RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/02/a_great_awakening_decades_in_the_making.html

Over at The Conservative Treehouse, Sundance has again managed to generate a treasure trove of anecdotal history, evidence, and analysis from those who visit his site.  

Last month, he asked readers: if “[y]ou did not take the COVID-19 shot, why not?”  The thousands of personal responses were illuminating and created a kind of timeline showing how irreconcilable conflicts pitting available scientific knowledge and common sense against the government’s own actions, orders, statements, and censorship heightened public distrust of COVID mandates and “vaccines,” until various tipping points spilled over into outright rejection of political, medical, and media authorities. 

This month, Sundance asks a more foundational question: “When did you start really paying attention?”  In other words, when did you “recognize that things around you, things you perhaps didn’t pay attention to before, were not what you thought they were”?  What was the moment when “your political awakening began”?  

The thousands of responses to this simple question are a cornucopia of rich history, personal reflection, and insightful analysis.  Just as last month’s COVID question created a powerful timeline documenting the last three years of COVID-1984 insanity, this month’s more general question has generated nothing less than a near-century’s worth of details and stories tracking people’s “aha moments” as they discovered that the promises of American self-government are often but an ornamental fabrication plastered upon the stratagems of ruthless government actors pushing propaganda, accumulating power, and sacrificing American lives.  Interestingly, they come from people traversing back and forth across the political spectrum.  From a research point of view, the collected information is staggeringly comprehensive, impressive, and invaluable.  From a personal point of view, the selfless entries and recorded memories are emotional, poignant, cathartic, and often deeply revealing.  I encourage you not only to read through some of the many responses, but also to continue the conversation here at American Thinker, whose commenters, like those at The Treehouse, are well known for their crisp intellectual engagement.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/jimmy-carters-last-hurrah/

When word came that Jimmy Carter, age 98, was entering hospice care, the predictable plaudits began to pour in. Calling Carter “an inspiration,” Maria Shriver gushed that he “moves humanity forward every single day.” Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) described Carter as having always “walked with God.” Rocker Nils Lofgren called him “[a]s fine a man and soul as I’ve ever seen.” And Steve Martin tweeted: “We’ve seen few humans this devoted and humble….Quietly continuing his mission,which was to do good. If you must leave us go gently . Leave your heart and bravery so we might learn.”

All of which is testimony to the power of hype.

I was nineteen years old during most of Jimmy Carter’s 1976 presidential campaign. You might have expected me to support him. Three years earlier, after all, I’d been every bit as addicted to the Watergate hearings on afternoon TV as my mother was to As the World Turns. I was besotted by the movie All the President’s Men, released a few months before the 1976 election. At the time of the election, I was a student on a college campus dominated by lefties who, purportedly jaded and alienated by politics in those post-Watergate days, embraced Carter as a breath of fresh air, a magnanimous soul uniquely equipped to make America, once again, a City on a Hill, noble in its character and great in its deeds. As Carter put it himself, “I can give you a government that’s honest and that’s filled with love, competence, and compassion.”

I didn’t trust the son of a bitch as far as I could throw him.

Yes, Nixon, aside from being a brilliant statesman, had been a wily character. The Watergate tapes had revealed his salty side. He was no saint, but then again he didn’t sell himself as a saint. What politician is a saint? What mattered was that Nixon was brilliant. He was a terrific president. He knew his stuff cold. He loved America. He hated Communism. Yes, he was often characterized as being awkward in his own body and very uncomfortable about interacting with voters on the campaign trail – which to me meant that, well, at least he wasn’t slick.

Carter was slick. Boy, was he slick. His big, toothy smile was the phoniest thing I’d ever seen. He insisted that his name appear on the ballot as “Jimmy,” not “James.” And he talked a lot more about his religion than any other presidential candidate in my lifetime had ever done. I’d never heard such sanctimony from a politician. It was while listening to him that I heard the term “born again” for the first time. Although plainly trolling for evangelical votes, he acted as if he was far too virtuous to think of doing such a thing.

https://thespectator.com/topic/victimhood-mudslinging-define-politics-nikki-haley/

The 2024 campaign has hardly started, but the air is already filled with noxious fumes, most of it from desperate cable TV hosts and anonymous social-media posters. Don Lemon’s sexist comments about Nikki Haley are the latest example, but the vitriol has spread much wider. It reveals a dank corner of American politics, filled with mud-slinging and name-calling, degrading our public square.

Donald Trump specializes in these attacks.. He has already launched several, unsuccessfully, on the man he sees as his most formidable competitor. Calling Florida’s popular governor “Meatball Ron” and “DeSanctimonious” isn’t an argument. It’s an epithet. It has the intellectual heft of giving someone the middle finger.

Lemon’s sour attacks on Nikki Haley have attracted the most attention because he has long been a prominent media personality. Why was it sexist to say she was “past her prime?” Because Haley, now age fifty-one, is actually in her sweet spot as a rising politician. What Lemon undoubtedly meant, without actually saying so directly, is that she is past her sexual prime. That is not usually considered the best reason to pick a president. Nor has it been applied to men seeking the office. When people say Biden is “past his prime,” as they frequently do, they aren’t talking about his sex life. They are worried about his mental confusion and physical frailty.

Lemon’s rant was hypocritical, as well, because he didn’t apply that same standard to his preferred female leaders. He didn’t mention it when he backed Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court. She was fifty-one at the time. He didn’t mention it when he backed Hillary Clinton for president in 2016. She was born in 1947. He never used it to criticize Kamala Harris. She’s fifty-eight. The list goes on and on.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/02/22/biden-is-still-after-your-gas-stoves/

Shortly after a Biden administration official boasted about how the federal government might ban gas stoves for being “unsafe,” the White House reassured the public that no such ban was in the works.

We warned readers at the time not to believe such reassurances because “once this sort of train starts moving there is often no stopping it.”

That was in early January. It took less than a month for the Biden administration to prove us right.

Earlier this month, the Department of Energy released a proposed rule that, if implemented, would essentially regulate gas stoves out of existence.

The new proposed rule comes despite the fact that the same federal department had decided in the past that – aside from an existing ban on always-lit pilot lights – efficiency mandates on gas stoves didn’t make much sense, since all they do is burn natural gas.

But Biden’s regulators decided to ditch common sense, insisting that appliance makers could squeeze out more heat through new designs.

The industry, which knows a thing or two about building appliances that customers want and can afford, recognizes BS when it sees it.