As Moonbat Tracker writes: “These outrageous and toxic books teach kids that the United States is an institutionally racist system filled with “bloodsucking capitalists” and Anglos who “rape Hispanic culture.”
Here are a couple of quotes from the books in which the lady recites:
“Hard drugs and drug culture is an invention of the gringo because he has no culture.”
“We have to destroy capitalism and we have to help 5/6 of the world to destroy capitalism in order to equal all peoples’ lives.
“The Declaration of Independence states that we the people have the right to revolution… the right to overrule the government…”
“Any country based on capitalism is based on greed…”
I was asked by a friend of my oldest Son on this topic, to see my response to him — JUMP to the bottom
Keep in mind if you are saying one of the below issues is morally wrong… you are saying so by borrowing from the Judeo-Christian worldview. Atheism or pantheism cannot account for moral [absolute] wrongs. For more on this, see:
Philosopher and scholar Mortimer J. Adler rightly points out that while many Christians are quick in responding to the conclusions in an argument often times the Christian is unaware that the point of departure is not in the conclusion, but in the starting premise, the foundational assumptions.
Norman L. Geisler & Peter Bocchino, Unshakable Foundations: Contemporary Answers to Crucial Questions About the Christian Faith (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2001), 20-21.
As someone who falls into the category of Protestant, some may find it odd that here I am defending Catholics from a recent attack by a left-leaning columnist, Gwynne Dyer. In his September 25th (2010) article entitled, “Why Pope can’t stand diversity and tolerance,” (at the New Zealand Herald online) Gwynne Dyer shows how he is in some dyer need of clarity of thought. I will deconstruct the parts I feel are always in need of addressing. Of course, out of the gate Dyer hits the Catholic Church with the priesthood molestation cases. While I would agree with Dyer that these are horrible instances of action on the priesthood’s part which should be held to the highest standards (as should pastors in Protestant denominations), we part company in his obvious statement that this emasculates any Christian from commenting on the culture around us:
Speaking in Scotland, he condemned “aggressive forms of secularism” and the threat of “atheist extremism”. Never mind the hundreds or thousands of priests who raped little boys (and occasionally little girls). (Dyer)
In this statement Dyer is saying because priests molested and sodomized boys and girls this should stop the church universal to comment on other aspects of the culture in general. This doesn’t make sense, and I will show you how in some analogies based in cases of molestation and sodomy in other fields of specialty. This actually comes from a challenge laid out to me in a debate about the mosque at Ground Zero, and it too used a position of moral injustice to try and squash dissent on an entirely different issue. I was challenged with the following thought in regards to the location of said mosque:
Sean…. If we are to follow your logic, I guess no Catholic churches should be located within a few blocks of daycare centers, no?
UPDATE (7/21/2022) before continuing to old post:
Nearly 200 K-12 educators are being charged with sex crimes involving children so far in 2022… But the left denies grooming at schools
While the left may deny child grooming in schools outright or claim that it is shockingly rare, this year’s arrest records prove them liars.
181 K-12 educators have been charged with sex crimes against children just in the first half of 2022, with 140 allegedly committing sex crimes against their students.
These crimes range from child pornography to rape and are all heinously vile.
The average for the 181-day period from January 1st to June 30th is one educator arrested for sex crimes every single day. That means that every single day these horrible acts are happening at schools.
Four principals, 153 teachers, 12 teachers’ aides, and 12 substitute teachers make up the 181 arrested pedophiles and groomers. Male teachers made up 78% of those arrested, some of the educators arrested, and about 40 of them were also women….(NTD)
UPDATE (7/26/2024)
Politically protected “classes” of people in the organization — racist organization — La Raza, were getting federal monies and using it to abuse children. Quite literally (via FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE):
….. A recent federal complaint revealed that “Southwest Key has engaged in a pattern or practice of severe or pervasive sexual harassment of children in its care”, and that “from 2015 continuing through at least the end of 2023, Southwest Key received complaints concerning the sexual abuse and harassment of children at the majority of its Casas.”
The litany of abuses included a worker molesting a 5-year-old girl and 8-year-old girl and threating to kill her family, a supervisor repeatedly raping a 15-year-old girl, and a “child” reporting a Southwest Key worker telling him he liked trangenders and asked him if “he dressed as a woman at night” while fondling himself as part of over 100 reports with numerous descriptions of workers who groped boys and girls of all ages and solicited them for sex.
According to the allegations in the federal complaint, Southwest Key employees helped cover up the abuses, threatening girls that they would face consequences if they spoke out and encouraging them to keep quiet about what happened.
These abuses might never have come to light except that once the Obama administration made way for the Trump administration, the detention of underage minors suddenly became controversial. Southwest Key shelters, once the embodiment of La Raza pride, were denounced as “baby jails.” Media outlets suddenly began reporting the multi-million dollar salaries at the non-profit. Reports emerged of a Southwest Key worker sexually assaulting 8 children.
By 2019, El Presidente Juan Sanchez had stepped down from his own organization.
La Raza was forced to suspend its former “affiliate of the year” to which it had provided $250,000 in grants, but multiple Southwest Key figures still had prominent La Raza ties including interim board chair Victor R. Grza, a founder of the La Raza Roundtable, its chief strategic partnerships officer Jose Velasquez, a former vice president of La Raza, and Anselmo Villarreal, the current CEO of Southwest Key who had been a La Raza board member.
La Raza’s fingerprints are all over Southwest Key and closely tied in with a network of Latino activist groups set up to profit financially and politically from the border invasion.
Under Obama it was Republicans, including Sen. Chuck Grassley, who were sounding the alarm about Southwest Key. Earlier this year, Sen. Grassley, citing whistleblowers, warned of “MS-13 gang affiliation” households and “possible child-trafficking rings”, and asked for reports of “potential cases of human trafficking” identified by Southwest Key employees.
When the Arizona Daily Independentrevealed in 2015 that whistleblowers were warning that children were being turned over to ‘drug families’ and that some of the minors were gang members, the story was buried. Only once Trump took office and tried to secure the border did the media suddenly become interested in investigating some abuses at Southwest Key. ……
Back to O.G. post:
Sean…. If we are to follow your logic, I guess no Catholic churches should be located within a few blocks of daycare centers, no?
I respond:
NUMBER TWO, I wish to discuss this issue of molestation by priests that you intimated about.
School counselors, dentists, Buddhist monks, foster parents, and the like — all have abused children. Men who are pedophiles look for positions of AUTHORITY OVER [*not yelling, merely emphasizing*] children that afford MOMENTS OF PRIVACY with these same children. Dentists do not violate children or women in the name of dentistry. Buddhists monks do not sodomize children in the name of Siddhartha. School counselors in the name of psychology, foster parents in the name of Dr. Spock, etc, … you get the point. Likewise, priests do not violate children in the name of Christ. (The many terrorist attacks are in the name of something… can you tell me what Nora?)
[….]
So I hope you can see that mentioning churches next to schools is a non-sequitur, I think we can agree that any church moving priests (Catholicism) or pastors (Protestantism) from one parish or church to another is a problem that has to be dealt with. Just like teachers who have the same issues levied towards them are moved from district-to-district (N.E.A.).
Here is an updated stat for clarity on this subject:
While sexual repression might explain the horrific history of sexual abuse committed by Catholic clergymen, it does not explain the much greater incidence of sexual abuse by secular educators in the public school system.41
[41] “The physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.” Shakeshaft, C. Ph.D., U.S. Department of Education report. 2002. [The 2004 study can be seen here in PDF FORM. I believe the author meant 2004]
Vox Day, The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, And Hitchens (Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, 2008), 174.
…But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a little-remembered 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, “the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests.”
After effectively disappearing from the radar, Shakeshaft’s study is now being revisited by commentators seeking to restore a sense of proportion to the mainstream coverage of the Church scandal.
According to the 2004 study “the most accurate data available at this time” indicates that “nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”
“Educator sexual misconduct is woefully under-studied,” writes the researcher. “We have scant data on incidence and even less on descriptions of predators and targets. There are many questions that call for answers.”
[….]
Weigel observes that priestly sex abuse is “a phenomenon that spiked between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s but seems to have virtually disappeared,” [see recomended book to the right] and that in recent years the Church has gone to great lengths to punish and remove priestly predators and to protect children. The result of these measures is that “six credible cases of clerical sexual abuse in 2009 were reported in the U.S. bishops’ annual audit, in a Church of some 65,000,000 members.”
Despite these facts, however, “the sexual abuse story in the global media is almost entirely a Catholic story, in which the Catholic Church is portrayed as the epicenter of the sexual abuse of the young.”
[….]
In 2004, shortly after the Shakeshaft study was released, Catholic League President William Donohue, who was unavailable for an interview for this story, asked, “Where is the media in all this?”
“Isn’t it news that the number of public school students who have been abused by a school employee is more than 100 times greater than the number of minors who have been abused by priests?” he asked.
“All those reporters, columnists, talking heads, attorneys general, D.A.‘s, psychologists and victims groups who were so quick on the draw to get priests have a moral obligation to pursue this issue to the max. If they don’t, they’re a fraud.”
EASILY PUT:
Because teacher’s unions transfer teachers who molest children around the districts means one should reject education.
…OR…
Because teacher’s unions transfer teachers who molest children around the districts means education doesn’t exist.
In other words, would Columbia University have to stop teaching about education because the N.E.A. shuffles around rapists and child predators? The argument is a non-sequitur designed merely to stir up feelings of animosity and then direct them towards an entirely different subject. There tends to be a blurring of subject/object distinction on the professional left. Here is a short list of what I alluded to above:
Two Buddhist monks and eight other men were arrested on Wednesday, accused of sexually abusing 11 children orphaned by the island’s 19-year civil war, an official said.
Investigations revealed that the children, aged between nine and 13, had been sexually abused over a period of time at an orphanage where the men worked, said Prof. Harendra de Silva, head of the National Child Protection Authority….
Mr. Tripp was arrested for sexually abusing a former 15-year-old foster care child.
The investigation started when the Oregon Department of Human Services was contacted by a school counselor who learned that there may be sexual abuse involving a student and Mr. Tripp. DHS workers then contacted Sheriff’s Detectives who took over the investigation.
Detectives learned that Mr. Tripp has been a foster parent since 1995 and has had at least 90 children placed in his home during that time. Sheriff’s Detectives are concerned that there may be more victims who have not yet reported sexual contact involving Mr. Tripp….
3) A therapist who worked at Booker T. Washington Middle School in Baltimore was arrested in Catonsville and charged with molesting a 13-year-old boy, Baltimore County police said yesterday.
Robert J. Stoever, 54, of the 1500 block of Park Ave. was arrested Sunday night after a county police officer saw him and the boy in a car in a parking lot at Edmondson Avenue and Academy Road, said Cpl. Michael Hill, a police spokesman.
Stoever was charged with a second-degree sex offense and perverted practice, according to court documents. He was sent to the Baltimore County Detention Center, Hill said….
4) A Bronx dentist was arrested yesterday on charges that he twice raped a 16-year-old patient whom he had placed under anesthesia during an office visit on Thursday, police said.
The girl, a patient of the dentist for several years, was hired for a summer job as his receptionist on Thursday, and had an appointment with him for treatment that afternoon, said Lieut. Hazel Stewart, commander of the Bronx Special Victims Squad.
[….]
“She went in and she changed into a little uniform that he gave to her, and he gave her some files to work on,” the lieutenant said. “Then he said that it was time to take a look at her teeth.”
At that point, Lieutenant Stewart said, “he used some type of anesthesia on her and he allegedly raped her.”
The young woman told officers that she was never fully anesthetized, Lieutenant Stewart said, but that “the effects of the anesthesia were strong enough to render her helpless to such a degree that he was able to rape her again.”
These folks that commit these crimes are atheists, Christians, Buddhists (which are epistemologically speaking, atheists), and every other ideology and from every stripe of life and culture in the world.
Thus, the argument is as strong as this:
There have been many cases of dentists molesting and raping children, therefore, dentists cannot take moral positions on secular society.
The conclusion just doesn’t follow the premise.
There have been many cases of priests molesting and raping children, therefore, the Pope (insert Catholic here) cannot take moral positions on secular society.
In the case of religious comparisons, you would have to isolate the founders and their lives in order to properly judge a belief, not the followers. I would engender the reader to consider well this quote by Robert Hume:
The nine founders among the eleven living religions in the world had characters which attracted many devoted followers during their own lifetime, and still larger numbers during the centuries of subsequent history. They were humble in certain respects, yet they were also confident of a great religious mission. Two of the nine, Mahavira and Buddha, were men so strong-minded and self-reliant that, according to the records, they displayed no need of any divine help, though they both taught the inexorable cosmic law of Karma. They are not reported as having possessed any consciousness of a supreme personal deity. Yet they have been strangely deified by their followers. Indeed, they themselves have been worshipped, even with multitudinous idols.
All of the nine founders of religion, with the exception of Jesus Christ, are reported in their respective sacred scriptures as having passed through a preliminary period of uncertainty, or of searching for religious light. Confucius, late in life, confessed his own sense of shortcomings and his desire for further improvement in knowledge and character. All the founders of the non-Christian religions evinced inconsistencies in their personal character; some of them altered their practical policies under change of circumstances.
Jesus Christ alone is reported as having had a consistent God-consciousness, a consistent character himself, and a consistent program for his religion. The most remarkable and valuable aspect of the personality of Jesus Christ is the comprehensiveness and universal availability of his character, as well as its own loftiness, consistency, and sinlessness.
The World’s Living Religions (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959), 285-286.
All this is to show that Dyer’s article starts with a shallow logic that is more a straw-man than a real critique of anything the Pope said. As much as I disagree with the office and structure of the Catholic church, this line of attack is asinine to say the least. I recommend to those who seriously wish to know why this rash of molestations has taken place should read the book by Michael S. Rose, Goodbye Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption Into the Catholic Church.
A Post on Buddhist Molestations
Deeper Thinking Here at RPT
Then… if reality is ultimately characterless and distinctionless, then the distinction between being enlightened and unenlightened is ultimately an illusion and reality is ultimately unreal. Whom is doing the leading? Leading to what? These still are distinctions being made, that is: “between knowing you are enlightened and not knowing you are enlightened.” In the Diamond Sutra, ultimately, the Bodhisattva loves no one, since no one exists and the Bodhisattva knows this:
“All beings must I lead to Nirvana, into the Realm of Nirvana which leaves nothing behind; and yet, after beings have been led to Nirvana, no being at all has been led to Nirvana. And why? If in a Bodhisattva the notion of a “being” should take place, he could not be called a “Bodhi-being.” And likewise if the notion of a soul, or a person should take place in him.
So even the act of loving others, therefore, is inconsistent with what is taught in the Buddhistic worldview, because there is “no one to love.” This is shown quite well (this self-refuting aspect of Buddhism) in the book, The Lotus and the Cross: Jesus Talks with Buddha. A book I recommend with love, from a worldview that can use the word love well. One writer puts it thusly: “When human existence is blown out, nothing real disappears because life itself is an illusion. Nirvana is neither a re-absorption into an eternal Ultimate Reality, nor the annihilation of a self, because there is no self to annihilate. It is rather an annihilation of the illusion of an existing self. Nirvana is a state of supreme bliss and freedom without any subject left to experience it.”
(This is a h/t to Freepers) The Chicago Tribune has this story about Monks disappearing when needed in court. Buddhist Temples say, “not our responsibility”:
Buddhist monks walk away from sex-abuse cases
Across the U.S., temples frustrate investigators by insisting they have no control over monks’ actions, whereabouts
The meeting took place at Wat Dhammaram, a cavernous Theravada Buddhist temple on the southwest edge of Chicago. A tearful 12-year-old told three monks how another monk had turned off the lights during a tutoring session, lifted her shirt and kissed and fondled her breasts while pressing against her, according to a lawsuit.
Shortly after that meeting, one of the monks sent a letter to the girl’s family, saying the temple’s monastic community had resolved the matter, the lawsuit says.
The “wrong doer had accepted what he had done,” wrote P. Boonshoo Sriburin, and within days would “leave the temple permanently” by flying back to Thailand.
“We have done our best to restore the order,” the letter said.
But 11 years later, the monk, Camnong Boa-Ubol, serves at a temple in California, where he says he interacts with children even as he faces a second claim, supported by DNA, that he impregnated a girl in the Chicago area.
Sriburin acknowledges that restoring order did not involve stopping Boa-Ubol from making the move to California. And it did not involve issuing a warning to the temple there. Wat Dhammaram didn’t even tell its own board of directors what happened with the monk, he said.
“We have no authority to do anything. … He has his own choice to live anywhere,” Sriburin said.
A Tribune review of sexual abuse cases involving several Theravada Buddhist temples found minimal accountability and lax oversight of monks accused of preying on vulnerable targets.
Because they answer to no outside ecclesiastical authority, the temples respond to allegations as they see fit. And because the monks are viewed as free agents, temples claim to have no way of controlling what they do next. Those found guilty of wrongdoing can pack a bag and move to another temple — much to the dismay of victims, law enforcement and other monks.
A woman who alleges she was sexually assaulted by a monk at a Theravada Buddhist temple in Chicago holds her 11-year-old daughter, who was conceived, according to her mother, during the assaults. (Stacey Wescott, Chicago Tribune / July 24, 2011)
Question from Son’s Friend
A friend of my oldest son contacted me about questions his brother is shooting his way. One dealt with this topic and a specific article (of which I will give only the headline):
Here is my response after my son’s friend asked for some help:
I do have a few responses.
To that story specifically, there is a specific response, as well as a broader issue at hand. First the specifics (and I encourage you as well to read and understand the main point as well…)
➤ [I linked to this post]
SIDE ISSUES FIRSTLY, people do not realize that many of these cases took place decades ago… and some of these memories are gotten from hypnotism or bad interviewing by psychologists… or even by people who want money. There is a really good book on this called “Confabulations: Creating False Memories, Destroying Families.” Another book is called, “My Lie: A True Story of False Memory.” So how the memory is obtained from a childhood experience is important. This issue is partly to blame for some of the Satanic craze of a couple decades ago.
SECONDLY, in the late 60s and 70s till even currently, there has been a push to normalize homosexuality. I will use the Boy Scouts as an example. As the push [which has succeeded as of late] to allow gay men as Scout leaders… the obvious inference is that you will get more abuse. Men, in general, have a high sex drive/imagination. Marriage to a good woman will most times subdue this urge to have variety. Subdue it is a polite term… I as a man constantly fight my nature through a worldview to please my natural desires. We, as men, primarily fight two big issues in our life… our violent nature and our lustful nature. Gay-men do not have this leveling affect in their relationships.
THIRDLY,and this segways into the main issue… these men who are attracted to boys or young people, typically look for jobs that they are in a control, or has moment of privacy and authority over their intended victims. Whether this be the Priesthood, a youth pastor, a Boy Scout leader, a dentist, a school counselor, a teacher, and the like.
THAT BEING SAID, of course not all these experiences are false. This has nothing to do with whether God exists or not. OR, whether the Catholic Church is the correct institution in its expression of Christian truth. (I happen to think that just like in my church, there are saved and there are unsaved persons… just like in the Catholic church.)
HOWEVER, if you say, “I doubt God’s existence because of this…” you would have to be consistent and apply this to other areas of your experience. For instance, the National Education Association and other local teacher unions often do the same. They cannot fire people because of the union contracts (or it is damn near impossible to and cost lots of $$$$$ to fire a tenured teacher). They cover-up their crimes and move the teacher from district to district. I make this point in my link, but to be clear… I still believe in the importance of education despite this. LIKE I still believe in the importance of God despite actions of people.
Another issue related to this is that without the Judeo-Christian worldview/ethic, one cannot say absolutely that such abuse is morally wrong. One need only look as far as atheists for this idea to be fleshed out: Hear Atheists Themselves on Evil and Absolutes
Hope this helps.
SeanG
PS: Always related to this topics are these issues… the first link is a response to an author in a small local paper:
Eric Metaxas Explains That Trump Is Our King Cyrus (and more)
What Eric was trying to get the laugh off of was that some Pentecostals on the fringe think Trump was prophesied about. Eric is just meaning that Trump is (a) probably not a Christian, and that (b), God can use him to help rebuild [so-to-speak] the chipping away the Democrats have for over 50-years. Not only that, but Jerusalem is now the recognized capital of Israel per our policy.
Cyrus in the Bible has, in recent years, been referenced frequently by prominent Christian leaders and by the media. It’s important to understand who Cyrus actually was and what role he played in the ancient world and in biblical history.
The Ancient Israelites referred to Cyrus as Cyrus the Great. What’s important to understand, however, is that the reason we know Cyrus’ name is so we would see how great our God is.
Who Is Cyrus in the Bible?
Cyrus was the King of Persia from 559-530 BC. He was also known as Cyrus the Great, Cyrus the Elder, and Cyrus II. We know from modern British royalty that it’s not uncommon for royals to be known by a variety of names and titles.
Cyrus was not a follower of the God of the Bible, but instead, he was a pagan king used by God to help His people. Just as God had used pagan kings from the Chaldeans, Assyrians, and Babylonians to chasten his people when they refused to repent of their idolatries, now He used a pagan king to help them return to their promised land and begin to rebuild.
[….]
The Jews of Old Testament times lauded Cyrus as “the Great” because it was under his rule that they were allowed to return to their homeland and rebuild the holy city of Jerusalem. …
Fox Nation host Piers Morgan compares former President Trump’s Michigan rally performance to that of a rock star after almost being assassinated a week prior on ‘One Nation.’
MSNBC’s ‘Chief Loon’ Host Slammed Over Latest Trump Remarks
Sky News host Danica De Giorgio has slammed “Trump’s super stalker” MSNBC host Joy Reid over her concerns that the former US president would ‘rewrite himself’ as both a ‘hero’ and ‘victim’ following the attempted assassination on him in Pennsylvania.
“Please, give it a rest, Joy. Take a break from Trump. Take a mental break,” Ms De Giorgio said.
“It must be exhausting being so broken all the time.”
This constant lying is not aimed at making the people believe a lie, but at ensuring that no one believes anything anymore.
A people that can no longer distinguish between truth and lies cannot distinguish between right and wrong.
And such a people, deprived of the power to think and judge, is, without knowing and willing it, completely subjected to the rule of lies. With such a people, you can do whatever you want.”
– Hannah Arendt
So I did some digging since I came across this post by RILBC, this author/philosopher is new to me — I think. I may have come across her in the past, mentioned by an author I was reading in the past, but below are some quotes and media.
The Banality of Evil: How Ordinary People Do Terrible Things?
In this deeply thought-provoking video, we explore the disturbing concept of ‘the banality of evil,’ coined by philosopher Hannah Arendt after witnessing the trial of Nazi Adolf Eichmann. Arendt’s work forces us to confront the truth that even ordinary people can commit monstrous acts when they surrender their critical thinking and moral compass. We’ll examine how systems can corrupt, the dangers of blind obedience, and the importance of cultivating empathy, questioning authority, and maintaining our individual responsibility in a complex world.
Nine months after the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann died at the end of a noose in Israel, a controversial but thoughtful commentary about his trial appeared in The New Yorker. The public reaction stunned its author, the famed political theorist and Holocaust survivor Hannah Arendt (1906-1975). It was February 1963.
Arendt’s eyewitness assessment of Eichmann as “terribly and terrifyingly normal” took the world by surprise. Her phrase, “the banality of evil,” entered the lexicon of social science, probably forever. It was taken for granted that Eichmann, despite his soft-spoken and avuncular demeanor, must be a monster of epic proportions to play such an important role in one of the greatest crimes of the 20th Century.
“I was only following orders,” he claimed in the colorless, matter-of-fact fashion of a typical bureaucrat. The world thought his performance a fiendishly deceptive show, but Hannah Arendt concluded that Eichmann was indeed a rather “ordinary” and “unthinking” functionary.
How callous! A betrayal of her own Jewish people! How could any thoughtful person dismiss Eichmann so cavalierly?! Arendt’s critics blasted her with such charges mercilessly, but they had missed the point. She did not condone or excuse Eichmann’s complicity in the Holocaust. She witnessed the horrors of national socialism first-hand herself, having escaped Germany in 1933 after a short stint in a Gestapo jail for “anti-state propaganda.” She did not claim that Eichmann was innocent, only that the crimes for which he was guilty did not require a “monster” to commit them.
How often have you noticed people behaving in anti-social ways because of a hope to blend in, a desire to avoid isolation as a recalcitrant, nonconforming individual? Did you ever see someone doing harm because “everybody else was doing it”? The fact that we all have observed such things, and that any one of the culprits might easily, under the right circumstances, have become an Adolf Eichmann, is a chilling realization.
As Arendt explained, “Going along with the rest and wanting to say ‘we’ were quite enough to make the greatest of all crimes possible.”
Eichmann was a “shallow” and “clueless” joiner, someone whose thoughts never ventured any deeper than how to become a cog in the great, historic Nazi machine. In a sense, he was a tool of Evil more than evil himself.
Commenting on Arendt’s “banality of evil” thesis, philosopher Thomas White writes, “Eichmann reminds us of the protagonist in Albert Camus’s novel The Stranger (1942), who randomly and casually kills a man, but then afterwards feels no remorse. There was no particular intention or obvious evil motive: the deed just ‘happened.’”
Perhaps Hannah Arendt underestimated Eichmann. He did, after all, attempt to conceal evidence and cover his tracks long before the Israelis nabbed him in Argentina in 1960—facts which suggest he did indeed comprehend the gravity of his offenses. It is undeniable, however, that “ordinary” people are capable of horrific crimes when possessed with power or a desire to obtain it, especially if it helps them “fit in” with the gang that already wields it.
The big lesson of her thesis, I think, is this: If Evil comes calling, do not expect it to be stupid enough to advertise itself as such. It’s far more likely that it will look like your favorite uncle or your sweet grandmother. It just might cloak itself in grandiloquent platitudes like “equality,” “social justice,” and the “common good.” It could even be a prominent member of Parliament or Congress.
Maximilien Robespierre and Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, I suggested in a recent essay, were peas in the same pod as Eichmann—ordinary people who committed extraordinarily heinous acts.
Hannah Arendt is recognized as one of the leading political thinkers of the Twentieth Century. She was very prolific, and her books are good sellers still, nearly half a century after her death. She remains eminently quotable as well, authoring such pithy lines as “Political questions are far too serious to be left to the politicians,” “The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution,” and “The sad truth of the matter is that most evil is done by people who never made up their minds to be or do either evil or good.”
Some of Arendt’s friends on the Left swallowed the myth that Hitler and Stalin occupied opposite ends of the political spectrum. She knew better. Both were evil collectivists and enemies of the individual(see list of suggested readings below). “Hitler never intended to defend the West against Bolshevism,” she wrote in her 1951 book The Origins of Totalitarianism, “but always remained ready to join ‘the Reds’ for the destruction of the West, even in the middle of the struggle against Soviet Russia.”
With the recent American political hoopla, I figured this clip of political philosopher, Hannah Arendt, would be a fun short listen for the thinker. This is the beginning part of a longer file found here on Philosophy Overdose’s YouTube:
Totalitarianism begins in contempt for what you have. The second step is the notion: “Things must change—no matter how, Anything is better than what we have.” Totalitarian rulers organize this kind of mass sentiment, and by organizing it articulate it, and by articulating it make the people somehow love it. They were told before, thou shalt not kill; and they didn’t kill. Now they are told, thou shalt kill; and although they think it’s very difficult to kill, they do it because it’s now part of the code of behavior. They learn whom to kill and how to kill and how to do it together. This is the much talked about Gleichschaltung—the coordination process. You are coordinated not with the powers that be, but with your neighbor—coordinated with the majority. But instead of communicating with the other you are now glued to him. And you feel of course marvelous. Totalitarianism appeals to the very dangerous emotional needs of people who live in complete isolation and in fear of one another.
Lies
The moment we no longer have a free press, anything can happen. What makes it possible for a totalitarian or any other dictatorship to rule is that people are not informed; how can you have an opinion if you are not informed? If everybody always lies to you, the consequence is not that you believe the lies, but rather that nobody believes anything any longer. This is because lies, by their very nature, have to be changed, and a lying government has constantly to rewrite its own history. On the receiving end you get not only one lie—a lie which you could go on for the rest of your days—but you get a great number of lies, depending on how the political wind blows. And a people that no longer can believe anything cannot make up its mind. It is deprived not only of its capacity to act but also of its capacity to think and to judge. And with such a people you can then do what you please.
Contingency and History
The main characteristic of any event is that it has not been foreseen. We don’t know the future but everybody acts into the future. Nobody knows what he is doing because the future is being done, action is being done by a “we” and not an “I.” Only if I were the only one acting could I foretell the consequences of what I’m doing. What actually happens is entirely contingent, and contingency is indeed one of the biggest factors in all history.
Nobody knows what is going to happen because so much depends on an enormous number of variables, on simple hazard. On the other hand if you look at history retrospectively, then, even though it was contingent, you can tell a story that makes sense…. Jewish history, for example, in fact had its ups and downs, its, enmities and its friendships, as every history of all people has. The notion that there is one unilinear history is of course false. But if you look at it after the experience of Auschwitz it looks as though all of history—or at least history since the Middle Ages—had no other alm than Auschwitz…. This, is the real problem of every philosophy of history how is it possible that in retrospect it always looks as though it couldn’t have happened otherwise?
Facts and Theories
A good example of the kind of scientific mentality that overwhelms all other insights is the “domino theory.” The fact is that very few of the sophisticated intellectuals who wrote the Pentagon Papers believed in this theory. Yet everything they did was based on this assumption—not because they were liars, or because they wanted to please their superiors, but because it gave them a framework within which they could work. They took this framework even though they knew—and though every intelligence report and every factual analysis proved to them every morning—that these assumptions were simply factually wrong. They took it because they didn’t have any other framework. People find such theories in order to get rid of contingency and unexpectedness. Good old Hegel once said that all philosophical contemplation serves only to eliminate the accidental. A fact has to be witnessed by eyewitnesses who are not the best of witnesses; no fact is beyond doubt. But that two and two are four is somehow beyond doubt. And the theories produced in the Pentagon were all much more plausible than the facts of what actually happened.
Jews
The “giftedness”—so to speak—of a certain part at least of the Jewish people is a historical problem, a problem of the first order for the historians. I can risk a speculative explanation: we are the only people, the only European people, who have survived from antiquity pretty much intact. That means we have kept our identity, and it means we are the only people who have never known analphabetism. We were always literate because you cannot be a Jew without being literate. The women were less literate than the men but even they were much more literate than their counterparts elsewhere. Not only the elite knew how to read but every Jew had to read—the whole people, in all its classes and on all levels of giftedness and intelligence.
Evil
When I wrote my Eichmann in Jerusalem one of my main intentions was to destroy the legend of the greatness of evil, of the demonic force, to take away from people the admiration they have for the great evildoers like Richard III.
I found in Brecht the following remark:
The great political criminals must be exposed and exposed especially to laughter. They are not great political criminals, but people who permitted great political crimes, which is something entirely different. The failure of his enterprises does not indicate that Hitler was an idiot.
Now, that Hitler was an idiot was of course a prejudice of the whole opposition to Hitler prior to his seizure of power and therefore a great many books tried then to justify him and to make him a great man. So, Brecht says, “The fact that he failed did not indicate that Hitler was an idiot and the extent of his enterprises does not make him a great man.” It is neither the one nor the other: this whole category of greatness has no application.
“If the ruling classes,” he goes on, “permit a small crook to become a great crook, he is not entitled to a privileged position in our view of history. That is, the fact that he becomes a great crook and that what he does has great consequences does not add to his stature.” And generally speaking he then says in these very abrupt remarks: “One may say that tragedy deals with the sufferings of mankind in a less serious way than comedy.” This of course is a shocking statement; I think that at the same time it is entirely true. What is really necessary is, if you want to keep your integrity under these circumstances, then you can do it only if you remember your old way of looking at such things and say: “No matter what he does and if he killed ten million people, he is still a clown.”
Progress
The law of progress holds that everything now must be better than what was there before. Don’t you see if you want something better, and better, and better, you lose the good. The good is no longer even being measured.
Hannah Arendt (1964) – What Remains? (Full Interview with Günter Gaus)
An interview with Hannah Arendt about her life and work in 1964 with Günter Gaus. This is a version of an upload from the previous channel. The translation is my own, but parts also come from the published version by Joan Stambaugh. Note, this is actually the complete interview. For whatever reason, the other one with English captions on YouTube is missing almost 15 minutes, including what I take to be some of the most interesting parts, like the discussion of truth and the parts from her book the Human Condition. That’s the main reason I originally decided to put it up to begin with…plus I think my own translation is somewhat better and more accurate. The audio and video have also been improved.
“Joe Biden could have a stroke in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose any voters.”
~ RPT ~
As another co-founder of the anti-Trump group, the Lincoln Project left the Republican party on Thursday, another said the group was anything but a reflection of the GOP.
“At this point, we’re as much as never-Republican as we are anything else,” Reed Galen, one of the co-founders of the project, told Politico.
…. I pray Amber Rose was there because this was an opportunity to transform not just her thinking but her soul. Opportunities for the Gospel abound, but if we only isolate it to our familiar circle, what good is it?
President Trump came to a church that is in a Democratic stronghold. He came to a church to listen to average, everyday Americans like you, and like me. He came to a church not to speak to us, but to listen to us. He came into a church, and a lot of people, they were upset. A lot of people they would ask me questions. Why would you allow Donald Trump to come into your church?
How many know that the Bible says we are all sinners and we all need the grace of God? How many of you know that the Bible says, He who has not sinned let him cast the first stone?
Again, the bellyaching GOP faithful needed to hear this, and Sewell challenged their thinking with a series of questions.
President Donald Trump, he came during his birthday weekend. Let me ask you a question, Grand Old Party: What would you do for your birthday if you were worth 6.7 billion dollars? What would you do for your birthday? Would you come into Detroit? Would you come into the Hood Hood? He came to the Hood because he cares about average, everyday Americans.
Grand Old Party I need to ask you a question? What would you ask for your birthday? If you could go to Mar-a-Lago, or if you could go to New York, what would you ask for your birthday?
He asked for prayer. I believe that prayer is preventative and prayer is proactive. I believe praying in the name of Jesus changes everything.
None of us knew this story, and none of us could imagine what would occur five days ago. But God knew.
And when we prayed for President Trump, only God knew that only 30 days later, there would be a Miracle by a Millimeter. Only God knew that if we prayed for him during his birthday there would be a Miracle by a Millimeter. If President Trump had moved one millimeter, he wouldn’t have been here on Monday to talk to us about how America was going to be made Wealthy Again. If President Donald Trump would have moved just a millimeter, he wouldn’t have been here on Tuesday to talk about how he was going to Make America Secure Again. If President Donald Trump would have moved just a millimeter, he wouldn’t have been here on Wednesday to tell us how he was going to Make America Strong Again. And if President Trump would have moved just a millimeter, he wouldn’t have been here tonight to tell us how he’s gonna Make America Great Again!
The audience said this in unison with Pastor Sewell and erupted in applause and praise. Pastor Sewell went to his closing, which delivered an even more powerful punch.
Before I take my seat, I just gotta talk to you about something called Providence and something called Sovereignty. God’s Sovereignty is his ability to be able to do what he wants, when he wants, because He’s God. And God’s Providence, it’s when he does what he wants, when he wants, for all of you.
Did you know President Trump was shot at 6:11? And do you know that Ephesians chapter number 6, verse number 11 says, to be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power?
RPT note: Actually, that is verse 10, but I believe eleven is more apt with all the lies garnered against Trump by the secular Left, the MSM, and #NeverTrumpers:
10 Finally, be strengthened by the Lord and by his vast strength. 11 Put on the full armor of God so that you can stand against the schemes of the devil. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this darkness, against evil, spiritual forces in the heavens. (CSV)
10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty strength. 11 Put on the whole armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm against the devil’s strategies. 12 For our struggle is not against a human opponent, but against rulers, against authorities, against cosmic powers in the darkness around us, against evil spiritual forces in the heavenly realm. (ISV)
10-12 And that about wraps it up. God is strong, and he wants you strong. So take everything the Master has set out for you, well-made weapons of the best materials. And put them to use so you will be able to stand up to everything the Devil throws your way. This is no afternoon athletic contest that we’ll walk away from and forget about in a couple of hours. This is for keeps, a life-or-death fight to the finish against the Devil and all his angels. (The Message)
Pastor Sewell’s last challenge was to Democrats, those who wouldn’t have given Trump the time of day, and those on the fence.
So, all of my Democrat friends, I want to ask you one question: Do you know anybody who was the 45th President? He was convicted of 34 accounts, he raised 53 million dollars in 24 hours and could be the 47th President of the United States of America, and he was shot one time? Do you know anyone like that?
So, all my friends back in Detroit who are Democrats, I want to ask you just one simple question: You can’t deny the power of God on this man’s life. You can’t deny God protected him. You can’t deny that it was a Millimeter Miracle that was able to save this man’s life. Could it be that Jesus Christ preserved him for such a time as this? Could it be… Could it be that when we prayed for him when he came to the roundtable in Detroit, that Jesus asked, and he received, that we sought him, and then he found protection?
Could it be that the King of Glory, the Lord God Strong and Mighty, the God who is Mighty in Battle protected Donald Trump because he wants to use him for such a time as this?
If you believe that, come on put your hands together and give our God great glory!
Mic drop. The audience did just that. Tell me again how the GOP has abandoned God?
These are Bongino’s podcasts, which means LANGUAGE WARNING. Here are the two first two casts after the attempt on Trump’s life.
No excuses. In this episode, I draw from my Secret Service background to deliver the most in-depth analysis of the Trump assassination attempt you’ll see anywhere.
A lot of this is not adding up. In this episode, I delve deep into the newly-uncovered details surrounding the Trump assassination attempt, plus my take on JD Vance as VP.
This is gonna be a long post. Sorry. But this is going to be an in-depth “discovery” [reminder] of the violent language/ideas of the Leftist Democrats and the #NeverTrumpers.
Lincoln Project
WHAT THEY DO:They malign people like myself (a conservative evangelical) as well as mainstream to conservative Republicans as bigots, racists, rubes, anti-American – when they are merely projecting. They contend that they are for true Democracy, while being committed to electing those who hate it. But they are insistent from their beginning that Trump said there are good Nazi’s and that those who support Trump are likewise by association.
I first wish to start with the Lincoln Project. The Lincoln Project are a bunch of Republicans [that is laughable] who malign Republicans as rubes, bigots, and the like:
Their maligning of me and person’s like Trump need to be dealt with first.
Here is a photo somewhat famous to us “politicos.”
A small group of demonstrators dressed as “Unite the Right” rallygoers with tiki torches outside the bus of Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin in Charlottesville.
Let me explain this photo. It is the Lincoln Project attempting to defeat Republicans and get Leftists into office by smearing us as racists:
The co-founder of the Never-Trumper Lincoln Project has doubled down on the group’s much-decried decision to stage a political stunt involving fake “white supremacists” supposedly backing Virginia’s Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin.
When asked by CNN’s Chris Cuomo Friday if he wanted to apologize, Stuart Stevens said no.
In fact, he told Cuomo, this is why people have donated millions to the Lincoln Project – even though both liberals and conservatives have called him out for trying to smear Youngkin as racist.
“Listen,” said Stevens. “Every day I hear people pleading with the Lincoln Project to help show Democrats how to win, how to play hardball. You know, this is an example.”
In fact, a person I know loves Rick Wilson, whom I have a couple snippets of herein:
As I’ve said before, Trump isn’t Hitler. Hitler had normal-sized hands and the ability to concentrate for more than thirty seconds.
Trump is, however, cut from the same modern authoritarian cloth as the leaders he publicly and slavishly worships: Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orban, Kim Jong-un, Rodrigo Duterte, and others.
Rick Wilson, Running Against the Devil: A Plot to Save America from Trump–and Democrats from Themselves (New York, NY: Forum Books, 2020), 74.
Not only was that call for Trump to be assassinated a horrid position, but, the Lincoln Project also chooses, politically, anti-American socialists… nay, Marxists, over Republican candidates and ideals.
As another co-founder of the anti-Trump group, the Lincoln Project left the Republican party on Thursday, another said the group was anything but a reflection of the GOP.
“At this point, we’re as much as never-Republican as we are anything else,” Reed Galen, one of the co-founders of the project, told Politico.
The Lincoln Project targeted more than half a dozen Republicans up for re-election in 2020, including Lindsey Graham (he won), Mitch McConnell (he won), Dan Sullivan (he won), and Susan Collins (she won).
While Democrats won the White House, the GOP lost only one seat in the Senate, and control of the upper house of Congress will be decided by runoff elections in Georgia on 5 January.
“We spent about $20m on Senate races, which is probably somewhere like 5 to 10 per cent of what other people spent on those things but somehow it was up to us to be determinative. And no one was more surprised by the results of that than I was,” Mr Galen said.
Despite the results, the Lincoln Project is continuing campaigning in the Senate with the Georgia runoffs to oust “Trump enablers” Kelly Loffler and David Perdue.
They have partnered with Democratic groups like Stacey Abrams’ Fair Fight, the NAACP and BlackPac, as well as lesser-known entities like MeidasTouch for more Twitter videos.
They received $700,000 from the Senate Majority Pac, closely linked with Chuck Schumer, who has vowed to first “take Georgia, then we change the world”. Left-wing lobby group Sixteen Thirty Fund has also bankrolled the Lincoln Project’s gambits with a $300,000 influx of cash.
Beyond January’s two Senate seats, the Lincoln Project is dialling in its sights on the 18 attorneys general and 126 House Republicans that publicly supported the Texas Supreme Court challenge to election results in key states.
As the goalposts move for whatever Trumpism looks like in a post-Twitter presidency, the Never Trumper movement becomes ever more Never Republican.
Among the founders, Steven Schmidt has registered full Democrat, while Ms Horn and Mr Galen have left the GOP as independents.
What a disgrace #NeverTrumpers are!
The Media
Not much to say about it other than you gotta watch these examples of the travesty of the mainstream media (MSM):
The MSM Convinces Their Lemmings Trump is Hitler
Here is a recent post of mine to finish out this section:
POWERLINEhas an excellent article regarding the Left’s predictable turn to their canards… or “cards”. The “Race-Card” or the “Fascist-Card” — here is that article, followed by some historical examples:
With the presidential election slipping away from the Democrats, the apparat is cranking up the old playbook. Behold the cover of The New Republic, once a sober and serious journal of liberal opinion:
It’s crap like this that makes Democrats and their media allies responsible for what happened today.
They have demonized Donald Trump to the point where any loon would think he would be a hero for trying to take out such a major “threat to Democracy.”
Democrats and their media allies have become the threats and unless things change immediately it’s going to get even worse.
Well now, that’s not what the Tomaskys of the 1970s and 1980s said. In the days right after Reagan’s first landslide in 1980, the head of the Joint Center for Political Studies, which the Washington Post described as a “respected liberal think tank,” wrote: “When you consider that in the climate we’re in—rising violence, the Ku Klux Klan—it is exceedingly frightening.” This was also the line from Raul Castro (funny how the American left and actual Communists always say the same thing): “We sometimes have the feeling that we are living in the time preceding the election of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor of Germany.” Claremont College professor John Roth wrote: “I could not help remembering how economic turmoil had conspired with Nazi nationalism and militarism—all intensified by Germany’s defeat in World War I—to send the world reeling into catastrophe… It is not entirely mistaken to contemplate our post-election state with fear and trembling.” Esquire writer Harry Stein says that the voters who supported Reagan were like the “good Germans” in “Hitler’s Germany.” Alan Wolfe of Boston College wrote in the New Left Review: “The worst nightmares of the American left appear to have come true.” And he doubled down in The Nation: “[T]he United States has embarked on a course so deeply reactionary, so negative and mean-spirited, so chauvinistic and self-deceptive that our times may soon rival the McCarthy era.”
As I’ve observed here before, this is the oldest cliche of the left, going all the way back to FDR and Truman. Let’s take in the front page of the New York Times, October 25, 1948:
PRESIDENT LIKENS DEWEY TO HITLER AS FASCISTS’ TOOL
Says When Bigots, Profiteers Get Control of Country They Select ‘Front Man’ to Rule DICTATORSHIP STRESSED Truman Tells Chicago Audience a Republican Victory Will Threaten U.S. Liberty
CHICAGO, Oct. 25 — A Republican victory on election day will bring a Fascistic threat to American freedom that is even more dangerous than the perils from communism and extreme right “crackpots,” President Truman asserted here tonight. . . “Before Hitler came to power, control over the German economy passed into the hands of a small group of rich manufacturers, bankers and landowners,” he said.
When Barry Goldwater accepted the 1964 Republican nomination, California’s Democratic Gov. Pat Brown said, “The stench of fascism is in the air.”
Former Rep. William Clay Sr., D-Mo., said President Ronald Reagan was “trying to replace the Bill of Rights with fascist precepts lifted verbatim from ‘Mein Kampf.'”
Coretta Scott King, in 1980, said, “I am scared that if Ronald Reagan gets into office, we are going to see more of the Ku Klux Klan and a resurgence of the Nazi Party.”
After Republicans took control of the House in the mid-’90s, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., compared the newly conservative-majority House to “the Duma and the Reichstag,” referring to the legislature set up by Czar Nicholas II of Russia and the parliament of the German Weimar Republic that brought Hitler to power.
About President George Herbert Walker Bush, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said: “I believe (Bush) is a racist for many, many reasons. … (He’s) a mean-spirited man who has no care or concern about what happens to the African American community. … I truly believe that.”
About the Republican-controlled House, longtime Harlem Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel, in 1994, said: “It’s not ‘s—-‘ or ‘n——-‘ anymore. (Republicans) say, ‘Let’s cut taxes.'” A decade later, Rangel said, “George (W.) Bush is our Bull Connor,” referring to the Birmingham, Alabama, Democrat segregationist superintendent of public safety who sicced dogs and turned fire hoses on civil rights workers.
Donna Brazile, Al Gore’s presidential campaign manager, in 1999, said: Republicans have a “white boy attitude, (which means) ‘I must exclude, denigrate and leave behind.’ They don’t see it or think about it. It’s a culture.” The following year, Brazile said: “The Republicans bring out Colin Powell and (Rep.) J.C. Watts, (R-Okla.), because they have no program, no policy. … They’d rather take pictures with Black children than feed them.”
About President George W. Bush, former Vice President Al Gore said: “(Bush’s) executive branch has made it a practice to try and control and intimidate news organizations, from PBS to CBS to Newsweek. … And every day, they unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts to harass and hector any journalist who is critical of the President.” Digital “brownshirts”?
About George W. Bush, George Soros, the billionaire Democratic donor, said: “The Bush administration and the Nazi and communist regimes all engaged in the politics of fear. … Indeed, the Bush administration has been able to improve on the techniques used by the Nazi and communist propaganda machines.”
Former NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, in a 2006 speech at historically Black Fayetteville State University said, “The Republican Party would have the American flag and the swastika flying side by side.”
Former Gov. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2005, described the contest between Democrats and Republicans as “a struggle between good and evil. And we’re the good.” Three years later, Dean referred to the GOP as “the white party.”
After Hurricane Katrina, Democratic Missouri Senate candidate Claire McCaskill said George W. Bush “let people die on rooftops in New Orleans because they were poor and because they were Black.”
Feminist superlawyer Gloria Allred, in 2001, referred to Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice as “Uncle Tom types.”
Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, in 2006, said, “The (Republican-controlled) House of Representatives … has been run like a plantation. And you know what I’m talking about.”
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee chairwoman in 2011, said “Republicans … want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws.”……
I bet almost all of my family believes Trump mocked a disabled man’s handicap; think that when he said “there are fine people on both sides” he was saying there were “fine Nazis or white supremacists;” or think that racists and white supremacists have voted Republican in general; or that the bodies natural defenses in immunity are non-existent and only “vaccines” can bring immunity.
These are dangerous lies to believe.
President Biden and Democrats
President Biden continues to lie about this, saying in a sense that President Trump said there were “fine Nazis”
This may go with the theory by some that the Democrats are actively seeing too replace Biden with someone present, so-to-speak. And these same people want Biden in the debates with Trump so he will fail on a national stage and get the electorate behind the move. Soo the complicit media is getting behind the move. Ergo, Snopes.
Many years agoPowerlineasked a question about Snopes – if it was a satire site. Lol. here is the graphic they used:
But this most recent shift towards truth in this matter has caused a “wailing” and “gnashing of teeth” with those that are consumed with TDS, or, Trump Derangement Syndrome. Here are some examples via Right Scoop and :
I respond to one of the TDS’ers:
Dennis Prager Discusses Trump Being Painted as Hitler @Biden’s Inaugural Speech
Montage Of Democrats Calling For Incitement/Violence (Larry Elder)
Trump continually disavowed white nationalists — but the media rejects:
Corey Booker’s Trump Card Is A Race-Card (ACB/BDP/EPMD Edition)
SOME MORE RESOURCES (USED AND RECOMMENDED)
Key Democratic Vendors Still Doing Business with Lincoln Project After Sex Scandal (Washington Free Beacon)
Even though I already uploaded some audio a few weeks back on the topic… the bitter drunkard Mark Hamill tweeted this which caused me to grab some more audio as well as a hat-tip POWERLINE’S piece. The FEDERLAIST starts us out on the topic:
… Hollywood actor Mark Hamill, a longtime Democrat fundraiser and Biden supporter, spoke out against Project 2025 in a recent post, writing, “With fear for our Democracy, I dissent.”
The actor included a graphic of Trump with a laundry list of goals supposedly outlined in the project, including ending no-fault divorce, banning African American studies, banning contraception, banning Muslim immigration, cutting social security, raising the retirement age, and court packing.
Project 2025 responded with an enumerated list of 30 “myths vs. facts,” clarifying Hamill’s more misleading claims. …
Enjoy some clarity in the Leftist hurricane of misinformation.
Here is the graphic Hamill shared used in the above video, adapted a bit:
Most of that is B.S., some of it reflects a majority of the voting public. FIRST HOWEVER, here is the older audio I grabbed to share with my mil-boys.
Left-wing media seems to be up in arms lately over Heritage’s Presidential Transition Project, better known as Project 2025. What is actually going on? Assistant Director Spencer Chretien explains. (The original audio was posted on Heritage’s site October 4, 2023). See more at: PROJECT 2025
That makes the goals of Project 2025 a bit clearer. But never underestimate the ability of Democrats to muddy the waters – which is the reason I feel the need for this post.
Project 2025 has a response to each point below:
MYTHS VS. FACTS ABOUT PROJECT 2025
We are not affiliated with former President Trump. We are a coalition of more than 110 conservative groups advocating policy and personnel recommendations.
And then John Hinderaker was on the “The Morning News” with Vineeta Sawkar to discuss the issues presented [falsely] by Democrats. Here is that conversation:
A good “left/right” discussion on this can be found here:
