Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Nancy Pelosi_2

Nancy Peolsi wants to study reparations.

Do the Democrats want to start a race war?

That, by the way, is a serious question. And it’s not at all clear to me that the answer is no.

So why do I bring this up now? In short, it seems to be the hip, new DNC talking point.

Oh, it’s not that the idea of reparations haven’t been floated before. Talk of that sort has been around since I was a kid. Over the past few years I’ve heard more talk about it, but it never seemed all that serious. And what with everything else in the world falling apart, well, there are only so many hours in a day, one has to pick and choose his battles.

That said, I was listening to a podcast with David Knight earlier today, and he spent a good deal of time talking about reparations and how talk of reparations was being taken seriously among Democrats.

Being the curious sort, I did a quick search and found out, lo and behold, that calls for reparations have indeed become a thing among top Democrats. What was once the province of fringe radicals is now a talking point of the Speaker of the House.

And they say Trump is divisive?

You could hardly come up with a more divisive, more destructive policy than reparations for slavery. According to The Hill, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) has a resolution with 35 co-sponsors and Nancy Peolosi has gone on record as supporting the study of the issue.

If you were to accuse Pelosi of supporting reparations for slavery, doubtless she would protest by saying that she only called for a study of the issue and has not come out in support of reparations.

But really, she kinda has.

You see, there are some issues that a responsible politician should never entertain.

Reparations for slavery is one of them.

Apart from the moral, practical and, probably, Constitutional issues involved with the suggestion, there’s the little problem that the idea, by its very nature, is designed to pit one American against another.

But then, maybe that’s the whole idea. Maybe the Dems really want to create racial animosity among Americans.

Maybe they see getting blacks and whites stirred up so they’re at one another’s’ throats as a winning strategy for 2020. Forget about the runaway debt. Forget about the predatory Federal Reserve. Forget about the endless foreign wars. Forget about the creeping surveillance state. Opening old wounds, that’s what we really need to focus on to move this nation forward!

Not to be outdone, Elizabeth Warren says that reparations for Native Americans should be part of the conversation.

Yeah, that’s going to be a fun talk. I can hardly wait.

But why stop there? After all, there’s an almost limitless number of potential aggrieved minority groups who could lay claim to victim status. But for some reason, I think the Dem political strategists have already thought of that one. Why, they could keep the whole racket going for years!

Marianne Williamson, who announced her presidential candidacy – I admit I have no idea who Marianne Williamson is, nor do I care to find out – even put a price tag on her reparations program, calling for $100B.

The odd thing is, she didn’t say specifically who would pay. According to the article in Ebony, she said the United States needs to pay. Well, the United States is in no position to pay anyone. It’s the citizens of the United States who pay. Apparently, Ms. Williamson isn’t honest enough to say what she really means, which is that she thinks white Americans owe blacks.

These women are disgraceful. Anyone who pits, or even so much as hints that they wish to study pitting, Americans against one another to score political points has no business being anywhere near the levers of power.

What’s interesting is that while this monstrous regiment of liberal women score cheap political points with their reparations talk, no one in the press ever dares call them divisive.

Apparently laying the groundwork for a race war is their little way of bringing everyone together.

 

Read Full Post »

 

GND_Announcement

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), Roman Catholics themselves and graduates of Jesuit Boston College, unveil the Green New Deal, February 7, 2019.  Alex Wong/Getty Images   

So I finally started reading the Green New Deal (GND) tonight in preparation for what I hope will be an upcoming series on socialism. With the rise of openly socialist politicians in the US, it is imperative for Christians to speak out against this ungodly political and economic system, both to preserve our remaining liberties and to witness to the system of truth as revealed in the pages of Scripture.

The GND is almost certainly the most aggressive attack on the Bible’s system of economics and politics, what John Robbins called constitutional capitalism, launched in my lifetime by an American politician. It’s so aggressive that my first thought is that the papal Antichrist must in some way be connected to it.

And guess what? It is.

The House Resolution “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal” begins with the following sentence, “Whereas the October 2018 report entitled ‘Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ˚C’ by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change….”

So, the GND is to a large degree based on a report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which notes on the groups homepage that it “is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. Anyone with a passing familiarity with the UN and the politics of the Roman Catholic Church-State (RCCS) knows that Rome and the UN are intimately connected. As John Robbins noted, “In the judgment of the Church-State, the United Nations is, at the present time, the likeliest vehicle to achieve the political and economic world unification that the Roman Church-State desires” (Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 194).

Since the GND’s socialist call to action is based largely on the IPCC’s report, and since the IPCC is part of the UN, and since Rome has a long history of supporting the UN and it various programs designed to promote world government, it is worth reviewing what Rome has had to say about the document that is so foundational to the GND.

No big surprise here. Rome loves it. For example,

  • “The complexity of this task, however, is amplified by the great sense of urgency to act, as was unmistakably stressed in the last Intergovernmental Panel on climate Change (IPCC) Special Report.” Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin
  • “Catholics urge action as UN report forecasts climate crisis in coming decades” National Catholic Reporter
  • “Members of the Holy See delegation spoke clearly during the meeting of the need to listen to scientists, particularly in the latest IPCC report, which echoes the cry of the earth and shows clearly the devastating impact of climate change on communities around the world” Vatican press release, 12/12/2018.

Worth noting the two sponsors of the House Resolution, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) are themselves both Roman Catholics and graduates of Jesuit Boston College.

Doubtless there are further connections between the GND and the RCCS to be discovered, but it seemed good to point out even the little bit that has come to light in just a few minutes research.

Rome’s ungodly Thomistic philosophy combined with its undisguised ambition to usher in world government make it imperative that Christians not only not be ignorant of Antichrist’s devices, but also that they refute his ideas, including his destructive environmental teachings, from the Scriptures.

Read Full Post »

According to a recent article in the Washington Post, if you don’t believe Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the very picture of physical health, you’re a nutjob, a wingnut, and an internet conspiracy theorist.

The piece by Eli Rosenberg and Abby Ohlheiser cites WaPo veteran Robert Barnes as being amazed that anyone, ANYONE!, would doubt that RBG is anything other than hale and hearty.

“A falsehood has been spreading in dark corners of the Internet that Ginsburg is dead,” write Rosenberg and Ohlheiser. The article then goes on to take shots are fringe “right wing Internet culture,” the sort of fringe culture that dares to raises doubts about official narratives put forth in the MSM.

The article even attempts to pin on the egregious fake news reports from a few weeks back – fake news reported on CNN and in WaPo itself about how MAGA hat wearing students from Covington Catholic High School were supposedly responsible for harassing a Native American Vietnam Veteran at the Indigenous People’s March in Washington D.C. – on independent journalists on Twitter.

Yes, we’re to believe that the mighty WaPo was taken in by “Two anonymous Twitter accounts,” that it was just following these anonymous accounts’ lead when it wrote about the “racist” actions of the high school students, and that it is in no way responsible for pushing a false narrative by publishing stories with headlines such as this: ” ‘Opposed to the dignity of the human person’: Kentucky Catholic dioceses condemns teens who taunted vet at March for Life.” If that’s true, then WaPo’s an even more pathetic joke of a newspaper than I thought.

But perhaps there’s a method to WaPo’s lame attempt to lay the blame on Twitter for their editorial mistake, they, along with a number of other news organizations and individuals, have been served a legal hold notice by the lawyer representing the students in anticipation of a possible lawsuit.

But what’s really odd about this piece from WaPo is its complete lack of evidence that RBG is, in fact, alive. There are no recent photos of her out in public. There are no videos. There are no quotes of any recent public statement from the judge.

The only “proof” offered to readers is Robert Barnes’ report that he saw RBG at a public performance, where, conveniently, we are told that “Photos were not allowed.”

Once you strip out the article’s rant on independent internet journalists, what you have is a very obvious appeal to authority. The fallacious argument runs thus, You have to believe that RBG is alive and well, because veteran WaPo reporter and editor Robert Barnes said so.

For my part, I don’t pretend to know the status of RBG’s physical health. It may be that she’s hale and hearty. Perhaps she’s alive but is seriously impaired, physically, mentally or both. It may be that she’s shuffled off this mortal coil.

The disappearance of Ruth Bader Ginsburg from the public eye is no small matter. Americans have a right to know whether government officials, elected or appointed, are capable of carrying out the duties of their office. Raising questions about Ginsburg’s physical fitness for office is not conspiracy theory, it’s a matter of national security.

If she’s healthy enough to serve as a judge, this is easy enough to prove. Let her make a public appearance and remove all doubt. If her health prevents her from sitting on the bench to hear arguments, the American people need to know this. Further, if this is the case, judge Ginsburg has an obligation to resign her post and allow the Senate to confirm a new judge in her place.

If judge Ginsburg is dead, then those who are hiding this fact are committing one of the greatest frauds in American political history and need themselves to be held accountable.

But whatever the case may be, WaPo’s readers, and Americans generally, deserve better than condescending reports about the health of a Supreme Court justice that tell them in so many words, just shut up and believe us already.

Read Full Post »

american gothic

 

“In a short while, I will sign a bill to open our government for three weeks.”

– President Donald J. Trump

 

Today’s post is the third and final installment of this series titled The Wall, The Donald and the Democrats, the purpose of which has been to analyze the debate over the border wall.

This post was written last weekend, before President Trump’s decision to temporarily end the government shut down without first securing funding the border wall.

This is a deeply disappointing development from the perspective of those, this author included, who had hoped, for once!, that the Republicans would stand up to the Democrats and actually do something about border security.

Perhaps the wall still will be built, but I’m less optimistic today than I was before Trump’s announcement on Friday 1/25 when he indicated that he was bringing the government shut down to a temporary end.

But even if the wall is built, Trump’s decision to fold on the shut down raises an important question. Namely, even if the wall gets built, will the political price be so high as to strip it of all benefit to the American people?

The word is that Jared Kushner is floating the idea of giving green cards to the DACA recipients. Who knows, Kushner may even offer them citizenship. If either of these two options occurs, then we’re right back to the same situation where we’ve been in the past: The Democrats get the immediate benefit of new Democratic voters via immigration amnesty while Republicans get promises – promises which somehow never seem to materialize – of future border security.

In other words, once again Lucy will have tricked Charlie Brown by pulling the football away.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: