RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.persuasion.community/p/john-mcwhorter-the-neoracists

John McWhorter, contributing writer at The Atlantic and professor of linguistics at Columbia University, is a member of Persuasion’s Board of Advisors. His new book, The Elect: Neoracists Posing as Antiracists and their Threat to a Progressive America, is being published in serial at It Bears Mentioning.

A new religion is preached across America. It’s nonsense posing as wisdom.

One can divide antiracism into three waves. First Wave Antiracism battled slavery and segregation. Second Wave Antiracism, in the 1970s and 1980s, battled racist attitudes and taught America that being racist was a flaw. Third Wave Antiracism, becoming mainstream in the 2010s, teaches that racism is baked into the structure of society, so whites’ “complicity” in living within it constitutes racism itself, while for black people, grappling with the racism surrounding them is the totality of experience and must condition exquisite sensitivity toward them, including a suspension of standards of achievement and conduct.

Third Wave Antiracist tenets, stated clearly and placed in simple oppositions, translate into nothing whatsoever:

When black people say you have insulted them, apologize with profound sincerity and guilt. But don’t put black people in a position where you expect them to forgive you. They have dealt with too much to be expected to.

Black people are a conglomeration of disparate individuals. “Black culture” is code for “pathological, primitive ghetto people.” But don’t expect black people to assimilate to “white” social norms because black people have a culture of their own.

Silence about racism is violence. But elevate the voices of the oppressed over your own.

You must strive eternally to understand the experiences of black people. But you can never understand what it is to be black, and if you think you do you’re a racist.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/atlas-mugged/?itm_campaign=headline-testing-atlas-mugged&itm_medium=headline&itm_

Institutions and journals are coming after Dr. Scott Atlas for the sins of having served in the Trump administration and questioning public-health orthodoxy.

S tanford’s campaign against Dr. Scott Atlas for the sins of working for former president Donald Trump and advocating for balancing the costs and benefits of COVID-19-mitigation measures has taken a new and ugly turn. In September, 105 Stanford medical and health-policy faculty members published an open letter accusing Atlas, their former Stanford medical-school colleague and then White House coronavirus-task-force member, of deliberate misrepresentations of the “established science” surrounding COVID-19 that “will lead to immense avoidable harm.” The letter writers did not cite any publications or statements by Atlas to support their claims. Now two of the letter writers, joined by psychiatrist David Spiegel, a third Stanford colleague who did not sign the original letter, have doubled down. In an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, they repeat the allegations and suggest that miscreants such as Atlas should be censured by professional medical societies, medical-licensing boards, and universities where they are faculty members. This vendetta has to stop.

Like the earlier letter, the JAMA article provides little evidence of Atlas’s alleged misrepresentations. Indeed, the sole source cited is a New York Times article that misstates Atlas’s positions. Moreover, some of Atlas’s alleged misstatements of science are not misstatements at all. None of this stops the three JAMA authors from insinuating that Atlas is comparable to physicians who promoted eugenics, conducted the racist Tuskegee syphilis experiments, and fraudulently linked vaccines to autism.

The JAMA authors and the Times article they cite claim Atlas questioned the efficacy of mask wearing and social distancing. But that article inaccurately cited an interview with Tucker Carlson of Fox News in which Atlas said people need not wear masks when they are alone but should wear masks if they can’t socially distance around others. Similarly, the Times article cited a different Times piece to claim, as the JAMA authors do, that Atlas pressured the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to change its guidance so that exposed, asymptomatic people would not be tested. But the second article acknowledged “conflicting reports on who was responsible” for the policy change and never suggested it was exclusively Atlas. It reported that Dr. Brett Giroir, the coronavirus-testing director, stated the new guidance was made with input from the CDC director and approved by all the task-force doctors.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/02/donald-trump-was-americas-whistle-blower-chief-michael-cutler/

Candidate Donald Trump promised that if he was elected President he would “Drain the swamp.”

(The term “Swamp” to describe the pervasively corrupt District of Columbia should be replaced by “Cesspool.”  Swamps are natural elements of our planet’s ecosystem and are home to many forms of plant and animal life and are, therefore essential to our environment.  Cesspools however, are entirely artificial, filled with fetid rotting feces and detritus and there is nothing good to be found in cesspools!)

While most politicians portray themselves as “outsiders” who will clean house when elected, in reality with few exceptions, they are an integral part of the corrupt political system, Trump was not only a true “outsider” but had sufficient wealth so that he was not beholden to the lobbyists and other corruptors of the political system who use campaign contributions to get the best government money can buy (them).

The Orwellian terms “Lobbyists” and “Campaign contributors” should be replaced by far more honest terms: “Corruptors” and “Bribers.”

Trump’s brash and unconventional approach to politics and campaigning rankled many but also attracted the attention of tens of millions of angry and frustrated disenfranchised Americans who knew that the system was not working for them.

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2021/02/09/covid-relief-bill-stalled-over-payments-to-illegal-aliens-n1424190

A trillion or two dollars in the COVID-19 relief bill has been stalled by Senate Democrats insisting on payments to illegal aliens, while millions of Americans remain unnecessarily unemployed and hopeless.

POLITICO reports that Democrats are “split” as “progressives rage” in their effort to send more borrowed money to illegal aliens.

“Split” might be putting it all too nicely.

Whatever the case, it took two POLITICO infotainment writers, Burgess Everett and Marriane Levine, to come up with this awful paragraph:

An effort to restrict stimulus checks to undocumented immigrants is blowing a hole in Democrats’ unity in the Biden era, after a bloc of Democrats sided with Republicans over their more progressive colleagues last week. The immigration status of those seeking new stimulus payments is shaping up as a major point of contention among Democrats as the House and Senate write their coronavirus relief bills, presaging the tough fights ahead among the party’s tight majorities in Congress on a politically volatile issue.

The effort is to restrict stimulus checks from illegal aliens, not to them, and “undocumented immigrants” isn’t the correct legal terminology.

Whatever.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/manchin-pushes-biden-to-reconsider-keystone-xl-pipeline-rejection

Joe Manchin, the most centrist Democrat in a split Senate, is calling on President Biden to reconsider his decision to cancel a permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

Manchin, the chairman of the powerful Energy and Natural Resources Committee, asked Biden in a letter on Tuesday that was shared with the Washington Examiner to consider what rejecting the pipeline means for safety, jobs, and energy security.

Biden’s decision, part of a day-one climate change executive order, has drawn backlash from union leaders who endorsed him and some centrist Democrats who say the cancellation will kill thousands of construction jobs.

The Biden administration is facing questions from these traditional allies on how its clean energy and infrastructure spending agenda will create new jobs that can replace lost work in the fossil fuel industry.

Manchin, who represents fossil fuel-intensive West Virginia, has been among the Democrats who have criticized Biden’s move to cancel the 2,000-mile Keystone XL pipeline that would have run from Alberta in western Canada to Texas.

But by going directly to Biden and calling for him to reverse the decision, Manchin is going a step further.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/537952-reckless-rhetoric-is-a-reckless-standard-in-this-impeachment

“James Comey used such rhetoric when he said, “The Republican Party needs to be burned down. It is just not a healthy political organization.” Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin likewise claimed, “We have to collectively in essence burn down the Republican Party. We should level them because if there are survivors, if there are people who weather the storm, they will do it again.”

Little more than one year since the first impeachment of Donald Trump, the Senate is poised to pass judgment on him again. There is, however, one notable difference in the trial that starts today. In 2020, his conduct when it came to Ukraine turned on his words alone. This time, a vote to convict could be seen as implicating a host of others in using similarly reckless rhetoric, including some of these Senate jurors.

The search for moral clarity will be lost if Americans cannot distinguish between the behavior of the accused and that of his jury. Polls show half the country favors conviction, so this trial could end up as an indictment of both sides for fueling our divisions. Impeachment was intended to be used in the clearest cases to secure a supermajority vote for conviction. However, Congress itself could wind up appearing like an unimpeached conspirator, not in the riots, but with our national discord.

https://dianebederman.com/bds-boycott-divest-and-sanction-is-out-to-destroy-ameri

There is an attack on America, today, coming from BDS, Boycott, Divest and Sanction, with the sole intent of destroying the country by attacking her at her very foundation, the Judeo/Christian ethic, which promotes freedom, free speech and free will and underpins the American Constitution.

Remember when Obama derided people who hold on to their guns and religion?

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them… They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion…”

Religion?

This was a direct salvo against the ethic that is meant to tie Americans, together.

This revolutionary, evolutionary ethic states all people are born with equal intrinsic value and all life is sacred.  That means we never judge people based on their race, colour, creed, religion or sexual orientation; their characteristics, but rather their character. The ethic that came out of the desert 3500 years ago taught us that we are the subjects of our destiny, not the object of our fate. We are neither born into the manor nor to be subservient.  We have what Jason D. Hill, author of We Have Overcome, professor of philosophy and Honors Distinguished Faculty at DePaul University in Chicago, calls moral agency: free will.  And that same ethic promoted free speech. It was the prophet, Jeremiah, who died defending free speech.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/08/what-happened-to-officer-brian-sicknick/

The claim is so pervasive as not to be questioned: Five people died as a result of the January 6 “insurrection” at the Capitol building, killed by blood-thirsty Trump voters at the president’s behest, out for revenge over a stolen election.

Even though only one death—the shooting of Ashli Babbitt by a still-unidentified police officer—is provable by video evidence, the other fatalities nonetheless are accepted as an article of faith to stoke public outrage about what happened that day.

The most tragic death, the media and lawmakers lament, is that of United States Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick. The 42-year-old New Jersey native was a 12-year veteran of the Capitol police force and himself a supporter of Donald Trump.

Before details about his death could be confirmed, the media quickly insisted Sicknick died after he was attacked at the Capitol. 

“A United States Capitol Police officer died Thursday night from injuries sustained when he engaged with a pro-Trump mob that descended on the U.S. Capitol the day before,” the New York Times reported January 8. The officer, according to the Times, had been “struck . . . in the head with a fire extinguisher, according to two law enforcement officials. With a bloody gash in his head, Mr. Sicknick was rushed to the hospital and placed on life support.”

Sicknick died on January 7. A statement released by the police department later that night vaguely supported the media’s emerging narrative.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/02/black-lives-matter-wants-dismantle-zionist-project-daniel-greenfield/

This comes from Marc Lamont Hill, courtesy of an intrepid online researcher of antisemitism. Hill had previously gotten into trouble for combining his CNN gig with support for murdering Jews. But even though CNN parted ways with him, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) are always happy to give an antisemites a forum, whether it’s Corbyn’s rep or Hill.

In 2014, Hill had claimed on CNN that the kidnapping and murder of three Jewish teens, Naftali Frenkel, Gilad Shaer, and Eyal Yifrah,  one of them an American citizen, wasn’t “terrorism”, but “resistance”.

Earlier this year, Hill had insisted that “occupied people have a legal and moral right to defend themselves” and that the idea that Israel has a “right to exist” is “propaganda”. In May of last year, he had argued that Trump’s “call for Palestine to ‘reject hatred and terrorism’ is offensive.”

“We have allowed this nonviolent thing to become so normative that we’re undermining our own ability to resist in real robust ways,” he complained.

A month after the Pittsburgh massacre, Marc Lamont Hill addressed a UN event in support of the terror colonialists occupying parts of Israel, endorsed BDS, called for the destruction of Israel and justified the murder of Jews.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/moral-narcissism-and-the-show-trial-of-donald-trump_3690218.html

Discussing the Democrats’ impeachment trial in legal terms is a ludicrous waste of time. Anyone literate in the English language can see that the concept of impeaching a post-president is entirely absent from the U.S. Constitution.

Removing someone from office who is no longer in office in the first place is a serio-comic oxymoron straight out of the Theater of the Absurd.

What is actually going on is Trump Derangement Syndrome taken from a neurosis to some kind of bizarre psychosis with overtones of obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The level at which this “trial” is worth examining therefore has a psychoanalytic, not a legal, tilt. It raises, once again, the question of why the Democrats and their media cohorts despise Donald Trump so much.

Yes, I know they fear his political comeback above all things and wish to extinguish it, but what is it, on a deeper level, that makes them believe this man to be such a monster that they are going full Stalinist in conducting what Rand Paul aptly called a “Show Trial”?