the Proud Boys proceeded to kick skinny antifa butt. (Only the antifa girls are fat.)

Guess who was prosecuted? The Proud Boys — by Manhattan D.A. Cyrus Vance Jr., the same guy who allowed Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein to wantonly rape women and girls in his jurisdiction, year after year.

Two Proud Boys are sitting in prison right now, sentenced to four years for fighting back. McInnes himself was thrown off every social media platform and forced to announce that he was stepping down from the Proud Boys.

Not one antifa was even arrested. NYPD: Oh darn. We couldn’t catch them. (Hey — maybe send the Proud Boys next time!)

But I’m sure you’ve heard all about it on Fox News and other conservative — oh no, wait, you haven’t heard about this from anyone. Democrats used our majestic system of justice to shield antifa from any private citizen who fights back. Not one elected Republican, including our bad-ass president, lifted a finger to defend McInnes and the Proud Boys.

Conservative sunshine patriots said to themselves: Those guys have tattoos! They like to fight! I’m a “constitutional conservative”!

The left has been laying the groundwork for this anarchist takeover for a long time. But even they must be amazed that the conservative response was to roll over and play dead. Except maybe they’re not playing.

My Own Two Cents


You’d have to have been living in a cave somewhere in Tujunga a to not know about the activities of the Democrats Party, and it’s more radical members. Recent history has found them screaming about the Rebel Battle Flag, while simultaneously, the Clinton’s using that flag in their political campaigns. Remember all the flap that occurred several years ago about taking down that flag?

Since the Dems found out the power they had over black people when using such rhetoric got more votes, they expanded their bile with throwing around lies about “Jim Crow Laws”, the KKK and other related elements of racial bigotry past. All the while inferring that the Republican/Conservatives where the ones behind that past, and desire to reinstate.

Now they have added statuary to their focused riots and demands. Claiming racism, they want everything that represents racism past, even the slightest, they are demanding it all be removed.

Those of you who have followed this site for a while know that I have commented on this movement, identifying it’s culprits. With the inflamed riots several thoughts have come to me, especially knowing that according to PEW Research, about 20% of the rioters are back and Hispanic; the rest WHITE, and predominantly democrat see: https://whatdidyousay.org/2020/06/29/race-stats-for-protesters-finally-come-out-destroy-leftist-narrative/.

So, what is behind all this?

Could it be that the Left is working feverishly to erase their history? All the slave owners of the South were DEMOCRATS. They wanted Lincoln dead. When President Lincoln signed the “Emancipation Proclamation”, these same DEMOCRATS formed the KKK as a rebellious response to the “Emancipation Proclamation”.

Who was Jim Crow? A DEMOCRAT in the South. Who fought all efforts for racial equality and freedom? DEMOCRATS. Who fought for the Black People? THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WHICH WAS FORMED TO SUPPORT PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S DETERMINATION TO FREE THE SLAVES.

By the way, who formed the NAACP? ALL REPUBLICANS TO ASSIST BLACK AMERICANS TO COMPLETE THEIR FREEDOM AND SHARE IN THE AMERICAN DREAM.

I come back to my question. Are the Leftist trying desperately to erase their history and rewrite it in the fiction they have been pushing all these years?

  • Remove the Rebel Battle Flag; Designed by, made by and erected by DEMOCRATS.
  • Sell a fictitious story as history in an attempt to erase the TRUE history of the DEMOCRAT PARTY.
  • Remove all other symbols of the racist DEMOCRATS PAST: Statues of DEMOCRAT SLAVE OWNERS and CIVIL WAR LEADERS. Of course, erected by the SAME DEMOCRATS.
  • Demand everyone in today’s society who never owned slaves nor supported slavery, to pay reparations to those descendants of Black slaves.
  • Cast all blame on anyone who disagrees with their thoughts, demands, rhetoric, hyperbole and spewed hatred.

Is it safe to conclude that any credibility offered such demands and efforts would be to reward their carefully planned deceptions?

Just asking.

A (an actual city in Southern California – many caves)

Ann Coulter OPED: Great Moments in Racism: The Dash Cam Tapes


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter Posted: Jun 24, 2020 5:15 PM

Great Moments in Racism: The Dash Cam Tapes

Source: AP Photo/Maya Alleruzzo

If you were watching MSNBC last Sunday, you may have seen Imani Perry, professor of African-American studies at Princeton University, and wondered, as I did, Why do I know that name?

Professor Perry’s delightfully original point was that we need to “think in serious contemplative ways about the depth of American inequality.”

So perhaps we know her from her incisive commentary! I certainly haven’t heard anyone talk about American inequality. It really made me think. But then I suddenly realized it’s that Imani Perry! The one who nearly destroyed a policeman’s life by falsely accusing him of racism!

Back in February 2016, Perry launched a series of tweets, alleging the following:

— She was “arrested in Princeton Township for a single parking ticket three years ago.”

— She was cuffed — FOR A PARKING TICKET — and not allowed to make a phone call “so that someone would know where I was.”

“I was afraid,” she wrote. “Many women who look like me have a much more frightening end to such arrests.”

Oh my gosh, she could have been killed!

— She was “working to move from being shaken to renewing my commitment to the struggle against racism & carcerality.”

Naturally, her story became instant international news. The president of Princeton leapt to her defense, firing off a letter to the chief of police, demanding an investigation. (I know Perry is a professor, but you’d think that, by now, more people would say, Let’s wait for the facts.)

Perry attributed the universal acceptance of her story to her “small build” and her association with “elite universities” such as Princeton.

Just a thought, but it might also be because she’s black.

The Princeton police spent several days investigating before finally releasing the dashcam footage. I’m hoping they dragged it out to allow public outrage to reach maximum velocity.

Perry wasn’t arrested “for a single parking ticket three years ago.” After being stopped for going 67 mph in a 45 mph speed zone, officers ran her name and discovered her license had been suspended. She was arrested for driving with a suspended license.

The officer was almost comically polite to the professor. He gently explained to Perry that because of her suspended license, “What you’re going to have to do is come with us, it’s $130, so if you have that money we’ll be able to post and we’ll be able to get you right back out.” He offered to drop her at the university, saying, “You really shouldn’t be driving because of your suspended license.”

He informed her that police are required to cuff anyone being transported to the station and assured her that no one would have to know. As for not being allowed to make a phone call, he clearly told her that once they got to the station, “You can make as many phone calls and texts as you want.”

A policeman was kind to her, so Perry turned around and accused him of racism, secure in the knowledge that no one would dare challenge whatever she said. It would have been firing offense for him, but not for her. She is still gainfully employed as a Princeton professor — and a sought-after guest on MSNBC and NPR! (It must be because of her “small build.”)

There are dozens of these cases. Tweet me your favorites!

Here’s another, from one of our blessed immigrants, Minati Roychoudhuri, professor at Capital Community College in Connecticut. (Really! That’s not one of my proposed new names for Yale, currently named for a slave trader.)

In 2015, Roychoudhuri (B.A., M.A., Utkal University, India) wrote a letter to the commissioner of public safety, as well as “the Senator and Legislator of my constituency” (she teaches English), claiming a policeman had racially profiled her.

Her letter said: “The officer did not give me any reason as to why had stopped me. His asking if I could speak English shows that he had racially profiled me and was not able to give me a concrete reason for stopping me. Further, the officer had checked ‘Hispanic’ in the race category in the infraction ticket.”

The professor also noted that, “I teach about diversity and the negative impact of racial profiling, I have now become a target of the same insidious behavior! It is easy to connect the dots with the nationwide racial profiling which has led to serious consequences.”

(It’s such a boon to have immigrants teaching about the horrors of “racial profiling” in America because we can’t get anyone to do that!)

Then police released the dashcam footage.

Below are relevant portions from the transcript. I didn’t include the part where the officer asked Roychoudhuri if she spoke English because he never did that. It was a bald-faced lie.

Officer: Hi ma’am, do you know why I’m stopping you today?

Roychoudhuri: No.

Officer: OK. There’s that big gore area with white lines painted across it and you cut in front of it, in front of me, thinking it’s a lane or something. You have to wait until it’s a dotted white line. License and registration.…

Officer: Ma’am. So I wrote you the infraction for that improper lane change that you did.

Roychoudhuri: Please, you know, I probably crossed over there, and that’s why I did it. … Obviously I did that. … My (record) is absolutely clean.

Officer: OK. So I wrote you an infraction for that improper lane change that you did.

Roychoudhuri: OK.

Officer: The answer date is on the front of it and the instructions are on the back of it.

Roychoudhuri: Wait, what?

Officer: It’s a mail-in infraction. All you have to do is mail in, either a check or money order, and mail it in.

Roychoudhuri: OK.

Officer: All right.

Roychoudhuri: Thank you.

Guess who’s still teaching at Capital Community College and paid by Connecticut taxpayers? Our sacramental immigrant!

(NOTE TO MSNBC: Roychoudhuri would make another excellent guest to discuss racism in America.)

After the 2014 killing of Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri — a justified killing according to everyone, including Obama’s Department of Justice — the big demand was that police be required to wear bodycams.

OOPS!

That was a miscalculation. Turns out body cameras are the best thing that ever happened to cops. Which reminds me: The public has still not seen the bodycam footage from the officers arresting George Floyd, explaining how he ended up on the ground.

Maybe we should wait for the facts.

Ann Coulter OPED: Yale Has to Go!


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 17, 2020 6:00 PM

Yale Has to Go!

Source: AP Photo/Beth J. Harpaz

The Democratic Party is being forced into taking ridiculous positions by its insane base. Defund the police! Dishonor the flag! Throw Christopher Columbus in a lake!

What a wonderful gift! All Republicans have to do is take the other side. Make themselves the alternative to madness. Instead, Trump and the Republicans have decided they’re going to be “Democrats Lite.”

I’ll let others berate Republicans for doing nothing about the rioting, the arsons, the beatings, the corporate and social media canceling. This column will address the GOP’s moronitude in response to attacks on the destruction of Confederate monuments. Works of art are being destroyed by Maoist vandals who have no idea what they’re doing.

Literally no idea.

Quick! Who was Fort Bragg named after? What did he do? Do you even know his first name? When you have to Google the guy on a statue to figure out who he is, maybe it’s not really the daily humiliation you claim it is.

At this point, the military bases are famous in their own right. No one hears “Fort Hood” and thinks of Gen. John Bell Hood. Fort Bragg, home of the 82nd Airborne, is many orders of magnitude more famous than Gen. Braxton Bragg. It would be like demanding President John F. Kennedy change his name because his namesake, John Fitzgerald, was a corrupt Boston mayor.

Most obviously, the Democratic Party is going to have to change its name. You want an institution that represents slavery? Confederate politicians were all Democrats, Democrats created Jim Crow, and the founder of the party was a slave holder. (The Republican Party was founded to end slavery.)

Speaking of repellant Democrats, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said on the Senate floor this week that the United States “didn’t inherit slavery from anybody. We created it.”

This is the most ignorant statement ever made on the Senate floor. (And that’s saying something!)

Every society has had slavery; it existed long before America did, including by American Indians (though they preferred torturing their captives to death, inasmuch as few of the natives farmed or built things). From 1530 to 1780, at least a million Europeans were kidnapped by African Muslims and forced into slavery. The vast majority were starved or beaten to death.

In fact, unless we’re counting the Democrats’ wearing kente cloth last week, slavery is the only African institution ever adopted by this country. Portuguese — not Americans — brought the first slaves to Jamestown in 1619 (The New York Times’ favorite episode of American history!). We, are, however, the only country that fought a war to end slavery.

Isn’t slavery bad enough? No, Kaine has to make it extra bad by calling slavery an American invention. A U.S. senator committed a blood libel against his own country.

Anything to say, Republicans? Even Obama would have corrected this boob.

The BLM fanboys complain that other countries don’t honor the losing side in their civil wars. Yes, exactly — that’s why their wars never end.

Myanmar has been in a civil war since 1948. Israel’s been fighting Palestinians since 1948. The Kurds and Turks have been fighting for half a century. At last count, there are two civil wars going on in the Philippines, and at least three in India.

America concluded its civil war by dominating and subjugating the losers, but also honoring their bravery.

Even before the war, the South was eons behind the North in industrial development. If the entire country had been the South, America never would have become the richest, most advanced nation on Earth. (And that’s how slaves built America!) After the war, it was like a third world country. On the other hand, Southerners could take justifiable pride in what everyone agrees was a better class of general and soldier.

At Appomattox, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant allowed Gen. Robert E. Lee to keep his sword. As Lee mounted his horse to leave, Grant saluted him. After announcing the South’s surrender at the White House, President Lincoln ordered the band to play “Dixie.” It was an amazing way to end a civil war.

My ancestors were abolitionists who fought for the Union, but you don’t have to be a Southerner to care about Confederate monuments. I can’t help but notice that the people trying to obliterate our history are not part of that history.

Not that long ago, nearly all Americans had pre-Civil War ancestors. Not anymore! Recent immigrants, by which I mean people who arrived after 1865, think the country started with them. They find it hilarious to destroy anything that happened before they got here.

Talk about cultural imperialism!

What about the black Revolutionary heroes, like Crispus Attucks and Phillis Wheatley? Nope, you can forget about foundational black Americans, too. The first two centuries of our nation’s history are canceled. Why would that interest someone from Pune, India, Mogadishu, Somalia, or Bangkok, Thailand? (That would be Kshama Sawant, socialist Seattle city council member, Democrat; Rep. Ilhan Omar, Democrat; U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, Democrat.)

Corporate plunderers, globalists, the wolf of Wall Street, 8 million “diversity” jobs (that go to Indians, not the descendants of American slaves, as intended) — that’s the America they revere.

The new arrivals are fine with Red Guards going into cemeteries, ripping up symbols of our heritage. Just don’t dare lay a finger on their privately owned Rothkos!

What do the Republicans say? No problem! Senate Leader Mitch McConnell says he’s “OK” with changing the names of military bases. Trump tweets narcissistic bluster.

How about a bill withholding all federal funds from Yale University until it changes its name? The school’s namesake, Elihu Yale, was not only a slave owner, but a slave trader. Quite a dilemma for the little snots who attend and teach there! It will be tremendously damaging to their brand. After all, true sublimity for a Social Justice Warrior is virtue signaling and advertising their high SAT scores at the same time.

If you refuse to fight, Republicans, don’t you at least want to have some fun?

Horowitz: SCOTUS decision redefining sexuality will wreak havoc on society


Commentary by June 16, 2020

SCOTUS ruling

Sarah Silbiger/Bloomberg | Getty Images

When Anthony Kennedy discovered a right to force states to redefine marriage in the 2015 Obergefell case, he promised that religious liberty would remain untouched. “The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered,” wrote the former justice for the majority at the time.

Yeah, right.

Thanks to Justice Gorsuch’s contorted reading of the word “sex” in anti-discrimination law, you now have a right to sue for protection for biological traits you do not possess. This means that legitimate rights of others will now have to yield. Anyone who can’t see the devastating real-world effects of this decision – well beyond firing someone simply because you hate their private behavior – is clearly not paying attention.

Codifying into anti-discrimination law the concept that a man who says he is a woman must be treated according to his mental illness is not something we can live with as a society. Gorsuch might want to dismiss the earth-shattering ramifications of his opinion, but he knows well that there are already pending lawsuits to demand that men be treated as women, in very dangerous or disruptive ways that go well beyond trying to use the boot of government to stamp out mean or discriminatory behavior.

Here is an outline of some of the most immediate threats from this decision. These are not hypothetical societal and legal problems; these issues are in contention as we speak and have now been decided by this court.

Forcing states and doctors to perform castrations

Forcing employers to retain gay employees and not fire them simply because of their private behavior sounds very innocuous and even laudatory. But what about forcing doctors to perform “sex change” operations and forcing states to fund them? Codifying the desires of someone afflicted with gender dysphoria into sex-based anti-discrimination law will force states and hospitals to treat anyone who believes they are really the opposite gender as that preferred gender.

In fact, the Supreme Court has already tacitly mandated this. In May, justices declined to take Idaho’s appeal from the Ninth Circuit, where the lower court ordered the state to pay for a castration surgery for a male serving time in Idaho prison for sexually abusing a 15-year-old boy.

Similarly, a federal judge in Wisconsin mandated that the Badger State use its Medicaid funding to pay for “gender confirmation” mutilations, which can include castration, mastectomies, hysterectomies, genital reconstruction, and breast augmentation.

Those radical decisions will now be backed up in all circuits. There are already numerous lawsuits suing employers to provide castration and hormone procedures under the employer health insurance mandate of Obamacare. Obamacare uses civil rights laws to bar discrimination in offering health care coverage. It would be easy for the courts to now apply Gorsuch’s interpretation of Title VII to other areas of discrimination in the ACA statute.

Will Gorsuch be there for us to overturn those decisions?

Women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, and all-female sports

Barring a male who says he is a female from an all-girls sports team, bathroom, or locker room now constitutes sex-based discrimination. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 reads as follows:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

It’s not even a jump to apply this ruling to that law; it’s a logical outgrowth. All separate gender school activities and private dressing rooms are out the window because the 1972 law, which liberals already felt included transgenderism, will now be so interpreted.

College dorms

As Justice Alito warns, similar lawsuits may be brought under the Fair Housing Act against colleges that have separate dorms for males and females. Also, female prisoners will be subjected to males living with them. Again, once sex is redefined, it is no longer limited to employment or animus-based discrimination. As Alito warned, “The Court … argues, not merely that the terms of Title VII can be interpreted that way but that they cannot reasonably be interpreted any other way. According to the Court, the text is unambiguous.” This wasn’t even a close call for the majority, and it will therefore reverberate across all areas of law, politics, and society.

Religious schools must become pagan

We were told not to worry about Obergefell creating a right to gay marriage because it was merely an issue of a marriage certificate and would never affect private religious institutions. Well, what happens now if a cross-dresser or a prominent homosexual activist wants to teach in a Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, or Muslim school? The majority opinion blithely denied these concerns and noted how title VII protects religious liberty by offering some long-standing exceptions. However, those exceptions have been interpreted more and more narrowly as time goes on. The same way Gorsuch has evolved on the definition of a sex, the courts are evolving on religious protections, and the former will now accelerate the latter.

What about pedophilia, nudity, and the next frontier in our “evolving” society?

Justice Gorsuch dismissed (p. 30-32) the dissent’s charge that he was backfilling into the statute ideas that its crafters would regard as absurd and immoral as “naked policy appeals” and as complaints about “undesirable policy consequences.”

What happens when the next letters of the alphabet get codified into the sacrilege of the sexual behavior legal protections, such as “N” for nudity and “P” for pedophilia?

“My sexual orientation is to be with children.”

“My sexual orientation is to express myself freely and be proud of my body, not to hide it.”

You might laugh, but at the speed with which transgenderism became in vogue, there is nothing stopping more sexual fetishes from joining the quasi “legal” distinction with a fancy acronym. The mainstreaming of pedophilia is already under way. Could employers still not fire those individuals for being disruptive to the decorum of the office the same way they can’t fire a man who walks in one day dressed like a woman, even if he has to deal with clients? Those ideals can be read into the word “sex” of a 1964 statute just as much as transgenderism can. After all, gay expanded to LGB and T, and then an undefined “Q” got added in. Others add on IAPK to include “intersex, asexual, pansexual, and kink.” It has broadly become known in those circles as “LGBTQ+.”

So, Justice Gorsuch, now that man and woman no longer mean what they mean, can you tell us what is and is not included in “sex” and why there should be protection for some fetishes or mental disorders over others? Can we lay down that marker now so that it doesn’t grow?

Freedom of speech

As Justice Alito warned in his dissent, the New York City government has already made it a criminal offense not to address someone by his or her preferred pronoun.

“After today’s decision, plaintiffs may claim that the failure to use their preferred pronoun violates one of the federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination,” wrote Alito.

Supporters of this decision claim that because the court did not create a constitutional right, merely a retroactive reinterpretation of statue, Congress is still free to legislate. But who are we kidding here? The Civil Rights Act is as politically untouchable as the Fourteenth Amendment, and there is no way Congress will have the guts to deal with this fallout. State legislatures will be cut out from the process entirely.

Also, as Alito warns, the jump from codifying transgenderism into statute to into the Constitution is nothing more than a hiccup for its supporters to overcome, and the court has consistently done that in the past. There are already numerous cases percolating in the lower courts to do just that. Once the lower courts codify a new right, we have seen the Supreme Court first ignore the lower court radicalization and then downright legitimize it.

Yesterday, Mitch McConnell didn’t even mention this travesty in his press briefing. Trump bizarrely commented, “they ruled and we live with their decision” and called it a “very powerful decision.”

Very powerful, indeed. Now who will stand up for the forgotten Americans and use separation of powers to push back against this travesty?

Author: Daniel Horowitz

Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.

More Hypocrisy of the Left


When I published the article VIDEO: Warlord “Raz from CHAZ” Caught on Video Handing Out AR15s to Random Young Activists (https://whatdidyousay.org/2020/06/15/video-warlord-raz-from-chaz-caught-on-video-handing-out-ar15s-to-random-young-activists/), I Monday, June 15, 2020, I should have made this point then. WHERE ARE THE ENDLESS NEWS REPORTS FROM THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA ABOUT NEEDING MORE GUN CONTROL BECAUSE THIS SO-CALLED LEADER JUST PASSED AT THE RIFLES WITHOUT DOING BACKGROUND CHECKS?

If you need a reminder, here is the video again.

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE????? WHERE IS THE HAND RINGING????? WHERE ARE THE ACCUSATIONS THAT THE NRA GAVE RAZ THE RIFLES TO DISTRIBUTE AS HE PLEASED?

And, by the way, WHO IS “THE JOHN BROWN GUN CLUB”? Why are they the security force for these squatters?

Finally, here is some wisdom found on FaceBook;

I am looking forward to your comments.

Jerry Broussard

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: