Amen to That! Democrats Will Have to Change Hundreds of English Words if They Really Want to be ‘Inclusive’ By Bryan Preston

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/bryan-preston/2021/01/04/amen-to-that-democrats-will-have-to-change-hundreds-of-english-words-if-they-really-want-to-be-inclusive-n1304673

Rep. Ewomanuel Cleaver, Missouri Democrat, (I’ve taken the liberty of changing his name from “Emanuel” to remove any offensive reference to the males of of our species) lifted up the “prayer heard ’round the world” over the weekend. He closed it with the Shebrew word “amen,” but then added “a-woman” to be inclusive.

That’s not the end of the inclusive effort, or at least it shouldn’t be. Literally dozens of English words have “men” embedded in them.  Many also have “him” and “he” embedded, including the always useful “heh.”

Let’s change that one to “sheh.”

It’s time to root those “men” out in the name of including all the genders.

Some of the words that must be changed to reflect our 2021 sensibilities are just so obvious I can’t believe no one thought of it before Rep. Cleaver provided enlightenment, sorry, enlightenwoment, to us all.

mentor

Duh. “MENtor” is so gender-specific. We must change it to “womentor” immediately.

menopause and hymen

Is It Time for NeverGOP? Why exactly is it imperative to vote Republican? How exactly will Republicans stop the Left—and stop them from doing what, exactly? By Jack Kerwick

https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/04/is-it-time-for-nevergop/

Since forever, Republican politicians and their apologists in conservative media have assured their constituents that unless they voted for the Republican Party, the country would go to hell in a handbasket—or, what amounts to essentially the same thing, be “fundamentally transformed” into a socialist dystopia.

We owe it to ourselves, and especially to our children, to vote against Democrats and for Republicans at every turn.

To be clear, it is never sufficient to vote for a third party candidate or to simply abstain from voting altogether. The only way that one can adequately “defeat the Left” is by voting for Republican candidates—regardless of how otherwise indistinguishable those candidates may be from their Democratic Party rivals. 

Talk radio host Michael Medved was doubtless representative of his colleagues throughout the universe of Big Conservative media when he would tirelessly ridicule those members of his own audience who, having reached their limit with the perpetual pattern of broken promises and acts of betrayal on the part of the self-styled “conservative” Republicans for whom they always voted, would threaten to vote for third party candidates. Medved would refer to them as “losertarians” while informing them that, if they were really upset with the GOP, they needed to reform the party from within.   

Of course, when the GOP candidates were those, like George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, over whom Medved and his ilk waxed orgasmic, then this counsel of Medved’s was framed as though it were axiomatic. When, however, conservative Republican voters acted on Medved’s imperative and voted in record numbers for Donald Trump, Medved failed resoundingly to practice what he preached: He blasted Trump at every turn and became, if not in theory then in practice, a “NeverTrumper.” 

In 2020, Medved wrote a column in which he announced that he would vote for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

Whether Medved ever realized it or not—whether or not he cared—the members of his audience, those who made him a success as a nationally syndicated talk radio host, felt betrayed. It’s not just that he disagreed with them over the virtues of President Trump; rather, he personally betrayed them, failing to practice what he had been preaching to the unwashed masses, the little people, for years. 

Losing Would Be a Fitting Coda for the Feckless GOP Senate If they won’t stand against a rigged presidential election, they certainly won’t stand against Joe Biden and the Democrats. By Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2021/01/04/losing-would-be-a-fitting-coda-for-the-feckless-gop-senate/

It should surprise no one that the Republican Senate—the most inept collection of politicians in recent memory—will end the Trump era in a state of disarray, discord, and dysfunction.

What Americans have witnessed over the past four years, as I’ve written several times, is a textbook example of political power squandered. Republican senators, rather than maximize the unexpected gift of a Republican White House, Senate, and House of Representatives to advance long-promised “conservative” policies, wasted the opportunity while giving political cover to both the corrupt president who preceded Donald Trump and the one who will succeed him.

The first half of Trump’s presidency was sabotaged by a special counsel investigation into Russian collusion, an imaginary crime that Senate Republicans knew was a farce from the start, yet defended anyway. While Robert Mueller’s partisan probe obscured the real scandal—the unprecedented abuse of the country’s law enforcement and surveillance apparatus to target a rival presidential candidate and then incoming president—Republicans in charge of powerful Senate committees did little more than write stern letters and make empty threats on cable news shows in a failed attempt to “get to the bottom” of Russiagate.

Investigations into the Biden family’s overseas racket were slow-walked; Republicans refused to compel Hunter Biden to testify in the president’s impeachment trial, an event that would have torpedoed Biden’s candidacy and elevated a surefire loser such as Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to the top of the Democratic presidential ticket.

A once-in-a-generation chance to purge the Beltway of fossilized institutionalists was bypassed. Ditto for major reforms of immigration law, foreign affairs, trade agreements, federal regulations, and climate change activism. The president almost single-handedly retooled failed national policies through executive orders or administrative decree; in most cases, especially related to U.S. military presence abroad, Senate Republicans thwarted rather than aided the Trump Administration.

“Conservative” achievements over the past four years belong solely to the president and his team, not to congressional Republicans.

When Tony Met Kary According to a Nobel laureate, Dr. Anthony Fauci should not even be an unelected bureaucrat. Lloyd Billingsley

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/when-tony-met-kary-lloyd-billingsley/

“As we get into the end of the summer, the beginning of the fall of 2021, we can start to approach some degree of normality,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci as he rang in the new year. People might wonder if it was 2022 that Fauci really had in mind for “the approach of some degree of normality.”

For most of 2020, Dr. Fauci claimed that to reach herd immunity about 60 to 70 percent of the nation would need a vaccine. Then in a December 24 interview with the New York Times, Fauci said he had been looking at “polls” showing that only half of all Americans would take a vaccine. Fauci thought, “I can nudge this up a bit,” and boosted the number for herd immunity to 80-85 percent. That caught the attention of Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican. 

Fauci “made the decision to mislead with nothing but good intentions,” said Rubio in December 30 Fox News opinion piece. “However, let’s be clear about what he was doing: lying to the American people in order to manipulate their behavior.”

Fauci is an “unelected technocrat,” Rubio wrote, and “if he wants to lead the nation, he should run for office.” If not, “he should give us an honest and transparent reading of the science, not polling data, and let the rest of us —policymakers and the American people who have elected them — do our jobs.”

That long overdue smackdown was hardly the first Fauci had received. Back in the 1990s, one of the world’s leading scientists held doubts that Fauci  should even be an unelected bureaucrat.

“This man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there, you will know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine. He should not be in a position like he’s in.”

Incubating Hatred: How Radical Professors Help Promote Jew-Hatred And how they further the dark purpose of the BDS movement. Richard L. Cravatts

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/incubating-hatred-how-radical-professors-help-richard-l-cravatts/

While the pandemic greatly disrupted campus activities in 2020, the student governments of at least three universities managed to focus their efforts to pass BDS resolutions, bills that asked their respective universities to divest from holdings of companies doing business with Israel.

At the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, that school’s resolution “called on the university to divest from Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Company, Lockheed Martin, Caterpillar Inc. and Elbit Systems Ltd. for what the resolution alleges is partaking in human-rights violations in the Palestinian territories. . . .” Additionally, in a twist that forced Jewish students to choose between supporting the Black Lives Matter movement and condemning Israel, the resolution included concessions for the minority community and a nod to BLM, and “also called for the university to divest from its own police department . . . and for the university to divest from companies involved in the prison system, U.S. immigration enforcement and fossil fuels.”

A successful BDS resolution vote at Columbia University similarly demanded that the school “divest its stocks, funds, and endowment from companies that profit from or engage in the State of Israel’s acts toward Palestinians that, according to Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), fall under the United Nations International Convention of the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.” 

And, most recently, in November at San Francisco State University (SFSU), a perennial hotbed of anti-Israel agitation, a resolution promoted by the radical group General Union of Palestine Students was passed and called on the University to divest from a list of some 100 companies “that benefit from Israeli Occupation, racism, and colonialism” in Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria. “[T]hese investments harm San Francisco State’s Palestinian, Arab, Muslim students,” the resolution read, “many of whom have families who currently live under Israeli occupation, or are descendants of Palestinians who have been killed or forcibly relocated as a result of Israel’s occupation of Palestine.” 

UK: We Need to Keep Schools Open The COVID-related tragedies that no one wants to talk about. Katie Hopkins

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/we-need-keep-schools-open-katie-hopkins/

As I sit here in my kitchen three days before the official start of the new school year, not a single member of my family knows what they are supposed to be doing next week.

Of course my husband and I know the things we have to get done — shifts for work already on the fridge, calls all scheduled in the calendar, and the other stuff of life stacked up like the ironing pile, reminding me there is no good reason to be sitting on my sofa.

But my children have no sense of what their lives are supposed to look like next week, or when they should show up for school, or whether their schools will be shuttered altogether.

If we turn on the news, the top story is the Teachers Unions angrily bellowing at the Education Secretary Gavin Williamson to shut everything down completely. He just caved to their demands in London and closed the few remaining primary schools he had tried to keep open.

Dr. Mary Bousted, joint head of the National Education Union (which has more than 450,000 members), called for all primary and secondary schools to be closed. She said, “What is right for London is right for the rest of the country.”

All very well Mary, but shouldn’t it be about what is right for our kids?

New York City is Back! Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/01/new-york-city-back-daniel-greenfield/

New York is back! No, I don’t mean Rudy Giuliani’s revived New York City. I mean the nightmarish New York City of Dinkins, Beame and Lindsay.

I mean the Death Wish and Warriors city.

And now Bill de Blasio’s New York City before it’s passed on to some even more nightmarishly incompetent and corrupt leftist whose only agenda is identity politics.

New York City is back, baby.

Bat-wielding man injures multiple people in NYC during crazy crime spree – New York Post

Violence adds to NYC’s 2020 death toll, with 97% jump in shootings and 45% increase in murders — criminal carnage not seen in 14 years – New York Daily News

NYPD: 8 People Shot In 6 Different Shootings Not Even 2 Hours Into 2021 – CBS 2

NYPD: Man Shot, Killed on Eve of His 21st Birthday – NBC 4

NYPD searching for suspect who shot into parked car in Brooklyn – ABC 7

‘Everybody is in shock’: New York City Christmas concert ends with police shooting gunman on cathedral steps – USA Today

Nearly 70 percent of 2020 shootings in NYC are unsolved: NYPD – New York Post

Start spreading the news. These vagabond bullets. Are yearning to stray. I’m leaving today. I don’t want to be a part of it. New York, New York.

The Judiciary vs. the Leftist Mob Patriots won’t bend to the mob — even if the judges do. Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/judiciary-vs-leftist-mob-daniel-greenfield/

Over two centuries ago, Alexander Hamilton pointed out that due to the “natural feebleness of the judiciary”, it’s “in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced.”

Jeopardy long ago became reality. Now our nation’s future is in jeopardy.

As mobs fill the street, the Roberts Court shows the weakness of a conservative judiciary that is willing to issue conservative rulings only on those issues that won’t infuriate the mob too much. Faced with blatant election rigging, judges across the country have retreated from having to make the hard choices and safeguard our constitutional republic against political gangsters.

Or rather conservative judges have.

Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner, Stacey Abrams’ sister, is happy to intervene on behalf of her sister in Georgia’s Senate rolls and protect the dirty voter rolls from being cleaned up by Republicans. Throughout the Trump administration, the Democrat judges appointed by Clinton and Obama haven’t been shy about blocking every administration move on specious grounds.

Democrats then seized on the pandemic to rig elections in key states. This wasn’t just gaming the system like gerrymandering or using dirty census figures that include illegal aliens: both traditional Democrat means of rigging elections. Instead Democrat governors, judges and secretaries of state bypassed legislatures to unilaterally change how elections were conducted.

This wasn’t just crooked or dirty. It violated the plain text of the Constitution which put the power into the hands of state legislatures in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania to determine how elections would be conducted. Federal judges and the DOJ have spent two generations monitoring elections in southern states because of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Pelosi Rules The Speaker changes House procedures to increase spending and stifle dissent. By James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-pelosi-rules-11609792916?mod=opinion_lead_pos10

Georgia voters, you can’t say Nancy Pelosi hasn’t warned you. The Speaker of the House is clarifying today that without a Republican Senate to serve as a check on her chamber, the 117th Congress is prepared to follow the fiscal blowout of 2020 with another historic surge in federal spending and debt. New House rules will eliminate one of the few modest institutional restraints on government budgets and further reduce the power of minority Republicans to impede the Pelosi agenda.

For anyone who’s been wondering whether the loss of Democratic House seats in November’s elections might encourage the Speaker to run a less partisan and less ideological House, you have your answer. Mrs. Pelosi has now endorsed a budgeting rule championed by radical Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.). The basic idea is to make every liberal priority eligible for “emergency” spending and remove it from any debate about government priorities.

Not that the rules enacted to this point by Speaker Pelosi and her predecessors have offered much resistance to the fleecing of taxpayers. The pile of publicly held U.S. Treasury debt is now larger than our entire economy and Washington’s unfunded entitlement promises are many times larger than that.

But when Mrs. Pelosi reclaimed the speaker’s gavel in 2019, she felt the need to maintain at least the appearance of being concerned about reckless federal borrowing. Amid a flourish of pronouncements about transparency and government reform, two years ago the Speaker angered Rep. Ocasio-Cortez with the re-imposition of a House rule purporting to require that new spending be offset by budget savings elsewhere.

Why We’re Ending the EPA’s Reliance on Secret Science The agency has long made decisions without allowing the public to scrutinize our underlying data. By Andrew Wheeler

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-were-ending-the-epas-reliance-on-secret-science-11609802643?mod=opinion_lead_pos7

The task of science is one of test and retest, analysis and comparison, over and over. It is slow and careful work, done in the open. Only rarely has science benefited from secrecy, and that is usually for reasons of national security. The geniuses of the Manhattan Project who built the atomic bomb, the mavericks of Cape Canaveral who sent men to the moon, these giants did their work behind high walls, and for good reason.

But the work of the Environmental Protection Agency—to protect human health and the environment—shouldn’t be exempt from public scrutiny. This is why we are promulgating a rule to make the agency’s scientific processes more transparent.

Too often Congress shirks its responsibility and defers important decisions to regulatory agencies. These regulators then invoke science to justify their actions, often without letting the public study the underlying data. Part of transparency is making sure the public knows what the agency bases its decisions on. When agencies defer to experts in private without review from citizens, distinctions get flattened and the testing and deliberation of science is precluded.

Our rule will prioritize transparency and increase opportunities for the public to access the “dose-response” data that underlie significant regulations and influential scientific information. Dose-response data explain the relationship between the amount of a chemical or pollutant and its effect on human health and the environment—and are the foundation of the EPA’s regulations. If the American people are to be regulated by interpretation of these scientific studies, they deserve to scrutinize the data as part of the scientific process and American self-government.