RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/reparations-are-political-suicide-and-joe-biden-knows-it/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_

H.R. 40, the reparations bill, is DOA. Per Politico:

As a candidate, Biden said he supported a commission on reparations. But the administration has yet to endorse the actual bill. After his speech Tuesday, the president met with the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who brought up the need for H.R. 40, which is named after the “40 acres and a mule” promise that now symbolizes the lack of support formerly enslaved people received from the federal government. According to those involved in the conversations, Biden let them down gently.

“He didn’t disagree with what we’re doing,” said Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-Mich.), the 2nd vice chair of the CBC. “He did talk about his plate [being] full with trying to get the infrastructure bill passed and that he really wanted to make sure that he could get that through before he took on anything else.”

Ouch.

H.R. 40, note, would not spend any money on reparations. It would simply create a commission to look into spending money on reparations. If Joe Biden is against even that at this early point in his presidency, then he’s going to be against the idea at every single point in his presidency. The next few months are going to be taken up with attempt to spend trillions of dollars on “infrastructure,” and, after that, the midterm election season will be upon us. In a cosmic sense, Biden may not “disagree with” what the CBC is doing. In practical terms, though, he’s running away from them as fast as he possibly can — and, in so doing, killing the idea dead for at least the rest of his tenure.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/joe-biden-attacks-courageous-maverick-democrats/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=hero&utm_content=related&utm_term=second

President Joe Biden dinged both Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin during a speech in Tulsa, Oklahoma, yesterday, calling them “two members of the Senate who vote more with my Republican friends.” Some coverage alleged that Biden had merely insinuated that the duo voted against more than with him, but it’s a lie that would have generated cheeky chyron corrections on CNN and instantaneous across-the-board fact-checking — five Pinocchios and all the rest — had it been Donald Trump.

It’s not to say that Sinema and Manchin have signed on to all of Biden’s multitrillion-dollar agenda items — often larded with proposals that Biden himself opposed only a couple of years ago, such as ending the Hyde amendment and allowing unlimited taxpayer funding of abortions. But, to this point, Sinema and Manchin have voted with the president 100 percent of the time. If Republicans are looking to them to be saviors, they will likely be disappointed.

Biden’s quip was meant to pressure both to help pass H.R. 1, and to give Democrats an excuse to blow up the Senate filibuster. The president, after all, framed their obstinance as a roadblock to protecting the “sacred right” of voting, again claiming that state laws that codify traditional integrity measures, rather than allowing the chaotic COVID–style free-for-all voting to become the norm, were on par with Jim Crow. H.R. 1 is an attack on free expression, an unconstitutional federal takeover of elections. Its scope is unprecedented. Yet, since the press has adopted the Democrats’ framing of the legislation — a “voting rights” bill meant to stop “Republican-led voting restrictions across the country” — many voters are probably confused by any reluctancy to support it.

Of course, the way Sinema and Manchin are portrayed by the press bears little resemblance to the coverage of, say, Susan Collins, who often held up Republican-agenda items. She was a plucky maverick ready to stand up for her beliefs. And Mitch McConnell was not, as far as I recall, asked daily whether he was willing to destroy the republican norms of the Senate to ram through his legislative agenda with a razor-thin majority. And even if he had been, reporters wouldn’t be referring to it as “filibuster reform.” Yet, the filibuster is the obsession of political media. Sinema and Manchin are the obsession of the political media. All of it geared to help one party realize its goals.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/06/02/never-let-a-plague-go-to-waste/

During America’s first-ever national lockdown, thousands of unelected bureaucrats, as well as federal and state governments, assumed enormous powers not usually accorded to them.

They picked and chose which businesses could stay open without much rationale. They sent the infected into nursing homes occupied by the weak and vulnerable.

Their rules for prosecuting those who violated social distancing, sheltering in place, mask wearing, or violent protesting often hinged on political grounds. Their spending measures on “infrastructure” and “health care” were excuses to lard up redistributive entitlements.

Conservatives moaned that left-wing agendas were at work beneath the pretenses of saving us from the pandemic. And the giddy left bragged that it was true.

After the 2008 financial meltdown, Barack Obama spoke of “fundamentally transforming” the country. Now he’s back, weighing in on the panic-driven, multitrillion-dollar spending that has pushed America’s debt to nearly $30 trillion.

“There’s a teachable moment about maybe this whole deficit hawk thing of the federal government,” Obama said in a recent interview with Ezra Klein of The New York Times. “Just being nervous about our debt 30 years from now, while millions of people are suffering—maybe that’s not a smart way to think about our economics.”

He apparently means that borrowing tons of money in a pandemic and not worrying too much about paying it back is a new, better approach to economics.

Last year, California Gov. Gavin Newsom boasted about leveraging California’s statewide quarantine.

“There is opportunity for reimagining a progressive era as it pertains to capitalism,” Newsom said. “So yes, absolutely, we see this as an opportunity to reshape the way we do business and how we govern.”

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-new-domestic-war-on-terror-has

The Department of Homeland Security on Friday issued a new warning bulletin, alerting Americans that domestic extremists may well use violence on the 100th Anniversary of the Tulsa race massacre. This was at least the fourth such bulletin issued this year by Homeland Security (DHS) warning of the same danger and, thus far, none of the fears it is trying to instill into the American population has materialized.

The first was a January 14 warning, from numerous federal agencies including DHS, about violence in Washington, DC and all fifty state capitols that was likely to explode in protest of Inauguration Day (a threat which did not materialize). Then came a January 27 bulletin warning of “a heightened threat environment across the United States that is likely to persist over the coming weeks” from “ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority” (that warning also was not realized). Then there was a May 14 bulletin warning of right-wing violence “to attack higher-capacity targets,” exacerbated by the lifting of COVID lockdowns (which also never happened). And now we are treated to this new DHS warning about domestic extremists preparing violent attacks over Tulsa (it remains to be seen if a DHS fear is finally realized).

Just like the first War on Terror, these threats are issued with virtually no specificity. They are just generalized warnings designed to put people in fear about their fellow citizens and to justify aggressive deployment of military and law enforcement officers in Washington, D.C. and throughout the country. A CNN article which wildly hyped the latest danger bulletin about domestic extremists at Tulsa had to be edited with what the cable network, in an “update,” called “the additional information from the Department of Homeland Security that there is no specific or credible threats at this time.” And the supposed dangers from domestic extremists on Inauguration Day was such a flop that even The Washington Post — one of the outlets most vocal about lurking national security dangers in general and this one in particular — had to explicitly acknowledge the failure:

Thousands [of National Guard troops] had been deployed to capitals across the country late last week, ahead of a weekend in which potentially violent demonstrations were predicted by the FBI — but never materialized.

Once again on Wednesday, security officials’ worst fears weren’t borne out: In some states, it was close to business as usual. In others, demonstrations were small and peaceful, with only occasional tense moments.

http://www.swtotd.blogspot.com

“Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.”    Thomas Jefferson January 12, 1819

In the above letter to Nathaniel Macon, Senator from North Carolina, a proponent of slavery and a political foe, Jefferson explained wisdom that comes with age – that it can only be based on a foundation of honesty. If we are not honest with ourselves and others, what good are facts and truth?

A friend suggested an essay on facts and truth – a challenging but interesting assignment. The result is my opinion, expressed as truthfully as I was able, but it is not a factual last word. The two words are commonly used synonymously, but they are different. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines fact as “something that has actual existence…an occurrence…[or] having objective reality.” Truth is the opposite of a lie. It is defined by the same source as “the body of real things, events and facts.” But the roots of the two words provide clarity as to their differences. “Fact” comes from the Latin facio, to fashion or fabricate something, while truth comes from the old English word treoth, meaning fidelity or faith, as in “I pledge thee my troth,” an archaic wedding commitment, meaning a lifelong pledge of faithfulness.

Larry Walsh, founder of the technology business strategy company 2112 Group recently wrote an essay on how the technology industry must “freely share new facts” and stop “clinging to accepted truths.” He described the two words: “A fact is something that’s indisputable, based on empirical research and quantifiable measures. Truth is entirely different; it may include fact, but it can also include belief.” In my opinion, his definition of fact is too simplistic. There are facts that are unalterable, like grass is green, water is wet, and skunks are odoriferous. Other facts are subject to change, as products, mechanizations, services and research evolve and improve. A fact is a fact until it isn’t. What better examples than the use of “facts” to determine the origin of COVID-19, the cause of the Trump Russian probe, or what was behind the January 6 protests. Mr. Walsh’s definition of truth implies a deficiency in faith and historical knowledge and a supercilious attitude toward the beliefs of others.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/06/01/denver-school-board-director-and-black-lives-matter-activist-accused-of-molesting-over-60-undocumented-teens/

A Democrat Denver School Board director and Black Lives Matter organizer has been accused of sexually assaulting over 60 undocumented students—some as young as 14-years-old.

The alleged predator, Tay Anderson, denied the accusations over the weekend, while announcing that he will step back from everyday board duties during the investigation.

The allegations came out during legislative testimony last week, when a parent claimed that a person employed by the district was sexually assaulting and targeting undocumented teens, CBSDenver reported.

Mary Brooks Fleming, a mother of three students within the Denver Public School district, testified before the state House Judiciary Committee that some of the children were “violently raped” by the employee and, in some case, forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Brooks Fleming appeared before the committee to testify in support of legislation that would make it easier for victims to sue institutions who employ child sexual abusers. The mother is a volunteer at a local nonprofit organization that aids sexual assault victims.

“Individuals were coming to my home asking for medical attention. One was as young as 14 and needed stitches. All in all, 61 high school students and one recent graduates would turn to me for help,” Fleming said, shaking and holding back tears. “Sixty-two victims as young as 14! Sixty-one were undocumented or dreamers. All were so afraid of this one man!” she added.

The DPS school board confirmed in a statement Friday night that the accusations were against Anderson, and that Denver police was also aware of the allegations.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/06/progressive_jews_delude_themse

To my Jewish brethren who in their heart of hearts think they are being virtuous, you must understand that the Black Lives Matter movement that so many of you marched for, sent money to, and still support with admiration has at its core the deep desire to annihilate Jews and destroy Israel. Here is the proof. In 2015 at a panel discussion at Harvard Law School, Black Lives Matter cofounder Patrisse Cullors called for the end of Israel.

It does not matter what denomination of Judaism you belong to or if you even believe in G-d but as a thinking being you must begin now to acknowledge that supporting a group that calls for the annihilation of your fellow Jews should go against every fiber of your moral compass.

There is no distinction between hating a country and seeking to wipe out its inhabitants. Israel is always the target with leftist groups like Black Lives Matter.

In fact, the latest form of  Jew hatred is the delegitimization of the Jewish people. It “represents a fundamentally different set of characteristics from prior expressions of hate” and it operates “differently from prior forms of anti-Jewish expression.”

Historically, the Anti-Defamation League’s  ‘model of measuring anti-Semitic attitudes focused on group traits and individual behaviors. This approach, developed in the post Second World War era, does not take into account how as a people and nation-state, Jews today are being re-defined and demonized.’

The ‘global Jew’ is being identified as destroying established cultural and religious norms while promoting Jewish influence and control. The other objective, in connection with this new assault, is the delegitimization of the State of Israel.