Tag Archives: culture

Human Rights Violations

Posted on by
Reply

The nation that fought a civil war to end slavery, whose people passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, put an end to Jim Crow laws now is to be the subject of a UN-run(!) human rights investigation. This is at the invitation of the Progressive-Democrat President, Joe Biden, and his Progressive-Democrat Secretary of State, Antony Blinken.

The Progressive-Democratic Party, a 21st century evolution of the Democratic Party.

It was the Democratic Party that forced that civil war so that Democrats in their effort to keep their slaves and create more.

It was the Democratic Party that created the KKK, whose Democrat white supremacist domestic terrorists lynched freed blacks and those whites who supported them.

It was the Democratic Party that pushed gun control to keep blacks disarmed in the face of the Democrats’ KKK atrocities.

It was the Democratic Party that enacted Jim Crow laws explicitly intended to keep blacks from voting.

It was the Democratic Party that resegregated the Federal government after Republicans had succeeded, in the main, in integrating it in the post-Civil War years.

It was the Democratic Party that nationalized minimum wage laws explicitly to keep blacks trapped on southern plantations instead of being able to move north to compete on wages for factory jobs.

It was the Democratic Party that built racist and sexist affirmative action programs with welfare cliffs built in so as to keep blacks and other minorities trapped in the Democrats’ welfare cages.

We have now that party’s modern evolution, the Progressive-Democratic Party. That evolution has all of this in its short history:

It is the Progressive-Democratic Party that continues to pursue race- and sex-based affirmative action.

It is the Progressive-Democratic Party that pursues racist college and university admission preferences.

It is the Progressive-Democratic Party that objects to blacks and other minorities having access to quality K-12 schooling by blocking voucher and charter schools and by suing States to prevent black children from switching from failing public schools to voucher/private schools.

It is the Progressive-Democratic Party that pursues identity politics, which is nothing but 1950s-era racist segregation brought forward to the 21st century to include sexist segregation alongside racist segregation.

If Progressive-Democrats are really concerned about human rights violations, they need to look in their mirrors.

A Brief Thought on Communism

Posted on by
Reply

The latest, and longest lasting, defense of communism is that it’s mismanaged (earlier defenses put it as “not done right, not implemented right.”

Stipulate that a problem with communism (and each of its socialist variants—socialism, fascism, social democracy, etc) is that it’s mismanaged.

That no communism or socialist variation has ever succeeded in all of human history is a clear demonstration that nations, or economies, cannot be managed successfully from the center. It’s just too hard, nations and economies are too complex to be…managed…from the center.

More Federal Intrusion

Posted on by
Reply

Senate Majority Leader Schumer (D, NY) and Senators Ron Wyden (D, OR) and Cory Booker (D, NJ) will soon unveil their plot to legalize marijuana at the Federal level. Among other steps in the initial stages of their plot is this:

establish dedicated funding streams for women- and minority-owned marijuana businesses.

Leave aside the destructive nature of marijuana. There are two other aspects of this particular step that are especially destructive. One is the sexist and racist nature of their “funding streams,” explicitly and deliberately favoring particular groups of government-approved Americans while simultaneously, and necessarily, excluding other groups of Americans, those of whom government disapproves. The contempt these Progressive-Democrats have for average Americans is obvious in the Senators’ decision to include this rank discrimination in the face of repeated court strike-downs of Progressive-Democrat moves to provide farm debt relief to favored races while deliberately excluding disfavored races.

The other utterly destructive aspect of this marijuana plot is the wolf in sheep’s clothing of those funding streams. With those Federal dollars will come Federal demands to control the recipients.  This is the Progressive-Democrats’ push for control.

Cowards Flee

Posted on by
Reply

Texas’ Progressive-Democrats have done it again. Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) called a special session of the Texas legislature because Texas’ Progressive-Democrats cravenly ran away from the last days of the legislature’s regular session explicitly to deny a quorum and prevent debate and votes to pass or reject a number of critical bills, including a couple of voting bills that would increase ballot security while facilitating voter access to ballots.

These wonders of Progressivism were too cowardly and too arrogant (with all the overlap between the two) to debate and vote—even to allow debate and voting. So much for their pious pretense of favoring voting.

Now, those same Progressive-Democrats have blown up the special session, wasting all the Texas taxpayer money spent on that special session, and run away again.

And they bragged about their cowardice. James Talarico (D, 52nd District), among the Progressive-Democrats who jetted out of the state on a chartered jet:

Just landed in Memphis on our way to DC. Thank y’all for your well wishes.

They showed their privilege again, too: they chartered private jets in which to flee to DC; they couldn’t even be bothered to fly commercial, or to take the train, or (gasp!) drive themselves.

Rich cowards fleeing.

Some did jump on a bus, though.

Others were reportedly pictured on a DC-bound bus with packs of Miller Lite.

Not even a Texas beer, even if it is a Dallas Cowboys sponsor; that just shows the Precious Ones’ virtue signaling. Miller is sold by Chicago, IL, headquartered Molson Coors. These wonders couldn’t even be bothered to bring packs of Shiner Bock or Texas Red.

Party down, guys. In every sense of that phrase.

Oh, and one more thing. The Progressive-Democratic Party’s leadership has already termed the filibuster a relic of Jim Crow. Here is that party–the Party that invented Jim Crow–by running away, reviving this relic. And they’re proud of it.

Washington State and Abortion

Posted on by
Reply

Washington passed a law—SB6219—that mandates all health coverage policies issued in that State provide (and charge for) coverage for abortions, with no exceptions whatsoever, including no exceptions for religious belief regarding life and conception. Under SB6219, no insurer can offer a policy that does not include abortion coverage.

Leave aside the cynical claim by Washington’s lawyers that

its no-exception abortion coverage mandate in health plans does not necessarily require health plans to include abortion coverage.

Leave aside that the Supreme Court has already ruled—repeatedly—that religious exceptions and conscience exceptions must be included in any such law.

The Cedar Park Church, in Bothell near Seattle, is challenging that law in Cedar Park Assembly of Kirkland v Kreidler (Kreidler is Myron Kreidler, Washington’s Insurance Commissioner; Jay Inslee, Washington’s Governor, also is a defendant. Both are defendants in their official capacities); the case currently is before the 9th Circuit.

What really jumps out at me, though, is this assertion by the State [emphasis added]:

The state lawyer emphasized what the church didn’t allege: “no carrier” would offer a plan consistent with its beliefs, it sought such a plan from other carriers, or that the state rejected a submitted plan.

On what basis does the State (or any State, or the United States) claim a preemptive, a priori, authority over a private enterprise’s business decision?

More importantly, on what basis does the State (or any State, or the United States) claim a preemptive, a priori, authority over a private citizen’s medical decision that should only involve that citizen and his doctor and secondarily (with no tertiary) his health coverage provider?

Most importantly, on what basis does the State (or any State, or the United States) claim a preemptive, a priori, authority to allow a baby to be killed before it’s born?

The answer to each of those questions is that there is no legitimate basis for such claims.