Happy Hanukkah! The story that celebrates the victory of the Maccabees, a Jewish Priestly family from Modiin that aren’t Israeli, didn’t live in Israel and they defeated the Greek empire that wanted to force them to abandon their faith, their heritage and their G-d.
If I were going to write the story today I would cast Jewish Voices for Peace, J street, If Not Now, B’Tselem, and leftist Jews as the Hellenistic Jews of the Hanukkah story. Because they work against Israel and those that want to live life according to Torah. It’s kind of interesting to me, I recently took a class called “Wrestling With Faith” in it we talked about the Mitzvot. The 613 little holy bread crumbs G-d gave to leave a path for us to follow to find him. You want to get to know someone? You ask him or her questions about themselves, and sometimes getting that information is like pulling teeth. G-d plays no such games with us. He says these things I like, these things I don’t like. You want to make me smile? You want to show you are a child who listen to their father? These are house rules. Which kind of baffles me when people tell me they don’t matter anymore. Maybe I just haven’t found the Parasha where it says G-d changed him mind about those. But that was the point of the Hellenization. To separate the Jews from the things that G-d ask. It’s like doing everything the opposite of what your boss, significant other, spouse or coach says you should do and then expecting them to still feel the same way about you. It doesn’t usually play out that way. So Hellenization was meant to turn people from the worship of G-d to the worship of the human body, art, and pagan rituals. They wanted to convince the Jews living in Israel that they didn’t need to observe the new months, circumcision, Torah study, Shabbat observance. They wanted to drive a wedge between the people and G-d.
For more info on this history of Hanukkah and information you’ll find we’ve got quite a few choices.
It definitely wasn’t safe to openly practice being a Jew in Israel at that time. As other times down through history different people of different nations have tried to eradicate Jews and their Judaism. It never began with cattle cars, concentration camps and ovens. It began with yellow stars and discrimination. At the end of WWII the world joined us in vowing #NeverAgain, and now there has been a self serving attempt to cheapen that phrase by a money grubbing, attention seeking political pawn who is protected by armed guards even as he oinks out that those that can’t afford paid protection be rendered defenseless. Little swine.
Did we think that would be the final attempt after the final solution? Well, it wasn’t.
One of the two new muslims elected to congress. She is leading a group to Israel, but not to visit Israeli Jews, Arabs, Christians and Druze. Nope, to visit the ancient people (est. 1964) Falestinians. The other muslim Ilhan Omar of Minnesota is also no friend.
Tlaib in the interview also came out in support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, which she said brings attention to “issues like the racism and the international human rights violations by Israel right now.”
Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, the other Muslim woman elected to Congress in November, said in an interview shortly after the election that she supports the BDS movement after saying during her campaign that it was “counteractive” and prevents dialogue.
What do people not yet accept or understand about “taquia”?
One might think it’s becoming unsafe in America for Jews to openly admit or display their faith. One would be correct. From wonderful Jack Engelhard in a column titled Americas Hidden Jews. This whole column is well worth reading.
Professor of Jewish and Holocaust studies at Columbia University Elizabeth Midlarsky is about the only one at the college who dares to identify herself openly as Jewish.
Let that sink in.
Remember, this is America. This is New York.
A few days ago she walked into her office to find it vandalized with anti-Semitic graffiti. “They got me,” she told The Washington Post. “I’m afraid.
And then we have Airbnb or AirBS depending on if you ask the company or me what their name is. AirBS is a site where people can list property, apartments or rooms they have to rent to vacationers. They have recently decided parts of Israel aren’t in Israel. So any of the Jewish homes listed in Judea and Samaria, the Biblical heartland, were removed. Not the Falistinian ones mind you, they’re still listed. Just not the Jewish ones. Have they done this in any other part of the world where there is dissension occurring? Why do I bother asking? Of course not. It is flat out anti-semitism. Are they being called out for it. Nope.
Remember in the Hanukkah story how a Hellenized Jew was going to sacrifice a pig on the alter in Modiin since Matthias Maccabee refused to do so? Matthias killed the corrupted Jew, and then the King’s officer that was commanding such a thing. There would be no pigs sacrificed on alters in the Maccabee name. The Hellenized Jews were trying to corrupt the pure ones. They’re still active today.
American Jewish peace activists who have spent much of their lives fighting discrimination against ethnic minorities, have decided there is one form of discrimination they support: discrimination against Jews who reside in Judea-Samaria.
Daniel Pipes is determined to make it clear to the Arabs in Judea and Samaria that in order to survive they must recognize Israel.
The Maccabeean revolt was a two fold war. One, it was incredible military victories, G-d gave many many miracles over the years the battles were fought. The other was the war of faith, religion or culture. However you choose to look at it.
I think I’m going to have to disagree with Lord Rabbi Jonathan Sacks this time. In his Hanukkah message this year he seems to me at least, to believe the great battle was for education, not military battles. I believe without the military battle of G-d through the Maccabees, there would have been no educational victories. To quote Dinesh D’Souza yesterday, he was discussing the difference between George H.W. Bush and President Trump. He said “sometimes you need Mother Teresa, and sometimes you need Dirty Harry”. I would add and sometimes, no one less than Judah Maccabee will do.
Unreasonably warm temperatures (55° on 13, December) spawn tourist outbreaks along woodland trails. How does one differentiate tourists from regular hikers and mountain bikers? Voices as loud as their clothing, hands crammed with devices and radios, unleashed trail-poopers (dogs), and packs of even louder chubby fast-food wrapper spewing hotdog fingered kids for whom being chained to a hamster wheel for six months…without food, would be beneficial. People attend movies to laugh, cry, and escape reality if but for a short time. Conversations, seat-kickers, and cell phone glow can spoil the experience. In like fashion, nature is spoiled when rude civilization intrudes. Didn’t the Bush Administration argue the fight against Tourists was international? Didn’t they coin the term “GWOT” for “Global War On Tourism?” Recently I considered reporting a herd of Tourists to Homeland Security. None appeared menacing, not even their dogs, and some seemed friendly enough. But isn’t that what people say when told their neighbor ran over pedestrians with a truck or blew themselves up at the train station killing many people? I’m keeping an eye on them.
In Part I, I began exposing Michael Savage’s campaign to ban private ownership of certain firearms and magazines, in which he employed arguments perfectly useful…to Confiscationists. If I don’t like Savage, why listen to him? I don’t. I used to enjoy his wit and irreverent humor but his undisguised jealousy of conservative radio-talk show hosts and promotion of a Buddha-ized version of Judaism wore thin. His claim to be the only true radio conservative on the one hand, and assertion FDR’s socialist New Deal solved the Great Depression on the other, was the final straw. Anyone with a modicum of understanding with respect to economics, history, and the Constitution knows this is false. I listen when necessary because 2nd Amendment supporters must be prepared to answer its enemies. Las Vegas was the impetus for Savage’s first salvo against the right to keep and bear arms as the second was the Sutherland, Texas church shooting.
On 6 November, 2017 Savage resurrected with a vengeance his anti-2nd Amendment rant from the previous month yelling into the microphone; “Don’t tell me if everyone had a gun in that church they could have stopped the killer! You John Wayne types.” With a sneer he added, “And please don’t play John Wayne with me on this show. I’m going to hang up on you if you call and say if all those church-goers had had a gun, this wouldn’t have happened. Yeah, you John Wayne types. You’d freeze up, drop the gun, and shoot yourself in the foot if evil came into your church with an ‘assault rifle” (sic). He asked how the “shooter,”1 a nut, got a gun. “Why? Because gun laws are too weak” Savage continued. “Gun shows are wide open ranges and anyone can buy a gun there.” He mocked conservatives arguing more guns are the answer and pastors saying G_d is with us even in the midst of such tragedies. Savage insisted every “nut”2 in the nation can buy an AR15 because of “lax gun laws” and the killer was allowed to buy an “automatic rifle.” Although Savage conceded he was ultimately stopped by a man with a gun, “That was only after he had killed everyone” he said and then trotted out an argument near and dear to the hearts of liberals with respect to the 2nd Amendment; “People have a constitutional right to drive,” Savage argued, which comes with all sorts of regulations, licensing requirements, training, and tests to enjoy this “right” (sic). People have to “demonstrate” knowledge of how to operate the car and that they can drive before getting behind the wheel. Why isn’t this true with guns? Then he shouted; “Why is the right to own firearms one hundred percent free from licensing, but not the right to drive? All you tough guys who want ‘assault weapons’ (sic) say, ‘well that government will come down and get us. Let’s roll armed and go out like the militia.’ Yeah, all the tough guys on conservative radio are going to lead you. Onward Christian soldiers with their ‘assault weapons’ (sic). They’ll run so fast you wouldn’t be able to say Mickey Mouse.” Wow. During this diatribe Savage let out he has a concealed carry permit. How does one obtain a permit in radical Left-wing People’s Republic of Marin County of California’s Bay Area? You can’t unless you’re a rich celebrity or well-connected. But, Savage confessed, he’d be too scared to use his firearm so he has two body-guards. Are they armed? When it comes to self-defense, how long must Americans endure being preached down to by upper-crust gated community, goon-protected self-styled aristocrats? It reminds me of the unquenchable hypocrisy flowing from ultra-rich super-liberal Senator Ed Kennedy raging about the plight of the poor in America. Savage continued railing against conservatives claiming the “knee-jerk” reaction from “right-wingers” is; “You can’t touch guns. But we must touch guns!” He yelled becoming unhinged. “Tell me I’m wrong that every nut-job in the world shouldn’t be able to get ‘assault-weapons’ (sic). You’re wrong! Too many nuts have their hands on too many guns!” He accused conservatives of arguing “nuts” should be allowed to have guns adding that those who claim they “need assault-weapons” (sic) for home defense “would poop in their pants instead. People armed is not the answer!” He shouted.3
On the following day, Savage claimed “right-wingers” oppose any and all restrictions on who can have a gun and the number of rounds held by a “clip” adding; “I have no idea why anyone in this country ‘needs’ a thirty-round clip (sic). Who really needs an assault-rifle? What, to hunt elephants? Don’t they use single-shot rifles, in .30-06 to hunt elephants? A single round from that caliber would drop an elephant. So what in the hell do we need a thirty-round ‘clip’ (sic) for? I know, you’re going to stand up like Paul Revere and you’re going to say Charge! You won’t say charge. You’ll drop your gun, you’ll drop your shorts, and you’ll run like everyone else. Stop pretending that you’re a big hero!” He then called for banning “assault weapons” (Meaning ARs, AKs, and similar function rifles) and “multiple round ‘clips” claiming this would limit the number of guns in circulation hence limiting criminal access. The Texas killer was able to kill so many people because “He had a machine gun in his hands!” Savage shouted. But, with an “assault-weapons” (sic) ban, he continued, the killer would have been forced to use a single-shot rifle which would have allowed the men in the church to have subdued him by beating him over the head with a chair. To this insanity Savage added; “One in five police officers is killed by an assault-rifle” and then he screamed; “I no longer believe Americans need to run around with thirty-round ‘clips’ (sic) and assault rifles! When the hell did the 2nd Amendment ever say you had the right to own an ‘assault-weapon?’ (sic) What am I going to do with one, wait for the day the government comes to get me? I’m going to hold off a platoon of government agents? You people are living in a dream world!” He then asserted, as before, AR15s were useless for home defense. The best weapon, he said, is a shotgun but they “are complicated to use” and “their mechanisms are complex, not for amateurs.” Savage again claimed an AR15 round will go through house walls but shotgun pellets would not. A pistol round might go through a wall but this was unlikely, he claimed, because they had 15 to 20 round “clips” (sic) as opposed to the thirty-round capacity of “assault-weapons” (sic). Finally Savage claimed because there are restrictions on the 1st Amendment, you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater or threaten the president, banning “assault-weapons” and thirty-round “clips” didn’t violate the 2nd Amendment. “There’s a difference between the right to bear arms and the right to bear machine-guns” he said.4
It would be beyond charitable to describe what Savage said as either abysmally ignorant or intentionally deceptive. His persistence in calling magazines “clips” and conflation of the terms “assault-weapon” (no such animal), assault-rifle, and machine gun with semiautomatic rifles demonstrates his knowledge of firearms is limited, at best, and promotion of an agenda supersedes honesty.
Conceding the Texas killer was stopped by an armed man but this would have failed inside the church because, Barney Fife-like, fear-stricken and trembling men would have dropped their guns shooting themselves is illogical. It is stupid. It also ignores the many, more than capable, men and women who carry and could have stopped the killer. It makes no sense unless Savage, shamed there are real people with spines out there, beyond the Bay Area, in places like Texas, is projecting his own timorous nature onto others. During any mass shooting event, in the time it takes to call the police, for them to respond, set up a command post, assess the situation, identify the good from the bad guy(s), and formulate a counter-response, the massacre is usually over. Contrary to the lies told by Savage, when a “good-guy” with a gun is on the scene, casualties are “dramatically lower” and is often the deciding factor in limiting the “body count.” In nine mass shootings in which victims had to wait for police arrive, from Luby’s Cafeteria, Killeen, Texas (16 October, 1991) to Pulse Night Club, Orlando, Florida (12 June, 2016) 220 people died. In eight similar shootings in which an armed good-guy was on the scene, from Pearl High School, Pearl, Mississippi (1 October, 1997) to the Curtis Culwell Center, Garland, Texas (3 May 2015), 37 people died.5 Savage’s attack on men and women willing to shoulder the responsibility for the safety of others, putting their own lives on the line, is disgraceful.
Why do liberals seem to go after the rights of law-abiding Americans as opposed to violent criminals (Chicago)? Why do they mock and ridicule notions of personal responsibility with respect to self-defense? Are the spines of liberal men removed in-vitro or do they dissolve naturally as they progress toward puberty? Savage’s allegation; conservatives want every “nut” to have guns, is a malicious lie and ignores the fact that, under “federal” law, they are already prohibited from so doing. Information on anyone institutionalized and or adjudicated “mentally defective” by mental health officials and judges must be forwarded to the FBI where it is entered into their massive data base known as NICS (National Instant Criminal Background System). If anyone so classified attempts to purchase a firearm, once the FFL (Federal Firearm License) holder calls and submits the individual’s name as required by law, they will be rejected. Further, as to Savage’s assertion armed law-abiding citizens are not the “answer,” approximately 2.5 million people per year employ a firearm to prevent violent criminal attack. In 98% of those cases, displaying the firearm is enough to stop the attack.6 Instead of reducing violent crime, Savage’s solution, disarming intended victims, always the first on the scene by virtue of their status as targets of criminals, would lead to even more murders and mass shootings.
Savage’s analogy between the “right” to drive and to keep and bear arms is slick sleight of hand. There is no constitutional right to drive and it is untrue that the manufacture, sale, and possession of firearms is completely unregulated, unrestricted, and unlicensed. All manner of legal restrictions, including age, legal status as a citizen, mental health, criminal record, and so forth apply to obtaining a firearm. Savage ignores the fact that each year more than 37,000 Americans are killed by other drivers in automobile accidents, essentially negligent homicide, with an additional 2.35 million injured, maimed, and crippled. Automobile accidents are the single greatest cause of death in the United States.7 Speaking as a passionate car lover and former police traffic investigator, Americans in general are careless, cavalier in attitude, irresponsible, and exert little effort to perfect driving skills. And yet once started, they and their automobiles pose a grave hazard to everyone in their path. By contrast, more than 124 million Americans own close to 300 million guns but there were only 505 deaths by gun accident in 2013 and of 2,596,993 deaths from all causes the same year, only 1% were firearm related and most were suicides.8 Comparing drivers to people who own guns makes for a very poor argument. One wonders to which constitution he refers.
The right to keep and bear arms is not subject to a utilitarian “needs” test. It’s no one’s business how many neckties, cars, horses, guns, or pairs of shoes anyone owns. People have a G_d-given right to their property and to accumulate however much of it they desire. But, for the non-gun owning public swayed by such arguments, let me ask you this; how many guns, rounds (not bullets) of ammunition, and magazines will you need when the power goes out, it’s not coming back on for a long time, and when called, the cops aren’t coming either. Remember the riots in Los Angeles (1992), Ferguson, Missouri (August 2014), and Baltimore (April 2015) and attendant looting, robbery, destruction of private property, and even assaults including murder? Where were the cops? Where was the National (sic) Guard? Natural disasters like Hurricanes Andrew (August 1992), Katrina (August 2005), and Harvey (sic) (August 2017) all resulted in attempted looting, rape, robbery, and destruction of property. Again, where were the police? In each case it was armed citizens, or lack thereof, who prevented crime or fell to predatory animals called looters.
Savage’s attempt to delegitimize semiautomatic rifles by tying them to elephant hunting is pathetic. No one hunts elephants with so-called “assault rifles,” nor a .30-06 single shot rifle. It is illegal to hunt elephants (as is the case with buffalo, Rhinos, and lions) with a caliber smaller than the .375 H&H. Most professional and experienced hunters use either the .404 Jeffrey, .416 Rigby, .416 Remington, .458 Winchester, or the .470 Nitro Express in bolt action repeating rifles.9 The point is not to argue the efficacy of one caliber compared to another but to demonstrate Savage hasn’t a clue what he’s talking about. These are all strawman arguments. Savage also seems ignorant of the fact that it was the American citizen soldier; the farmer, mechanic, tradesman, shopkeeper, and laborer, trained to arms, who were the backbone of the resistance to Britain’s armies in the War of Independence possessing modern equivalents of the “assault rifles” of their time.
In Federalist Paper #28, Alexander Hamilton declared the people held an “original right of self-defense” to take up arms, resist, and defeat even their own government should it betray and usurp their liberties.10 In Federalist #29, Hamilton added the “best possible security” against a standing army was the whole body of the people, who are armed and “stand ready to defend their own rights.”11 In the Federalist Papers and writings of many other Founding Fathers it becomes clear the main purpose of an armed populace, not a military or National (sic) Guard was to serve as a bulwark against infringement of their liberties by their own government.
Savage’s claim one in five police officers is killed in the line of duty by “assault-rifles” is false. It comes, from Senator Dianne Feinstein (Democrat, California), who appeared on Face the Nation making this claim. She took this “statistic” from the Violence Policy Center, a virulently anti-2nd Amendment Leftist organization. Here’s the trick. California classifies all semiautomatic firearms, including pistols, rifles, and shotguns, as “assault-weapons” (sic) a classification rejected by the FBI. Feinstein and Savage conflate California’s broad and ambiguous “assault-weapons” category with semiautomatic rifles meaning ARs, but this is a lie. Roughly 1% of officers shot and killed in the line of duty are killed by semiautomatic rifles.12 Using lies spun by ultra-liberal Senator Feinstein and an extremist anti-2nd Amendment group? Does Savage attack conservatives so viciously, while claiming to be one himself because, well, he’s not really one after all?
More demonstrations of ignorance can be found in Savage’s claim that shotguns are complicated and complex to use. This is absurd. A shotgun is typically one of the first guns kids learn to shoot because its operation is so simple. His claim AR15 rounds will, but shotgun pellets won’t penetrate sheetrock walls is wrong to the point of being dangerous. They all will. Finally, his use of the hackneyed “you can’t yell fire in a crowdedtheater” cliché is another liberal shibboleth. Pay attention Michael; the 1st Amendment is a prohibition against government interfering with free political speech. For it to be free, one must rightly possess or control the platform from which one speaks. Yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is not political speech nor does its shouter own the platform from which they yell. At the least, it’s a property rights violation of the theater owner, the sole determiner of what will or will not be said on his platform. The same holds true for threats against the president. These are fallacious if not atrocious analogues.
Savage’s straw man arguments and discreditable analogies demonstrate ignorance of the fact America’s Declaration of Independence proclaimed all rights G_d-given, inalienable, and among them is life. They are off limits to a majority vote of one’s neighbors or act of government. Inherent in the right to life is the right to protect it which also presupposes the means to do so. It is an illegal and unconstitutional act by man or his governments to alter, modify, regulate, infringe upon, or in any way denature a G_d-given right. It is not possible to square calls for “reasonable gun laws,” which by their nature must violate the 2nd Amendment, with equal claims to support the 2nd Amendment.
11 Typically I employ terms like: Killer, murderer, dirt bag, scum bag, and so forth. A shooter is someone engaged in target practice and competition at the range. Never let your foes and the ignorant shape the narrative through misuse, intentional or not, of vocabulary.
22 Unless someone clearly defines what they mean by “nut,” you should not presume you share the same understanding. For example, to me the term applies to an individual clinically diagnosed as schizophrenic. A person suffering an emotional meltdown, depression, or PTSD, for example, is not necessarily insane, often far from it. Savage lumps them, including soldiers returning from war who have difficulty adjusting to civilian life with the same broad brush as the insane. Cops who have seen too great a loss of life, in tragic ways, too many times and are having trouble dealing with it, could, under Savage’s broad brush, be characterized as nuts as well. They are not.
33 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 6 November 2017.
44 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 7 November, 2017.
By now, I hope you are aware of threats by California Democrat Rep. Swalwell to use nuclear weapons to enforce gun control laws (newsletter subscribers will get an early look at a detail column on the subject; others will wait until Tuesday).
He’s trying to walk back the threat as sarcasm (it wasn’t) or hyperbole to demonstrate that the government has gun owners out-gunned.
Nonetheless, he is working on the assumption that military personnel will be willing to — illegally — exercise overwhelming military force, including Weapons of Mass Destruction, against American civilians to enforce gun control laws.
Swalwell has now upped the ante by suggesting that military personnel would go so far as to conduct nuclear weapon strikes against Americans for the sake of gun control.
I would like to limit this poll to current military personnel and veterans. I suggest reviewing the Posse Comitatus Act before taking the poll.
Please share this poll, to reach as many people as possible. If limited to regular TZP readers, I expect I’ll see a strong bias in responses.
The Question: “The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms (“assault weapons”). A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.”
It’s Veteran’s Day, and I recently saw this video and it just nailed me. It broke my heart. That this can be happening in America is a shame, and I mean that literally and an outrage. The fact that there are around 7,000 foreign invaders headed for our southern border and that we should even entertain the thought of allowing any of them in, and giving them any kind of social services or benefits is a disgrace. And to the “do-good” helping hand out private social groups that would help the invaders but are not helping our Veterans first? You are a sham, you are a sham and a fraud.
Someone made the comment to me recently about people not wanting the caravan in the country because they look different than we do. What utter B___ S___. חרה to put it plainly.
I’m not a man, yet I would imagine the vast majority of the veterans in need of help are men. I’m not a black, or a Mexican, and only a little Native American, nor am I Asian. But we have homeless veterans that are, and I can promise you, I care far more about them than I do any illegal invader. No matter how pathetic CNN (#FakeNews) makes them look. We owe our veterans. We owe them a debt of gratitude for their service, and we owe them far more help than they are getting.
With the Demoncratic win in the house, I do not expect to see things improve for them at all.
At the end of the video there is quite a list of agencies should you choose to check them out. I reached out to a friend for some solid leads, and that’s what these are.
These are the statistics given in the video. Just in case you get caught up in the story and don’t absorb them, here they are to read over.
300,000 Veterans sleeping homeless on the streets, and rising.
Over 1.4 million are at risk of becoming homeless.
More than 67% of homeless Veterans served our country for at least 3 years.
Divorce rate among military couples has increased 42%.
An estimated 460,000 veterans suffer from PTSD.
Homeless veterans spend an average of 6 years on the streets.
The veterans administration has resources to serve only a fraction of our veterans.
Nearly 5000 veterans die by their own hands every year.
This is a large part of the list given at the end of the video, if I linked it, the link is active at the time of writing. Some in the video aren’t, and this is not the full list, but it’s a bunch of them.
For those of you who have served in the military, you are heroes. You are my hero, I don’t care if you peeled potatoes or washed sheets. Your families are heroes, because they served in their way right along side of you. You put aside your own life to serve our country, no matter your circumstance in life now, I ask G-d to bless you and your family, and bless ya’ll richly.
Recently I had occasion to patronize several commercial establishments including an apartment complex. Displayed on the glass entry door of each was the international symbol for “No,” a red circle bisected by a diagonal line. Centered in each was a handgun; Beretta 92FS in the first, 1911A1, possibly a Colt, in the second, and a Glock 19, Gen 4 in the third. I thought; thank G-d for Smith & Wesson. Why do those responsible for malls, schools, stores, apartments, and venues open to the public believe posting these stickers deters those bent on violent behavior? Criminals, by behavior and definition, exist outside the law and if legal prohibitions against them possessing firearms provide no dissuasion, a decal surely won’t. Instead they disarm the law-abiding, the only ones already on the scene capable of halting violent crime and mass shootings.
Webster’s Dictionary (a virginal source of information for today’s public school students) define Straw Man as: “a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up to be easily confuted (overwhelm in argument, refute conclusively).”1 Talk show host and baron of bombast Michael Savage knows something about Strawmen. Recently he launched a series of attacks on the 2nd Amendment, specifically semiautomatic rifles as well as their owners. His wild assertions were an army of scarecrows so stuffed with combustible straw, one dared draw nigh with matches at his own risk. When anyone says; “I own guns” or “I’m a big supporter of the 2nd Amendment” followed by a “but,” they don’t. They’re lying. It’s a trick to seize the intellectual and moral high ground thereby casting those in disagreement as extremists. Savage case in point. He began each show declaring support for the 2nd Amendment followed by an angry frothing at the mouth denunciation of firearms owners and notions of self-defense. In so doing, he promoted arguments undercutting the very amendment he purports to defend. Hay crammed in his Strawmen must have been plucked from the field of contradiction.
Savage’s first broadside came the day after the Las Vegas, Nevada Mandalay Bay Hotel mass shooting. He said he was a gun owner, big supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and to have given a “fortune” to the NRA apparently believing by brandishing such credentials he was immunized against critique. Savage asked if Americans should be able (allowed) to own “military grade weapons” and “assault rifles,” terms left undefined. He asked; should a man in therapy and on medication for mental problems be allowed to own a gun? If concealed carry was legal, how could armed citizens have stopped the killer’s rampage Savage demanded to know. In mocking tones he added; “Gun-slingers will say that. No matter what you hold in your pocket, you couldn’t have defended yourself. Fallacious argument. All you John Wayne’s with concealed carry on your mind, put it aside. You’d have gone down like ten pins.” He asked why anyone “needed” an “automatic weapon” declaring there needs to be “limits.” Should people be “allowed” to own a Howitzer, Russian tank, or bazooka? No one “needs” a semiautomatic rifle to defend their house, Savage continued, saying a shotgun was much better in that role. “The whole idea you’re going to get a semiautomatic rifle to hold off an army, come on. Stop the BS. If someone breaks into your house all you’ll have time to grab in the dark is a shotgun and an automatic pistol, not a semiautomatic rifle. Unless you keep a semiautomatic weapon fully loaded, and in your bedroom, it’s not going to do you any good. And if you do keep one, you’re crazy. If you keep a semiautomatic rifle next to your bed cocked and locked and ready to fire, you’re a sicko.” He then mocked Mandalay survivors who said they were no longer atheists. Next he attacked unnamed conservative talk-show radio hosts who, after Mandalay Bay, still opposed new gun control laws and regulations, yelling into the microphone; “You bunch of John Wayne’s!” He accused them of calling people like him, now supporting stricter new gun control laws; “lousy communist Progressives” adding in sneering tones; “No one wants to seize your guns otherwise it would have happened during the Obama years.” He asked how the killer had obtained “machine guns” because “they’re illegal” reminding listeners he wasn’t new to the gun control debate and had been on his high school rifle team. He asked if every psycho in the nation should own machine guns. “Did you know machine guns are legal in Nevada?” Savage continued. “But of course, fully automatic rifles are illegal.” What? Come again. Continuing in mocking tones, he asked who “needed” a fifty round drum magazine. “They should be illegal!” He shouted. “I argued this before. When I asked callers why they ‘needed’ one, they said to hold off the U.S. government which is against the private ownership of firearms.”2
Savage continued his assault on the 2nd Amendment the following day floating hysterical conspiracy theories attacking the Las Vegas Police for taking too long to assault the killer’s hotel room. Once again he reminded listeners he was a gun owner, “passed all the tests,” and gave money to the NRA therefore his calls for new gun bans had to be reasonable. Again he asked if the right to keep and bear arms included hand grenades, bazookas, used Russian tanks, and half-tracks asking; “Should there be limits on the right to keep and bear arms? What do you mean saying the 2nd Amendment ‘permits’ you to have any number of machine guns? Does this mean you can own two hundred machine guns, that every man should be able to have an arsenal in his basement? I can see having weapons to defend yourself but does that mean an entire arsenal? Why not RPGs and flame throwers? I don’t think the 2nd Amendment goes far enough” he continued in sarcastic tones. “I think we should be allowed to have flame throwers for that evil government that may arise any moment now. We should be able to have flame throwers.” During Savage’s shows, he insisted on calling magazines “clips” and using the terms semi and fully automatic rifles interchangeably.3 He entertained, as experts, numerous callers claiming because they had been in Vietnam, they knew precisely what weapons the suspect used (opinions subsequently contradicted by the FBI). Many voices sounded too tender to have been alive let alone old enough to have served in Vietnam. Once again he labeled anyone holding contrary views as “John Wayne’s” and “right- wingers” promising to hang up on them if they called his show. Savage concluded by attacking the Las Vegas Police, again, and blaming mass shootings on prescription drugs and the “proliferation of guns.”4
Savage’s claims and Straw Man arguments are wrong on so many levels, space and sufficient matches probably don’t exist to address them all. His oft repeated claim to be a firearms authority, supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and NRA backer is artifice, a trick as noted, to prevent debate to the contrary.
As to the efficacy of concealed firearms with respect to the Mandalay massacre, handguns are designed for self-defense at personal distances not against someone shooting rifles from the 32nd floor of a hotel window hundreds of yards away. Savage’s attempt to undermine concealed carry by judging its validity against situations for which it was never intended is a fallacious straw man argument a practice he accuses critics of employing. Does he really know what he’s talking about?
Doctors don’t use the terms bacterial and viral infection interchangeably. Weight lifters know the difference between dumb and barbells. Authorities on any subject use proper terminology. Improper use exposes pretenders, poseurs, and frauds. For example, in Stephen King’s novel Salem’s Lot, his policeman character checks his .38 special revolver to ensure the “safety is on.”5 A kid in his novel IT, warns another kid to be careful with his dad’s pistol, a Walther PPK, because it has “no safety.”6 In the movie The Fast And The Furious, Vin Diesel’s character Dominic Torretto tells Paul Walker that his dad’s 1970 Dodge Charger’s engine had so much torque, it twisted the “chassis” coming off the line.7 As a Deputy Sheriff and later policeman in the 1970s and 80’s, I carried and or shot Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Colt revolvers in .38 special and .357 magnum. None, nor those on revolvers of colleagues, had a “safety.” I’ve also shot a variety of PPKs from Walther and Manurhin and their clones from FEG to Bersa and each had de-cocker safeties. Except for the Imperial (1965), Chrysler abandoned the chassis in favor of a uni-body frame, (1960-1961), which my 68’ Charger has, exposing TheFast And The Furious’s writers to be automotive ignoramuses. In like fashion, Savage insisted on referring to drums and other magazines feeding semiautomatic pistols and rifles as “clips” and conflated “assault weapons, assault rifle, semiautomatic rifle,” and “machine gun” as interchangeable terms, one and the same over and over.
A “clip” holds individual cartridges, “has no spring and does not feed shells directly into the chamber. Clips hold cartridges in the correct sequence for ‘charging’ a specific firearm’s [fixed] magazine.”8 A magazine holds rounds in a box, separate from the firearm for the weapons under discussion. Examples of clip “fed” firearms would include the Russian Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and American M1 Garand of W.W. II fame as well as the postwar Soviet SKS. Cold War weapons like the Soviet AK-47, U.S. M14, and later M16, are magazine fed. No such category of “assault weapon” exists for firearms. Any object that can be used to hurt another; flyswatter, umbrella, coat-hanger, or kitchen counter hardened wedge of cornbread is an assault weapon. The term “assault-weapon” was invented by liberals to frighten non-gun owners into believing your AR15 is identical to an M16 and that AKs and Mini-14s are full-automatic machine guns. Repeat after me; “The other side lies.” Editor of Jane’s Military Publications and firearms expert Charlie Cutshaw writes there are firearms categorized as “assault-rifles” but to be so classified they must be “shoulder-fired,” capable of fully automatic fire,” and chambered in a caliber intermediate “between pistol (or revolver) and rifle ammunition.”9 Some have a device allowing operators to switch from semiautomatic to full-automatic fire and back again. Commercial AK47s, AR15s, Mini-14s, and similar families of rifles don’t have this capability. Their triggers must be pulled, one at a time, for each round fired hence they are not “assault rifles” but “semiautomatic rifles” and “carbines.” “Machine guns” are typically heavy and tripod mounted, with hand held versions called “submachine guns,” and are capable of full automatic fire, emptying a magazine with a single pull of the trigger.10 Consistent misuse of terminology indicates Savage is grossly ignorant and misinformed, flagrantly dishonest, or both. He has no credibility.
No one wants to take your guns is the mantra of people, who, in the same breath, call for “assault weapons” (sic) and “high-capacity” (sic) bans. Time and again Liberals from anti-2nd Amendment organizations to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have said no one wants to take your guns and then promote Australian gun control which did just that. They are either stupid or brilliantly cunning. Perhaps dangerously naïve, I have never called liberals stupid because they’re not. Recall that U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake essentially resurrected the “sporting purpose” standard in upholding Maryland’s ban on AK and AR rifles mislabeling them “assault rifles” asserting they are not commonly used for lawful purposes including home defense.11 Liberals claiming; no one wants to confiscate guns, followed by proposals to ban AR, AK, and similar rifles, sounds contradictory until one understands their two pronged “trick”; the first is how they define “gun.”12Confiscationists define “gun” in general as a firearm possessing a long established sporting purpose commonly used for hunting, trap and skeet shooting, and target competition at ranges and with no military analogue.13 This would exclude ARs, AKs, FN-FALs, and so forth. The second part of their trick is to convince the non-gun owning pubic there is no difference between full and semiautomatic firearms. Obama and others said time and again, AR15s, AKs, their derivatives, and similar rifles are military weapons that belong on battlefields, not our streets. It would not be confiscation, they argue, to return military weapons in civilian hands back to the U.S. Military where they belong.14 The only way to do this is through a ban on “civilian” possession of semiautomatic rifles and confiscate them as did Australia and England, and incrementally in California. How can Savage, living in Marin County, California, one of the most liberally infected in the galaxy, deny confiscation is not the liberal’s end game? He lies.
Like Judge Blake, Savage’s claim no one uses and no “cop” would recommend using an AR15 for home defense because they are such a poor choice, is pure buffoonery from one who has lived for too many years behind the Bay Area’s Tofu Curtain.15 Breathlessly, about to reveal a secret, Savage said his listeners, had never heard or been “told this” but one of the reasons AR15s are such poor choices is because the .223 round goes through walls. Shotguns and pistols are better because their rounds don’t. On the contrary, “More Americans than ever are relying on AR15s for home defense. Not only is an AR easier to shoot more accurately than a handgun—thanks to its additional points of contact with the body (cheek weld, shoulder mount, and two hands)—[and longer sight radius]—on AR rifles chambered in .223/Rem/5.56 NATO, produces superior terminal performance, and penetrates less when compared to the typical handgun.”16 An AR is harder to grab in the dark than a pistol or shotgun, Michael? Why is that? People have been attaching optics and lights to ARs for decades. A cocked and locked rifle makes one a “psycho” Michael?17 Employing his unloaded pistols and shotguns without lights against intruders beggars the question as to whose sanity should be in question. His rhetorical cant; “who needs” this or that firearm or “high capacity clips” and that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t allow possession of bazookas, hand grenades, and Russian tanks is a fallacious Straw Man argument to set the stage for infringements against the 2nd Amendment.
Savage is ignorant of or intentionally misrepresents the 2nd Amendment’s meaning. It grants no rights including to own anything. Rather, it recognizes an individual right to self-defense, to keep and bear arms, and establishes prohibitions against any government infringement on this right. The Declaration of Independence establishes it as a G-d-given right belonging to every individual inherent in their humanity whether government exists or not. It is inalienable and off-limits to a majority vote by one’s neighbors, act of government, or fashionable whim of the times. Rights cannot be modified, regulated, licensed, or infringed upon by government otherwise they would be called privileges.18 Inherent in the right of self-defense is the means by which one exercises it. To answer Savage’s “need” question, rights are not dependent upon a utilitarian need standard which, at best, is arbitrary, subject to popular opinion, or manipulated and controlled by those in power. Were this not so, government could raise the bar to demonstrate “need” so high, it becomes insurmountable thus rendering the right de facto abolished. Employing Savage’s Straw Man “need” standard to firearms ownership would subordinate it to ephemeral notions of “the common good, the good of the whole,” or “the greater good.”19 How long before it became extinguished? Ask Britons. By suggesting the 2nd Amendment regulates bazookas, half-tracks, Russian tanks, and grenades, therefore rifles can be regulated as well, is hay falling from massive gaps in Savage’s last Straw Man. Matches please.
Half-tracks and used Russian tanks are not firearms hence are regulated by other laws not the 2nd Amendment which applies to weapons citizen soldiers would keep and bear. Bazookas were the technological equivalent of shoulder fired canons, used against tanks, and grenades are sort of like exploding cannon balls. None of these are proper analogues to firearms. These are fallacious and false arguments employed by the deceitful to trick the unwary into surrendering bits and pieces of their 2nd Amendment rights until all of them are gone. This explains why Savage banned calls from those who knew what they were talking about in favor of kooks, conspiratorialists, the deluded, and poseurs.
11 Frederick C. Mish, Editor-in-Chief, Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Massachusetts, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Publishers, 1985), 1165, 276.
22 Michael Savage, The Savage Nation, broadcast 2 October, 2017.
1616 Richard Nance, “Your AR15 ASAP: Hornady’s Rapid Safe Wall Lock and Gunlock Provide a Safe Storage Solution for Quick Access in the Home,” Guns & Ammo 10 (October 2017), 76.
1717 Expanding what constitutes “mental illness” and “mental instability” is very popular on the Left who will use such determinations to expand individuals prohibited from owning firearms. Can thought-crimes be far behind?
1818 Ronald J. Pestritto, Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism (Lanham, Maryland, Rowman & Littlefield, Publishers, Inc., 2005), 3-6. See also; Gary T. Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1989), 127-129.
1919 Jeff Snyder, A Nation of Cowards (St. Louis, Missouri, Accurate Press, 2001), 119-121.
On my 91st day of employment with Lockheed Missiles and Space, Sunnyvale, California, I became a member of Local 508, Machinist and Aerospace Workers’ Union, an AFL-CIO affiliate. How odd considering I hadn’t joined and, I’m not even a Democrat. When asked about this, my manager said union membership was a condition of employment. What? Who hired me, Lockheed or the Union? He answered; “Lockheed,” but “the contract negotiated between the company and union stipulates all non-managerial employees automatically become union members after 90 days. Dues are also deducted automatically from your paycheck.” But, I’m the one who found, pursued, and won this job with no help from anyone else, thank you, I protested. “If you quit the union, you’ll be fired” was his response. Well, if there’s no choice in the matter, why not attend the meetings? What an eye opener.
It could have been a B-grade movie; Clash of the Hillbillie Pig Roast Meets Angry Biker Bar. Venomous “Us versus them” class-warfare invective laced with hatred of management, the college educated, and rich people, were hurled back and forth like darts, each adding his own poison to the tips. So asinine and uneducated were the inflamed assertions and chanted slogans, they placed validity for each member’s high school diploma in jeopardy. It was eerily reminiscent of the simpleminded claptrap spouted by ignorant, backward, and gullible unionized Appalachian hillbillies, an area where once I had the misfortune to live. Superstitious and highly combustible with conspiratorial rumors,1 they fought to keep wages up with threats of strikes even during President Carter’s wretched economy. They drove one business after another from the region ensuring it remained trapped in a quicksand-like poverty of their own making. At least Local 508 members could read, they had a newsletter.
It was a masterpiece organ of radical rage-filled propaganda; 100% pure liberal Democrat Party politics demonizing free markets and every Republican ever born. It wouldn’t have shocked me to find Vladimir Lenin, raised from the grave, passing out Hammer and Sickle armbands at meetings. My union brothers would’ve made Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini proud. Italy’s flamboyant dictator, fave among American intellectuals, adopted Georges Sorel’s Syndicalism which held revolutionaries could only achieve power through organizing and radicalizing trade-unions. Thereafter, “society could be divided by professional sectors of the economy” organized into guilds or unions.2 On 7 August, 2018, Missourians, walking in the steps of Mussolini’s Fascists, took a giant step back from freedom toward that goal voting no on Prop A.
The very idea one’s neighbors could vote in the first place on conditions of employment, including union membership, using instrumentalities of government to force their will on others, is obnoxious to the very notion of liberty. Forced unionism is unconstitutional and as anti-freedom as it is anti-American. Above market union wages are sustained only by restricting other’s access to employment. It means limiting, not expanding jobs thus crushing the state economy. Clinging to a bankrupt and an anachronistic 1930s socialist economic model ensures Missouri will remain mired in longsuffering stagnant economic growth. It translates into thousands of lost jobs, a flat-line tax base, and few opportunities beyond the agricultural sector as companies, deciding it makes economic sense to avoid forced union states, go elsewhere. Seeking job opportunities, Missouri’s young will have to leave as well. To survive, businesses that remain will replace union workers with robots and illegal aliens. Way to go guys. Is it possible those voting “no” on Prop-A are so self-centered or such dolts they don’t realize union dues provide the major source of funding for the Democrat Party? The same party that elects politicians determined to abolish the 2nd Amendment and outlaw the firearms you possess? I understand autoworker and bulldozer Bolsheviks may be too selfish to consider the rights of fellow Missourians and pesky ideas like freedom, but what happened to the rest of you? If you voted “no” on Prop A, don’t dare tell me you also support the 2nd Amendment because the latter is a Constitutional right. No sir. You’re either ignorant or a hypocrite no different than Gun-Confiscationist liberals supporting only those parts of the Constitution furthering their agenda. How dare you claim support for liberty when you’re so willing to deny it to others. If you voted for forced unionism, don’t ask me to work with you on any cause from this day forward. You’ve disgraced yourselves and you’ve disgraced your state. Well, well, I see minimum wage (socialism) and medical marijuana (first step toward total legalization, like Potorado) are on the November ballot. Gee, I wonder how people will vote. At my age I’ve learned looking the other way with respect to even the smallest injury to liberty and compromising with fools only begets less liberty and more fools. Thank God we can still vote with our feet.
If not already busy with a coalition to Save Our Dime, by removing Constitution-hating FDR’s visage off its face, as well as the Committee to Re-Name Washington, D.C., because, after all, George shouldn’t be saddled with connection to that stinking crime scene on a hill, yet a new cause beckons.
With labor union and Democrat stronghold Baltimore at is epicenter, Maryland is unlikely to ever glow red instead of blue. Ironically, Ronald Reagan won my home state (Go TERPS!) in 1980 and again in 1984 with 52.51 to Mondale’s 47.02 percent of the vote. Although Reagan carried 22 of 23 counties (Prince Georges the lone reprobate), the election was still close.3 This demonstrates a perversion of representative democracy in which populous urban centers inhabiting tiny areas, dictate law and policy to geographically vastly larger surrounding suburban and rural areas possessing significantly different cultural, religious, social, and political values. America’s founding fathers would be appalled. They didn’t fight a long bloody war in order to reestablish a form of tyranny just overthrown. Regrettably the Reagan Revolution was followed by the equivalent of worn brakes; unable to stop and disinclined to slow government’s inexorable massive growth and leftward trajectory, known as the Bushes. Once residual Reaganites were rounded up and banished to the hinterlands, conservative ramparts were scaled and breached crumbling under enormous pressure from hordes of Liberal Northeastern Carpetbaggers swarming to the Old Line State swelling government in Washington, D.C. to corpulent Jabba the Hut size. The effect was that of parasites feeding on a helpless host imparting a fatal infection. We never had a chance. With stocks of conservative anti-biotic exhausted, parasites flung aside their drained and emaciated host oozing across the border into Virginia. Soon it too was stricken with the dread liberal infection brought by Carpetbaggers who understand they have but to outnumber natives by one vote in any district to win elections. Once in power, their policies soon led to a huge influx of illegal aliens who know for which party to vote, wink wink. And so the fever raged destroying a former bastion of liberty home to greats like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Robert E. Lee. Now the Carpetbaggers are on the move again heading further south into North Carolina. Callers to a recent radio program from Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina shared tales of woe wrought by what Liberal Carpetbaggers had done to their once fair and free states. Callers from Illinois and New York chimed in explaining most of their state’s counties were fairly conservative but, due to swollen population centers, Chicago, New York, and the liberal pustules inhabiting them, they live under a boot of tyranny holding in contempt their cultural, social, and religious values. Hence I’ve been asked to support LCBICA, the Liberal Carpet Bagger Immigration Control Act. For what’s left of free America to survive, people must unite, drive liberal Carpetbaggers from their states, and take power back from workshop socialist unions. It’s a matter of life and death. Watch your borders. Be vigilant. Watch your borders.
For the Left, everything is political. Nothing exists outside their ideology. Any cause they support, from abortion to minimum wage, is done to further the Great Project; bringing all aspects of human activity, social, economic, religious, and political under state control. And they are the state. For this to work, American government must be transformed from a federal into a national system. Check that one off the list. They must overturn the Constitution subordinating all local and state political activities to “federal”4 control. In order to trick Americans into accepting their vision for a Brave New World, Leftists teach false narratives to America’s youth filling their heads with lies about the nation’s founding principles, and censoring out anything undermining this indoctrination. Good guys become boogeymen and boogeymen become the good guys. The same holds true with the Left’s war on the police. It’s nothing personal, it’s an agenda.
Black Lives Matter (BLM) is one of the radical Left’s hammers against Western values. Created by Marxist Lesbians, BLM propagates the false narrative white America, acting through armed surrogates, the police, is waging a war of genocide against black America. They preach, and their stooges in the white liberal media repeat, the preposterous assertion the moment a black man steps from his residence, he must run for his life because he’s hunted by gun-slinging mad-dog white men driving pickup trucks adorned with Trump stickers and Confederate Battle Flags. Spitting tobacco juice and swilling Bud-Lite, these unshaven rednecks in BBQ stained ‘Wife-Beaters’ scour the highways and byways looking for black men to drag through the streets, chained to the back of their trucks or to shoot down as target practice. And dadgummit, if one should slip through their fingers, thank God for America’s racist white cops,5 they’ll get them, by Jiminy. This delusional fantasy is separated from reality as far as possible. For those accusing me of being hyperbolic, have you spent time on websites for groups like BLM, Pantifa, the New Black Panthers, and others? Were you ever a cop? Did you ever live in Baltimore or Philadelphia’s inner cities as I did? If so, you’d know who has to be scared stepping through their front door. Hint; it’s not who BLM says it is. Why is it so important for liberal teachers to fill the minds of young kids with guilt over being white? If they can be made to feel responsible for all that has gone wrong in minority communities, how much more amenable will they be to the radical socialist agenda when of age to vote? The ludicrous claim Trump’s, “Make America Great,” slogan is secret code promising followers a return to slavery6 has already had its intended effect among Millennials.
Liberals promised Barrack Obama’s election would bridge and transcend racial divides thus bringing about racial healing. Would that it were true. Born in Hawaii and growing up there and in Indonesia, Obama as president attempted to appropriate the American “Black experience,” which he was never part of, allowing him to cast critics of his socialist agenda as racists. His administration became “the most anti-law enforcement administration in memory.” From Milwaukee to Baltimore, crime sky-rocketed and “Homicides in the country’s 50 largest cities rose nearly 17 percent in 2015, the greatest surge in fatal violence in a quarter of a century” reversing a “two-decade long decline.”7 In addition, murders of police officers, by ambush and direct assault, spiked dramatically under Obama. “Root-cause liberals” who never shy from blaming everyone but themselves for failed government policies, naturally singled out poverty, unemployment, and racism, especially police oppression, to explain horrifying crime rates in America’s inner cities.8 And how did they explain the fearful spike in murder of police officers? Many on the left claim cops have it coming. When minorities kill cops, its self-defense, justifiable homicide.9 This attitude; cops deserve to be killed because they’re the bad guys who gun-down blacks in cold blood, continued unabated even after the facts about the execution style murder of two New York police officers became widely disseminated in the news and on social media.10 Liberal’s method to address root-cause solutions to crime, throwing billions of other people’s dollars at poverty and unemployment, failed. Inner-city crime remains epidemic.11 They failed because they’re based on false premises refusing to address the fact 94 percent of blacks are killed by other blacks not whites or cops.12
Substantial political dividends accrue to liberals capable of enforcing Party (Democrat) discipline engendered through fear-mongering and lies. For leftists, including college professors and young Marxist revolutionaries, racial division stoked to red-hot hatred and violence is the vanguard of the long hoped for ignition of revolution in America. BLM and their white supporters claim incarceration of blacks represents a plot to put them in concentration camps. Through drug laws, whites are “re-enslaving black Americans.” Liberals especially target “discretionary policing” meaning stopping and checking out “suspicious looking people” (if you’re a cop, you know one when you see one), before they can commit crimes. New York City’s “stop and frisk” program drastically reduced crime under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. But liberal court challenges and protests against “profiling,” forced cops to back off. Now crime is out of control again and “a blood bath ensued and its victims were virtually all black.” When police back off, its “black people themselves who pay the greatest price.”13 In addition if anyone tells the truth, the liberal media, Hollywood, and Leftist Pop-Culture, spring into action destroying critics with accusations of racism, the kiss of death these days. The media hounding Trump’s every step, never took Obama to task for his words and connection to subsequent racial violence in America.
Today white leftists push blacks to react with aggressive hostility and combativeness, including resisting arrest, when stopped by police. This makes the job much more dangerous for cops and increases the likelihood low-risk encounters explode into major scuffles. The type that lead to use of deadly force. But the left doesn’t care about the blacks it pushes to physically resist cops. They serve as props in the narrative white cops are waging war against blacks with revolution the only solution. Kind of reminds me of the 1960s. Fear and distrust have been promoted so heavily by the Left, it has spawned feelings of anger and resistance in black communities who now see all encounters with police as resulting from racism by whites attempting to control and suppress them. Anger against whites has birthed the “knock-out” game in which a black youth walks up to an unsuspecting white person punching him or her as hard as possible in the head trying to knock them out with one blow. Witnessed by many and broadcast throughout social media, nevertheless the white liberal media refuses to report on it because to do so would undermine the false narrative of a white war on blacks.14
For those arguing; but look at all the whites marching with BLM, keep in mind BLM views white liberals as individuals who have internalized and are blind to their racism. Conservatives, on the other hand, are openly and shamelessly racist. For blacks who believe all problems within their community are the result and fault of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, “good and bad” whites are simply opposite sides of the same racist coin. The good ones are to be used and discarded.15 As for crimes committed by blacks, including O.J. Simpson, knock-out games, and violence in Kansas City’s Plaza,16 these are seen as collective acts of self-defense against an oppressive white society holding all the reins of power.17
In response to the Grand Jury’s decision not to indict officer Darren Wilson in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting of Michael Brown, President Obama said he understood the disappointment and anger in the black community. He made no mention of the rule of law or that a grand jury investigation ruled Wilson’s shooting was justifiable self-defense. Riots, looting, and assaults followed.18 Obama essentially declared the facts and forensic evidence didn’t matter. The white man was always guilty, no matter what, a view Obama had come to internalize as a youth.19 For example, Obama blamed Michael Brown’s shooting and riots on “lack of diversity” within the Ferguson Police Department, not the actions of Brown and those burning and looting.20 At the time, Obama’s remarks seemed foolish and naïve. They weren’t. They express the same view as BLM; white people are born inherently racist and are the cause of all problems in all minority communities, thereby exculpating any crime committed by any black person no matter the circumstances. Without accepting that this is the point of view held by many in the debate on race and crime, it’s impossible to understand what is really driving the Left’s agenda.
11It was a small town which I un-affectionately called “Dogpatch,” when, in 1972, while still in high school, I wrote an editorial in support of President Nixon’s reelection which was carried in a local newspaper. This sparked a meeting of outrage among town leaders as, they were almost all union Democrats. They concluded, no one my age could write such an editorial without help from dad. My parents had no idea I had written and submitted the letter. I concluded their level of astonishment was proportionate to their level of literacy. In 1974, my dad bought an Opel station wagon which was considered scandalous and led to meetings by the town’s movers and shakers. After all, the car was made in Germany. Had he bought a car made in Japan, the Witness Protection Program would have been the only option. Hatred of Asians was and is alive and well in parts of America.
22 Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Change (New York, N.Y., Broadway Books, 2009), 36-37 (Paperback version).
With Demoncrats doing everything to gain control of the nation so they can institute their program of higher taxes, impeaching a lawfully elected President and enacting gun control they have a variety of strategies they are flinging at the goal.
Since San Fran Nan has decided it’s more important to enact gun and citizen control than to win elections, I thought we might take a look at some of these brand new demoncratic socialist candidates. Although really, I guess if you’re a Demoncratic Socialist, after you’ve enacted gun and citizen control, you don’t really need to worry about winning elections, yeh? They’re just being more open about it now.
One is the socialist who thinks Bernie Sanders is the Great Pumpkin, Ocasio-Cortez.
Another is a candidate in Texas who wants to lead the nation in gun control, has a perfectly WASP sounding name so apparently wants to be called Beta, oh, sorry! Not Beta? Oh, right Beto. So Beto is desirous of stripping Americans on one of their Constitutionally enumerated rights. Not granted. I’ve also heard he eats his tacos with a fork, so does Beto use the same fork to eat his tacos he uses to shred our Constitution?
Sometimes I wondered if the National Demoncratic Socialist Party realizes these elections are to be held in America, but in this day an age? Ocasio-Cortez beat a sitting legislator, so yeah, I guess they do.
Then there is Missouri. Missouri has Air-Claire McCaskill.
I’ll be right up front here, this really isn’t a “Gee Josh Hawley is a great guy, how could you pass him up” column. For one, I don’t like Josh Hawley, I think he is a smarmy, greasy, snake oil selling jerk. Missouri elected a Governor, we’ll call him Eric Greitens, shall we? Gov Eric did something quite foolish in his personal life before he ever ran for Governor. And like politicians all over, of every party, he got caught. Now, he didn’t drown her so he didn’t actually follow a recognized approved DSNC playbook and perhaps that is why the Demoncratic Socialists became convinced the world would end, end I say, if our Gov Greitens wasn’t removed from office. Well, it could have been the lack of playbook or it could have been that he signed a bill to allow Missouri to become a right to work state. The Demoncratic Socialists didn’t like that either. But the AG at the time was Josh Hawley. I don’t know if Hawley was just trying to prove how cool and unbiased he is but he felt compelled to wade into the poop patch created by Demoncrats and their propaganda arm, the mainstream media. Now the thing is, there are some actually very curious things about the persecution of Gov Greitens by good little Demoncratic Socialist Kim Gardner that SCREAM for someone such as a real attorney general to poke a nose in. Lt Col Dave Grossman did a couple of articles for The Federalist asking questions the media or the AG didn’t seem to be asking. The first one asked questions like,
1. Where is the police report?
2. Where is the evidence?
3. Why did the FBI, the U.S. Attorney, and the police refuse to look into this case?
4. What’s the deal with the private investigators?
5. Why did the prosecution want so badly to delay the trial until the fall?
That number 4? Now that is some interesting reading.
The Second article, had such data that one would really think someone would be asking about her expenditure of taxpayer funds,
1. It appears that Gardner began preparing the paperwork for the indictment prior to conducting any investigation.
2. Gardner allegedly broke the law in the course of her prosecution.
3. Gardner’s assistant prosecutor allegedly misled the grand jury about the indictment.
4. Gardner’s investigators were under FBI investigation.
5. Even the chief of police of St. Louis is demanding answers.
But, guess not. So no, I’m really not so much a Hawley fan. When you consider that this grave threat to freedom, Mom, the flag and apple pie just pretty much faded away after Gov Eric resigned…seems odd. Still don’t have Right to Work.
So, when I say this is about the Demoncratic Socialist known as Air Claire McCaskill, please don’t think this is about saying Hawley is great, it’s not. It’s that Air Claire is so much worse, and dirtier than Josh Hawley. Let’s take a few trips down memory lane, shall we? Because Air Claire has a lot of history that can be examined, along with her baggage, carry-on and otherwise.
But I’m saving the cherry of memory lane for last.
Air-Claire likes to create problems so she can use the force of government to solve them, like all big government Demoncratic Socialists do. For example in February of this year, Air Claire got all hot and bothered to battle “Identity theft” and the use of stolen social security numbers! Especially the use of stolen children’s social security numbers! Good job Air-Claire, right?? I mean who wouldn’t want Air-Claire in her crusader cape flying the friendly skies on behalf of law abiding citizens?
Air-Claire helped create the problem, now she expects private businesses to spend their money to fix it, after she blithely spent OUR money to create it. How so?
It would be appropriate to have [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals – DACA] applicants disclose any misuse of Social Security numbers or other personal identifiers so that the system can be purged and corrected, and so that the true number holders can be informed. It would also be appropriate to impose an additional fine on the many DACA recipients who worked illegally before obtaining DACA status and improperly used false identity information. The fines could be used to establish a restitution fund for the victims.
… 43.9 percent of all surveyed DACA recipients had worked prior to gaining DACA status, and that percentage increases to 60.7 percent for DACA recipients over 25 years of age. However, these individuals were unable to legally obtain Social Security numbers for their pre-DACA employment, which means that they used fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers that all-too-often belong to American citizens, including American children.
The use of unlawfully obtained Social Security numbers by individuals eligible for DACA status is so pervasive that the Obama administration instructed applicants not to disclose their illegally obtained numbers. That ensured that Americans who are the victims of DACA identity theft were left with destroyed credit, arrest records attached to their names, unpaid tax liabilities, and corrupted medical records while the DACA recipients walked away scot-free from multiple felonies.
Does Air-Claire have anything to do with that mess? Does a Demoncratic Socialist love vote fraud?
She supports chain migration, sanctuary cities, funding for executive amnesty, and funding for processing centers for Central American unaccompanied minors. She voted for the DREAM Act, against a bill to prevent suing Arizona for immigration law, and against defunding sanctuary cities.
The Association of Air Medical Services (AAMS) is greatly concerned about the unintended negative consequences that can result from the recent Air Ambulance Consumer Protection Act, reported to be introduced today by Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO). While it is the position of AAMS that all our members advocate on behalf of their patients and work toward solutions that keep patients out of the middle in negotiations with insurers, this legislation doesn’t do that – it only provides insurers with smaller portions of patient’s bills to cover while erecting “borders in the sky” making it difficult or impossible to transport patients across state lines. We can do better – we can require transparency, fix Medicare, and solve for greater healthcare access.
Transporting patients across state lines was something aero-medical helicopters routinely did when I flew. It’s like Air-Claire just hasn’t yet ruined enough healthcare systems to suit herself.
And it’s kind of ironic that Air-Claire thinks she should chime in on air anything really.
McCaskill is one of the wealthiest members of Congress, a fact that Republicans are quick to remind voters as McCaskill battles for a third Senate term representing a state President Donald Trump won by nearly 19 percentage points in 2016. GOP-funded ads trying to paint her as out of touch with ordinary Missourians have attacked McCaskill for buying a $2.7 million D.C. condo and for using her husband’s private plane on the campaign trail.
So a few years ago, air-Claire got busted using the family’s private jet to travel around and campaign. And billing the taxpayers for it.
It gets worse for Air Claire. The public realized (even the press) that using taxpayer dollars to pay yourself is wrong. The pressure was unbearable and McCaskill whipped out her personal checkbook and re-paid the federal treasury with an $88,000 check. It’s shameful when you game the system to the point of being politically forced to pay back a taxpayer subsidy.
McCaskill had been keeping the plane in Delaware and Illinois, two states that do not impose personal property taxes. Well, Missouri does. So, was McCaskill, a committed liberal millionaire who advocates soaking the rich, actually dodging taxes?
Yes, Air Claire was trying to pay fewer taxes. Caught again and pressured by the public, McCaskill pulled out her checkbook and wrote a check for over $300,000 for back taxes on the plane.
Not only was McCaskill paying her own company taxpayer dollars to fund her travels, she avoided paying taxes to the state she supposedly serves.
The RV, named BigBlue by the campaign, was unveiled late last month by McCaskill, who said she was “very excited to hit the road” in it for an upcoming “Veterans for Claire” tour. The campaign kept a live blog of its three-day RV trip from May 29 to May 31, posting updates of its whereabouts.
All indications from the McCaskill campaign were that she was traveling on the RV. The campaign bragged after the three-day tour concluded that it had traveled 700 miles on the RV. The campaign asked in fundraising emails for money to fuel the RV, complaining, “gas is expensive.”
“It costs us $200 just to fill up the RV and with the number of places we plan on going—that adds up fast,” the campaign wrote, without mentioning aircraft fuel costs. “Will you pitch in just $5 today to help fund our RV tour and power us to a victory in November?”
Now for the fun part?? Air Claire has been FLYING a bunch of that in her private plane, and just not telling anyone or at least so far as we know, charging the taxpayers for the use of the plane. The same article listed above tells how the plane has been tracked and it’s path lining up with her RV. Yeah. Worth reading that. But Air Claire knew they would probably track the plane, so she had
Then KOLR10 allowed Air Claire to express her outrage at Josh Hawley. Huh? He had nothing to do with it. Air Claire had a synapse or two go missing. So rather than watch Claire’s idiotic response, let’s watch the brilliant and talented Mr. O’Keefe dismantle it.
Now at 1:17 in, James seems shocked that Air Claire would just say something on TV, that is just a flat out lie. Just say it, just throw it out there with no truth behind it. Darling James, WHY?? It’s not like it’s the first time Air Claire has done this. From 20th June 2012,
And, we’ll let Glen Beck take it away
But now, now, the cherry. Just step into my wayback machine. And I do mean way back. Back to when Air Claire was the Prosecutor for Jackson County Missouri, on 9th December 1992.
Yes, Air Claire is the prosecutor. I’m almost sure back in 1992 James O’Keefe and Josh Hawley had nothing to do with her lying to the press about the law that she certainly should have known better as a prosecutor. But if you really fear that they might have secretly been taping what she openly lied about I can ask the author.
You see, that is the thing, Air Claire openly lies, in any way shape or form she feels the need to get what she wants. She will deceive and hurt whoever necessary, because Air Claire is evil. You may or not give two hoots about the Second Amendment, but I promise you, there is most likely an issue that you care very deeply about. And you think you know Air Claire’s position on it. But she has lied to and betrayed Second Amendment people for years, you think she won’t betray you? You are being foolish.
Air Claire is only one of the Demoncratic Socialists up for election this time. Nancy Pelosi has said if they win, gun control takes priority over winning elections. And, as I suspect will be the case it will be because the fight will have changed from the soft fight to the hard fight. Because there are something that they just can not do to us while we can fight back. Whether or not you believe in the electoral system or think it’s all bunkem, I think it it worth it to suit up and show up and participate in the legal option, at least as long as we have it. Besides, you can always join Bear in his new game.
A teachable moment. There are various ways to define this experience. In the classroom it results from the serendipitous confluence of an opportunity to teach a concept with an extrinsic factor sparking student interest driving a heretofore un-manifested desire to learn that concept.1 In short, a lightbulb comes on. What could cause students, generally apathetic toward learning, to suddenly sit up and take notice? For an English class it might be a guest speaker, author J.K. Rowling explaining the secret of her success (Harry Potter) while others failed. Perhaps a notable personage drops in on a socialIST studies class explaining his rise from humble origins to political prominence or, in Phys-Ed, becoming an Olympic athlete. At that moment teachers enjoy rapt attention from their charges hoping it inspires seemingly average students to reach their full potential. How true must this be for science teachers beholding a once in a lifetime celestial event; a solar eclipse. As totality approached, the happy faces of kids conducting experiments under the beaming guidance of science teachers, appeared on television in the Kansas City metropolitan area. A teachable moment. But not so in Lee’s Summit. Alleging concern for student safety, its fearless administrators, shepherds of your children, Henny Penny like shut down the entire district, added an extra day to the end of the school year and…hid.
The pros and cons of writing this series were carefully weighed. On the one hand, racists might distort and misuse research provided herein to promote noxious agendas. Today it seems people in general consider hatred of others based on race irrational and repugnant. But the reality remains; hatred of those not members of one’s “tribe” stretches back to the dawn of mankind. The wrong events at the wrong time might transform ancient animosities into violent action. No reasonable person wants that. But on the other hand, there are those who, for political and personal reasons, have declared any observation reflecting negatively on ethnic, racial, sexual, or religious groups, regardless of how scientific and true, as beyond the bounds of discussion. To do so constitutes unacceptable “hate-speech” the trade of extremist racial supremacists, never to be countenanced.
Discussing race and crime is to enter a metaphorical no-man’s land laced with tripwires, landmines, and booby-traps. Automatic accusations of racism, hatred, and intolerance, regardless of how baseless, are to be assumed. Even for those making good faith attempts at mutual understanding may, if failing to recognize and validate other points of view, find themselves talking past each other leading to hurt feelings, rancor, and confirmation the other person holds racist attitudes. For example, many if not all whites probably reject the idea they are racists. When apprised of the epidemic of young black males killing each other in cities like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia, some respond with indifference. After all, it’s not happening in their neighborhoods and what can they do anyway? Fair enough but lack of concern can be interpreted as stemming from racism toward those not like them. Still others, perhaps desensitized by media coverage of urban bloodbaths and Hollywood’s glamorization of gang violence, shrug their shoulders saying, “that’s what those people do,” or “there’s nothing we can do, it’s a black thing.” For them the film Escape from New York is probably desirably prophetic. Ignorant and callous, the latter attitude can justifiably be interpreted as racist by the black community. No genetic predisposition toward violence exists among any race. It is a learned behavior (think Vikings and modern Swedish males for example). How could anyone calling himself a Christian embrace such attitudes? Who can claim to love God and hate his brother?2
Indifference and ignorance provide no starting point for dialogue. They consign victims of violent crime to ongoing misery. Americans in general are probably familiar with the Jonbenet Ramsey case. She was a six year old blonde haired blue eyed beauty pageant queen, killed sometime on 25 or 26 December 1996. Her case remains unsolved. How many, even in the Kansas City area, know who Machole “Coco” Stewart was? Aged 10, she was sitting on the couch with her family watching the 2014 World Series when a gunman sprayed their house with bullets. Her murder was also unsolved.3 Regardless of the Ramsey case’s celebrity status being driven by Americans obsessed with living vicariously through others, to some degree blacks believe the lives of little white kids, especially Scandinavian in appearance, matter more than those of black children. Blacks to some degree embrace the notion of “white privilege” believing because of their race, whites automatically have a leg up on everyone else when it comes to employment, professional advancement, and especially social acceptance.4 In my last year as a teacher, a black senior, one of the coolest most intelligent kids I ever had the privilege to teach, told me he, his family, and every black person he knew didn’t consider themselves “Americans” because white society rejected and excluded them. My point is not to argue whether any of this is true or to what degree it might or might not be. Instead, it’s to demonstrate races come to the table with uniquely different experiences and perspectives. If we categorically reject each other’s viewpoint from the start, any hope of dialogue, understanding, and reconciliation is lost. Prejudices on all sides become reinforced. This serves no one’s interest.
When I was a young man at the university, J-M, a friend and brilliant student now a prominent Baltimore attorney, postulated the “Axe-to-Grind” theory of historical interpretation. Before reading books on history and politics, he examined their dust jackets. Autobiographical information can unmask biases affecting an author’s historical interpretation or reveal they wrote simply to “deconstruct” another historian’s work hence, “an axe to grind.” No historian is objective, neutral, or unbiased. The collection, sifting and assemblage of historical evidence and data is naturally designed to validate the author’s interpretation shaping final analysis and conclusions. The same holds true for groups defending the police against accusations of profiling and racism and those making the accusations. M’s Postulate requires full disclosure on my part. I was a policeman but I also grew up partly in Baltimore and Philadelphia’s inner cities, attended predominantly black schools, was poor, and have sported a “natural tan” from birth. I may be in a better position to take an objective as possible look at race and crime than lily-white liberal journalists whose only encounter with minorities is the one cleaning their Five-Star hotel room. This brings me to the central question of this series; as claimed by Black Lives Matter (BLM) and certain Leftist professors, do white police officers represent the tip of the majority race’s spear in waging a war to oppress, suppress, and even murder black people? Are police officers the greatest threat to black men in America? Or, is this pure fiction crafted by the radical left and members of the black community who benefit politically from this claim?
According to Black Lives Matter, (BLM) a loud aggressively confrontational organization, white cops are indeed waging a war of terrorism against the black race.5 Their webpage credo under the section titled “We Affirm That All Black Lives Matter” is, “Black lives matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. It’s an affirmation of Black folk’s contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.”6 Make no mistake about it, BLM believes cops, assassins for white America, are engaged in a conspiracy to murder innocent black people. Because white America is engaged in genocide, resistance by any means, including preemptive action, is warranted. This begs the question; if BLM believes this genocidal campaign is sanctioned by the U.S. government, how might they ultimately respond?7 Clicking on text-boxes exposes what BLM is really about. Under “Black Villages” it reads; “We are committed to disrupting the Western prescribed nuclear family structure requirement supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another especially ‘our’ children to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”8 These Marxist code-words comprise a root and branch assault on Judeo-Christian values and principles including the family unit as ordained by God. BLM wants to destroy this order, including the biological distinctness of the male and female sexes, in favor of fluid Hermaphrodicity. Children are to belong to the “collective” ultimately meaning the state…like North Korea. Rather than recreating a notional semi-communal African village living in harmony and with the rhythms of nature (descriptive for all peoples at one time), they envision a neo-Marxist female dominated pagan fertility cult.
BLM believes America is ruled by the white race solely for its benefit. Traditional “Western” institutions identified with the white race include: Christianity, the family, law, schools, military, police, and government. They constitute hierarchical structures erected to preserve white rule and suppress challenges to this arrangement. Any institution or belief deemed “Western” is by nature de facto racist, oppressive, and must be overthrown. Don’t scoff or sneer at this idiocy for it’s what they are teaching your kids at the university. Arguing the contrary self-identities and condemns a student as guilty of racism. BLM and Leftist professors believe police and the criminal justice system are the agents of enforcement for the white hierarchy. Because racism is considered inherent in all whites, as if genetic, regardless of what they do in support of “black” causes, it won’t matter. Nothing can purge their “guilt.” BLM and like-minded groups believe to compete with whites in the social, economic, and political arena is a waste of time because, until white dominance is eliminated, there can be no level playing field. Leftist white professors have been teaching this view as contemporary social reality for decades. Is it any wonder young whites graduate from college feeling guilt over their middle and upper class backgrounds? They fail to realize it’s not really about race it’s about seizing political power which is done through inculcating a Leftist world view in the minds of America’s young. Race-guilt renders them impotent to challenge Marxist paradigms.9 They have been taught that to criticize or oppose any aspect of any movement dominated by blacks and other minorities, no matter how extreme their behavior and rhetoric, flows from supremacist colonial white attitudes. How many young Millennials breathed a sigh of relief voting for Obama because it proved they weren’t racist?
Since BLM came to the fore, people from all backgrounds have insisted all lives matter regardless of race. But BLM, the “New” Black Panthers, and their allies reject this claim contending people who say this are typically white, live in predominantly white areas, and associate only with other whites. BLM’s counterattack against universal brotherhood, supported by young white Millennials writing for liberal publications desperate to prove they aren’t racists, claims all lives do not matter because there is “demonstrative evidence that black lives matter less than white lives to the criminal justice system (and the American government as a whole).” This assertion is based on comparisons between white and black incarceration rates as well as grandstanding relatively rare police shootings of black men as routine, the norm.10 Comparisons without context can be used to shape and mold desired narratives. For example during an in-service at Lee’s Summit High school, an assistant principal upbraided teachers for a disparity in office referrals for rules infractions, behavior problems, and classroom disruptions between black and white male students. The inference was, blacks were written up more often than whites due to racism. The message was clear, teacher’s whose office referrals demonstrated a statistical disparity between black and white students, might be considered racist. Teachers faced two options: Find ways to write up way more white kids, or, look the other way with respect to the misconduct of black students. I wanted to ask the administrator, “suppose that, for whatever reason, black males are simply committing infractions and engaging in disruptive behavior at a greater proportion than their white counterparts?” A teacher, who said such was the case, nevertheless told me pointing out the truth would be career suicide.11
BLM claims it is concerned with the plight of the black community and especially those being murdered [by white cops] but completely ignores the thousands of blacks killed each year at the hand of other blacks. This is because their agenda is really political and disingenuous. “Hands up don’t shoot,” is an exemplar of this strategy. White liberals, hostage to a racial “Stockholm Syndrome” implanted in their psyches by liberal public education (should be called “indoctrication”), and the university, work off their shame and guilt through arguments justifying black violence [riots and looting] and hatred of whites. It’s cathartic cleansing of their racist-stained souls. BLM, the New Black Panthers and other Marxist groups see these pathetic liberals as Lenin’s proverbial “useful idiots” doing their bidding and discarded later. Paradoxically, caught in the middle are the many if not most blacks, neither Marxists nor haters of anyone who, manipulated by inflammatory rhetoric, will also be discarded this time by white Marxists once achieving their goals. While living in California’s Bay area, I observed white liberals worked up into hysterical lathers over Rhodesia and South Africa’s system of racial separation known as Apartheid. Palo Alto’s city government (for which I worked) as well as many others including states and corporations, removed investments and contracts in these countries pressuring them to end Apartheid and white minority rule. Once successful, Rhodesia became a Marxist hellhole known as Zimbabwe ruled by murderous thug Robert Mugabe. But white liberals no longer cared. It was wrong for the white minority to imprison and murder several hundred blacks but okay for the black majority government to imprison, rape, and murder hundreds of thousands of blacks through forced starvation, hacked up by machetes, and shot by guns acquired from North Korea and other communist regimes?11 Acceptance of oppression and mass murder by blacks against blacks seems to be a recurring theme among Liberals.
Is BLM a civil rights movement comparable to those of the 1960s? For the most part the latter, led by Martin Luther King, preached passive non-violent protest and resistance to denial of Constitutional rights. Their end goal was not revenge, retribution, or racial separation. It was full inclusion of black people among all the races of the earth as equals under the ideals laid out in the Declaration of Independence. They understood America’s history and Judeo-Christian founding principles were on their side not those wearing bedsheets and strange pointy hats. Their leaders claimed the “equality that belongs to them as human beings by natural and political right.” Who could oppose this? Americans of all races understood that, until blacks enjoyed full inclusion, the principles upon which this nation were founded could not come true.12 How did America go from struggling to bring this dream to fruition, including election of America’s first black president, to accusations of a war against blacks?
Black political activist, author, and filmmaker Taleeb Starkes charges that when a black person is killed by a white person, especially a policeman, certain members of the black community dash to the scene and politicize the tragedy in support of their own agenda. “Their mission is to start racial infernos. In other words, they racialize not harmonize.”13 He notes “calls to action” following police shootings of black men are not spontaneous reactions from a local populace. “They’re calculated maneuvers promoted by an ever present Race Grievance Industry [RGI], whose only product is victimhood and it’s manufactured without pause.” Racial healing does not serve their agenda. Instead the RGI works to convince blacks that they are “permanent victims of racism” and nothing they can do will ever change this.14
Absent blacks to buy-in to the notion of eternal victimhood, the RGI would lose power, influence, and fat checks sent in by blacks, white liberals, and Hollywood celebrities. The same holds true for political parties and organizations who derive support from the same clientele. Therefore it is in the best interests of the RGI to promote the boogeyman theorem that a Klansman lurks beneath the surface of every white skin, that whites are not and can never be their friends, and to enforce and discipline political support rendering blacks immune to calls of racial healing and unity. As long as blacks buy into such notions, liberal white politicians are all too eager to fan the flames of racial animosity knowing it can generate support and buy votes with no regard for what it does to the nation as a whole.
11 This is my own definition. There are many others, certainly better than what I came up with.
22 Editors, New American Standard Bible, The Open Bible Edition (Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson, Publishers, 1977), 1 John 4:20, 1202. Check out Matthew 25: 34-46 on one’s Christian duty toward others.
33 Betsy Webster, “1 Year Later, Machole Stewart’s family still searching for answers as police search for killer,” KCTV5 news at http://www.kctv5.com
44When I was a teacher Black students asked me this on many occasions. I explained that the danger in seeing life through a racial prism was it might short circuit avenues to success by automatically concluding their dreams were unattainable because of their race. However, I didn’t summarily reject the notion either especially in the social spheres of life. In addition, not one white-liberal, who claim to be the champions of civil rights against racist conservatives, in my SocialIST Studies department ever heard of “White Privilege” or “Blonde Privilege” yet I, a conservative have and so did my many of my minority students.
1010 Jesse Damiani, “Every Time You Say ‘All Lives Matter’ You are Being An Accidental Racist,” The Huffington Post, at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-damiani/ever. Damiani accuses anyone who says “all lives matter” of being an “ignorant racist.” This claim, incarceration rates proves racism, will be dealt with in subsequent installments.
1111 The beauty of this strategy is it self-validating. Anyone claiming differences in behavior problems based on race will be confronted by school administrators waving handfuls of teacher office referral forms for rule infractions and disruptive behavior “proving” (sic) no statistical difference in behavior problems between white and minority students. But can they really be considered valid when teachers, disciplining students, know to write up, or even “fail” black and minority students will lead to increased scrutiny (and pressure if they are an athlete)? A teacher deemed “racist” by students is in for a very unpleasant career. If considered the same by administration, soon they will be gone.
1111 Martin Meredith, The Fate of Africa: A History of Fifty Years of Independence (New York, N.Y., Public Affairs, Perseus Book Group, 2005), 309-344, 617-675.
1212 Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind (New York, N.Y., Simon and Schuster 1987), 33.
1313 Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matters: Why Lies Matter to the Race Grievance Industry (Lexington, Kentucky, Starkes, 2016), 1.
Demonstrating brainwashing works if captured early enough, Trotskyite Munchkin victims of educational malpractice, surrounded by a sea of bitter angry middle-aged women, descended on the nation’s capital like flying malefactors from the Land Oz. Their demand? A federal Congress pound a “national” stake through the heart of an already liberal trampled Bill of Rights. Munchkin March observers reported crowds so tightly packed movement was all but impossible and Porta-Potties an unreachable oasis. Perhaps it wasn’t numbers causing kids to huddle so closely together but rather, fear. Among the March’s backers was Planned [un]Parenthood, you know, those reconstructed Josef Mengele organ harvesters, brain blenders in one hand, suction hoses in the other, ensuring as many unwanted kids as possible not survive the womb. Some of the marchers were young, very young. Considering on average abortionists take more lives weekly (21,069.484)1 than all school shootings combined, will marchers be protesting outside the doors of Planned [un]Parenthood?
An ecstatic liberal media heralded the March of the Mad Munchkins as a student-led protest, organized by Marjory Stoneman-Douglas High School survivors [I thought more than 10 survived]. In “cooperation,” of course, with Everytown For Gun Safety, a radical anti-2nd Amendment Michael Bloomberg front group.2 Was the March really a student-led grassroots movement?
March organizers, and liberal media cheerleaders, claimed attendance swelled to 850,000 including many high school teenagers. But Alex Pappas, writing for FOX News, reported only 10 percent of the marchers were teens, 90 percent were adults, the average age was just under 49, and the real attendance number was only 202,796,3 about the same number of people camping out at Walmart waiting to claw and tear out each other’s hair and eyes come Black Friday. Notions of unemployed high school kids organizing this gala event are preposterous. Instead, Hollywood actors and directors, pro-athletes, a motley crew of extremist leftwing organizations, and the Democrat Party elite organized and bankrolled the March. Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh, using tax-payer dollars from a city sliding into decrepitude,4 bussed students, truant Monday through Friday, to D.C., that Saturday. The Marjory Stoneman-DouglasDuped Ten were merely props in a staged drama.5 Just like my lefty colleagues in public education, some will chortle you can’t trust statistics and reporting from FOX News. Well, let’s see what the Washington Post, daily talking points for liberals, had to say.
University of Maryland Professor of Sociology, Dana R. Fisher, writing for the Washington Post, conducted thorough research as to who, why, and how many attended the March. Relying on camera and satellite imagery, reports from police and other official authorities, and interviews with Marchers, she concluded most (70%) were women, educated, and slightly under 49 years old. Gun control was the driving issue for only 12% of Marchers. Peace causes drew 56%, hatred of trump brought out 42%, and 79% self-identified as “left-leaning” [Marxists]. As can be expected, 89% voted for Hillary Clinton.6 In order to transport, house, and provide nourishing earth-friendly food for the Mad Munchkins and Leftist rabble going to Washington, logistical and financial support was required. They had plenty.
For transportation, the New England [un]Patriots and owner Robert Kraft provided team Boeing 767s. Kraft even wrote a letter of support for the Duped Ten vindicating my rooting for the Philadelphia Eagles in the Super Bowl. Apparently abandoning any connection with the NRA wasn’t enough for Delta Airlines. Flaunting their recent self-castration, Delta also provided free flights to the nation’s capital and back for the Stoneman Ten and their handlers.7 In order to induce people to congregate in close proximity with so many raging feminists, a carrot was needed. It came in the form of celebrity appearances. Model Chrissy Teigen and Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon8 were joined by comedians Amy Shumer and Jason Sudeikis as well as singers Paul Simon, Willow Smith, Jennifer Hudson, Ariana Grande, Vic Mensa, Disney’s Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana), Demi Lavato, Paul McCartney formerly of the Beatles (a group I liked before their Hash-and-Hindu days), and a slew of actors, including Reese Witherspoon,9 all calling for an end to your 2nd Amendment rights. But it had to be paid for.
Stepping into the financial breach with cash swollen wallets bigger than most people’s homes were the glitterati. Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney, Steven Spielberg and wife Kate Capshaw, and Jeffrey Katzenberg each ponied up $500,000 dollars with Taylor Swift donating an undisclosed amount toward abolishing the Bill of Rights.10 They were joined by Eli Broad, wealthy businessman who donated $1 million dollars to Bloomberg’s front group, Everytown For Gun Safety. Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff donated $1 million dollars, Italian fashion house Gucci coughed up $500,000, the Miami Dolphins tossed in $100,000, and Joshua Kushner, brother of presidential adviser and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, gave $50,000 dollars. AT&T, Office Depot, Ultimate Software, and Starbucks donated to a student victim’s fund.11 Not to be left out, support poured in from jocks including basketball stars, past and present, LeBron James, Bill Russell, Dwayne Wade (who donated $200,000 dollars), Chris Paul, Caron Butler, Dennis Rodman, and Carmello Anthony who helped bus the Baltimore kids to Washington. Moral support came from Golden State Warriors’ head coach Steve Kerr, L.A. Lakers president Jeanie Buss, baseball player Anthony Rizzo, soccer player Kyle Martino, and football player DeMarcus Ware.12 Actors, singers, and athletes typically have large followings on social media. It seems Americans determine the veracity of what stars say based on how much they like them. If not for huge amounts of money stars derive from those patronizing their careers, they’d have no platform. Stop patronizing them. Boycott.
Students did not plan, organize, or coordinate the March of the Mad Munchkins. Instead it was done by March for Our Lives (sic) an umbrella organization created by Everytown For Gun Safety, itself a Bloomberg front group with assistance from the Joyce Foundation. Everytown collected and disbursed cash and arranged for statements and appearances by stars. Everytown’s webpage answers the question the liberal media failed to ask; what specifically would you do to end “gun-violence?” Their answer; Congress should end the federal government’s ban on gun-violence research at the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta.13 Like mosquitos that won’t go away, Liberals incessantly claim the CDC is banned from studying “gun-violence” (sic) which is a lie. In 1996, following publication of a CDC funded controversial study on so-called gun-violence, in reality political advocacy masquerading as science paid for with tax payer’s dollars, Arkansas Republican Jay Dickey attached an amendment to a CDC funding bill prohibiting studies done to “promote or advocate gun control.” It was signed into law by Democrat President Bill Clinton. The CDC could continue to study “gun-violence” but research couldn’t be tailored to achieve a political outcome. Like other “federal” agencies, CDC research is at times farmed out to universities which, in turn, are dominated by Leftist professors whose careers depend upon receiving federal grants. Grants are dependent on “finding” what benefactors are paying for. In 1996, CDC researchers wanted to declare “gun-violence” a “public health crisis” a designation which, to some degree, empowers the CDC to impose rules, regulations, and direct action to deal with a health crisis.14 Treating biological causes of epidemics and disease outbreaks means neutralizing the bacterial, viral, and other causes. In this case, the viral agent was firearms.15 Bill of Rights Tramplers also demand ending “absurd” restrictions on the BATF to “digitize records for all guns sales.” This would constitute gun-owner registration which is illegal under federal law. Rights are not registered with governments. Registration transforms rights to privileges dispensed by government. In addition, the Tramplers demand universal background checks meaning the .22 rifle parents give to sons or daughters as Christmas gifts would be illegal. It would have to go through government becoming part of an already existing (form 4473) registration list. Gun and gun owner registration has always been THE prerequisite to government confiscation. Ten-round magazine capacity limits are also part of their shopping list. Apparently it’s okay to shoot 10 but not 11 people. The Tramplers damn semiautomatic rifles as “weapons of war” and “assault weapons” (sic) declaring they have no place in any community and must be banned. At first, gun buy backs would be used to convince people to voluntarily hand them over. How can government buy back what it never owned? To maintain legal possession, gun-owners would have to register semiautomatic rifles with the government and transfers to anyone other than authorities prohibited.16 Why would they be allowed to keep “weapons of war” having no place in any community? They wouldn’t. Once registration was deemed complete, they would be banned. Turn them in or go to prison. During the colonial era, Great Britain never possessed the largest of armies but they were sufficient to execute what amounted to door to door searches for weapons in their colonies including Scotland, Ireland, North America, and later Asia and India. It’s necessary to point this out because anti-2nd Amendment organizations and activists deny they want registration and confiscation. History is the first to call them liars. I’m following suit.
Stoneman Ten students Emma Gonzalez and David Hogg, are too egocentric and full of youthful ignorance and hubris to disguise what they really want. Interviewed by Alisyn Camerota, a conservative before moving from FOX to CNN, she began with a question judges would throw out in a trial as “leading” to wit; could anything be done about gun-violence when needy politicians have no choice but to take campaign donations from the NRA? For some reason Camerota failed to put her question in perspective by noting the NRA has donated $3,533,294 dollars to current members of Congress since 1998, equivalent to Democrat comedian Jimmy Kimmel’s salary for three months.17 Labor Unions, including the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, two of the most virulently Leftwing unions in existence, donated $1.7 billion dollars in 2016 alone, and almost all went to liberal Democrat candidates who want to ban and confiscate firearms and abolish the 2nd Amendment.18 Neither did Camerota note the NRA’s source of funds for campaign donations comes in small dollar amounts from members while unions typically confiscate their huge haul from the paychecks of workers voluntarily or not. It’s no surprise liberals lie, statists have done this throughout history. It’s alarming how easily they get away with it.
Seething with anger, Gonzalez replied to Camerota declaring: “The NRA should be disbanded and dismantled. Don’t you make a new organization under a different name. Don’t you dare come back here. We need to fix our country. Gun control is just the first thing. We keep telling them [politicians] that if you accept this blood money [from the NRA], you’re against the children. They are against the people who are dying. You are funding the killers [NRA] or you’re standing with the children.” Wow, if you belong to the NRA, and by extension, any similar civil rights organization like the WMSA, you’re a killer. You’re the ones shooting and killing kids! Gonzalez’s thinking is not merely an immature and grossly ignorant misunderstanding of history and the Constitution (she’s an Advanced Placement student, too), it is deranged, totally divorced from reality. Her partner in historical illiteracy, a constantly glowering angry pinch-faced almost trembling with rage David Hogg, made even more bizarre and irrational claims saying politicians took money from the NRA to “make it easier for these horrifying people to get guns. If you can’t get elected without taking money from these child murderers [the NRA], why are you running?”19 What are they teaching kids in public schools today? Emma Gonzalez, sporting a Cuban flag on her clothing, a communist dictatorship that tramples the rights of Cubans, starves kids, and murders people young and old, and David Hogg, who calls for revolution, damns the NRA as baby killers? The Left, which has schooled these sock-puppets, and once called American boys serving in Vietnam “baby killers,” now hangs this appellation around the necks of NRA members? Mental health officials, take note.
Piling on the NRA, Huggies Pull-Ups wetting Washington Post “journalist” (sic) Adam Weinstein complains the NRA are big mean bullies because they insist those writing about “gun-control” issues know something about the subject including use of proper terminology. Whimpering Weinstein condemns this as “Gun-splaining” adapting the term “man-splaining” invented by radical feminist college professors outraged by any hint of DNA dictated masculinity. Broadcasting from behind enemy lines (Washington, D.C.), radio talk show host Chris Plante wondered if, while other little boys were off playing the games little boys play, Weinstein was in his backyard playing with his Easy Bake Oven.20
Instead of indoctrinating American kids into a Leftist social, political, and economic worldview, instead of confusing them about the purpose of biological genitalia, instead of demonizing masculinity and traits like self-reliance and rugged individualism, principals should ensure kids are being taught every sentence doesn’t begin with “so” and the Constitution and history of our founders. Teaching for decades in a public high school socialIST studies department, I know it ain’t happening.
One cannot lend support or donate to a movement without also embracing its cause and the cause of gun control organizations is banning private possession of semiautomatic rifles. Handguns come next. Once ownership is no longer a right, its turn them in or go to prison. CVS, Dicks Sporting Goods, and Krogers’ are among those aiding and abetting the demonization of gun-owners. The following is a letter I sent to CVS Pharmacies:
“Dear Mr. Merlo, CEO, CVS Pharmacies
I’ve been a CVS customer 20+ years. Near the end of December, 2017, I noticed the usual wide variety of firearm related magazines had disappeared from your stores. I thought perhaps magazines were discarded at year’s end. Several weeks later a pharmacy employee told me CVS’s corporate office had decided to remove all such magazines. I confirmed this with Kristen, CVS Customer Relations, at your corporate office.
I am both a retired police officer and public high school teacher with an extensive background in firearms. As a member of the 2nd Amendment and sports shooting communities, I was chagrined by your decision. By removing these magazines, you deem something is wrong with them, that they are socially unacceptable. If true based on content, logic dictates the same be true of those who read them. In deciding to slander and discriminate against millions of law-abiding Americans and CVS customers, you have moved from the commercial to the political realm. In so doing, you have de facto allied yourselves with those whose political agenda is abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the individual right to keep and bear arms. If you were in my shoes, would you remain a customer?
To offer as a defense, striving for social responsibility, begs several questions; are you going to remove the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue featuring scantily clad girls? Women displayed in sexually provocative poses perpetuate notions that our wives, daughters, and sisters are sex objects playing a role in sexual harassment and rape. Considering negligent drivers murder 37,000-40,000 people each year and injure, main, and cripple 2-million more, will you remove car, truck, and ATV magazines? Since beer, wine, and liquor appear to be staples at your pharmacies, (is a statistical recitation of the misery and death caused by their misuse necessary?), will you remove alcoholic beverages from your shelves?”
In addition, I announced unless CVS changed their policy, I was initiating a boycott and transferring my accounts to Walgreens, which I did. Executive Support Coordinator Waldemar Kepa responded thanking me for my letter writing he would share my concerns with the merchandising team responsible for magazine selection. He didn’t answer any of my questions or address the boycott. Unless you fight back, gun owners will become as demonized as political conservatives and Christians holding to traditional morality; deemed socially unacceptable, marginalized, pariahs, and driven from the public square.21 “Ho ho, liberal indoctrination has got to go.”
22 Michael Bloomberg, with an estimated worth of $50.8 billion dollars, the 7th richest man in the U.S. and 10th in the world, was the virulently anti-2nd Amendment of New York City, 2002-2013. A Democrat before he became an liberal Republican, he remains, along with George Soros, the biggest financier of political efforts to abolish the 2nd Amendment. Income statistic from Forbes, January 6, 2018. In 2016, not only did he endorse Hillary Clinton for president, he spoke at the Democrat National Convention. At https://web.archive.org/web/2018106213340/https://www.forbes.com/profile/michael-bloomberg/.
44 I know whereof I speak. Compelled to attend Baltimore’s Margaret Brent School 53, the miseducation, and the wounds and injuries I suffered, should be presumptive grounds for a lawsuit. Don’t worry Mayor, Philadelphia was worse.
I’ve been watching all the memes and the news about some spoiled overpaid, loser becoming a model for what I feel is an over-rated shoe. If that’s what passes for an athlete and man of valor these days we’ve sunk quite a bit.