News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!
Before going further, let me state that sexual assault is one of the most despicable crimes. I know someone who was victimized as a teenager, which sent her down some very dark paths. After much therapy, she’s no longer a victim. And, she doesn’t believe Ford’s testimony.
Many years ago while working part-time at a gas station as a 2nd job (back when there was an option for ‘full service’), a ~8-9 year old girl wandered in around 9:45PM or so, when it was totally dark—and there was very little light on that corner. I was working by myself, hadn’t had a customer in a while, and I was bewildered as to why this young girl was all alone (no cars were outside). Well, she had just been raped, and the sorry excuse for a human being that perpetrated this dropped her off just down the street. I was the first person she saw after the horrific encounter. She was abducted a few blocks over on a street perpendicular to where she was dropped off, at around 3PM while checking the family’s mailbox in an apartment complex. I often wonder how she’s doing now.
I go into ‘non-Christian’ mode when I think about these perpetrators.
I wanted the above to preface the rest of my comments, in order to put them in perspective.
I know a man whose own daughter suddenly ‘remembered’ that he molested her as an infant when undergoing therapy. (Mental illness runs on the maternal side of this family, I found out later.) When I met this man he was post-divorce, as his wife divorced him over these allegations. He was allowed supervised visits to his children, including the one he purportedly molested, and I even chaperoned once for him—they moved out of town, requiring I give up a large part of a day off. (His wife came up to me afterward, asking if he seemed to interact with the kids in an in/appropriate way.) Years later, the daughter was convinced it never happened, recanted the story (she had no real motive to falsely accuse him in the first place), leading us to believe that the therapist somehow ‘coaxed’ this ‘memory’ out of her. I wonder how often this happens.
About a year or so ago, a now-former neighbor was listening to what I recognized was a YouTube MGTOW channel, prompting me to begin a conversation with him. I later found out that he himself had been accused of perpetrating violence against a now-ex-girlfriend. He was in the process of clearing his name. Also, for a short time he had a married friend sleep on his couch. The man had 3 daughters, one of whom accused him of sexual assault. Thankfully, the police investigated quickly before making any formal charge, finding out that the daughter fabricated the story—for the investigators questioned some of the girl’s classmates, who admitted that she told them she was going to accuse him. Apparently, she thought he was too strict.
There was a somewhat recent case in which a father was on trial for sexually assaulting his barely teenaged daughter. As the defense attorney questioned the girl on the stand, he noticed her vocabulary seemed a bit advanced for her age, and immediately asked the judge if he would grant an early excusal that day so he could do some research. On a hunch, he bought Fifty Shades of Grey, finding that very verbiage in it! Armed with this information, the next day he questioned the girl, and she promptly broke down, admitting that she made the whole thing up, basing the accusations on portions of that book. As I recall, she thought her father was too strict with her.
In Dr. Helen Smith’s book Men on Strike is the following account:
I used to coach girls’ soccer with my fiancée (now wife). I stopped because one of the girls (all of 8 years old) said: “I don’t have to listen to you. I can get you in trouble just by telling people you touched me.” Now that I have a child of my own, I have no idea how I’m going to be involved when he wants to do sports or other activities. I already got odd looks on the playground the year I was a stay-at-home dad and carting him around with me all the time
Many years ago I coached kids’ soccer. Over the past 25 or so years, I determined that I would NEVER coach or do anything with children ever again. One of my exes had children from a previous marriage, children of a different race, and obviously not my own (one of which is special needs). I really enjoyed taking these boys to the local park and playing with them. Give me a chance to act like a kid, and I’m all in! But, the looks I received gave me pause. I vowed never to put myself in a position where someone can falsely accuse me of something heinous.
------
“Better that ten guilty men walk free than that one innocent man go to jail.”
This is a very powerful testimony by a Muslim immigrant whose father, a doctor, was, he strongly asserts, wrongly convicted:
Breezy Bear: I’m so sorry about what happened to your dad. I know men this has happened to (my brother) and luckily he was able to prove his innocence. You shouldn’t #believeallwomen bc they lie just as much as anyone else. Stay strong.
mimi11011: Yes #himtoo so many men are falsely accused. My boyfriend was accused of rape by his exgirlfriend who later confessed that she lied and was depressed. This is why evidence is so important for kavanaugh's matter before a precedent is set against the natural justice of due process.
Shannon Ramos: I am sorry for what you have been through. I saw my husband in Kavanaugh’s eyes. We still await justice which is only afforded to those with enough money to hire an attorney. Even then as a man you are immediately thought of as guilty and this goes against everything America stands for. I have you, your father and your family in my thoughts and prayers, because though we differ in religious beliefs we are connected by the love we have for what this nation stands for and the tragedy we must endure in order to move forward. It is people like you and I that can change this country. Keep your head up. We’ve been fighting since 2016 and soon we will sue the liar for smearing my husbands good name. I will think of you. God bless
Alan Wilmot: I am constantly moved by #walkaway videos, this one is particularly profound. Just know that I, a Christian pastor, and praying for your father's freedom and that he may regain his self esteem. To seek justice for the sexually abused is one thing. To do it by REMOVING justice from the accused is a crime. But that's what we've come to. That is why, more than ever, Brett Kavanaugh NEEDS to be on the Supreme Court. He can join Clarence Thomas as witnesses to what can happen when slander replaces evidence. It's a shame your father was railroaded, with the jury deliberating about a quarter hour to destroy him and your family. America needs to fear for her sons...
Interjection: “where slander replaces evidence” is a quotable phrase.
Andrew Thompson: As a male that has been sexually assaulted when younger, let me just say the #metoo movement has no place for men
Scott Gibbons: Men are sexually assaulted and lied about everyday. It happened to me in school several times. But if I said something about being attacked by girls in highschool I would be made fun of because it is not the manly thing to do, even though I wasn't a man but a boy who was raised different. People are evil it's not always men but also woman!
Responding to the above:
Alanda: YES! The new norm seems to be for "older" girls to prey on younger, naive boys! You are SO right! I have seen it and feel powerless to stop it, due to the bias in favor of the girls. A complaint is seen as ridiculous...tragic.
“There is a possibility that [Myers] could teach adults now or in the future and we want to preserve that possibility,” Stoll said. “She still is a talented teacher and has those skills, and I don’t see any reason to destroy her ability to make a living and to contribute to society in a positive way.”
One may wonder where this ‘social studies’ teacher’s particular talent and skills lie—but I digress.
This exemplifies our biased criminal courts which favor women, consistently giving them lighter sentences. Just imagine the outrage had the genders been reversed in this case.
I'm watching the media all over for coverage, and the journalism is mostly very poorly done. I already knew it was. But this Kavanaugh confirmation process is really showing poor journalism in sharp relief more than ever.
For instance, today CNN saw fit to fixate on this:
I tried to find reporting on the Mitchell memo and only came up with this. I believe this is called minimizing. It's reported once -- as minimally as possible and only for the sake of preventing loss of face -- and then no more. Notice how little detail there is. The full text of the memo is not even linked to.
The only good thing is that anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty can see that the media is completely biased in this regard. Hopefully, this will 'red-pill' some more people. But, it also well-illustrates that the media is a propaganda machine for leftists, further leading me to believe that we are inching ever closer to Christ's return.
Basically, there isn’t much to investigate, as the Bureau had already investigated into alcohol or possible drug use, and they only go back to the 18th birthday. And, presumably, they already reviewed Kavanaugh’s and Ford’s Senate testimonies.
The following is 10 month’s old, but this man’s cause against the falsely accused—because he was falsely convicted and later vindicated—is appropriate:
Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. He’s joined on Megyn Kelly TODAY by Project director Justin Brooks and former prosecutor Loni Coombs, with whom he now examines other potentially wrongful convictions on the series “Final Appeal.”
Banks’ plea deal also exemplifies how broken our legal system is. Judges STRONGLY encourage plea deals, and most ordinary plebs don’t have the funds for a protracted criminal trial anyway. Thus, this innocent man was forced to accept a plea. Moreover, many jurors side with the woman accuser out of misguided empathy rather than impartially judging the merits of the case. Sad.
Thanks for the comments. I thought there were MANY holes in the Blasey-Ford testimony. I further believe that she may have been acting as a more naive and child-like personality than she actually is. She has too much education and career experience to sound that simple. I believe she may have been tossing the "hail Mary" pass for those who think Roe vs. Wade to be endangered.
This guy most always puts out excellent content, with straightforward facts, in a calm manner. He's an Aussie; and, here's his take on the Kavanaugh issue:
Apparently times up for Brett Kavanaugh. I have a different take.
He has some interesting footage, aptly illustrating the frenzy of the-accused-man-is-guilty-if-it's-a-woman/girl-accusing-him ideology, i.e. he's guilty until proven innocent. The video contains images/footage I've not seen before.
First and foremost, I strongly believe that the entire Dr. Ford account of the alleged incident did not happen. There are far too many holes in her story.
Having said that, there are some items about Kavanaugh that I didn't like from the start. Kavanaugh is an insider that was well connected to the establishment throughout his career. This is something that cannot be denied. I had known that he was connected to the Ken Starr investigation (more like an establishment cover-up)into the Clintons, which also included a very bogus investigation into the alleged Vince Foster "suicide." Back then, Ambrose Evans Pritchard was an investigative reporter from Great Britain that covered the Foster case in particular, as did Christopher Ruddy for I believe the Pittsburg Gazzette. In short, the evidence in the Foster case is absolutely overwhelming that Foster was murdered, yet, in spite of the evidence, the Starr investigation concluded otherwise. And who was it that allegedly intimidated a key, Grand Jury witness (see link below) and ultimately wrote the bogus Starr Report on the Vince Foster murder ... I mean ... suicide? None other than Brett Kavanaugh!
There was a very big reason why Foster was murdered. What it was is left to speculation. Some credible people have speculated that Foster had become extremely disillusioned with the Clintons and was about to blow the whistle on the Clinton Crime Syndicate ... of which he was intimately aware of all the details. Who knows? The point is; it doesn't take long to research this "who dunnit?" case to realize that it could never have happened according to the Starr Report conclusions ... written by the establishment's own, Brett Kavanaugh.
PS: the opposition to Kavanaugh has nothing to do with the USSC overturning Roe, or Gay "marriage." It is all about having judges interpret the Constitution according to the Globalist Agenda, which will lead to totalitarian Communism. In order to gain complete control, the elite need to remove our rights, including the right to bare arms. Back in his day, FDR (he was a Communist) attempted to "load the Court" with his radical leftists in order to get his Socialist programs approved as "Constitutional." This has been their tactic for decades.
Don't forget the deciding vote that, unbelievably, declared Obamacare to be "Constitutional." It was none other than the Jesuit trained Chief Justice John Roberts! Roberts was the one that actually changed the wording of the legislation in order to justify his ludicrous decision to vote for it. Incidentally, Roberts, like Kavanaugh, had deep connections to the Bush family. You can't get more establishment than that.
Those are very interesting points. I still don't want Kavanaugh to be stopped for the wrong reason. Maybe he should have been questioned about Vince Foster, not about drinking beer.
In a sworn statement provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, a man who claims to be an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford says that he personally witnessed Ford coach a friend on how to take a polygraph exam. If true, it would mean Ford provided false testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week when she claimed she had never had any discussions with anyone about how to take a polygraph….
The ex-boyfriend also said in his statement that during their six-year-long romantic relationship, Ford never mentioned the alleged assault against her, Brett Kavanaugh, or a fear of flying.
I don’t know she could have been so quiet during her testimony with her pants ablaze.
Twitter user ‘@millennialwoes’ (Colin Robertson) was deplatformed, banned on the social media site for stating an easily verifiable fact relating to race (as found on FBI and DOJ sites)—while, as we know, Sarah Jeong not only retained her account for stating overtly racist comments (e.g. “CancelWhitePeople”), her statements yet stand—due to selective application of their terms of service:
This is cultural Marxism, in which people groups are dichotomized into supposed “oppressors” and “oppressed”, and, according to this ideology, it’s OK to oppress and suppress the speech of the so-called “oppressors”. This is now happening to Brett Kavanaugh, as some have brought up race in their criticisms of him and their demands that he step aside.
Re:…..I thought there were MANY holes in the Blasey-Ford testimony. I further believe that she may have been acting as a more naive and child-like personality than she actually is. She has too much education and career experience to sound that simple. I believe she may have been tossing the "hail Mary" pass for those who think Roe vs. Wade to be endangered.
I totally agree!
The following is a transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show and has to so with a vocal technique known as "uptalking." The video is no longer available, but I heard it during the Rush Limbaugh program and it sounded just like Blasey-Ford's "baby voice."
I watched both the confirmation hearing and the second hearing involving Blasey - Ford and Judge Kavanaugh.
A former prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, who specializes in sex crimes was hired by the Senate Judiciary Committee to question Blasey-Ford.
I am not alone in thinking Rachel Mitchell was brilliant. I understood what her strategy was right from the start. She was criticized by some for asking what at first appeared to be "irrelevant" questions like the one that exposed Blasey-Ford's untruthfulness about being afraid to fly. Hardly "irrelevant" if one is challenging her credibility.
In fact,Democratic Senator Maize Hirono actually had to gall to criticize Rachel Mitchell for questioning Blasey-Ford in such a way as to place her credibility in doubt. HELLO MAIZE!!!
The real gem, however, which seemed to come up out of nowhere was whether or not Blasey-Ford ever coached anyone on taking a lie detector test - to which Blasey-Ford answered "No" under oath!
It turns out that one of Blasey - Ford's ex boyfriends said that Blasey-Ford had indeed coached a friend Monica McLean on how to take a lie detector test. McLean, who has denied being coached by Blasey-Ford on taking a polygraph test, had been interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney's office.
Christine Blasey Ford's ex-boyfriend says she coached friend on how to take a polygraph: Report https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/3/christine-blasey-fords-ex-boyfriend-says-she-coach/ ________________________________________
Monica McLean: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/monica-mclean/ ______________________________________________________
Grassley Says Ford is Withholding Evidence & Her Polygraph May Be Unreliable https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/read-grassley-letter-ford-polygraph/ ______________________________________________________
Interestingly, the ex boyfriend also reveals in his letter that the reason why he ended his relationship with Blasey-Ford was because he learned that she had been unfaithful to him while she was in Hawaii.
Isn't it ironic that the greatest threat to the cause of protecting women from violence is other, lying women with an ax to grind and a heavy dose of self righteousness. Christine Blaze Ford should be tarred and feathered.
I know you are venting, and as far as I am concerned, it is okay for you to vent away. What happened is enough to justify an angry response. (So I will not nitpick your comment, although I was tempted to ; )
That could have gone unsaid. (So I will not nitpick your comment, although I was tempted to ;) ). What the heck does that mean? So it's ok for him to vent...justify an angry response but then you'll hold back the nitpick? How "nice of you" since you are feeling so "gracious", Jsaid, Jsaid, Jsaid, Jsaid.......
Once upon a time Atticus Finch (To Kill a Mockingbird) would have been honored by the democrat party. Today Atticus Finch would fall victim to the left’s lynch mob.
Should we apply the left’s standards as they demanded of us last week this innocent man would not have been freed.
But the left’s repeated mantra regarding Kavanaugh is “this is not a trial, it’s a job interview”. The mantra originated from United States Senator Feinstein, a legislator, sworn to uphold the US Constitution; yet she exhibits such little regard for it. This hasn’t gone unnoticed by the American people.
The media is now bewildered. Recent polls show democrats’ leads in the mid-term elections has evaporated. Do Americans’ appetites crave a path which rejects the presumption of innocence, a core foundation of our Constitutional republic? Last week the left demanded from us that we shut up and believe.
As the cases against Kavanaugh crumbled from lack of evidence, corroboration and credibility, the left shifted strategy. Confirmation is now about temperament; it is about ice cubes; it is about an FBI cover up. They are outraged over Kavanaugh’s outrage that he would have to defend himself against accusations of the felony crime of rape. Had he presented himself in a meek and mild manner during the hearing he would have been pronounced guilty for not exhibiting outrage. He was to be damned either way.
Now, the left must prop up Ford as her high school best friend, under penalty of perjury, states she has no recollection of Ford ever mentioning this alleged sexual assault. The argument is this doesn’t impeach Ford’s claims, she simply doesn’t remember. Has the left has abandoned rational thought? I deeply cared about my high school friends. I loved one as though she was a sister. I still do. If she had ever even hinted she had been assault I sure as hell would remember!
Has the left even considered what impact this smear campaign will have upon the legitimate reporting of sexual assault and victim advocacy?
“But this is a job interview”, right? I’ve read a piece which astutely describes this sleight of hand: “Democrats and the media have simultaneously applied two separate standards by suggesting Kavanaugh may have committed a crime, which would entitle him to due process, but insisting that he’s not on trial, which is intended to deny him any presumed innocence.”
This sleight of hand which has manifested in a mob-rule mentality is fascism on full display. It is an instrument which allows the left to continue down the path of fascism with a clear conscience.
I'm going to introduce a complication into this, like RayB did. I absolutely don't want to see the destruction of an innocent man's reputation by false allegations.
But Kavanaugh the non-rapist may not be the most strict constitutionalist after all.
I am open to arguments otherwise.
Watch this video of Judge Andrew Napolitano talking, and see what you think. (Judge Andrew Napolitano: Brett Kavanaugh and the Patriot Act)
I think we must have been typing at the same time. I didn't mean to breeze right past your remark. I absolutely agree with everything you said. Very well put.
As is typical, in order to get to the truth, you always have to scratch and dig below the surface, which of course takes time and effort.
There is a lot out there on Kavanaugh that continues to illustrate his deep connection to the Establishment. Is he better than the out and out liberals on the court? YES. Is he as good as Amy Coney Barret? NO. Not even close!
I wasn't aware of Kavanaugh's connection to the EXTREMELY un-Constitutional Patriot Act, a fact that is an unfortunate precursor as to how he will probably vote in the future.
When it comes to the Establishment, they reach their goals by being patient and through stealth. Many fail to consider that some of the very worst USSC Justices were appointed by GOP Presidents. For example, at a time when a pro-life Justice would have tipped the balance on Roe, Reagan appointed none other than Sandra Day O'Connor, who happened to have had a history of being pro-abortion, a position she held during her entire time on the Court.
Thanks for posting your video ... I very much respect Judge Napolitano.
According to a March 2017 report in Politico, Judge Andrew Napolitano told friends that President Donald Trump told him he was considering Napolitano for a United States Supreme Court appointment should there be a second vacancy. Ultimately, Judge Brett Kavanaugh was chosen instead.
A potential future USSC ruling on Trump's doing away with the un-Constitutional Obamacare Mandate could very well be in jeopardy. Why? Because we already know where the turncoat Chief Justice John Roberts stands. But what about Brett Kavanaugh? Where does he stand?
Check this out:
Here’s a summary of Judge Kavanaugh’s take on Obamacare, written by Christopher Jacobs of The Federalist:
"In Kavanaugh’s view, the mandate could fit "comfortably within Congress’ constitutional powers,” Even as he ‘do[es] not take a position here on whether the statute as currently written is justifiable,’ Kavanaugh concludes that ‘the only potential Taxing Clause shortcoming in the current individual mandate provision appears to be relatively slight."
"Read that again, America: Brett Kavanaugh, the man Donald Trump wants to appoint to the Supreme Court, wrote in a judicial holding that the constitutional shortcomings of the individual mandate of Obamacare are “relatively slight.”
This is all starting to add up to a lot of water! Here's what we have so far:
Kavanaugh wrote the bogus 58 page Starr Investigation Report that declared, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Vince Foster was NOT murdered, but committed "suicide."
As a young, Bush Administration attorney, Kavanaugh helped write the overtly un-Constitutional Patriot Act.
The "man" that Kavanaugh worked for:
Although George W. Bush campaigned as a "fiscal conservative," he went on to double the nation's deficit in 8 years. Bush also campaigned against "nation building" yet, his administration manipulated 9/11 evidence in such a way as to falsely "justify" the nation building disasters of the Iraq & Afghanistan wars (17 years and still counting). Further taking advantage of the 9/11 paranoia, Bush then went on to introduce and sign into law the nefarious, totalitarian Patriot Act. Bush then went on to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus, through Executive Order (the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012), which authorizes INDEFINITE incarceration without trial of anyone (including American citizens), that are "suspected" of having "connections" to "terrorists."
At the risk of stating the dramatic, the Nazis had laws such as these. Many do not realize that the Nazi Government never annulled their Weimar Republic constitution (modeled after our own), but used Nazi appointed judges that were used in their "People's Court" to unjustly prosecute German citizens in their show trials. All done under the appearance of law and order in order to fool the citizenry!
Thanks for the link to the legal blog. Do you have an opinion or conclusion after reading it? I had a difficult time focusing on it. I will need to try to read it again in maybe a few days and see if I can concentrate better on it.
Paglia on androgyny [from Greek andros + gynē = man-woman]: “The more I explored it, the more I realized that this movement towards androgyny occurs in late phases of culture, as a civilization is starting to unravel.” Of course, this only followed the advent of third-wave feminism; i.e., feminism was its precursor.
Comment by Luke Reid: We are witnessing the slow death of Western civilisation. Islam is massing on the periphery and the cultural Maxists, relativists, feminists and regressives are all throwing open the doors to our eventual destruction. It's been a long time coming - probably since the end of the First World War and the rise of individualism and hedonism. The really nasty destructive effort came in with the sexual revolution of the 60s and the dismantling of traditional values. Now things have totally gone to shit.
Here are other excerpts from the larger talk from which the first excerpt in the above vlog was taken. She makes some excellent points, though I don’t agree with her en toto:
The paper that was published in Gender, Place and Culture seems downright silly. “Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon” claims to be based on in situ observation of canine rape culture in a Portland dog park. “Do dogs suffer oppression based upon (perceived) gender?” the paper asks.
The 4th Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and siezures - the key word being "unreasonable."
I am still in the process of learning more, but after reading the legal blog I linked you to, I got the impression that Judge Kavanaugh has tried to maintain the proper balance between individual privacy and the legitimate intelligence gathering activities needed to maintain national security.
In that context, you might find the following article of interest.
Thank you. I will have to hope it's true he will try to maintain a balance, although the very concept of "balance" seems already too weak to me, intuitively. If balance is off, how does an individual restore it? If the state pushes the balance too far to their side, what can an individual do in response? I see that as the primary problem.
I forgot to add economic abuse, which makes all the verbal and emotional abuse so much more difficult to stand up to.
Who has most power to enforce economic abuse? It is other white, heterosexual males.
I have to wonder, why do they do it?
If they did not do it, what would they need to give up?
Would they need to stop endorsing Marxism -- the kind of soft Marxism where there is no individual equality in a legal, moral and social sense? Where it is mob vs. mob? Where a historically underdog mob is justified into doing anything to a historically more powerful mob? And it is just a form of soft revolution, at least socially and culturally?
It seems so many men are willing to give something up so that they don't have to give up on the above ideas? Why?
In hard Marxist, communist countries, if a dissident is caught and he knows he will be killed, he has been known to thank the state for teaching him better and for punishing him.
I found this interesting interview by Charlie Rose of Paglia from ’92. After the intro, the discussion centers on her view of Anita Hill (until about the 4 minute mark, though it picks up again @ around 9 mins)—a view I applaud. I found the entire interview of interest, though, of course, I disagree with a number of her ideas. Since I’d only found out about her recently, I was taken aback by her brazen, cocky self-promotion—something I’ve not heard in any of her more recent videos. In any case, her views on Anita Hill I do believe haven’t changed, and they are apropos to the Kavanaugh circus. Note that there is about a 2.5 minute gap between the 1st and 2nd parts of the interview (2nd part starts @ 14:38):
Watching those anarchic mobs, I can say with some certainty that you are watching the New Age activists teamed up with their free-thinker friends in "Revolution execution."
If anybody remembers seeing the elevator encounter the other day beetween Senator Flake and the "rape victim" who demanded he look at her, SHE was interviewed on CNN today. She was neatly and professionally groomed. It turns out she is a professional community organizer holding a major leadership role in the Movement. She ducked the question of whether she was a paid demonstrator by saying in effect that she held a professional job in the Movement.
But for today, I'm grateful for your prayers on this. As SW Radio Church's David Webber used to announce in the 1980s: GOD IS STILL ON HIS THRONE AND PRAYER CHANGES THINGS!
Innocent till proven guilty but not on trial is NOT sleight of hand. that concept is for criminal court trial, and a lower standard of evidence is for civil. This is a matter of making a hiring, social, or whatever judgement where better safe thqan sorry is the issue. Would you demand innocent till proven guilty, face accusers and beyond a reasonable standard of doubt before you wouldn't pouot you kid in the case of someone with a dubious reputation? STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS MAKES "DUE PROCESS" IMPOSSSIBLE ANYWAY.
Zech. 12:10 the correct part is not they look on Him, that is fulfilled, but mourning for Him in classical sex separated style and specific family groups mentioned. Unless this is about converstion of Jews after the Resurrection before the gentiles came in en masse, this has yet to happen.
J, "The Christian church was grafted onto the geographical nation of Israel? " the ethnos of Israel only some are in the geographic Israel.
"Or believing gentiles were grafted onto the believing Jews, ...?" A careful reading DOES NOT reveal that the root is God, that is a DIFFERENT analogy Jesus uses in John. Paul says the root Israel bears us we are grafted in among the branches of that root, and can be cut out again if not careful. grafting attached branches onto branches from a now shared root the plant itself.
"Boast not against the root for the root bears you." How would antisemitic Christians be boasting against God? "THEY ARE BELOVED FOR THE FATHERS' SAKE, BUT ENEMIES FOR THE GOSPEL'S SAKE." God has not rejected His people but INCLUDED us like the mixed multitude sort of that came out of Egypt with them. The outrageous population count shows adoption into various tribes. Adoption as good as blood or David would never have been king or even an Israelite BECAUSE LESS THAN 10 GENERATIONS FROM mOABITE BLOOD, last several verses Ruth "a son is born to Ruth" becomes "a son is born to Naomi" after she lets the kid pointlessly suckle her dry breast. a ritual adoption action. THIS IS WHY THE KHAZAR THEORY IS IRRELEVANT ALSO.
empathy is not remorese or conscience or caring. the confusion lies with those who think that feeling another's emotions (which can be delusional also) means you would give a damn. you wouldn't unless you had sympathy, pity, compassion, etc.
LOOK AT THAT LIST AGAIN, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? "identify another person’s emotions and thoughts," "analyse the variables in a [person], to derive the underlying rules that govern the behaviour of a [person]" and to respond to these with an appropriate emotion." you respond apprpriately? sounds like an act.
" Empathising allows you to predict a person’s behaviour,' "Systemising allows you to predict the behaviour of a system, [or person]"
EMPATHIZING DOES NOT MAKE YOU CARE ABOUT OTHER'S FEELINGS ONLY IDENTIFY THEM. caring is another matter entirely. BUT IF YOU RESPOND "APPROPRIATELY" YOU HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THEM AND CAN DIRECT THEM BECAUSE THEY TRUST YOU. or are flattered by you. systematizing alllows you " to control it."
so does empathizing, you figure what they feel you can lead them.
the psychopath and similars notice closely what your reactions and feelings are - to EXPLOIT THEM, or to enjoy them if they are painful and the observer is a sadist.
As for constantly posting on certain subjects those posts were all in response to others who were either lying or foolish or both and harassed me in packs.
paul, she didn't say she couldn't remember how she got in the room, she said she was PUSHED in when she went towards the bathroom across from it. I agree she's lying or so demented by some event that she is not reliable. prior sex activity has no bearing. if she didn't want it from THEM or at that time, she didn't want it.
ROGER STONE: KAVANAUGH LYNCHING A PAID DIRTY TRICK FROM SOROS
Kavanaugh opposition backed by globalist billionaire, not grassroots activism
Roger Stone | OCTOBER 6, 2018
If you think I am an experienced Dirty Trickster, then here is one of the dirtiest tricks of all time.
The rule of law, indeed our adherence to bed-rock principles of the law and the Constitution where an unprecedented smear campaign based on false vague charges without any corroboration, eyewitnesses, or proof. All those people named in Dr. Ford’s testimony deny her claims. Yet all this is disregarded in an Alinsky-type lynching in which full-throated demands to reject Kavanaugh by roving bands of kamikaze feminist terrorists stalk reporters and elected officials.
This jacked up rabbles disruption of Senator Susanne Collins’ announcement on the floor of the US Senate and their shouting down of Senator Joe Manchin are parts of an organized paid-for assault. These are the seeds of anarchy or more importantly, globalist control by the man financing this fraud against the American people and seeking to snatch our Constitutional Liberties.
The whole thing is bullshit, but now the mainstream media and their hand maidens in the Democratic Party are providing the air support to roving bands of thugs trying to disturb the coming confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh.
Those who follow me on Infowars and read the Stone Cold Truth, know that Judge Kavanaugh was not my first choice for this appointment (https://stonecoldtruth.com/stone-suggests-trump-take-sen-mike-lee-for-scotus) and that I had grave concerns about his attitude towards the 4th Amendment. But I also said at the time that I would support whoever President Trump appointed, because whoever it was, would be superior to whoever Hillary Clinton would have appointed.
But what we are seeing here is the lynching of Judge Kavanaugh and that cannot be allowed. Their charges are baseless. They shout down those who disagree. It’s guerrilla tactics. It’s well-funded astro-turf.
Their demand for an FBI report was just a delay tactic. Dianne Feinstein did not want it released. Then she did, demanding to know why it hadn’t been released. Having come up empty-handed in the report, the Schumer-Feinstein-Blumenthal-Hirono freakshow said it was inadequate.
In fact, it must be difficult for the FBI to investigate an event for which no one can identify a year, date, time, or place. Senators who have read the report including Democrats said there was no evidence of Dr. Ford’s charges or any other evidence of sexual impropriety or assault by Judge Brett Kavanaugh. There is no “cover up” as some Democrats now scream.
Yet in the streets it lends legitimacy to the screaming hordes of protestors and paid hit-squads of bleached-hair raging activists demanding Kavanaugh’s rejection without due process or regards to the facts. Instead they brand him a “gang rapist”. People actually desecrate the man’s home with spray paint, while throwing rocks through windows – on the basis of nothing.
Make no mistake about it, they have similar lynching of President Donald Trump in mind. In fact, we are seeing the dress rehearsal for their planned take down of the President. This is their dry run. We have the blueprint. We see their game plan. Should Democrats win the House, they will vote articles of impeachment in the House, to create a trial in the US Senate in which the same discredited women who attempted to surface in 2016 but could never provide credible proof or evidence of their claims of sexual harassment against Donald Trump will be paraded before the world’s cameras to recycle their vague claims. They have no corroboration, witnesses or proof, but the screaming hordes and their leftist media allies like MSNBC and CNN (and increasingly FOX), will demand they be believed simply because they are women.
That is why the left is so hysterical. We now see their M.O. It’s their dress rehearsal. If they take down Kavanaugh, Donald J. Trump is next on the hit list, on baseless claims from alleged female victims.
Today their use of zombie like talking points like “this is not a job interview,” “there is no presumption of influence in a job interview” and the very clever “look me in the eyes when I talk to you,” are textbook Alinsky tactics to perpetuate this smear. This is the paid-for political theater of billionaire George Soros. This is not some grass roots insurrection, this is manipulation of the facts and the use of guerrilla tactics to topple the US Constitution and rule of Law.
According to a study by the Media Research Center, left wing billionaire George Soros is funding the anti-Kavanaugh protests. Soros has a history of meddling in American and foreign politics. He is underwriting this fraud upon the American people. This is agit-prop paid for political thuggery courtesy of Nazi collaborator George Soros.
In 1992 the British government was propping up the pound sterling and Soros and his associates acquired millions of pounds and then shorted the currency betting that its worth would decrease. Sure enough Prime Minister John Major withdrew the pound from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) and the pound plummeted. Soros made more than $1 billion. Elderly retirees on fixed income had their saving wiped out and their pensions diminished. For that Soros became known as the “man who broke the Bank of England.” In 2002 Soros was convicted and fined for insider trading in France.
More recently Soros met with House Dem leader Nancy Pelosi, Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren and others to discuss strategies to combat President–elect Trump’s “terrifying assault on President Obama’s achievements.” In fact, Soros spent more than $25 million on Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016. In 2004 Soros spent $27 million to defeat George Bush. Currently Soros has invested more than $246 million in groups that are behind the anti-Kavanaugh movement. Women’s March is in the forefront in organizing opposition to Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Women’s March counts Planned Parenthood and the Natural Resource Defense Council as partners and both groups are associated with George Soros.
According to the Media Research Center, 100 of the 544 Women’s March partners have received a total of $246,637,217 from Soros. Both Planned Parenthood and the Natural Resource Defense Council are among those partners. Soros is within his rights to spend his money on whomever he wants.
Another anti-Kavanaugh group appeared in May 2018 calling themselves Demand Justice. According to the list of trade names on file with the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Demand Justice was organized by a fiscal sponsor called the Sixteen Thirty Fund. Tax filings from Soros’ Open Society Policy Center reveal that the Sixteen Thirty Fund is funded by Soros Open Society Policy Center.
There’s more.
Demand Justice pledges to spend $5 million to stop Kavanaugh from being appointed. The group is run by Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer’s aide Brian Fallon. Fallon is Hillary Clinton’s former campaign press secretary.
Whatever one thinks about George Soros and his political agenda think about the kind of man that would profit from the deaths of Hungarians during the Nazi occupation of Hungary. In a 1998 interview with CBS’ Steve Kroft, Soros admitted that he participated in the confiscation of Jewish property with the Nazis. The following is a transcription of that part of the interview.
Steve Kroft: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson. Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
George Soros: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
Steve Kroft: Was it difficult?
George Soros: No, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t–you don’t see the connection. But it created no problem at all.
Incredibly, CNN talking heads tried to discredit the charges from Infowars that George Soros was a Nazi collaborator, refusing to recognize the well-reported TV interview by CBS reporter Steve Kroft and Infowars’ accurate reporting.”
Below is a link to a detailed, confidential, lengthy memo on the plan for "fighting Trump," written by the George Soros funded David Brock. Very revealing!
For those who heard or read Collins’ well-reasoned—and most excellently-timed (for maximum viewership)—speech, can you spot the straw man just in the title (let alone the contents)?
…Collins’s rhetoric pushes her into a difficult position. On the one hand, she wants to grant Ford respect and dignity as a “survivor,” as Collins called her. At the same time, her decision to vote for Kavanaugh is based on her ultimate rejection of Ford’s account.
Collins, like many other Republican senators, has tried to reconcile this conflict by saying that she believes Ford was assaulted, simply not by Kavanaugh.
First, let’s look at the title: believing that someone is a “survivor” of sexual assault does not necessarily entail believing the entire account of the assault as told by the survivor. And, unless I missed it, I don’t think Collins has stated that a condition of ‘believing survivors’ means one has to believe the account of the assault as told by the survivor in full—inconsistencies, conflicting testimony, and all. Evidence and corroboration are necessary components of any trial or hearing.
Rachel Mitchell’s words are important here: ”‘he said she said’ cases are tough to prove. This case is even weaker than that”. And as the author of the piece here stated, Collins even accepted a lesser burden than had this been a criminal trial, and here are her specific words: This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of ‘more likely than not’ as our standard. Yet, with Ford’s own chosen witnesses to the alleged assault unable to corroborate her account, and gaps in Ford’s recollections of it, Collins found, rightly, that the allegations did not even meet this lesser burden.
To be more specific, Collins did not say she outright rejected Ford’s account (contra Graham above), nor did she state that Ford was not assaulted by Kavanaugh. The senator made no claims at all regarding whether or not she thought Kavanaugh assaulted Ford. Collins stated that she found Ford’s testimony “sincere, painful, and compelling”, and, further, that she “believe[s] that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life.” However, it is her very next statement that needs to be added to understand her here: “Nevertheless, the four witnesses she named could not corroborate any of the events of that evening, gathering where she says the assault occurred. None of the individuals Professor Ford says were at the party has any recollection at all of that night.”
We mustn’t assume some sort of contradiction here, we must, instead, seek to reconcile the senator’s words—which really isn’t that darn hard. Analyzing Collins here, in short: an assault really did occur, but Ford cannot recall the events (who was there—her best friend, who cannot even corroborate this claim, e.g.—when, where, etc.) in sufficient detail to support her specific allegation. This even leaves open the possibility that it was Kavanaugh [to be clear, I’m not saying I or Collins believes that], though Collins did defend his record—a record which she finds exemplary.
Yet, Collins was very clear that due process, to include the presumption of innocence, should be afforded to the accused; and, given that Kavanaugh cannot be found to be guilty of Ford’s allegations using a “more likely than not” burden, and that Kavanaugh vehemently denies the charges, then the presumption of innocence must prevail.
Amen to that!
The bottom line is that Graham’s charge that “Collins’s rhetoric pushes her into a difficult position” is completely unfounded, and he’s erected a straw man in his overall statement, perhaps to further a political agenda. In the title itself, the author juxtaposes Collins’ position that she Believes Survivors with her belief that Ford is a ”survivor” in such a manner as to imply that the senator is being oxymoronic with her overall statement. No, it’s Graham who’s being moronic. One can believe an assault took place while rejecting portions of the allegations.
Due process matters. This includes presumption of innocence for the accused, and some sort of burden of proof for the accuser (evidence and corroboration, not to mention credibility).
Amen. I'm feeling relieved that the tactics of the New Agers and Leftists failed for now. I'm also feeling encouraged that a few normally wishy washy politicians found some moral conviction!
Kavanaugh may not be perfect as an individual (with his dubious writings about fourth amendment rights), but he's unlikely to be able to unilaterally have individual interpretations of fourth amendment issues. I think his net effect will be to make the Supreme Court a bulwark against judicial activism.
I skimmed the memo and read parts of it. It relayed a lot of arrogance, a lot of organizing, a lot of people and a lot of money.
One part almost made me laugh, though. It was the part where it said their side has moral authority. This claim seems to be based on a belief in the rightness of egalitarianism.
In my opinion, the drive toward "egalitarianism" is a twisted, counterfeit version of the type of egalitarianism that Jesus Christ offers us: not material -- but legal, moral and spiritual. This basic moral foundation in Jesus Christ is what both the alt-right and the Left miss, as I see it.
Anon. (with the links to what G. Soros is all about); Awesome, thank you!
Christine, There's a difference between writing down exactly what you think to yourself in your head, and writing. The latter, Writing, is normally at least understandable. It clarifies things when it's done well. But James Joyce would be semi proud of you and your stream of semi-consciousness. I can't waste my time trying to decode your inner voices, other than that they consider themselves superior to everyone else in the room. In fact that's about the only clear point to most of what you write: that everyone else here is wrong and that you are right.
My reading of you is that you seem to me to like to be contentious and to confuse issues to the point where you are the only person brilliant enough to properly parse through the tortured language and logic.
You seem to in fact be a very intelligent individual, but you don't seem to be interested in intellectually honest and sincere discussion.
It's a shame, because you so frequently have interesting insights and information.
I have a personality type shared by perhaps 4% of the female population. (It's not INTJ. I'm not going to say what it is, because I don't want to be pigeonholed. I only take it just so seriously, but not as completely self-defining.)
Again, though, go back and look at that first headline and read that first article and let it sink in.
I haven't become a personality type scholar, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of this statistic. But this web site claims that 65% of men are thinkers, while 60% of women are feelers.
It's important to realize what this means, though. In personality types, being a "feeler" does not necessarily mean being unable to be logical, and it does not necessarily equate to emoting. It's also important to understand that all of us both think and feel, and our feelings depend to a great extent on what our thoughts are.
Here is what it means to be a "thinker" vs. a "feeler", as explained to me by somebody who studied it a lot. (Again, I'm not an expert on this, but this is my tentative understanding of it.) When evaluating something, a thinker is most likely to ask mentally, "How does this affect me?" A feeler is most likely to ask mentally, "How does this affect us (the relationship or the family)?"
Of course there are many factors in play besides personality type. Any individual of any personality type could be mature or immature, for example.
OK, so with the ordeal surrounding the Kavanaugh nomination, I’ve been distracted away from other things I should be doing. So, just a bit ago, to take a break, I decided to turn the TV on, scrolled a bit, then found Law & Order, SVU, which I like to watch on occasion. I’m aware it leans left, so I sometimes have to pass it on by, depending on the episode.
Today, ironically, I catch the very end (maybe 3-4 minutes of the episode) of a case in which all charges are dismissed against the defendant, and then learn that it was a false rape accusation by his own wife (he was cheating, so she apparently did so out of revenge). Benson, the Lt. of the PD, then states that such false accusations ‘prevent real victims from coming forward’, parroting this garbage I hear/read quite often. But, exactly HOW/WHY is this so? Moving on.
Then the camera goes to the man leaving the courtroom, finding his wife there. He approaches her gently, then, to my astonishment, he says he wants to get back with her! Dumbfounded, I had to keep watching. She apparently was pregnant, and he wanted to stay in her life, and be a father to the baby. But, she had aborted the (presumed?) pregnancy!—thus underscoring some of the things I’d written in the past on here regarding women having total control over a pregnancy, the decision to keep a child or give it up to the state, while the man has absolutely none and can be forced to pay support for a child he never wanted. This ends the episode. OK, what’s next?
The next episode begins with two women arguing with each other at a car accident site, with a police cruiser rolling up containing two male officers. One attends to one woman, and the other to the other, separating the two women. One asks the woman for her ID, with her responding, “You don’t know who I am?” or something to that effect, as she is some sort of celebrity (he has no idea who she is). Just then, the other begins having some sort of health-related issue, and the other officer comes to help his partner. The other woman uses this opportunity to flee the scene.
The officer who had attended to the now-fleeing woman (Amaro, for those who’ve watched the show) runs to the cruiser, chases her, and quickly blocks her in, as she drove to a deadend. I already knew what was going to happen next. She gets out of her vehicle, he gets out of his, and he tells her to provide ID, and then tells her she’s under arrest. She propositions him, but he remains professional throughout the arrest.
At her arraignment the next morning (she was at a rehab facility as a condition of parole for DUI, left the facility, then had the accident the previous night), the judge is ready to remand, when the young girl (20-ish) claims that the officer propositioned HER—yet another false allegation! But the dashcam provides vindicating evidence.
During questioning, the woman claims that the therapist at the facility was abusing her! So, the therapist is questioned, suggesting they review video footage. They do so, only to find that this young woman fellated a 15-year-old boy as a favor to him for getting her (and him) some drugs at the rehab! I gave up after that…
I found the following comment accompanying a vlog regarding Google’s ‘Project Dragonfly’, which is designed specifically for the Chinese government in order to know all citizens’ internet searches:
Hello! Is this Gordon's Pizza?
No sir - it's Google Pizza.
I must have dialed a wrong number. Sorry.
No sir - Google bought Gordon's Pizza last month.
OK. I would like to order a pizza.
Do you want your usual, sir?
My usual - you know me?
According to our caller ID data sheet, the last 12 times you called you ordered an extra-large pizza with three cheeses - sausage - pepperoni - mushrooms and meat balls on a thick crust.
OK - that's what I want .
May I suggest that this time you order a pizza with ricotta - arugula - sun-dried tomatoes and olives on a whole wheat, gluten free, thin crust?
What? I detest vegetables.
Your cholesterol is not good, sir.
How the hell do you know?
Well, we cross-referenced your home phone number with your medical records. We have the result of your blood tests for the last 7 years.
Okay, but I do not want your rotten vegetable pizza! I already take medication for my cholesterol.
Excuse me sir, but you have not taken your medication regularly. According to our database, you only purchased a box of 30 cholesterol tablets once, at Drugsale Network, 4 months ago.
I bought more from another drugstore.
That doesn't show on your credit card statement.
I paid in cash.
But you did not withdraw enough cash according to your bank statement.
I have other sources of cash.
That doesn't show on your last tax return unless you bought them using an undeclared income source, which is against the law.
WHAT THE HELL?? !!!
I'm sorry, sir, we use such information only with the sole intention of helping you.
Enough already! I'm sick to death of Google - Facebook - Twitter - WhatsApp and all the others!! I'm going to an island without internet - cable TV - where there is no cell phone service and no one to watch me or spy on me !!
I understand sir - but you need to renew your passport first. It expired 6 weeks ago!!
Well, at least it, in part, contradicts the BELIEVE HER narrative, as even L&W, SVU illustrates that women sometimes lie about sexual assault/impropriety.
I don't recall the original source, but I saw on one vlog a cartoon depicting three women with BELIEVE HER signs and a man next to them pointing to the blindfolded lady justice (with scales), saying, "I believe HER". Very well-put-together illustration, juxtaposing 3 irrational, emoting women with the lone man suggesting fairly evaluating evidence.
Last night I watched Luke Cage lose a fight with a Satanic martial arts expert from the West Indies and nearly drown in a river, but begin to reconcile with his estranged reverend father. That was after reading a scientifically realistic bedtime story about a boy who goes to the moon and back.
I think you may have missed one of my implicit points. The Kavanaugh hearing centered on allegations of sexual assault that are assumed true by many, while I think they are false given the evidence. Art imitated life to an extent, when the man in the episode was accused of sexual assault initially (assumed true), but was later vindicated by some new evidence clearing him (though I didn't get to see what that was).
Re:I will have to hope it's true he will try to maintain a balance, although the very concept of "balance" seems already too weak to me, intuitively. If balance is off, how does an individual restore it? If the state pushes the balance too far to their side, what can an individual do in response? I see that as the primary problem.
But the state HAS pushed the balance too far to the LEFT since about 1934 when Franklin D. Roosevelt set out to pack the courts with left-leaning judges who could be counted on to approve his "New Deal."
Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937 _____________________________________________________________________
This Is How FDR Tried To Pack The Supreme Court https://www.history.com/news/franklin-roosevelt-tried-packing-supreme-court _____________________________________________________________________
The recent confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh seems to have changed things.
Brett Kavanaugh Confirmed, Possibly Most Conservative Supreme Court Since 1934
The Supreme Court has not had a conservative majority since 1934, when the New Deal took hold and the Court moved to the left, giving the federal government vast new powers over economic issues. The Court massively broadened federal powers over commerce, taxing, and federal spending.
The Court abandoned the original meaning of several key constitutional provisions during the 1930s: in 1934, the Contracts Clause (Blaisdell); in 1935, the Appointments Clause (Humphrey’s Executor); in 1936, the Spending Clause (Butler); and in 1937, the Commerce Clause (Jones & Laughlin Steel). These radically expanded the role of the federal government in people’s lives.
A conservative majority on the Court has been considered within striking distance since 1993, when two moderate justices were the swing votes on almost every issue that divided along philosophical lines. In 2006, conservative Justice Samuel Alito replaced one of those moderates, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.....
If the balance is off and if the state pushes the balance too far, the solution is exactly the one we just implemented in November, 2016.....which is to get out and vote for a presidential candidate and for legislators who will restore the balance by appointing constitutionalists to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is why President Trump is telling people over and over at all the recent rallies...."get out and vote Republican." We need more Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate so that if there is another SCOTUS appointment, it won't be such a squeaker.
It may take a while for President Trump to undo damage done by his more liberal predecessors, but in addition to the things he has already accomplished in less than two years (i.e. the economy ) President Trump has also appointed two conservative judges to the U.S. Supreme Court and has been quietly appointing conservative judges to the lower Federal Courts. Therefore, IMHO, he is off to a good start.
I don't think we disagree with each other. My context of the word "balance" was not left-right balance. It was state-individual balance, and my concern was the fourth amendment. I don't think it's likely that Kavanaugh will be able to unilaterally impose fourth amendment interpretations. Anyway, it's too late. The Patriot Act is already law. I think it's more likely Kavanaugh's confirmation will be able to end judicial activism. For that I am grateful. I read that Breitbart article yesterday. It's a good article.
J, your message to Christine is right on although she puts out things that are outright crazy. When she wrote of how her mother attempted to possess her by entering through her mouth and she had to expel her through her anus was a bit too much for even Constance to tolerate. Add to that her chakras, vampire feeds, her long term shack is holy, etc., etc. you’ll get the sense she’s crazed.
San Fransicko isn't the only Democratic conclave that is in deep decay due to liberal social policies. As time goes on, these types of problems will only increase, leading to the spread of disease. According to a number of health experts, we are not that far away from seeing the spread of contagious diseases that could morph into epidemics or even possible global pandemics.
This was written with the author's leftist assumptions and value judgements showing. But the article is at least informative about the upcoming cases that will be tried before the Supreme Court.
"The Republican Party and Donald Trump wanted Brett Kavanaugh on the U.S. Supreme Court before the November 6 midterm elections because if the Democrats had achieved a majority in the Senate, there may not have been sufficient votes to confirm him.
But the real hurry to get Kavanaugh confirmed had more to do with the several cases on the Supreme Court’s docket: Republicans are hoping to ensure the outcome of several hot-button cases, including those involving double jeopardy, immigration, age discrimination and the Endangered Species Act. Moreover, there is the possibility that the Supreme Court could also decide to take up additional cases affecting gerrymandering, gay and transgender rights, and the separation of church and state."
The Pope said that the church was under attack by the "great accuser," i.e. the Devil. I wonder if he was attempting to associate ANYONE and EVERYONE that makes legitimate accusations of pedophilia with the Devil? Or could he have someone specifically in mind, such as Vigano? After all, Vigano "accused" Francis of complicity in the pedophilia/homosexual scandals and went so far as to call for his resignation.
It's been quite awhile since Francis uttered his "I will not speak one word" regarding Vigano's 11 page indictment. He has remained true to his word as he continues to refuse any comment on Vigano's statement. I wonder why? Could it be that he has no defense?
"Most rapes are intraracial. The vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators and black victims are usually assaulted by blacks.
But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
Wuhl, if ol’ boy JimBob sez it, then it dang well mus’ be true!
Sure, there are individual areas in the US that are racist: white, black, Hispanic, etc. But, Jay Fayza, a black man, makes the case that whites are by far the most tolerant and accepting of other races:
And, let’s not forget how Asians are systematically discriminated against for entrance into “Ivy League” colleges, due to Affirmative Action (favoring blacks and Hispanics—which discriminates against whites, as well). See the current case against Harvard.
Dave Rubin (Rubin Report) interviews Larry Elder (a black man--NOT "African-American"), who dispels many myths regarding racism against blacks, black crime, police shootings, etc:
A white, Libertarian man's opinion about the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process:
"In reality, of course, the political 'debate' in this country is ludicrously restricted, and those participating must adhere to laughably narrow guidelines. Battle over gay marriage and transgender bathrooms all you want. But don’t talk about the perpetual wars, bombings and occupations, or the top secret intelligence agency budgets. And never, ever mention anything about the Federal Reserve, or the counterfeit nature of our fractional banking system.
So this 'debate' is perfect for America 2.0. Screams, profanities, and threats of violence over a claim alleged thirty six years after it happened. And even if it is true, why wasn’t the underage Kavanaugh (who was seventeen at the time) a 'victim' here, too? I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent. But it’s impossible for anyone perceived to be associated with Trump to be considered a victim of anything, under any circumstances. As the establishment 'liberals' love to say now: 'punch a Nazi in the face' and all that.
I thought the selection of Brett Kavanaugh was stupid, much like all of Trump’s appointments have been stupid. It was clearly yet another capitulation on his part to a conservative, neocon establishment that opposed his candidacy and continues to oppose any real reforms he may attempt. But the phony debate taking center stage now is beyond stupid; it is state-sponsored theater for the dumbed-down masses. It’s hard to imagine a more fitting example of 'bread and circuses.'"
"Most rapes are intraracial. The vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators and black victims are usually assaulted by blacks."
This is a VERY misleading statement. Of course the "vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators." Why? Because of the fact that the White population (and hence, criminals) is far greater than the Black population, which makes up only 13% of the U.S. population. This disparaging fact obviously translates into more crime by the numbers. A far more telling statistic is to look at the percentages of crimes committed by the various racial groups. According to FBI crime statistics, year after year, Blacks commit a much higher percentage of crime than do Whites. In fact, by percentages, they commit the majority of crime in America! Blacks also commit an incredible amount of crime upon their own people, which has fostered the "Black on Black" crime groups that campaign against this criminal behavior. On a personal note, I have always felt that these groups are sending out a racist message, because they aren't standing firm against ALL crime, but concentrate their activities against crime perpetrated against Blacks by Blacks! The underlying message seems to be; if you're going to commit crime, do it against someone else other than Black people!
I don't think using an ignorant, vulgar, self-confessed "redneck" is a very good source for establishing his (or your) claim that "all Whites are racist."
An honest, Christian Harlem Pastor James David Manning preaches on "Blacks are the Most Racist People."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YA4irxFEzE
PS: This Pastor stands against the vast majority of race baiting "pastors" that live off of the hatred that they spew from their "pulpits." Speaking the truth against this tide of lies and hatred is a revolutionary act!
I stumbled upon this article a while back totally at random, as it popped up below another article I was viewing. I kept it in a Word doc in case a proper time might come to post it. Now is that time:
OK, this is a good thing. However, I’ve heard that educated black women are finding it increasingly difficult to find a suitable black partner, or a partner of any race—because, as with most women, they are hypergamous, i.e. they want to date and marry individuals who makes more money than they do. Or at least as much money.
From the article:
According to findings compiled in a study by the National Center For Education Statistics, Black women have been obtaining degrees at a consistently high rate for the last eight years and counting. Information collected about the higher education among African-Americans between 2009 and 2010 shows that Black women accounted for 68 percent of associate's degrees, 66 percent of bachelor's degrees, 71 percent of master's degrees and 65 percent of doctorate degrees awarded to Black students during that time frame.
All this is saying is that there are more black women relative to black men obtaining degrees—a LOT more. This is certainly not good news for black men, unfortunately (which is also be bad news for black women wishing to marry within their race). But then the need for self-victimization kicks in:
However, while the study does shed light on many positive aspects of Black women and education, some of the overall statistics are still immensely troubling. For example, as of 2012, only 15 percent of students enrolled in college were African-American, a drastically low number relative to that of the 60 percent of white students enrolled.
“Only 15 percent”?! According to the latest US Census, blacks make up 13.3% of the total population, while whites make up either 76.9% (whites plus Hispanics) or 61.3% (white non-Hispanics). This means there are more blacks enrolled relative to whites, with most of these black women. So, what’s the problem?
Additionally, while Black women continue to pursue higher education at increasing rates, they make up only eight percent of private sector jobs.
Assuming the ratio of females to males in the 13.3% black population is the same as in the larger US population at 50.8%, this would make black women roughly 6.76% of the total population. So, black women holding 8% of the jobs in the private sector means that they disproportionately hold more jobs. Again, what’s the problem?
This sounds like, in SJW lingo, black female privilege to me, as opposed to SJW claims of “white privilege” and “male privilege”.
This was the part that concerned me. We have been discussing wrongful rape conviction and statistics. Nobody registered any objection to that. So therefore why the objection to this:
"But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
In fact, remember, the last time a conservative nominee for the Supreme Court was smeared with sexual allegations, it was a black man who called it a high tech lynching -- Clarence Thomas.
So this is quite a relevant topic to this blog discussion thread.
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?
Galatians 3:28 King James Version (KJV)
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
I don't want in the Republican club. I don't owe loyalty to any politics. My loyalty is to Christianity.
I am an independent. I reject all ideology.
The problem with ideology is that it gets people re-arranging cliches. To do that is not to think.
But no matter how well you think, if you have not love, it is all for nothing. No matter your politics or race or sex -- if you have not love, you are nothing.
1 Corinthians 13
1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 13And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
As regards my immediately preceding comment, I don’t have her raw data, but if we assume the 15% enrollment figure she provided remained consistent through to graduation, and if we take ~68% as degree holders of all the subgroups she listed, then we can arrive at an approximate figure of 10% of college graduates that are black females. With that, we might be able to assume the 8% of private sector jobs held by black women is lower than their graduation numbers. HOWEVER, how many are in the public sector? Not only that, what are these degrees in, and how would any disparity between degree holders and jobs compare with other races’ disparity between degree holders and jobs? Without this crucial data, we don’t have much of anything. Except someone wishing to play the victim…
...So this is quite a relevant topic to this blog discussion thread.
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?...
This is a straw man. If one chooses not to engage in a specific topic, that hardly means one is racist or complicit in racism.
So, by your statement, should all readers here assume that your "coming from self-professed Christians" is intended to apply to all readers here?
You could analyze statistics in a skeptical and sophisticated manner that well any time you choose. Apparently you only choose to do so when it is statistics about false accusations and convictions of black men.
I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now.
I don't want to go around in circles arguing with you. Besides, I'm sure you have a lot of work to do and have little time to argue about this topic.
Excuse me, I am going to go read a book called, Love Without Hurt: Turn Your Resentful, Angry, or Emotionally Abusive Relationship into a Compassionate, Loving One.
"But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
J,
This is one of those types of statements that when read causes moral outrage from the left. Yet, it is misleading. Why? Because the fact remains that Blacks commit far more violent crimes percentage wise than do Whites, so naturally, the "risk of wrongful conviction" would rise dramatically.
Here is an illustration to consider: if you know statistically that Pit Bull dogs tend to attack people at a far higher rate than do, say, Beagles, and an attack occurred in your neighborhood, which species would you tend to "suspect" more? Beagles or Pit Bulls? Now, the Beagle very well might have bitten the victim, but which species would you probably concentrate your investigation upon?
Not mentioned in this statement as well is that, more often than not, those that have been "wrongfully convicted" also had very long rap sheets that would influence the investigators in a manner that would be against the suspect in question.
I served 13 weeks as a vice foreman on a felony grand jury. I can assure you, there are very few "one time" criminals out there. Most have rap sheets as long as your arm, and they all claim their innocence! Hence, the tendency is to NOT believe anything they say based upon their past track record.
One more huge point; this has NOTHING to do with a lack of "love." It has everything to do with the truth. I kind of feel a little insulted (but will survive) that you would insinuate that my, or Craig's posts would be influenced upon "hate."
My personal experience along with observations leads me to conclude that Blacks are their own worst enemies. I feel an intense sorrow for the many good Black people that are every bit of a victim of the criminals in their community because it causes many people to "suspect" them of the same type of behavior.
It is often claimed that White people do not want to see Black people move into their neighborhoods because they are "racists." That is not true. They fear the influx of Blacks because of their justifiable fear of the increase in crime.
Here is just one of many examples I can cite: I grew up next to a suburb that was, by my standards, very affluent. This thriving city had all the extras, including services, better schools and recreational facilities, etc. that my town did not have. They also had a state of the art shopping mall that they were proud of. It was also well known as a VERY safe town with a minuscule crime rate.
Back in that time period, the spirit of "diversity" along with a very heavy dose of egalitarianism was very popular. Liberal Democratic administrations in this city began to seek out developers (and offering tax abatement incentives) for building apartment complexes with the intent to purposely attract low income renters in order to create a more "diverse community." Once the apartments were built, Black people began to move into this previously all White community. At first, there were no problems at all and the liberal politicians celebrated the success of their "diverse" community. As time went on, the Black population began to increase in the areas of the low income apartments. Unfortunately, crime also began to spike dramatically. Home robberies, car thefts, etc. rose at a high rate. Customers were accosted and robbed in parking lots of previously safe retail businesses. Car-jackings also rose dramatically ... I personally survived an unsuccessful, violent attempt by two Black males while driving through this area one early summer evening.
As crime continued to increase, businesses in this area began to close. A newer "Super K-Mart" was forced to close due to the dramatic increase in crime, both in their parking lot and inside the store. The newer Mall also had a very high increase in crime and retailers saw a loss of Whit customers, which further led to store closings. Eventually, the entire Mall was abandoned and torn down!
In what was once a thriving, appreciating housing market, home prices began to plummet, with values losing as much as 75% off their previous highs. The city today has a Black population of about 80%. Crime, including drug related violence continues to be rampant. Whenever the town comes up in conversation, most people just shake their head in disbelief as to what happened to this once peaceful community.
Now, Blacks have "taken over" a new Walmart in a neighboring town, where they make up 90% of the customers. Crime again has spiked dramatically, both inside and outside of this store. I was told personally by a very good source that the store had lost $1 Million in theft in 2016. The figure doubled to $2 Million in 2017! Employees are told to "not confront anyone" regarding theft. Cashiers are hired and fired often within one week. Why? Because they are routinely caught ringing up their "friends and relatives," severely under charging them. Often, the theft amounts to hundreds of dollars for just one of these "customers."
Again, Blacks are their own worst enemies. They need to clean up their own communities and quit playing the "race card" for all of the bad things that people attribute to them.
I could cite a lot more of these types of examples ... but will stop here.
There have been accounts of how the Black community was (allegedly) deliberately targeted for the introduction of drugs.
There have been accounts of the Black music industry (allegedly) being deliberately targeted for the (introduction of)/(supplanting by) more radicalized music at the expense what was then the standard(s).
There have been accounts of what was then typical relatively close-knit Black homelife (allegedly) being deliberately targeted to be broken up.
There is an interesting book out called "Mr. T: The Man with the Gold: An Autobiography" in which he says that the area known as "The Projects" in Chicago were quite safe UNTIL THE SAFEGUARDS WERE WITHDRAWN.
We must be careful and cautious in drawing conclusions as we must take into account the possibility of deliberate social manipulations by the "puppet masters" to cause divisions amongst us.
Rather than point the finger at a particular race in any such matters we would be far better served by focusing on the SOCIAL CONDITIONS which differentiate us from one another to our loss.
You wrote: You could analyze statistics in a skeptical and sophisticated manner that well any time you choose. Apparently you only choose to do so when it is statistics about false accusations and convictions of black men.
First, I’m going to assume you meant to negate the 2nd sentence (using “not”). Second, you mentioned above the case of Clarence Thomas in your response to RayB, and when taken with your assertion that this particular topic [of the OP] never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men [your emphasis] is proven false by the following: (1) I specifically mentioned Clarence Thomas in my very first comment in this very thread in quoting someone who referenced him; (2) in one of my comments on Camille Paglia, I specifically mentioned Anita Hill (and Paglia’s position on her), which, of course, is a reference to the Thomas-Hill ordeal; (3) I referenced a video by Janice Fiamengo in which she made the case that women make false rape accusations and profit from such, using Anita Hill as her primary example; and (4) I specifically referenced the case of Brian Banks (10:24 PM)—though I didn’t mention race at all, as I didn’t think it was germane—in which he, a black teenager in high school, was falsely accused by a white classmate, reluctantly took a plea deal, and was jailed. He was later set free by the California Innocence Project. I finished my comment with these words:
“Banks’ plea deal also exemplifies how broken our legal system is. Judges STRONGLY encourage plea deals, and most ordinary plebs don’t have the funds for a protracted criminal trial anyway. Thus, this innocent man was forced to accept a plea. Moreover, many jurors side with the woman accuser out of misguided empathy rather than impartially judging the merits of the case. Sad.”
I skimmed through the 20 page pdf referenced in your comment about the higher percentage of false rape convictions of black men when the accuser is a white woman, but I didn’t make any comment because it would have taken quite a bit of time to read the entire document in order to make a proper assessment. I don’t like to make any comments unless I understand the argument, AND I check to see if there’s any sort of authorial bias. Thinking about this, though, did the authors check every single case of all convicted men, black, white, and other races? If not, how would they know if there aren’t innocent white men accused by white women and falsely convicted at just as high a rate as those of black men accused by white women? In other words, is it possible that there are just as many white men falsely convicted (by percentage) whose cases have not yet been appealed?
Now, that’s not to say there wasn’t some sort of racial bias in (some of) the courts in which these black men were falsely accused.
You have no idea who I am. I do not reveal all of my identity, just like you don’t, as I prefer a measure of anonymity. Perhaps it might surprise you if I told you that the large majority of my relationships with significant-others has been with non-white women. I could go on, but I suspect no amount of words on my part will appease you, as your mind is apparently made up, given your comment:
I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now.
Your quoting of the love chapter, 1 Corinthians 13, is quite disingenuous, as you did so while pointing the finger accusingly at others. All I’m hearing is a clanging cymbal.
I must make a correction. Banks’ accuser was black, not white. I went by memory, apparently conflating this account with another—I’ve watched many different videos of false rape cases over the past two years. In any case, here’s a synopsis of the case after her recanting:
Wanetta Gibson should be put UNDER the jail! [I’m being hyperbolic, for those easily ‘triggered’.] All that money she, in essence, extorted from the school based on her false allegation… Her name needs to be as well known as and synonymous with Tawana Brawley and Nikki Yovino.
The way the sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh were handled “was a disservice to the American public,” says Anita Hill, nearly three decades after she was put through the wringer for making similar claims.
Hill, 62, spoke on the high-profile case Wednesday at a talk at the University of Pennsylvania, and noted that not much has changed in the years since she testified that then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her in the workplace.
Hill called it a “tragedy” that the Senate Judiciary Committee did not give Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Blasey Ford time to prepare her testimony, and failed to interview all available witnesses before moving forward with Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote, according to the Guardian.
“Those were all the things that I experienced in 1991 and it was what I experienced in 2018 – that failure to really help the public understand very significant issues and to understand that those issues, and seeking truth in those issues, aligned with the interest of having a supreme court that people have confidence in, they have faith in, they believe in the impartiality of and they believe in the integrity of,” Hill reportedly said.
Anita Hill lost credibility when she said Thomas tried to entice her by placing a pubic hair on her can of Coke. I don't believe any man would think that would be a turn on.
The following is a good observation by a commentator to the vlog:
David H: It is interesting that Jim Brown was also at that meeting and isn't given the same degree of heat that Kanye is receiving. This is also about the platform that Kanye possesses. Socialists and globalists have teamed up to take down our constitution. They have successfully taken over academia and most of the media. A person like Kanye who has a huge platform to speak on and is followed by mostly young people is extremely dangerous to them. Having a guy like Kanye tell young people to start thinking as an individual and speaking out against socialist programs and their effects on the black community is a nightmare scenario. It is to be expected that globalists would unleash the media on Kanye in an effort to discredit him.
A reprint of an article by Marjorie Millett, sister of Kate Millett. Kate Millett wrote Sexual Politics, a very influential second wave feminist manifesto. Marjorie Millett had a front row seat and tells us what she saw!
The author was moved to reprint this on News with Views after viewing the behavior of the activists during the Kavanaugh confirmation process.
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of a friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked
“To make revolution,” they answered
“What kind of revolution?” she asked
“The Cultural revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural revolution?” she demanded
“By destroying the American family?” they answered
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch:?” she replied
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution, and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Everyone must be permeated with ‘The Revolution:’ the media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches, and even the library system.”
I liked this biographical information about the influence of the Clarence Thomas hearings on Andrew Breitbart. I liked that he was against racism but became a conservative after he saw that liberals were not protecting Clarence Thomas from racism.
I personally could not be against racism and be either a liberal or a conservative, but I respect that Andrew Breitbart meant well and was sincere in his convictions. He seems genuinely not to have only been playing games and seems genuinely not to have not only cared about other white men like himself.
"Andrew was raised in California and was a product of that reflexively liberal climate. He admits to taking being a liberal for granted until, in his early 20’s, he witnessed a horrific national event:
The confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas and the random insertion of Anita Hill into the process.
Andrew watched and wondered what was going on. He couldn’t understand how the NAACP would stand by and let a black man be accused of something like this and not stand up to protect his rights. He couldn’t understand why the National Organization for Women would blindly support someone coming forth so late with accusations.
Andrew thought those groups were supposed to be about fairness and protecting the rights of the underdogs.
Silly Andrew.
Once awakened, Andrew Breitbart became curious, he became informed, and he became active. Boy did he become active! Today, Breitbart News stands virtually alone in presenting an uncompromising exposure of Team Left tactics and giving a large platform to the works of James O’Keefe, John Nolte, and others."
I like this picture of Kanye West and Trump hugging. I think it is political theatre, but at least it is not divisive political theatre for a change. I think it is strategy, but at least it is ethical strategy for once. I personally care about this for more reasons other than just making Democrats look like they are hypocrites and racists. And I hope that some conservatives feel the way I do, too.
I signed the pledge for Mom's March for America last year, and I noticed they sent some members to Washington, DC during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. Some of them held pro-Kavanaugh demonstrations. I was glad to see that, although I have decided that personally I don't want to be controlled and homogenized and am not a joiner.
Concerned Women for America also had some members on the pro-Kavanaugh side visiting senators' offices and holding pro-Kavanaugh signs. I'm not a member, and I don't think I'll join, after reading what Penny Nance had to say about Ivanka Trump's drive to get more employers to offer paid maternity and paternity leave. What Penny Nance had to say did not strike me as sincere and realistic. It struck me as hypocritical. She said it would make it harder for women to compete in the workplace.
I worked for years before getting pregnant, and my company offered maternity leave under state law for short-term disability leave. Men also used short-term disability leave for a variety of reasons, from colon cancer to throat surgery. Men also used FMLA leave for a variety of reasons, from coping with a daughter's cancer to coping with their own cancer. They also worked at home sometimes when dealing with unexpected family crises.
Because of my experience, it did not ring true at all for Penny Nance to say her reason for coming out against maternity leave is that women would not be able to compete as well in the workplace. I can't really say that it surprised me, either, that a conservative spokeswoman for other women would be heartless about the struggles of other women and would be aiming to please corporate men.
I mean it when I say heartless. When I was pregnant, I belonged to an online due date club, along with about thirty other women whose babies were due in January. Half of these women didn't know how they were going to keep on paying their bills after they had their babies. Some of them were temps. Some worked for employers without any maternity leave policy.
It was stressful on their husbands and boyfriends as well. Just as it would have been stressful on my husband to lose my income during my maternity leave, given our budget and income at the time. Just as it would have been hard on my son to have a stressed out mommy at the very beginning of his life, when bonding is so important and sets the stage for parental relationships from that time forward.
I can respect Penny Nance and Concerned Women for America for standing up to Leftist women and supporting Kavanaugh. Now if only they would ever stand up for other women. Because there is nothing wrong with doing unto other women as you would have them do unto you. In fact, in my Bible, it's a good thing. (And I also don't recall it saying anywhere in the Bible to love your enemy only if they are not Leftists.)
You never subjected the statistical claims about false rape convictions for men in general to the very tortuous analysis that you went through, when it was about black men, and not just about men.
I want to say something about the article by Marjorie Millett. It frightened me when I read it.
If you read the very beginning, you will see that the two sisters, Marjorie and Kate, started out Catholic. Then they turned communist and atheist after their university education.
This is about a battle for the mind and soul.
It is one religion vs. another.
It is not just about "logic". It is about world views. It is about beliefs.
To concern oneself with logical arguments is to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic.
Jesus Christ never said a word about logic. He talked quite a bit about love, though.
"Feminist icon Kate Millett passed away recently in Paris at the age of 82. Her 1970 book Sexual Politics, called 'the Bible of Women’s Liberation' by the New York Times, had a seismic effect on feminist thought and launched Millett as what the Times called 'a defining architect of second-wave feminism.' In a cover story that same year, TIME magazine crowned her 'the Mao Tse-tung of Women’s Liberation.' Fellow feminist Andrea Dworkin said that Millett woke up a sleeping world.
Kate’s sister Mallory, a CFO for several corporations, resides in New York City with her husband of over twenty years. In a riveting article from a few years back bluntly titled, 'Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives,' Mallory revealed what she saw of the subversive undercurrent of her sister’s passionate radicalism.
Asked for her thoughts on Kate’s legacy, Mallory shared her very personal responses, which follow."
I just think we should care equally about black men who are wrongfully accused of rape. Is that controversial to you?
J,
Why would you think that would be "controversial" to me? I care equally about ANYONE that is "wrongfully accused of rape," be it a Black man, a White man, or whatever. Kind of like my answer to "Black Lives Matter" is "ALL Lives Matter ... including Cops." If you think that type of attitude is "controversial," so be it.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean, though I understand some your statement, and it’s this part I will answer: because black men are a subset of all men (“just men”, as you state), meaning that black men are included.
In any case, I did make a statement about the 20 page document you sourced being both long and requiring a significant amount of time to analyze. Perhaps you could do it, since you are the one who brought it up.
Nevertheless, as I skimmed once more, I decided to jump to the conclusion. In it I found almost exactly what I remarked in my 8:59 AM comment regarding incomplete data; i.e., one would have to look into EVERY rape case in order to come to any kind of even tentative conclusions. The authors concede this very thing:
Our analysis involved a review of confirmed cases of African Americans who were wrongfully convicted of sexual assaults against Whites and an examination of the factors associated with the wrongful convictions. Our findings, coupled with the cited literature, suggest that African Americans face unique vulnerability related to cross-racial identifications, all-White juries, and interrogation practice. We regard this as a tentative conclusion, however, pending review and analysis of the broader picture of wrongful convictions in sexual assaults that contrast all race/ethnic configurations of defendants and victims. Stated differently, our analysis disaggregated the subset of Black defendant/White victim cases from the larger group of all wrongful convictions in sexual assault cases. Further research is warranted to assess the comparative role of various risk factors among a more diverse sample of wrongful convictions (p 290 / 16 pdf).
It should be noted here that this data is culled primarily from 1982-92; that is, it is over 25 years old. In addition and more importantly, how can ANYONE, besides God Himself, possibly know with any certitude how many others are languishing in prison due to wrongful convictions (by false allegations, mistaken identity, etc.), regardless of the race of the perpetrator or victim?
I didn't say anything about Black Lives Matter. I thought we were talking about the statistics about wrongful rape convictions for all men vs. for black men.
"For Black History Month, I wrote about five historical cases of African Americans wrongfully convicted in the Jim Crow era. In today’s follow up, I’ll examine how contemporary wrongful convictions compare. While triumphant present-day innocence stories are all notable successes, and it’s always remarkable when an innocent person finally gets his or her day of justice to be released from hollowed prison walls, the majority (63%) of those exonerated through DNA evidence are African American."
"Yesterday, Innocence Project New Orleans (IPNO) client Wilbert Jones was exonerated in Baton Rouge after a 46-year fight for his freedom. Jones was wrongly convicted in 1973 for the October 1971 kidnapping and rape of a nurse at Baton Rouge General Hospital. He was sentenced to life in prison."
This story makes me feel like crying. And just look at his picture. No bitterness in his face. Amazing.
You should see him in person. Absolutely amazing! As one who enjoys most any kind of music, IMO he is in the very top tier of drummers of any genre (and this includes any rock drummer one can name). And he makes it look easy!
"... the majority (63%) of those exonerated through DNA evidence are African American."
J,
Again, another misleading statement. What percentage of the 63% had previous criminal records? Would you think if they did, it might prejudice the investigators?
Again, the reason African Americans would have a higher exoneration PERCENTAGE is due to the fact that PERCENTAGE wise, Blacks commit a much higher PERCENTAGE of crimes than any other race. FBI statistics show that, although Blacks make up only 13% of the U. S. population, over 80% of all violent crime is committed by Blacks. That is not a racist statement, it is a fact.
It stands to reason that due to the much higher crime activity rate, higher wrongful prosecution along with a higher exoneration rate would be expected. The bottom line is that human error, which effects all facets of life, is the culprit, and not some "get the Blacks" conspiracy.
What you are really impugning here is that, the entire Justice system in America is prejudiced against Blacks. This is one of tactics of the radical left that constantly seeks "victims" in order to cause division and chaos, all designed to help bring about their communist dream of revolution.
Remember Michael Brown's "friend?" He emphatically proclaimed that his "gentle" friend was on his knees when he said "hands up, don't shoot" and the officer "just shot him dead in the back." I wonder if you believed that at the time, J? I didn't. I knew Cops don't go about just murdering people. THEN, in spite of all the "witnesses" to the contrary, the autopsy PROVED, beyond any doubt, that the robbing thug Brown was attempting to wrestle the gun away from the Cop when the gun discharged, hitting Brown in the front, killing him. The liberal media had the whole country (not me) believing in their lie, and to this day, many people still believe it.
Just another quick example of the radical left's lies regarding the "biased Justice" system that constantly works to wrongfully persecute "innocent" Blacks.
When Trayvon Martin was shot and killed, in self defense, by George Zimmerman, ABC News showed photos of Zimmerman as he entered the police station for questioning. Unbelievably, they edited out wounds to the back of Zimmerman's head, later proven to have been inflicted by Martin as he, while on top of Zimmerman, banged the back of his head upon the concrete pavement. ABC also edited out key words out of Zimmmerman's "911" call, making it appear that Zimmerman was saying that Martin was "up to something" because he was "Black," when in reality, he was providing a description of suspicious behavior of a man walking in an area that had experienced break ins.
The media also reported that Zimmerman was a "white male," when in fact, he was Hispanic, obviously playing the "white vs black" bias game. With all this, the media constantly posted photos of a "young" Martin in his football uniform. Obama added fuel to the fire stating is he "had a son, it would be Trayvon Martin." What the media never posted were screen captures of Trayvon with his "gold grill," menacingly holding a semi-auto handgun, giving the "one finger salute" to the camera, etc. .... all indications of him not being this "innocent little boy," but, what he really was, a young gansta street thug. Missing too was the report that Trayvon was expelled from school for possessing criminal burglary tools inside of his "book bag." There's more, but we'll stop here.a
Let's not forget the other "victims" in all of this; the policeman that shot Michael Brown (forgot his name) and George Zimmerman ... both lives ruined for doing nothing wrong.
J, you are being played by the liberals that seek to control you through your emotions.
Yes, J's advocacy is lacking a lot of other important factors for the information that corresponds to this subject. Maybe her thinking that she is more merciful to people she considers downtrodden (than say you RayB) to promote the numbers she sites, but instead does real injustice to any person caught up in that web regardless of color. What needs honest review is how much of the problem lies at the feet of criminals who happen to be black. The numbers are disproportionate for a host of reasons, but mainly because people make horrible choices and that is not a race issue. It is a people issue. People issues are all over every issue because people are flawed, so at times it is those out on the street and at times on jury panels and courtrooms, etc, too.
Sometimes people lend themselves to appear more merciful (fair and just) than others to further the slant of their point of view, but fairness and the truth should be on the same page. Her take has one view in the room and the other standing out in the hallway. That is not helpful, no matter how well intentioned.
If you want to use a descriptor like “INCREDIBLE”, I’d have to say Cecil Taylor fits that bill. Advance warning: his music is very dissonant. And for those who think he’s haphazardly pounding the keys, observe that he returns to the same motifs. I don’t think there’s anyone else on par with Taylor in ANY genre, including Classical:
Much of his music is actually rooted in the call-and-response of Blues.
J,
Perhaps by now you’ve figured out why I posted the Hamid Drake video. I predicted your response, and you followed as expected (though I was ready if you actually viewed it first). Obviously, my comment @ 9:49 PM is a non sequitur—just as much as your response to my initial non-comment of your post on “Study examines rape, race and wrongful convictions”, along with your implicit charge of racism attending it.
I have a love of music going back as far as I can remember, and I have an extensive collection of records (vinyl and cds). The large majority is Jazz. Are you aware that at one time Jazz was recognized as the only American original art form? (Nowadays, others claim there are other American art forms, but I demure.) Some have called it Black Classical Music. A question was posed on Quora: “Where did the idea that jazz is the only original American art form come from?” Answer by Ricky Schultz, former Record Label Executive, Producer and Consultant:
“Jazz has long been recognized around the world as America’s original art form, because it was created and formed here. A new musical language was forged. It’s elements of freedom, creativity and imagination are frequently associated with America and the American spirit. The 20th Century is often referred to as The American Century and The Jazz Age. Jazz was once the “pop” music of the land. The words “art form” have taken on a more fluid meaning so I won’t comment as to whether jazz is the only one. Jazz is also referred to as Freedom Music. Decades before the Civil Rights movement took hold, it was jazz musicians who began breaking down the barriers and planting the seeds of the 1960s [my bold].”
Maybe you know the meaning behind the famous, haunting Billie Holiday song “Strange Fruit”—it moves me every time I hear it. Perhaps you’ve heard/heard of Max Roach’s “Freedom Now Suite” from 1960? And perhaps you know that Thelonious Monk had his cabaret card taken away under dubious circumstances, which prevented him from playing live for a time in the ‘50s. Maybe you’re aware that the late Art Blakey had a steel plate in his head due to a severe beating he received by apparently racist cops.
In the movie Jerry Maguire, there’s a historical inaccuracy that I noted on first viewing. When the character (don’t recall his name) gives Cruise a cassette of jazz music (as a seduction tool), he comments about it containing the last concert of Miles Davis and John Coltrane playing together and it being from 1961 (’62?), when it was actually in 1960. Later in the bedroom scene with Rene Zellweger there’s an intro to a tune being played, upon which Cruise exclaims, “What is this sh*t!”, to which I actually said out loud (I was at a friend’s house watching it), “Are you kidding?; that’s Charles Mingus!” (the tune is “Haitian Fight Song”).
There’s a Dirty Harry movie in which Clint Eastwood walks into a black-owned barber shop with all black patrons, along with his rookie female officer/partner, with Eastwood replying to one man, “That’s mighty white of you.” Such a comment would NEVER pass today, and if modern day SJWs were to hear it, they might try to get the movie censored/censured. But it was a joke; and this was back when folks could make/take a joke, because many were not perpetually offended. While I don’t recall his name, there is one black actor who appeared in a number of Dirty Harry movies—a few times as a villain, and once as a police officer friend of Harry’s—because Eastwood liked the guy. Eastwood himself is a jazz fan, having directed Bird, the story of Charlie “Bird” Parker, as well as Straight, No Chaser, a documentary on the great Thelonious Monk. I recall my profound sadness when I went to see the latter as one of a relative handful of attendees. Doesn’t the larger public KNOW who Monk is?!
And maybe you’re familiar with the somewhat popular Donald Byrd jazz tune from ‘63 “Cristo Redentor”, which means Christ, the Redeemer? Jimmy Smith’s “The Sermon”? (My grandmother played the Hammond B3.) Or perhaps Lee Morgan’s “The Sidewinder”?
With the exception of the specific Ricky Schultz quote, all the foregoing was written off the top of my head. I posted the Hamid Drake video because I’ve long enjoyed his music and I saw him in a show in Austin, TX about ten years ago. Hands down it was the best performance I’ve ever attended. For the record, for the racially-sensitive, the quartet—headed by William Parker (hear O'Neal's Porch)—was three blacks and one white (somewhat ironically, the lone white is named Rob Brown). As I recall, all (or most all) attendees were white or Hispanic—to my disappointment. Though I watched the entire show intently, my focus was mostly on the amazing Drake, who had this perpetual smile as he played, seemingly effortlessly.
It truly saddens me that I’ve yet to meet any black who comes anywhere near my appreciation of Jazz (though there are obviously some out there). This is something to be proud of!
And you might be surprised to find out that my name is referenced in a biography of a black jazz artist. I found this out well after the book came out, and I’m not even exactly sure why I’m included, though I have an idea. In any case, I’m both honored and humbled that the author would have done so.
I’m offended that you would make an implicit claim that I’m racist against blacks merely because I didn’t reply to your earlier comment. Maybe you’ll walk back your comment now?
Albert Popwell co-starred alongside Clint Eastwood in five films, starting off as "Wonderful Digby" in Coogan's Bluff (1968). The next four occasions were entries in the highly popular "Dirty Harry" films, firstly as the wounded bank robber at the receiving end of Eastwood's now legendary, "Do you feel lucky, punk?" speech in the opening minutes of Dirty Harry (1971). He was back as a sadistic pimp who murders a greedy call girl with a can of drain cleaner and is later executed by a vigilante motorcycle cop in Magnum Force (1973), and he was still on the wrong side of the law as a "Black Power" activist named "Big Ed" Mustapha in The Enforcer (1976). For his final appearance alongside Eastwood, Popwell was on the right side of Clint for once as a fellow detective in Sudden Impact (1983).
Popwell passed away on April 9, 1999, from complications arising after major surgery.
This study that I downloaded from the U of M law department web site cites the following statistics for wrongful conviction for sexual assault:
Blacks accounted for 22 percent of convictions but 59 percent of exonerations for sexual assault.
The executive summary of the study states:
"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated. They constitute 47% of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in 'group exonerations.'
We see this racial disparity for all major crime categories, but we examine it in this report in the context of the three types of crime that produce the largest numbers of exonerations in the Registry: murder, sexual assault, and drug crimes."
Puppet-Masters no doubt looove race debating because it can go 'round-and-'round FOREVER.
IDEA: Let's acknowledge that racism is stupid on move on.
"After Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in 1968, school teacher Jane Elliott wanted to teach her third-grade class about racism. Rather than a lengthy discussion about it, she decided to show the 8-year-olds what racism is all about in a famous "experiment":
With King shot just the day before in Memphis, Elliott encouraged her third-graders to discuss how something so horrible could happen.
"I finally said, 'Do you kids have any idea how it feels to be something other than white in this country?' "
The children shook their heads and said they wanted to learn, so Elliott set the rules. Blue-eyed children must use a cup to drink from the fountain. Blue-eyed children must leave late to lunch and to recess. Blue-eyed children were not to speak to brown-eyed children. Blue-eyed children were troublemakers and slow learners.
Within 15 minutes, Elliott says, she observed her brown-eyed students morph into youthful supremacists and blue-eyed children become uncertain and intimidated.
Brown-eyed children "became domineering and arrogant and judgmental and cool," she says. "And smart! Smart! All of a sudden, disabled readers were reading. I thought, 'This is not possible, this is my imagination.' And I watched bright, blue-eyed kids become stupid and frightened and frustrated and angry and resentful and distrustful. It was absolutely the strangest thing I'd ever experienced."
No, I don't want to watch YouTube videos, but thank you for summarizing.
Only you and God know if you are racist or not. I never called you racist. I only called for compassion for black men who are falsely convicted.
Then I immediately noticed how much more controversial it was to talk about falsely convicted black men -- as opposed to falsely convicted "all men".
Let’s be clear: it was YOU who made this subject controversial. And, while you expect the readers here to view your comments in this regard—lest you get offended—YOU decline to read/view others’ contributions, by your own admission? Hypocrite.
No, you never outright called me racist, but you certainly implied it—as I’ve already stated. That is, unless you can explain how this means anything else:
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?...
…I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now [my bold].
And you’ve absolutely refused to acknowledge that I’ve brought up cases involving blacks falsely accused (Clarence Thomas, Brian Banks) in this very thread before you posted your inflamed, accusatory comments. That’s not to mention that I’d posted the case of false accuser Nikki Yovino, and by extension the falsely accused black man (or men) in that case, months ago—though maybe before you began reading here.
It’s been my experience that the one who makes the charge of racism, whether implicitly or explicitly, is usually the one who is the racist—most especially when the individual denies their implicit or explicit charge when challenged on it. If that shoe fits…
We all know that "all white people are racists," and that the entire Justice system in America is at war "against black people," right? We also know that when black people claim to be a "victim" of race, we should always believe them. Well, real life is a little more complicated than the ultra-radical, left wing loony bin fantasy "everyone is a victim" world they want to believe in.
Here's an "inconvenient" example that may lead thinking people to question what they are being told:
Here is the testimony of a President of a local chapter of the NAACP accusing this "racist" Cop of "PROFILING" him because he was "driving a nice car in a nice area." What he didn't realize is that his lies were about to be exposed due entirely to what Black people had been calling for ... Body Cams on Cops:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re30eyNKMuc
PS: Funny thing happened on the way to the installment of Body Cams ... the Cops are being proven over and over again to be innocent of these "police brutality," "unjustifiable use of force," etc. charges .... AND .... there's an awful lot of lying going on out there!
Do you have a comment on my 12:09 PM post? Or Anoymous's 12:33 PM post? I would prefer to have your responses to those entries before writing a response to your 1:00 PM post.
Given that your implicit charge of racism (unless you can illustrate how it's not) well-precedes these comments, I shall decline unless and until you acknowledge your charge.
You referenced experience with a housing project of apartments that allowed black people to move into a neighborhood you lived in, in the past. I just want to point out that when blacks own homes, they take care of their neighborhoods. Homeownership vs. renting makes a difference in how well people take care of their property and even in how invested they are in their own community. Renters tend to be more transient and to vote less and move around more. Their kids are more likely to go from school to school. Overall they are less invested in their community.
I'm sure that the law-abiding black people were the primary people harmed by their criminal neighbors.
I had an experience of living across the street from a rural rental area comprised of trailers and shacks. My parents got a deal on a horse property right across the street. They paid no interest on their mortgage due to a homesteaders program of some kind. So we lived across the street from these folks. The owner, RJ, kept them all drunk and took their welfare checks. They were mostly rural black people. Sometimes Hispanic people lived there very briefly.
In all the years I lived across the street from those folks, I never knew them to make my family or any white families a victim of their crime. They were quite violent with each other at times. Once a man had his eye stabbed out, and my father had to take him to the emergency room in the back of the car in the morning while I was waiting for the school bus. Once I sat up in a tree in the front yard and watched several men beat up a little boy while his mother screamed in the doorway. I never had anything happen to me other than one time a drunken man tried to grab the reins of my pony while I was riding in an empty field adjacent to the property. I easily evaded his grab and went my way.
I'm sure many innocent black people were victimized while living there. The little boy who was beat up by several grown men is an obvious example. The man who had an eye stabbed out is one more example. I'm sure I don't even know the half of it.
I had one more experience with black people that really stood out in my experience. My son attended a magnet school, an arts academy in a black neighborhood. He was in kindergarten at the time. Before he went there, I researched crime statistics and noted a high rate of theft but no violent crime. So he went there with about 25% white kids and the rest other races, mostly black.
All the children at that age are beautiful in their spirits. They are just kids, not angels, but they are not egotistical yet. They love to be helpful. They all accepted my son although he had autism and sometimes even kicked or hit them (very lightly because of his hyptonia -- and not in malice but from misunderstanding appropriate touch -- and enjoying the attention he received from acting out. It was a phase he got over after kindergarten.) The kids forgave him and hugged him. They pushed him on the swing, they took turns on the jumping stones and held his hand to help him. They engaged him in "zombie ring around the rosie" and "zombie tag" games. If he had any frustration about anything, from his shoes coming undone to opening a package, twenty kids jumped up eager to help him.
The kids touched my heart for their compassion to a white boy with autism and their eagerness to draw him out and get him to play with them.
Two things bothered me about the kids. One thing that bothered me was that their school went from a failing school to a successful school to a failing school again. What made the difference? Federal funds for after-school homework help.
The other thing that bothered me was how negative their environment was. They had 75% negative communication from adults and only about 25% positive. It was the most negative environment of all the schools I've been in. I've been in a lot. I was there and involved in the beginning a lot due to my child being functionally non-verbal at the time (with only me understanding his word approximations). So I know what all the environments were like. The mostly white schools gave the kids much more positive communication and a lot less negative communication.
I don't know how all the kids in the magnet school will turn out. But I know how they started life. They started life beautiful, bright and innocent in their minds and hearts.
Of course I've had many other more casual experiences, including working with blacks, some of whom were my friends and some who were not.
When I think of black people, I don't just think of one kind of person. After all, white people are not just one kind of person.
Yes, I do know of black people doing bad things. White people also do bad things.
When black people do bad things, it accrues to their individual sinfulness, not their collective blame. Isn't it he same for white people? If individual white people do racist acts, does that accrue to the collective blame and shame of white people? Or does it accrue to their individual sin?
We are all sinners. The world is a messed up place, with lots of man's inhumanity to man and woman, and woman's inhumanity to man and woman, and the inhumanity of both to children. Sinners come in all races.
To project more sin collectively onto a race of people is to scapegoat that people. What does God think of that? Would God look into the heart and prefer more individual humility about one's own sin?
Not too long ago, I had a 2+ hour, one on one conversation with a highly educated and successful Black man that is a business associate of mine. We had an honest discussion about race, which all began with his stated assumption that "the only reason whites opposed Obama was because of race," to which I responded that I opposed Obama because of his policies and that alone. This opened up an opportunity to share with him some of my experiences in life to which he was quite surprised to hear. Actually, he was stunned by what I had to say.
Here are just a few of the points that I made:
I informed him that unlike the Black community, Whites are not united, but in fact, are often severely divided along ethnic, social, political, religious and economic grounds. I told him that ethnic groups often hate each other and that all hate is as a result of "the fall" when sin entered into the world. I relayed a true story about when I was in high school and had an interest to date one of the Italian girls in my class. I was threatened that "I better not" by the Italian boys from the neighborhood. He was stunned to hear this. I also told him that the Whites that I have known in my lifetime do not talk about race and that I can honestly say that I have known VERY few actual "racists," but they tended to be the ignorant jerks that hate just about everyone. I emphatically stated that the vast majority of White people do not hate Black people, but fear the crime that is often associated with them moving into neighborhoods, to which he did not argue that point.
I also related a true story concerning my then future wife. We had discussed marriage, but were both going through very trying economic times during a very bad recession. To make a long story short, my future wife ended up briefly working, way below her abilities I might add, for her businessman uncle at commercial laundry that he owned. Among the 20+ workers, she was the only white girl, the rest were all Black. Her and a Black young single mother soon became very good friends and would always eat lunch together. One day, the Black girl told her that she "could no longer be friends with her" because the rest of the Black girls were putting too much pressure on her! That was the end of their friendship. Tragically, this girl soon died in an auto accident. We went to the wake and were the only Whites their aside from her uncle. To say that we were treated coldly is an understatement.
I gave my friend more illustrations ... One that really hit home. I said "if my wife and I went out to eat and at the next table the people were loud and vulgar, we would move." If they were White people, they would think nothing of it. However, if they were Black, they would probably immediately think we moved because we are "racists," and not because they were acting obnoxiously.
I also told him that I have known many Black people that I would love to have as neighbors, but also, many that I would not, and that it had nothing to do with the color of their skin. The same is true for White people. I've known many obnoxious types that I would not want living on my quiet street!
To make a long story short, my friend repeatedly stated that he had "never had a conversation like this" in his entire life! Quite a statement coming from a 60+ year old man.
The bottom line is this J: I agree with your recent posts. I am all about truth and refuse to be influenced by groups that seek to cause hate and division based upon misleading "studies," that all seem to have one goal in mind: advance hatred by entire groups of people towards other entire groups of people. The people that are behind a lot of this have an agenda, and it is often political, all too often they are the beneficiaries economically as well.
I have another story that I may choose to share with you ....
What a wonderful conversation! It's not often a black and white individual have a heart to heart conversation like that.
It's been my observation that rural and small-town whites in the Midwest don't mind international students coming into their small university towns, because the students are so quiet and polite.
I sympathize with your wife. I worked in a factory third shift with mostly black people. The two black women who worked next to me were never rude and never caused me problems -- but never, ever talked to me. One (younger) would speak to me if I spoke to her first. The other (older) would just look at me, and then the other one would talk. The younger one didn't resent me but didn't want anything to do with me. The older one seemed vaguely either distrustful or resentful. There was a wall up. I couldn't read her mind. It was embarrassing to me, because they worked circles around me, talking to each other the whole time. I tried to keep up.
My sister and I had a similar experience to yours wife's, RayB, when we lived near an Indian Reservation during our high school years. I, a white girl, would be ganged up on 7 to 1 by the Indian girls during dodge ball games in P.E. class (and not just there). They did everything short of really hurt you to take you out of the game, or make you feel their presence and want to leave. My sister befriended an Indian girl and they would hang out at lunch period but it didn't take long (after a few months) and the Indian girl called off their friendship because she was beaten up by other Indian girls for having a white girl friend. What I, and my sister, were glad to find out years later, was that particular Indian girl went on to get an education and left the reservation. She is a successful person in the supposed "white people's world" and still goes back to the reservation to participate in the festivals because she still loves the people and culture she was raised in.
Sorry, not my cup of tea. Of that group Ron White is the funniest. Not to mention Engvall goes further than necessary at the end, though I understand it’s not Christian comedy. I do like Foxworthy’s word redefinitions, though (like “initiate”, with a meaning akin to an’-then-she-ate). A while back I had an eye infection, with the doctor calling it blepharitiso—which I immediately recognized as from the Greek (the verb blepō)—and I responded, “shouldn’t that be called psoriasis” (sore-eye-asis)?
In the clip you reference, the slang use of awesome annoys me, frankly. What about the song “Our God Is An Awesome God”? #s 1 & 2 below reflect the meaning I prefer, as reflected in the Christian song. In fact, I recently posted a blog article in which I wrote “feelings of awe”, wondering if readers would understand the meaning, given the prevalent slang use of awesome.
adjective 1. causing or inducing awe; inspiring an overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration, or fear: an awesome sight. 2. exhibiting or marked by awe; showing reverence, admiration, or fear. 3. Slang. very impressive: That new white convertible is totally awesome.
Well, I found LTCG's FIRST Blue Collar Comedy Tour appearance great. After that, not consistently up to that standard. That being said, he certainly has his moments.
I think this is fascinating. Democrats are heavier on Ps. Republicans are heavier on Js. Democrats are slightly heavier on Fs. Republicans are slightly heavier on Ts.
Of course if you look at the breakdowns, what I'm describing is only a tendency. All the personality types have representation among Republicans, Democrats, middle-of-the-roaders and more categories.
Popes act like politicians, talk like politicians and create a "public" persona like politicians. They are also masters at the art of talking without really saying anything that has any real meaning or applicable substance.
Here's another example of more nonsensical gibberish from this pope ...
Although it may be uncomfortable to contemplate getting an upgraded blogspot please do so.
Although I am not Catholic by any means, I am tired, quite frankly, of the endless stream of posts by RayB on that particular topic. Tired too of the endless stream of lengthy academic posts between Susanna &/or Craig &/or J. Tired too of the super-lengthy stream of topic informational posts by Susanna. Tired too of J's post after post after post. (As one poster put it "Jsays Jsays Jsays Jsays Jsays".) You HAD an incomparably more severe such problem with MCE until you stepped in. All this is NOT AT ALL to say that Susanna, RayB, Craig and J DON'T make significant contributions to this blogspot, they MOST certainly DO! I, for one, like many of them. It's just that it's a Royal Pain I.T.A. to have to wade through all of that verbiage to see what else there might that I REALLY would like to see IF that current verbiage does not happen to be of interest. I do NOT suggest limiting them like you did MCE but INSTEAD upgrading your blogspot to be able to go DIRECTLY to BOTH authors AND topics IF one so desires! So you would KEEP the current stream format BUT ADD the ability to go to JUST topic or author! This is not about RayB, Susanna, Craig, or J, per se, NOR should it be construed as such, but about unnecessarily (with the currently available technology) having to wade through voluminous verbiage. One may be tired of a certain topic/author, let time go by during which they partake of others, then GO BACK to that topic or author. This way ALL are served better!
USA Today asked black feminist writer Ijeoma Oluo to write an article saying that she does not believe in due process for men who have been accused of sexual harrassment. She refused.
I'm not so much interested in her opinions in her article on Medium that I linked to. I'm interested in the fact that the editors at USA Today would ask a writer to write an article about a specific opinion -- and such a pernicious and divisive one at that. Advocating against due process!
(And this will be my last post in this thread Anonymous 11:43 AM. I will try to limit myself to just one or two posts per thread from now on.)
"I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent." Because of the violence involved you can charge a minor with murder and with theft and with battery why not charge with rape? Also, to in this case bypass the legal fiction (lies, idiocy) that would allow such horror to be done with impugnity. but this is NOT ABOUT A CRIMINAL TRIAL this is about vetting someone's character. IF he had been charged, convicted and punished back then, being a minor he would have no record of it now anyway. so this vetting would still have to happen. I AGREE SHE'S LYING ditto the rest, I'm addressing the issue raised. A distinction should be made between jail bait (physically mature but illegal) and pubescent or pre pubescent. statue of limitatins makes all "due process" you ignorant people demand impossible, in terms of criminal trial at least, most civil also out, but that is more likely true than not standard. Same as the investigation.
"The underlying message seems to be; if you're going to commit crime, do it against someone else other than Black people!"
you really don't get it. a lot of people don't mind oppression by their own family, tribe, race, nation but can't stand it from outsiders. This is against that and saying that a black person bleeds as much from damage by a black as by a white and freedom to be oppressed only by fellow blacks not whites is not freedom.
pubic hair on can of coke - that was NOT TO BE A TURN ON but an accusation she had done it to him as A MODE OF VOODOO love spell casting, that he might ingest it with the drink. he accused her of doing this as I recall, though of course he did it himself. Frankly, I don't recall any grabbing or groping or threats so I don't see that his alleged behavior was really horrible but it was really inappropriate.
The Kate Millet article - this is NOTHING like what original feminism was about. most in fact were demanding the same standard of chastity for men as well as for women, only one high profile type was into "free love" and even she eventually admitted that monogamy is how people would settle out after a time of experimentation. Most if not all were anti abortion or considered it a necessary evil and by product of abusive male supremacy society
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fanea5kcfg think new age ab used quantum physics and quantum mechanics? now the gay freaks are doing it Paul Joseph Watson describes and denounces this.
Anonymous posted to Constance @ 11:43 AM (in part):
Constance,
"Although it may be uncomfortable to contemplate getting an upgraded blogspot please do so."
"Although I am not Catholic by any means, I am tired, quite frankly, of the endless stream of posts by RayB on that particular topic."
Anon,
Although it may be "uncomfortable to contemplate" for you, the American Catholic Church is now under investigation by 13 STATES regarding their alleged role in the crimes of PEDOPHILIA, i.e., sexual abuse crimes against innocent children, along with the subsequent enabling of pedophilia criminals and the ensuing obstruction of justice by the RCC cover-ups.
The main stream media continues to play down this incredible scandal involving the lives of innocent children. The Papacy as well, mainly through the pope, continues their propaganda scheme of deflection and denial, along with an all out attack upon those that are attempting to righteously expose these crimes, such as Archbishop Vigano.
I feel genuine sorrow for you if you don't see the importance in exposing this criminal behavior that effects directly the lives of innocent children. What subject, may I ask, do you think should take precedence over this? Should we just ignore all this Anon because you are "tired" of it all?
On a side note, Anon, if you don't like the posts of myself, Susanna, Craig, J, Paul, etc., etc. why don't you just ignore those posts, instead of attempting to pigeon hole all of us into silence?
(And this will be my last post in this thread Anonymous 11:43 AM. I will try to limit myself to just one or two posts per thread from now on.)
J,
Don't allow an "Anonymous" to silence you. I may not always agree with you, but I have found your posts to be an intelligent, thoughtful contribution to this blog. If you have something to say ... say it! "Anonymous @ 11:43 AM is just one opinion, a disgruntled one at that!
Don't try to twist my post into what you try to make it.
It was making the case from a regular readersr perspective as to WHY Constance should actively pursue upgrading her blogspot.
THAT was the point.
You seem to like to have a chip on your shoulder and will manufacture a knocking off of it if necessary.
I was abundantly CLEAR on NOT limiting your postings but you totally ignored THAT. No, it HAS to be that I don't care about the awful crime of pedophilia.
Do you have a link to a web page that covers upgrading a Blogger blog? A search I did brought up nothing.
Is it possible that you could have upgrading Blogger, confused with migrating a blog to different platform (like WordPress)?
I don't think I've ever seen any blog that functions in the way you describe. Is it possible you are confusing blog comment threads with discussion boards?
I'm sorry; I don't know you at all, and I don't know how sophisticated you are about computer stuff. I've known many intelligent people to get easily confused about things like this. I hope I don't offend you.
If you take issue with anything I've said, the easiest way to dispel it to please just provide a link to examples of what you are talking about. Thanks.
I'm truly not trying to start something. I really just don't know what you are talking about. I used to make web pages for a living, and I know WordPress very well. I have limited experience with Blogger from years ago. So I'm just thinking if I don't know what you're talking about, then I wonder if Constance does, either.
That would mean exporting the archives and importing them into a new platform. It would also mean a new URL. The links in the sidebars would need to be re-created. Constance would need to learn the new platform. She would have to redirect them from this blog to the new one. There is quite a bit of time and hassle involved in all of this.
Michael Voris of the Church Militant emphatically states that the "establishment" Catholic news agencies are part of the RCC cover-up and cannot be trusted. These agencies refuse to report on anything that is remotely critical regarding the homosexual (mainly) fueled pedophilia scandal.
On a personal note, just one example ... I used to visit the site CNS News, until I noticed that it never reported on anything related to the numerous controversial statements by Pope Francis, along with a virtual news blackout on the clergy/pedophilia scandal.
This shouldn't be too surprising, when you consider that one of their mainstay contributors is none other than Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League, a $500,0000 (plus benefits) per year paid propagandist for the Catholic Church establishment. He is the same guy that immediately did a hit piece on the PA Grand Jury investigation, along with attacking AB Vigano's scathing 11 page indictment which ended by calling for the resignation of Pope Francis.
I don’t really know much about The Economist, but, just by its name, I’d assume it’s business-oriented, with a focus on economics. Yet I would be wrong. It looks to be just another social justice/political/anti-‘conservative’ rag. The article’s title, its subtitle, and the title of the chart as well as the statements that respondents were to respond with a ‘yay’ or a ‘nay’ in this chart accompanying the article are all set in loaded language—and just before the mid-term elections. And note that it’s split by gender and Trump vs. Hillary voters.
Victim blaming United States, % of adults agreeing
Now let me fix it:
After a year of #MeToo, American opinion has shifted against automatically believing accusers Survey respondents have become more skeptical about claims of sexual harassment
Trends in opinion United States, % of adults agreeing
The first query posits a bad dichotomy: “False accusations of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported assaults”. I don’t think anyone would suggest that one who has been victimized should not report the incident(s). How about “False accusations are increasing” (Y or N)?
The second one is just horribly worded: “Women who complain about sexual harassment cause more problems than they solve”. How about: “False claims can make it more difficult for real victims to come forward”.
The last one is a bit better: “Men who sexually harassed women 20 years ago should not lose their jobs today”; but, let’s change it to “Men who are accused of and and found guilty of sexual harassment of women 20 years ago should not lose their jobs today” (Y or N).
I have a friend in HR who outed two different false accusers at two different jobs! All he did was go by guidelines set forth by the government in investigating sexual harassment claims, forming them into individual questions. The first woman recanted (jilted lover seeking revenge). The second one’s claims could not be substantiated, and there was reasonable suspicion for her claims (plus, the accused, her boss, had a spotless record), so she was moved to another division within the company with a no-nonsense female superior. Shortly after she was transferred something else came up, casting more suspicion on her (and she quit six months later).
Check out #35 and its ramifications on Roe v Wade. Of course, this is a sample of known cases; how many others didn't go far enough along because they were dismissed as false before they ever gained any traction, because of recantings, and how many other falsely-accused men languish in prisons?
While these stories are somewhat interesting, I don't put much "faith" in them because already have infinitely better evidence that the account of David and Goliath actually occurred as a factual event. It's found in I Samuel chapter 17.
No amount of archeological proof will turn a true skeptic into a believer in Christ. The reason being is that people do not reject Christ due to a lack of evidence or for intellectual/philosophical reasons; they reject Him because they "love darkness, because their deeds are evil." John 3:19 All human beings are born skeptics, because their focus is on the only thing that ultimately counts to them; themselves. Christ demands to reign over them as Lord and King, which means, that they must give up their sins and follow Him. This is the precise reason why mankind is in a state of rebellion against God, and we all inherited it through the fall in the Garden.
The bottom line is that we don't need secular evidence to verify what we believe in. The Bible is all we need for all matters concerning doctrine and how we conduct ourselves in life, thru of course the gift of faith and grace as granted by God. Ephesians 2:8,9
Interesting post. Many years ago, when I was a young believer and single, my then girlfriend and future wife were attending a church in our area. After the service, it was customary for the younger adults to gather and just socially talk in an area that provided coffee, etc. I have never forgotten one of my experiences. As our group engaged in casual conversation, I began to talk with one of the young ladies that stood next to me. All of a sudden, completely out of nowhere, she loudly admonished me in front of the entire group that she "was married" and was "not interested in me!"
This happened without even a hint of any type of flirting, etc. on my part! Whatever the motive it was that moved this nutcase to act in the manner she did, I never found out. Perhaps she was attempting to "prove" to her husband (who was standing in the group) that he should be lucky to have her because there are a lot of other guys that wish they were in his place? Who knows? From that point on, I avoided her like the plague.
I had a similar incident like that happen one evening while shopping in a supermarket. That time, I didn't even talk to the woman. The husband approached me in the parking lot claiming that I "was trying to hit on his wife." He obviously recognized by my reaction that the charge was complete fiction. He meekly said "well, that's what she said" and walked away. I tend to doubt that the wife actually thought that her skinny little husband was going to come over and approach me, instead of just driving away with the thought that she was a real prize that should be appreciated!
The point to all this is that there are obviously women out there that are suffering from some type of deranged syndrome! Many of these women make completely fictional claims against men for a variety of reasons. Of course, some are credible, and that cannot be denied. But they ALL should not be believed simply because a woman is making the claim.
Her attempt at shifting the blame backfires. Since men routinely lose their jobs over allegations of this sort--whether proven true or not--then I sure hope this woman lost hers over her proven false allegation.
City of Atlanta reaches $1.2 Million settlement with former Atlanta Fire Chief who was fired for holding to his Christian convictions. Several years ago, the Chief had written a book detailing the Bible's teachings on marriage being between one man and one woman, along with a brief reference on Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. For this, he was eventually fired, which resulted in a lawsuit brought upon by Fire Chief Cochran. Atlanta city council voted to settle, with the Mayor's signature pretty much a sure thing.
The ramifications of this case is huge, and marks another pivotal defeat for the radical left regarding its quest to silence and destroy all Christian influence upon society.
Listen to Dr. Steve Turley's encouraging comments regarding this matter ... and more:
CHINA BROADENS ITS PROPAGANDA DRIVE TO HEARTLAND AMERICA
October 20, 2018
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — China's propaganda machine has taken aim at American soybean farmers as part of its high-stakes trade war with the Trump administration.
The publication of a four-page advertising section in the Des Moines Register has opened a new battle line in China's effort to break the administration's resolve. U.S. farmers are a key political constituency for Trump, and Beijing has imposed tariffs on American soybeans as retaliation for Trump's tariffs on hundreds of billions in Chinese imports.
China regularly disseminates propaganda in the West through its China Daily newspaper to try to influence public opinion. But the advertorial in the Register was unusual for deploying not a national publication in New York or Washington but a newspaper in the farm state of Iowa. --- Stanley Chao, a business consultant who has written a book called "Selling to China," said it's not entirely surprising that China would try to take its trade arguments directly to American farmers, whose crops have been hit by Beijing's retaliatory tariffs.
"This is the norm for the Chinese propaganda machine," Chao said.
Chao noted that when a Chinese dissident won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize — chosen by the Norwegian Nobel Committee and an embarrassment for Beijing — China responded by placing propaganda ads in Scandinavian newspapers.
In addition to its connection to the tariffs China imposed on American soybeans and other crops, Iowa is also home to Terry Branstad, a former governor of the state who is now the U.S. ambassador to Beijing. And in the past, President Xi has visited Iowa, whose caucuses serve as the first contest in every presidential election year.
Trump tweeted a photo of the "China Watch" edition that ran in the Register, calling it propaganda and asserting that Beijing was trying to interfere in U.S. elections...
The ever evolving luminescence of the Barbara Marx Hubbard The culmination of all knowledge, technology with the human is god! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RupWYbPYi0
Here's an outside-the-box idea to (eventually) put an end to all of the saber-rattling as well as to mutually highly benefit both of these particular countries:
See about whether the people (there and here) would like the peaceful, industrious, sovereign island of Taiwan to become the 51st state.
U.S. Justice Department has opened an investigation regarding the massive amount of sex abuse of children by Catholic clergy in Pennsylvania. This marks the first time that the Federal government has become involved in the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, and it could involve RICO violations, due to the conspiratorial nature in covering up these crimes.
With 13 states (and counting) currently running their own investigations, look for the Feds to expand into more states.
Church Militant provides their take on the Federal Prosecutors investigation of the PA dioceses. Also, be sure to watch the video that covers the "silencing" of a whistle-blower priest that was about to expose the "under reporting" of sex abuse within the diocese of Buffalo. A day before he was to go public, the priest suddenly "committed suicide" by allegedly shooting himself TWICE in the back of the head!
The people involved in Pedophilia are driven by their master Satan ... and they don't play around with anyone that seeks to end their evil pleasures!
This is not for the faint at heart ... Dr. Dave Janda and Greg Hunter discuss, at length (1hr., 43 minutes) the REAL problems of our debt driven economy, along with the machinations of the deep state. If you want to know the real situation we are in, how we got here and who "dunnit," this is a very good primer, all based on truthful information!
NJ Senator Cory Booker, probable candidate for the Democratic nomination for President, has been accused of sexual assault. The alleged victim is a liberal homosexual male that makes the serious charge that Booker assaulted him in a men's room back in 2014.
Booker was extremely nasty during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, staunchly claiming that "victims of sexual assault need to be believed." Well, Senator, now what do you have to say?
Hi Dan, it's interesting that Barbara Marx Hubbard caught your eye too! I posted the following observations a few months ago back in Constance' Pope Francis Earth Charter blog post comments:
---
FINDHORN Co-Creatives - David Spangler, Barbara Marx Hubbard
It's been quite some time since I posted in Constance' comments but after looking at Findhorn's website recently, I wanted to share a couple of the bizarre events that they've planned for later this year and are promoting quite enthusiastically. Findhorn seem to be returning to their fairy days in an attempt to push a new 'New' agenda forward.
- In October, David Spangler will be heading up a week long conference at Findhorn entitled. "Co-Creative Spirituality Shaping Our Future with the Unseen Worlds." Scheduled activities for the week include collaborating with the fairies (Sidhe), angelic realms, techno elementals and other beings!
Prior to David's week, Findhorn will be working with Barbara Marx Hubbard on 'The New Story' online video-conferencing teaching programme which will spread itself thinly over eight months. "... as part of our evolutionary new story, Homo sapiens is giving birth to a new species — Homo universalis (universal human) — a higher conception of humanity that co-evolves with nature, co-exists with high-tech genius, co-creates with spirit and leads with love."
http://newstoryhub.com/
Maybe Findhorn are trying to get folks hooked in to Global Ecovillage Network type projects, I do wonder, especially as Ken Wilber was speaking about 'Transformational Communities of Tomorrow' at Findhorn about a year ago. https://www.findhorn.org/programmes/transformational-communities-of-tomorrow/
https://ecovillage.org/. GEN is registered as an international charity in Scotland.
Interestingly, Lucis Trust mention GEN (amongst others) in their Newsletter 2016 #2 - Agents of the Future. https://www.lucistrust.org/world_goodwill/newsletter_2016_2_agents_of_the_future
The buzz word seems to be Co-Creatives / Co-Creation and I'm also noticing a subtle use of the lotus blossom in some logos and video graphics.
273 comments:
1 – 200 of 273 Newer› Newest»I have been praying for this family.
May God bless them in this battle and deliver them from the lies aimed at them.
“Rather ten innocent men go to jail
than one potential female victim hesitate to come forward.”
How To Spot Injustice: The real victim is always female - NJJ Episode 5
I really appreciate Janice Fiamengo!
Before going further, let me state that sexual assault is one of the most despicable crimes. I know someone who was victimized as a teenager, which sent her down some very dark paths. After much therapy, she’s no longer a victim. And, she doesn’t believe Ford’s testimony.
Many years ago while working part-time at a gas station as a 2nd job (back when there was an option for ‘full service’), a ~8-9 year old girl wandered in around 9:45PM or so, when it was totally dark—and there was very little light on that corner. I was working by myself, hadn’t had a customer in a while, and I was bewildered as to why this young girl was all alone (no cars were outside). Well, she had just been raped, and the sorry excuse for a human being that perpetrated this dropped her off just down the street. I was the first person she saw after the horrific encounter. She was abducted a few blocks over on a street perpendicular to where she was dropped off, at around 3PM while checking the family’s mailbox in an apartment complex. I often wonder how she’s doing now.
I go into ‘non-Christian’ mode when I think about these perpetrators.
I wanted the above to preface the rest of my comments, in order to put them in perspective.
I know a man whose own daughter suddenly ‘remembered’ that he molested her as an infant when undergoing therapy. (Mental illness runs on the maternal side of this family, I found out later.) When I met this man he was post-divorce, as his wife divorced him over these allegations. He was allowed supervised visits to his children, including the one he purportedly molested, and I even chaperoned once for him—they moved out of town, requiring I give up a large part of a day off. (His wife came up to me afterward, asking if he seemed to interact with the kids in an in/appropriate way.) Years later, the daughter was convinced it never happened, recanted the story (she had no real motive to falsely accuse him in the first place), leading us to believe that the therapist somehow ‘coaxed’ this ‘memory’ out of her. I wonder how often this happens.
About a year or so ago, a now-former neighbor was listening to what I recognized was a YouTube MGTOW channel, prompting me to begin a conversation with him. I later found out that he himself had been accused of perpetrating violence against a now-ex-girlfriend. He was in the process of clearing his name. Also, for a short time he had a married friend sleep on his couch. The man had 3 daughters, one of whom accused him of sexual assault. Thankfully, the police investigated quickly before making any formal charge, finding out that the daughter fabricated the story—for the investigators questioned some of the girl’s classmates, who admitted that she told them she was going to accuse him. Apparently, she thought he was too strict.
[cont]
[cont]
There was a somewhat recent case in which a father was on trial for sexually assaulting his barely teenaged daughter. As the defense attorney questioned the girl on the stand, he noticed her vocabulary seemed a bit advanced for her age, and immediately asked the judge if he would grant an early excusal that day so he could do some research. On a hunch, he bought Fifty Shades of Grey, finding that very verbiage in it! Armed with this information, the next day he questioned the girl, and she promptly broke down, admitting that she made the whole thing up, basing the accusations on portions of that book. As I recall, she thought her father was too strict with her.
In Dr. Helen Smith’s book Men on Strike is the following account:
I used to coach girls’ soccer with my fiancée (now wife). I stopped because one of the girls (all of 8 years old) said: “I don’t have to listen to you. I can get you in trouble just by telling people you touched me.”
Now that I have a child of my own, I have no idea how I’m going to be involved when he wants to do sports or other activities. I already got odd looks on the playground the year I was a stay-at-home dad and carting him around with me all the time
Many years ago I coached kids’ soccer. Over the past 25 or so years, I determined that I would NEVER coach or do anything with children ever again. One of my exes had children from a previous marriage, children of a different race, and obviously not my own (one of which is special needs). I really enjoyed taking these boys to the local park and playing with them. Give me a chance to act like a kid, and I’m all in! But, the looks I received gave me pause. I vowed never to put myself in a position where someone can falsely accuse me of something heinous.
------
“Better that ten guilty men walk free
than that one innocent man go to jail.”
This is a very powerful testimony by a Muslim immigrant whose father, a doctor, was, he strongly asserts, wrongly convicted:
"In Kavanaugh's eyes I saw my Father" #HimToo #WalkAway
Some comments accompanying this video:
Breezy Bear: I’m so sorry about what happened to your dad. I know men this has happened to (my brother) and luckily he was able to prove his innocence. You shouldn’t #believeallwomen bc they lie just as much as anyone else. Stay strong.
[cont]
[cont]
mimi11011: Yes #himtoo so many men are falsely accused. My boyfriend was accused of rape by his exgirlfriend who later confessed that she lied and was depressed. This is why evidence is so important for kavanaugh's matter before a precedent is set against the natural justice of due process.
Shannon Ramos: I am sorry for what you have been through. I saw my husband in Kavanaugh’s eyes. We still await justice which is only afforded to those with enough money to hire an attorney. Even then as a man you are immediately thought of as guilty and this goes against everything America stands for. I have you, your father and your family in my thoughts and prayers, because though we differ in religious beliefs we are connected by the love we have for what this nation stands for and the tragedy we must endure in order to move forward. It is people like you and I that can change this country. Keep your head up. We’ve been fighting since 2016 and soon we will sue the liar for smearing my husbands good name. I will think of you. God bless
Alan Wilmot: I am constantly moved by #walkaway videos, this one is particularly profound. Just know that I, a Christian pastor, and praying for your father's freedom and that he may regain his self esteem. To seek justice for the sexually abused is one thing. To do it by REMOVING justice from the accused is a crime. But that's what we've come to. That is why, more than ever, Brett Kavanaugh NEEDS to be on the Supreme Court. He can join Clarence Thomas as witnesses to what can happen when slander replaces evidence. It's a shame your father was railroaded, with the jury deliberating about a quarter hour to destroy him and your family. America needs to fear for her sons...
Interjection: “where slander replaces evidence” is a quotable phrase.
[cont]
[cont]
Andrew Thompson: As a male that has been sexually assaulted when younger, let me just say the #metoo movement has no place for men
Scott Gibbons: Men are sexually assaulted and lied about everyday. It happened to me in school several times. But if I said something about being attacked by girls in highschool I would be made fun of because it is not the manly thing to do, even though I wasn't a man but a boy who was raised different. People are evil it's not always men but also woman!
Responding to the above:
Alanda: YES! The new norm seems to be for "older" girls to prey on younger, naive boys! You are SO right! I have seen it and feel powerless to stop it, due to the bias in favor of the girls. A complaint is seen as ridiculous...tragic.
To this, I’ll add: Has anyone seen the very recent case of the 29 year old female teacher who had sex with a 14 year old male student, receiving only PROBATION while RETAINING HER TEACHING CERTIFICATE?! She must, however, register as a sex offender. Her attorney had this to say:
“There is a possibility that [Myers] could teach adults now or in the future and we want to preserve that possibility,” Stoll said. “She still is a talented teacher and has those skills, and I don’t see any reason to destroy her ability to make a living and to contribute to society in a positive way.”
One may wonder where this ‘social studies’ teacher’s particular talent and skills lie—but I digress.
This exemplifies our biased criminal courts which favor women, consistently giving them lighter sentences. Just imagine the outrage had the genders been reversed in this case.
I'm watching the media all over for coverage, and the journalism is mostly very poorly done. I already knew it was. But this Kavanaugh confirmation process is really showing poor journalism in sharp relief more than ever.
For instance, today CNN saw fit to fixate on this:
The obvious contradiction at the heart of Brett Kavanaugh's drinking defense
I tried to find reporting on the Mitchell memo and only came up with this. I believe this is called minimizing. It's reported once -- as minimally as possible and only for the sake of preventing loss of face -- and then no more. Notice how little detail there is. The full text of the memo is not even linked to.
J @ 8:41 PM,
The only good thing is that anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty can see that the media is completely biased in this regard. Hopefully, this will 'red-pill' some more people. But, it also well-illustrates that the media is a propaganda machine for leftists, further leading me to believe that we are inching ever closer to Christ's return.
Kavanaugh report could be finished tomorrow, FBI says
Basically, there isn’t much to investigate, as the Bureau had already investigated into alcohol or possible drug use, and they only go back to the 18th birthday. And, presumably, they already reviewed Kavanaugh’s and Ford’s Senate testimonies.
The following is 10 month’s old, but this man’s cause against the falsely accused—because he was falsely convicted and later vindicated—is appropriate:
Wrongfully Jailed For Rape As A Teen, He Now Helps Others Falsely Convicted | Megyn Kelly TODAY
Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. He’s joined on Megyn Kelly TODAY by Project director Justin Brooks and former prosecutor Loni Coombs, with whom he now examines other potentially wrongful convictions on the series “Final Appeal.”
Banks’ plea deal also exemplifies how broken our legal system is. Judges STRONGLY encourage plea deals, and most ordinary plebs don’t have the funds for a protracted criminal trial anyway. Thus, this innocent man was forced to accept a plea. Moreover, many jurors side with the woman accuser out of misguided empathy rather than impartially judging the merits of the case. Sad.
This is nothing short of malicious journalism:
USA Today: Kavanaugh Should ‘Stay Off Basketball Courts When Kids Are Around’
A Daily Kos blogger is being more fair than USA Today!
Wow. Just wow.
What if Kavanaugh is telling the truth? Let's consider that with reason and logic.
Thanks for the comments. I thought there were MANY holes in the Blasey-Ford testimony. I further believe that she may have been acting as a more naive and child-like personality than she actually is. She has too much education and career experience to sound that simple. I believe she may have been tossing the "hail Mary" pass for those who think Roe vs. Wade to be endangered.
Constance
Constance,
Yes, and her voice reminded me of my faking sick voice in my childhood, when I wanted my mother to let me stay home from school in the morning.
This guy most always puts out excellent content, with straightforward facts, in a calm manner. He's an Aussie; and, here's his take on the Kavanaugh issue:
Times Up!
Apparently times up for Brett Kavanaugh. I have a different take.
He has some interesting footage, aptly illustrating the frenzy of the-accused-man-is-guilty-if-it's-a-woman/girl-accusing-him ideology, i.e. he's guilty until proven innocent. The video contains images/footage I've not seen before.
Just a few thoughts on Brett Kavanaugh ...
First and foremost, I strongly believe that the entire Dr. Ford account of the alleged incident did not happen. There are far too many holes in her story.
Having said that, there are some items about Kavanaugh that I didn't like from the start. Kavanaugh is an insider that was well connected to the establishment throughout his career. This is something that cannot be denied. I had known that he was connected to the Ken Starr investigation (more like an establishment cover-up)into the Clintons, which also included a very bogus investigation into the alleged Vince Foster "suicide." Back then, Ambrose Evans Pritchard was an investigative reporter from Great Britain that covered the Foster case in particular, as did Christopher Ruddy for I believe the Pittsburg Gazzette. In short, the evidence in the Foster case is absolutely overwhelming that Foster was murdered, yet, in spite of the evidence, the Starr investigation concluded otherwise. And who was it that allegedly intimidated a key, Grand Jury witness (see link below) and ultimately wrote the bogus Starr Report on the Vince Foster murder ... I mean ... suicide? None other than Brett Kavanaugh!
There was a very big reason why Foster was murdered. What it was is left to speculation. Some credible people have speculated that Foster had become extremely disillusioned with the Clintons and was about to blow the whistle on the Clinton Crime Syndicate ... of which he was intimately aware of all the details. Who knows? The point is; it doesn't take long to research this "who dunnit?" case to realize that it could never have happened according to the Starr Report conclusions ... written by the establishment's own, Brett Kavanaugh.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sinister-battle-brett-kavanaugh-over-202425923.html
PS: the opposition to Kavanaugh has nothing to do with the USSC overturning Roe, or Gay "marriage." It is all about having judges interpret the Constitution according to the Globalist Agenda, which will lead to totalitarian Communism. In order to gain complete control, the elite need to remove our rights, including the right to bare arms. Back in his day, FDR (he was a Communist) attempted to "load the Court" with his radical leftists in order to get his Socialist programs approved as "Constitutional." This has been their tactic for decades.
One more quick note:
Don't forget the deciding vote that, unbelievably, declared Obamacare to be "Constitutional." It was none other than the Jesuit trained Chief Justice John Roberts! Roberts was the one that actually changed the wording of the legislation in order to justify his ludicrous decision to vote for it. Incidentally, Roberts, like Kavanaugh, had deep connections to the Bush family. You can't get more establishment than that.
RayB,
Those are very interesting points. I still don't want Kavanaugh to be stopped for the wrong reason. Maybe he should have been questioned about Vince Foster, not about drinking beer.
Christine Blasey Ford’s Ex-Boyfriend Told Senate Judiciary He Witnessed Her Coach A Friend On Polygraphs
In a sworn statement provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, a man who claims to be an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford says that he personally witnessed Ford coach a friend on how to take a polygraph exam. If true, it would mean Ford provided false testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week when she claimed she had never had any discussions with anyone about how to take a polygraph….
The ex-boyfriend also said in his statement that during their six-year-long romantic relationship, Ford never mentioned the alleged assault against her, Brett Kavanaugh, or a fear of flying.
I don’t know she could have been so quiet during her testimony with her pants ablaze.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-changing-memories-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/
Nolte: 28 Reasons Julie Swetnick’s Kavanugh Allegations Are Total Garbage
Twitter user ‘@millennialwoes’ (Colin Robertson) was deplatformed, banned on the social media site for stating an easily verifiable fact relating to race (as found on FBI and DOJ sites)—while, as we know, Sarah Jeong not only retained her account for stating overtly racist comments (e.g. “CancelWhitePeople”), her statements yet stand—due to selective application of their terms of service:
TWITTER: Destroyers of Intellectual Heresy #FreeWoes
This is cultural Marxism, in which people groups are dichotomized into supposed “oppressors” and “oppressed”, and, according to this ideology, it’s OK to oppress and suppress the speech of the so-called “oppressors”. This is now happening to Brett Kavanaugh, as some have brought up race in their criticisms of him and their demands that he step aside.
-----
These two minutes are fairly representative of Blasey Ford’s testimony.
Dear Constance, 2:44 A.M.
Re:…..I thought there were MANY holes in the Blasey-Ford testimony. I further believe that she may have been acting as a more naive and child-like personality than she actually is. She has too much education and career experience to sound that simple. I believe she may have been tossing the "hail Mary" pass for those who think Roe vs. Wade to be endangered.
I totally agree!
The following is a transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show and has to so with a vocal technique known as "uptalking." The video is no longer available, but I heard it during the Rush Limbaugh program and it sounded just like Blasey-Ford's "baby voice."
The Curious Case of Dr. Ford’s Uptalker Voice
Oct 2, 2018
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/10/02/the-curious-case-of-dr-fords-uptalker-voice/
____________________________________________________________
As for the Roe v. Wade issue...
Christine Blasey Ford Published Eight studies about “Abortion Pill” and Works for Company that Produces It
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/christine-blasey-ford-published-eight-studies-about-abortion-pill-and-worked-for-company-that-produces-it/
____________________________________________________________
I watched both the confirmation hearing and the second hearing involving Blasey - Ford and Judge Kavanaugh.
A former prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, who specializes in sex crimes was hired by the Senate Judiciary Committee to question Blasey-Ford.
I am not alone in thinking Rachel Mitchell was brilliant. I understood what her strategy was right from the start. She was criticized by some for asking what at first appeared to be "irrelevant" questions like the one that exposed Blasey-Ford's untruthfulness about being afraid to fly. Hardly "irrelevant" if one is challenging her credibility.
In fact,Democratic Senator Maize Hirono actually had to gall to criticize Rachel Mitchell for questioning Blasey-Ford in such a way as to place her credibility in doubt. HELLO MAIZE!!!
The real gem, however, which seemed to come up out of nowhere was whether or not Blasey-Ford ever coached anyone on taking a lie detector test - to which Blasey-Ford answered "No" under oath!
It turns out that one of Blasey - Ford's ex boyfriends said that Blasey-Ford had indeed coached a friend Monica McLean on how to take a lie detector test. McLean, who has denied being coached by Blasey-Ford on taking a polygraph test, had been interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney's office.
Christine Blasey Ford's ex-boyfriend says she coached friend on how to take a polygraph: Report
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/3/christine-blasey-fords-ex-boyfriend-says-she-coach/
________________________________________
cont.
cont.
The following is where the story of Blasey-Ford and Monica McLean gets REALLY interesting.....
Christine Blasey-Ford Friend In Delaware Was Career FBI Agent and Likely Together During Accusation Letter Construct…
Posted on October 3, 2018 by sundance
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-friend-in-delaware-was-career-fbi-agent-and-likely-together-during-accusation-letter-construct/
___________________________________________________________________
Christine Blasey Ford ex-boyfriend says she helped friend prep for potential polygraph; Grassley sounds alarm
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christine-blasey-ford-ex-boyfriend-says-she-helped-friend-prep-for-potential-polygraph-grassley-sounds-alarm
Here is a link to the ex-boyfriend's letter which is redacted and is dated October 2, 2018.
https://www.scribd.com/document/389992060/Declaration-Redacted-Ford-Friend#download&from_embed
______________________________________________________
Monica McLean: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/monica-mclean/
______________________________________________________
Grassley Says Ford is Withholding Evidence & Her Polygraph May Be Unreliable
https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/read-grassley-letter-ford-polygraph/
______________________________________________________
Interestingly, the ex boyfriend also reveals in his letter that the reason why he ended his relationship with Blasey-Ford was because he learned that she had been unfaithful to him while she was in Hawaii.
P.S.
It would appear from the following photo that Monica McLean was at the hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee with Blasey-Ford.
Retired FBI Agent/DOJ Lawyer Ms. Monica McLean Attended Kavanaugh Hearing With Blasey-Ford…
Posted on October 3, 2018 by sundance
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/03/retired-fbi-agent-doj-lawyer-ms-monica-mclean-attended-kavanaugh-hearing-with-blasey-ford/
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/monica-lee-mclean.jpg
Isn't it ironic that the greatest threat to the cause of protecting women from violence is other, lying women with an ax to grind
and a heavy dose of self righteousness.
Christine Blaze Ford should be tarred and feathered.
Paul,
I know you are venting, and as far as I am concerned, it is okay for you to vent away. What happened is enough to justify an angry response. (So I will not nitpick your comment, although I was tempted to ; )
That could have gone unsaid. (So I will not nitpick your comment, although I was tempted to ;) ). What the heck does that mean? So it's ok for him to vent...justify an angry response but then you'll hold back the nitpick? How "nice of you" since you are feeling so "gracious", Jsaid, Jsaid, Jsaid, Jsaid.......
Anonymous 12:13,
I'm sorry. You're right. It could have gone unsaid.
This speech by Senator Ben Sasse about the Kavanaugh confirmation is very good, because it is moral and not just political.
Susanna,
With so many discrediting facts readily available on the internet, the MSM should be losing face right now for not reporting on most of them.
I think they know they can get away with it because so many people don't really care if the process is fair to Brett Kavanaugh.
So many people just want to block Trump's appointment of another Supreme Court justice until after the mid-terms.
Many people really don't care if an innocent man is destroyed.
Many people also really don't care if an innocent women is abused. They only seek to weaponize abuse for political battles.
In all of this simple morality gets lost. And so does simple truth.
Once upon a time Atticus Finch (To Kill a Mockingbird) would have been honored by the democrat party. Today Atticus Finch would fall victim to the left’s lynch mob.
Should we apply the left’s standards as they demanded of us last week this innocent man would not have been freed.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/nyregion/innocence-project-manhattan-rape.html
But the left’s repeated mantra regarding Kavanaugh is “this is not a trial, it’s a job interview”. The mantra originated from United States Senator Feinstein, a legislator, sworn to uphold the US Constitution; yet she exhibits such little regard for it. This hasn’t gone unnoticed by the American people.
The media is now bewildered. Recent polls show democrats’ leads in the mid-term elections has evaporated. Do Americans’ appetites crave a path which rejects the presumption of innocence, a core foundation of our Constitutional republic? Last week the left demanded from us that we shut up and believe.
As the cases against Kavanaugh crumbled from lack of evidence, corroboration and credibility, the left shifted strategy. Confirmation is now about temperament; it is about ice cubes; it is about an FBI cover up. They are outraged over Kavanaugh’s outrage that he would have to defend himself against accusations of the felony crime of rape. Had he presented himself in a meek and mild manner during the hearing he would have been pronounced guilty for not exhibiting outrage. He was to be damned either way.
Now, the left must prop up Ford as her high school best friend, under penalty of perjury, states she has no recollection of Ford ever mentioning this alleged sexual assault. The argument is this doesn’t impeach Ford’s claims, she simply doesn’t remember. Has the left has abandoned rational thought? I deeply cared about my high school friends. I loved one as though she was a sister. I still do. If she had ever even hinted she had been assault I sure as hell would remember!
Has the left even considered what impact this smear campaign will have upon the legitimate reporting of sexual assault and victim advocacy?
“But this is a job interview”, right? I’ve read a piece which astutely describes this sleight of hand: “Democrats and the media have simultaneously applied two separate standards by suggesting Kavanaugh may have committed a crime, which would entitle him to due process, but insisting that he’s not on trial, which is intended to deny him any presumed innocence.”
This sleight of hand which has manifested in a mob-rule mentality is fascism on full display. It is an instrument which allows the left to continue down the path of fascism with a clear conscience.
I'm going to introduce a complication into this, like RayB did. I absolutely don't want to see the destruction of an innocent man's reputation by false allegations.
But Kavanaugh the non-rapist may not be the most strict constitutionalist after all.
I am open to arguments otherwise.
Watch this video of Judge Andrew Napolitano talking, and see what you think. (Judge Andrew Napolitano: Brett Kavanaugh and the Patriot Act)
Anonymous 2:10 PM,
I think we must have been typing at the same time. I didn't mean to breeze right past your remark. I absolutely agree with everything you said. Very well put.
J,
As is typical, in order to get to the truth, you always have to scratch and dig below the surface, which of course takes time and effort.
There is a lot out there on Kavanaugh that continues to illustrate his deep connection to the Establishment. Is he better than the out and out liberals on the court? YES. Is he as good as Amy Coney Barret? NO. Not even close!
I wasn't aware of Kavanaugh's connection to the EXTREMELY un-Constitutional Patriot Act, a fact that is an unfortunate precursor as to how he will probably vote in the future.
When it comes to the Establishment, they reach their goals by being patient and through stealth. Many fail to consider that some of the very worst USSC Justices were appointed by GOP Presidents. For example, at a time when a pro-life Justice would have tipped the balance on Roe, Reagan appointed none other than Sandra Day O'Connor, who happened to have had a history of being pro-abortion, a position she held during her entire time on the Court.
Thanks for posting your video ... I very much respect Judge Napolitano.
J,
According to a March 2017 report in Politico, Judge Andrew Napolitano told friends that President Donald Trump told him he was considering Napolitano for a United States Supreme Court appointment should there be a second vacancy. Ultimately, Judge Brett Kavanaugh was chosen instead.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/andrew-napolitano-supreme-court-shortlist-trump-236488
__________________________________________________________
Perhaps this is one of the main reasons why Judge Napolitano isn't exactly gung ho on the Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS nomination.
Napolitano also claims that Kavanaugh is an "enemy" of the 4th Amendment. I did a little digging because I wanted to learn more.
The following is from the SCOTUS Blog which included the Kavanaugh opinion which has drawn the most attention - namely, Klayman v. Obama.
Judge Kavanaugh on the Fourth Amendment
Orin S. Kerr is the Frances R. and John J. Duggan Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Southern California Gould School of Law.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/judge-kavanaugh-on-the-fourth-amendment/
___________________________________________________________________________
A potential future USSC ruling on Trump's doing away with the un-Constitutional Obamacare Mandate could very well be in jeopardy. Why? Because we already know where the turncoat Chief Justice John Roberts stands. But what about Brett Kavanaugh? Where does he stand?
Check this out:
Here’s a summary of Judge Kavanaugh’s take on Obamacare, written by Christopher Jacobs of The Federalist:
"In Kavanaugh’s view, the mandate could fit "comfortably within Congress’ constitutional powers,” Even as he ‘do[es] not take a position here on whether the statute as currently written is justifiable,’ Kavanaugh concludes that ‘the only potential Taxing Clause shortcoming in the current individual mandate provision appears to be relatively slight."
"Read that again, America: Brett Kavanaugh, the man Donald Trump wants to appoint to the Supreme Court, wrote in a judicial holding that the constitutional shortcomings of the individual mandate of Obamacare are “relatively slight.”
Drip, drip, drip ....
This is all starting to add up to a lot of water! Here's what we have so far:
Kavanaugh wrote the bogus 58 page Starr Investigation Report that declared, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Vince Foster was NOT murdered, but committed "suicide."
As a young, Bush Administration attorney, Kavanaugh helped write the overtly un-Constitutional Patriot Act.
The "man" that Kavanaugh worked for:
Although George W. Bush campaigned as a "fiscal conservative," he went on to double the nation's deficit in 8 years. Bush also campaigned against "nation building" yet, his administration manipulated 9/11 evidence in such a way as to falsely "justify" the nation building disasters of the Iraq & Afghanistan wars (17 years and still counting). Further taking advantage of the 9/11 paranoia, Bush then went on to introduce and sign into law the nefarious, totalitarian Patriot Act. Bush then went on to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus, through Executive Order (the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012), which authorizes INDEFINITE incarceration without trial of anyone (including American citizens), that are "suspected" of having "connections" to "terrorists."
At the risk of stating the dramatic, the Nazis had laws such as these. Many do not realize that the Nazi Government never annulled their Weimar Republic constitution (modeled after our own), but used Nazi appointed judges that were used in their "People's Court" to unjustly prosecute German citizens in their show trials. All done under the appearance of law and order in order to fool the citizenry!
Susanna,
Thanks for the link to the legal blog. Do you have an opinion or conclusion after reading it? I had a difficult time focusing on it. I will need to try to read it again in maybe a few days and see if I can concentrate better on it.
RayB,
Time will tell. It looks like he's just about got it. We can only watch what he does now.
I think some of these matters you bring out should have been reported and questioned more. But now it's too late.
I usually don't get so distracted by political theatre to the exclusion of all else. It was pretty intense this time.
Paul Craig Roberts writes about the attacks by crazed feminists upon the "white heterosexual male." Very interesting ... and true!
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-05/paul-craig-roberts-white-heterosexual-male-has-been-renditioned-punishment-hole
Camille Paglia: The Collapse of Culture
Paglia on androgyny [from Greek andros + gynē = man-woman]: “The more I explored it, the more I realized that this movement towards androgyny occurs in late phases of culture, as a civilization is starting to unravel.” Of course, this only followed the advent of third-wave feminism; i.e., feminism was its precursor.
Comment by Luke Reid: We are witnessing the slow death of Western civilisation. Islam is massing on the periphery and the cultural Maxists, relativists, feminists and regressives are all throwing open the doors to our eventual destruction. It's been a long time coming - probably since the end of the First World War and the rise of individualism and hedonism. The really nasty destructive effort came in with the sexual revolution of the 60s and the dismantling of traditional values. Now things have totally gone to shit.
Here are other excerpts from the larger talk from which the first excerpt in the above vlog was taken. She makes some excellent points, though I don’t agree with her en toto:
Camille Paglia Explains Why Feminism Is The Collapse Of Western Civilization – MGTOW
On one level this is hilarious, but on another it’s quite disturbing.
What an Audacious Hoax Reveals About Academia: Three scholars wrote 20 fake papers using fashionable jargon to argue for ridiculous conclusions.
An excerpt:
The paper that was published in Gender, Place and Culture seems downright silly. “Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon” claims to be based on in situ observation of canine rape culture in a Portland dog park. “Do dogs suffer oppression based upon (perceived) gender?” the paper asks.
Yep, I can smell the toast burning.
J,
Fer sure, that blog is not an easy read.
The 4th Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and siezures - the key word being "unreasonable."
I am still in the process of learning more, but after reading the legal blog I linked you to, I got the impression that Judge Kavanaugh has tried to maintain the proper balance between individual privacy and the legitimate intelligence gathering activities needed to maintain national security.
In that context, you might find the following article of interest.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kavanaugh-confirmation-fourth-amendment/
Susanna,
Thank you. I will have to hope it's true he will try to maintain a balance, although the very concept of "balance" seems already too weak to me, intuitively. If balance is off, how does an individual restore it? If the state pushes the balance too far to their side, what can an individual do in response? I see that as the primary problem.
But I will read and hope.
RayB 8:19 AM,
White males are being verbally and emotionally abused in academic culture.
When emotional abuse happens, some of the implicit or explicit messages are:
"My feelings matter. Yours don't."
"My perspective matters. Yours doesn't."
"My opinion matters. Yours doesn't."
"Your abuse is your own fault."
"If you stand up for yourself, you will be punished."
"You are what I say you are."
"You think what I say you think."
"You said what I said you said."
"You did what I said you did."
"You never measure up to expectations."
"I am always mad at you because there is something wrong with you."
"The best you can do is to be on probation all the time."
I forgot to add economic abuse, which makes all the verbal and emotional abuse so much more difficult to stand up to.
Who has most power to enforce economic abuse? It is other white, heterosexual males.
I have to wonder, why do they do it?
If they did not do it, what would they need to give up?
Would they need to stop endorsing Marxism -- the kind of soft Marxism where there is no individual equality in a legal, moral and social sense? Where it is mob vs. mob? Where a historically underdog mob is justified into doing anything to a historically more powerful mob? And it is just a form of soft revolution, at least socially and culturally?
It seems so many men are willing to give something up so that they don't have to give up on the above ideas? Why?
In hard Marxist, communist countries, if a dissident is caught and he knows he will be killed, he has been known to thank the state for teaching him better and for punishing him.
Janice Fiamengo on Ford, providing some information I didn’t know and info I’d not considered before:
To Understand Christine Blasey Ford, Take a look at Palo Alto University
I found this interesting interview by Charlie Rose of Paglia from ’92. After the intro, the discussion centers on her view of Anita Hill (until about the 4 minute mark, though it picks up again @ around 9 mins)—a view I applaud. I found the entire interview of interest, though, of course, I disagree with a number of her ideas. Since I’d only found out about her recently, I was taken aback by her brazen, cocky self-promotion—something I’ve not heard in any of her more recent videos. In any case, her views on Anita Hill I do believe haven’t changed, and they are apropos to the Kavanaugh circus. Note that there is about a 2.5 minute gap between the 1st and 2nd parts of the interview (2nd part starts @ 14:38):
Camille Paglia 1992 interview
It’s great Kavanaugh was confirmed, but this was a very close call. And I’m sure the repercussions will be felt for a while.
Watching those anarchic mobs, I can say with some certainty that you are watching the New Age activists teamed up with their free-thinker friends in "Revolution execution."
If anybody remembers seeing the elevator encounter the other day beetween Senator Flake and the "rape victim" who demanded he look at her, SHE was interviewed on CNN today. She was neatly and professionally groomed. It turns out she is a professional community organizer holding a major leadership role in the Movement. She ducked the question of whether she was a paid demonstrator by saying in effect that she held a professional job in the Movement.
But for today, I'm grateful for your prayers on this. As SW Radio Church's David Webber used to announce in the 1980s: GOD IS STILL ON HIS THRONE AND PRAYER CHANGES THINGS!
Constance
Innocent till proven guilty but not on trial is NOT sleight of hand. that concept is for criminal court trial, and a lower standard of evidence is for civil. This is a matter of making a hiring, social, or whatever judgement where better safe thqan sorry is the issue. Would you demand innocent till proven guilty, face accusers and beyond a reasonable standard of doubt before you wouldn't pouot you kid in the case of someone with a dubious reputation? STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS MAKES "DUE PROCESS" IMPOSSSIBLE ANYWAY.
Zech. 12:10 the correct part is not they look on Him, that is fulfilled, but mourning for Him in classical sex separated style and specific family groups mentioned. Unless this is about converstion of Jews after the Resurrection before the gentiles came in en masse, this has yet to happen.
J, "The Christian church was grafted onto the geographical nation of Israel? " the ethnos of Israel only some are in the geographic Israel.
"Or believing gentiles were grafted onto the believing Jews, ...?"
A careful reading DOES NOT reveal that the root is God, that is a DIFFERENT analogy Jesus uses in John. Paul says the root Israel bears us we are grafted in among the branches of that root, and can be cut out again if not careful. grafting attached branches onto branches from a now shared root the plant itself.
"Boast not against the root for the root bears you." How would antisemitic Christians be boasting against God? "THEY ARE BELOVED FOR THE FATHERS' SAKE, BUT ENEMIES FOR THE GOSPEL'S SAKE." God has not rejected His people but INCLUDED us like the mixed multitude sort of that came out of Egypt with them. The outrageous population count shows adoption into various tribes. Adoption as good as blood or David would never have been king or even an Israelite BECAUSE LESS THAN 10 GENERATIONS FROM mOABITE BLOOD, last several verses Ruth "a son is born to Ruth" becomes "a son is born to Naomi" after she lets the kid pointlessly suckle her dry breast. a ritual adoption action. THIS IS WHY THE KHAZAR THEORY IS IRRELEVANT ALSO.
empathy is not remorese or conscience or caring. the confusion lies with those who think that feeling another's emotions (which can be delusional also) means you would give a damn. you wouldn't unless you had sympathy, pity, compassion, etc.
LOOK AT THAT LIST AGAIN, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? "identify another person’s emotions and thoughts,"
"analyse the variables in a [person], to derive the underlying rules that govern the behaviour of a [person]"
and to respond to these with an appropriate emotion." you respond apprpriately? sounds like an act.
" Empathising allows you to predict a person’s behaviour,'
"Systemising allows you to predict the behaviour of a system, [or person]"
EMPATHIZING DOES NOT MAKE YOU CARE ABOUT OTHER'S FEELINGS ONLY IDENTIFY THEM. caring is another matter entirely. BUT IF YOU RESPOND "APPROPRIATELY" YOU HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON THEM AND CAN DIRECT THEM BECAUSE THEY TRUST YOU. or are flattered by you.
systematizing alllows you " to control it."
so does empathizing, you figure what they feel you can lead them.
the psychopath and similars notice closely what your reactions and feelings are - to EXPLOIT THEM, or to enjoy them if they are painful and the observer is a sadist.
As for constantly posting on certain subjects those posts were all in response to others who were either lying or foolish or both and harassed me in packs.
paul, she didn't say she couldn't remember how she got in the room, she said she was PUSHED in when she went towards the bathroom across from it. I agree she's lying or so demented by some event that she is not reliable. prior sex activity has no bearing. if she didn't want it from THEM or at that time, she didn't want it.
ROGER STONE: KAVANAUGH LYNCHING A PAID DIRTY TRICK FROM SOROS
Kavanaugh opposition backed by globalist billionaire, not grassroots activism
Roger Stone | OCTOBER 6, 2018
If you think I am an experienced Dirty Trickster, then here is one of the dirtiest tricks of all time.
The rule of law, indeed our adherence to bed-rock principles of the law and the Constitution where an unprecedented smear campaign based on false vague charges without any corroboration, eyewitnesses, or proof. All those people named in Dr. Ford’s testimony deny her claims. Yet all this is disregarded in an Alinsky-type lynching in which full-throated demands to reject Kavanaugh by roving bands of kamikaze feminist terrorists stalk reporters and elected officials.
This jacked up rabbles disruption of Senator Susanne Collins’ announcement on the floor of the US Senate and their shouting down of Senator Joe Manchin are parts of an organized paid-for assault. These are the seeds of anarchy or more importantly, globalist control by the man financing this fraud against the American people and seeking to snatch our Constitutional Liberties.
The whole thing is bullshit, but now the mainstream media and their hand maidens in the Democratic Party are providing the air support to roving bands of thugs trying to disturb the coming confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh.
Those who follow me on Infowars and read the Stone Cold Truth, know that Judge Kavanaugh was not my first choice for this appointment (https://stonecoldtruth.com/stone-suggests-trump-take-sen-mike-lee-for-scotus) and that I had grave concerns about his attitude towards the 4th Amendment. But I also said at the time that I would support whoever President Trump appointed, because whoever it was, would be superior to whoever Hillary Clinton would have appointed.
But what we are seeing here is the lynching of Judge Kavanaugh and that cannot be allowed. Their charges are baseless. They shout down those who disagree. It’s guerrilla tactics. It’s well-funded astro-turf.
Their demand for an FBI report was just a delay tactic. Dianne Feinstein did not want it released. Then she did, demanding to know why it hadn’t been released. Having come up empty-handed in the report, the Schumer-Feinstein-Blumenthal-Hirono freakshow said it was inadequate.
In fact, it must be difficult for the FBI to investigate an event for which no one can identify a year, date, time, or place. Senators who have read the report including Democrats said there was no evidence of Dr. Ford’s charges or any other evidence of sexual impropriety or assault by Judge Brett Kavanaugh. There is no “cover up” as some Democrats now scream.
Yet in the streets it lends legitimacy to the screaming hordes of protestors and paid hit-squads of bleached-hair raging activists demanding Kavanaugh’s rejection without due process or regards to the facts. Instead they brand him a “gang rapist”. People actually desecrate the man’s home with spray paint, while throwing rocks through windows – on the basis of nothing.
Make no mistake about it, they have similar lynching of President Donald Trump in mind. In fact, we are seeing the dress rehearsal for their planned take down of the President. This is their dry run. We have the blueprint. We see their game plan. Should Democrats win the House, they will vote articles of impeachment in the House, to create a trial in the US Senate in which the same discredited women who attempted to surface in 2016 but could never provide credible proof or evidence of their claims of sexual harassment against Donald Trump will be paraded before the world’s cameras to recycle their vague claims. They have no corroboration, witnesses or proof, but the screaming hordes and their leftist media allies like MSNBC and CNN (and increasingly FOX), will demand they be believed simply because they are women.
That is why the left is so hysterical. We now see their M.O. It’s their dress rehearsal. If they take down Kavanaugh, Donald J. Trump is next on the hit list, on baseless claims from alleged female victims.
Today their use of zombie like talking points like “this is not a job interview,” “there is no presumption of influence in a job interview” and the very clever “look me in the eyes when I talk to you,” are textbook Alinsky tactics to perpetuate this smear. This is the paid-for political theater of billionaire George Soros. This is not some grass roots insurrection, this is manipulation of the facts and the use of guerrilla tactics to topple the US Constitution and rule of Law.
According to a study by the Media Research Center, left wing billionaire George Soros is funding the anti-Kavanaugh protests. Soros has a history of meddling in American and foreign politics. He is underwriting this fraud upon the American people. This is agit-prop paid for political thuggery courtesy of Nazi collaborator George Soros.
In 1992 the British government was propping up the pound sterling and Soros and his associates acquired millions of pounds and then shorted the currency betting that its worth would decrease. Sure enough Prime Minister John Major withdrew the pound from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) and the pound plummeted. Soros made more than $1 billion. Elderly retirees on fixed income had their saving wiped out and their pensions diminished. For that Soros became known as the “man who broke the Bank of England.” In 2002 Soros was convicted and fined for insider trading in France.
More recently Soros met with House Dem leader Nancy Pelosi, Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren and others to discuss strategies to combat President–elect Trump’s “terrifying assault on President Obama’s achievements.” In fact, Soros spent more than $25 million on Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016. In 2004 Soros spent $27 million to defeat George Bush. Currently Soros has invested more than $246 million in groups that are behind the anti-Kavanaugh movement. Women’s March is in the forefront in organizing opposition to Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Women’s March counts Planned Parenthood and the Natural Resource Defense Council as partners and both groups are associated with George Soros.
According to the Media Research Center, 100 of the 544 Women’s March partners have received a total of $246,637,217 from Soros. Both Planned Parenthood and the Natural Resource Defense Council are among those partners. Soros is within his rights to spend his money on whomever he wants.
Another anti-Kavanaugh group appeared in May 2018 calling themselves Demand Justice. According to the list of trade names on file with the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Demand Justice was organized by a fiscal sponsor called the Sixteen Thirty Fund. Tax filings from Soros’ Open Society Policy Center reveal that the Sixteen Thirty Fund is funded by Soros Open Society Policy Center.
There’s more.
Demand Justice pledges to spend $5 million to stop Kavanaugh from being appointed. The group is run by Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer’s aide Brian Fallon. Fallon is Hillary Clinton’s former campaign press secretary.
Whatever one thinks about George Soros and his political agenda think about the kind of man that would profit from the deaths of Hungarians during the Nazi occupation of Hungary. In a 1998 interview with CBS’ Steve Kroft, Soros admitted that he participated in the confiscation of Jewish property with the Nazis. The following is a transcription of that part of the interview.
Steve Kroft: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson. Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
George Soros: Yes. That’s right. Yes.
Steve Kroft: Was it difficult?
George Soros: No, not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t–you don’t see the connection. But it created no problem at all.
Incredibly, CNN talking heads tried to discredit the charges from Infowars that George Soros was a Nazi collaborator, refusing to recognize the well-reported TV interview by CBS reporter Steve Kroft and Infowars’ accurate reporting.”
https://www.infowars.com/kavanaugh-lynching-a-paid-dirty-trick-from-soros/
Below is a link to a detailed, confidential, lengthy memo on the plan for "fighting Trump," written by the George Soros funded David Brock. Very revealing!
https://archive.org/stream/DavidBrockMemoTrump/scribd-download.com_full-david-brock-confidential-memo-on-fighting-trump_djvu.txt
For those who heard or read Collins’ well-reasoned—and most excellently-timed (for maximum viewership)—speech, can you spot the straw man just in the title (let alone the contents)?
Susan Collins Says She Believes Survivors—Just Not Ford: The Maine senator called Christine Blasey Ford a “survivor," but her decision to vote for Kavanaugh is based on her ultimate rejection of Ford’s account.
by David A. Graham | Oct 5, 2018
…Collins’s rhetoric pushes her into a difficult position. On the one hand, she wants to grant Ford respect and dignity as a “survivor,” as Collins called her. At the same time, her decision to vote for Kavanaugh is based on her ultimate rejection of Ford’s account.
Collins, like many other Republican senators, has tried to reconcile this conflict by saying that she believes Ford was assaulted, simply not by Kavanaugh.
First, let’s look at the title: believing that someone is a “survivor” of sexual assault does not necessarily entail believing the entire account of the assault as told by the survivor. And, unless I missed it, I don’t think Collins has stated that a condition of ‘believing survivors’ means one has to believe the account of the assault as told by the survivor in full—inconsistencies, conflicting testimony, and all. Evidence and corroboration are necessary components of any trial or hearing.
Rachel Mitchell’s words are important here: ”‘he said she said’ cases are tough to prove. This case is even weaker than that”. And as the author of the piece here stated, Collins even accepted a lesser burden than had this been a criminal trial, and here are her specific words: This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of ‘more likely than not’ as our standard. Yet, with Ford’s own chosen witnesses to the alleged assault unable to corroborate her account, and gaps in Ford’s recollections of it, Collins found, rightly, that the allegations did not even meet this lesser burden.
To be more specific, Collins did not say she outright rejected Ford’s account (contra Graham above), nor did she state that Ford was not assaulted by Kavanaugh. The senator made no claims at all regarding whether or not she thought Kavanaugh assaulted Ford. Collins stated that she found Ford’s testimony “sincere, painful, and compelling”, and, further, that she “believe[s] that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life.” However, it is her very next statement that needs to be added to understand her here: “Nevertheless, the four witnesses she named could not corroborate any of the events of that evening, gathering where she says the assault occurred. None of the individuals Professor Ford says were at the party has any recollection at all of that night.”
[cont]
[cont]
We mustn’t assume some sort of contradiction here, we must, instead, seek to reconcile the senator’s words—which really isn’t that darn hard. Analyzing Collins here, in short: an assault really did occur, but Ford cannot recall the events (who was there—her best friend, who cannot even corroborate this claim, e.g.—when, where, etc.) in sufficient detail to support her specific allegation. This even leaves open the possibility that it was Kavanaugh [to be clear, I’m not saying I or Collins believes that], though Collins did defend his record—a record which she finds exemplary.
Yet, Collins was very clear that due process, to include the presumption of innocence, should be afforded to the accused; and, given that Kavanaugh cannot be found to be guilty of Ford’s allegations using a “more likely than not” burden, and that Kavanaugh vehemently denies the charges, then the presumption of innocence must prevail.
Amen to that!
The bottom line is that Graham’s charge that “Collins’s rhetoric pushes her into a difficult position” is completely unfounded, and he’s erected a straw man in his overall statement, perhaps to further a political agenda. In the title itself, the author juxtaposes Collins’ position that she Believes Survivors with her belief that Ford is a ”survivor” in such a manner as to imply that the senator is being oxymoronic with her overall statement. No, it’s Graham who’s being moronic. One can believe an assault took place while rejecting portions of the allegations.
Due process matters. This includes presumption of innocence for the accused, and some sort of burden of proof for the accuser (evidence and corroboration, not to mention credibility).
TRUMP NOOSE SOURCES
Washington Post
New York Times
MSNBC
CNN
Constance 11:54 PM,
Amen. I'm feeling relieved that the tactics of the New Agers and Leftists failed for now. I'm also feeling encouraged that a few normally wishy washy politicians found some moral conviction!
Kavanaugh may not be perfect as an individual (with his dubious writings about fourth amendment rights), but he's unlikely to be able to unilaterally have individual interpretations of fourth amendment issues. I think his net effect will be to make the Supreme Court a bulwark against judicial activism.
RayB 9:21 AM,
I skimmed the memo and read parts of it. It relayed a lot of arrogance, a lot of organizing, a lot of people and a lot of money.
One part almost made me laugh, though. It was the part where it said their side has moral authority. This claim seems to be based on a belief in the rightness of egalitarianism.
In my opinion, the drive toward "egalitarianism" is a twisted, counterfeit version of the type of egalitarianism that Jesus Christ offers us: not material -- but legal, moral and spiritual. This basic moral foundation in Jesus Christ is what both the alt-right and the Left miss, as I see it.
Craig,
Great link to the Fiamingo site.
Anon. (with the links to what G. Soros is all about);
Awesome, thank you!
Christine,
There's a difference between writing down exactly what you think to yourself in your head, and writing.
The latter, Writing, is normally at least understandable. It clarifies things when it's done well.
But James Joyce would be semi proud of you and your stream of semi-consciousness.
I can't waste my time trying to decode your inner voices, other than that they consider themselves superior to everyone else in the room. In fact that's about the only clear point to most of what you write: that everyone else here is wrong and that you are right.
Christine 3:18 AM,
My reading of you is that you seem to me to like to be contentious and to confuse issues to the point where you are the only person brilliant enough to properly parse through the tortured language and logic.
You seem to in fact be a very intelligent individual, but you don't seem to be interested in intellectually honest and sincere discussion.
It's a shame, because you so frequently have interesting insights and information.
Christine,
Before we got off on tangents about what empathy means, I think I was trying to discuss biological differences between men and women.
I want to return to my original point. It has been lost. I was trying to say that I see this...
Don’t Say ‘Mothers’ – It Offends Transgender People, Doctors Told
...as just a very few inches down the slippery slope from this...
Feminist Perspectives on Sex and Gender
It doesn't mean that this doesn't annoy me...
Mars Venus
...and it doesn't mean that I see anything wrong with women like this:
INTJ Female: The Unicorn Amongst The Humans
I have a personality type shared by perhaps 4% of the female population. (It's not INTJ. I'm not going to say what it is, because I don't want to be pigeonholed. I only take it just so seriously, but not as completely self-defining.)
Again, though, go back and look at that first headline and read that first article and let it sink in.
I haven't become a personality type scholar, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of this statistic. But this web site claims that 65% of men are thinkers, while 60% of women are feelers.
It's important to realize what this means, though. In personality types, being a "feeler" does not necessarily mean being unable to be logical, and it does not necessarily equate to emoting. It's also important to understand that all of us both think and feel, and our feelings depend to a great extent on what our thoughts are.
Here is what it means to be a "thinker" vs. a "feeler", as explained to me by somebody who studied it a lot. (Again, I'm not an expert on this, but this is my tentative understanding of it.) When evaluating something, a thinker is most likely to ask mentally, "How does this affect me?" A feeler is most likely to ask mentally, "How does this affect us (the relationship or the family)?"
Of course there are many factors in play besides personality type. Any individual of any personality type could be mature or immature, for example.
I forgot the link to the web site:
The strengths and weaknesses of every personality type (Business Insider)
OK, so with the ordeal surrounding the Kavanaugh nomination, I’ve been distracted away from other things I should be doing. So, just a bit ago, to take a break, I decided to turn the TV on, scrolled a bit, then found Law & Order, SVU, which I like to watch on occasion. I’m aware it leans left, so I sometimes have to pass it on by, depending on the episode.
Today, ironically, I catch the very end (maybe 3-4 minutes of the episode) of a case in which all charges are dismissed against the defendant, and then learn that it was a false rape accusation by his own wife (he was cheating, so she apparently did so out of revenge). Benson, the Lt. of the PD, then states that such false accusations ‘prevent real victims from coming forward’, parroting this garbage I hear/read quite often. But, exactly HOW/WHY is this so? Moving on.
Then the camera goes to the man leaving the courtroom, finding his wife there. He approaches her gently, then, to my astonishment, he says he wants to get back with her! Dumbfounded, I had to keep watching. She apparently was pregnant, and he wanted to stay in her life, and be a father to the baby. But, she had aborted the (presumed?) pregnancy!—thus underscoring some of the things I’d written in the past on here regarding women having total control over a pregnancy, the decision to keep a child or give it up to the state, while the man has absolutely none and can be forced to pay support for a child he never wanted. This ends the episode. OK, what’s next?
The next episode begins with two women arguing with each other at a car accident site, with a police cruiser rolling up containing two male officers. One attends to one woman, and the other to the other, separating the two women. One asks the woman for her ID, with her responding, “You don’t know who I am?” or something to that effect, as she is some sort of celebrity (he has no idea who she is). Just then, the other begins having some sort of health-related issue, and the other officer comes to help his partner. The other woman uses this opportunity to flee the scene.
The officer who had attended to the now-fleeing woman (Amaro, for those who’ve watched the show) runs to the cruiser, chases her, and quickly blocks her in, as she drove to a deadend. I already knew what was going to happen next. She gets out of her vehicle, he gets out of his, and he tells her to provide ID, and then tells her she’s under arrest. She propositions him, but he remains professional throughout the arrest.
At her arraignment the next morning (she was at a rehab facility as a condition of parole for DUI, left the facility, then had the accident the previous night), the judge is ready to remand, when the young girl (20-ish) claims that the officer propositioned HER—yet another false allegation! But the dashcam provides vindicating evidence.
During questioning, the woman claims that the therapist at the facility was abusing her! So, the therapist is questioned, suggesting they review video footage. They do so, only to find that this young woman fellated a 15-year-old boy as a favor to him for getting her (and him) some drugs at the rehab! I gave up after that…
I found the following comment accompanying a vlog regarding Google’s ‘Project Dragonfly’, which is designed specifically for the Chinese government in order to know all citizens’ internet searches:
Hello! Is this Gordon's Pizza?
No sir - it's Google Pizza.
I must have dialed a wrong number. Sorry.
No sir - Google bought Gordon's Pizza last month.
OK. I would like to order a pizza.
Do you want your usual, sir?
My usual - you know me?
According to our caller ID data sheet, the last 12 times you called you ordered an extra-large pizza with three cheeses - sausage - pepperoni - mushrooms and meat balls on a thick crust.
OK - that's what I want .
May I suggest that this time you order a pizza with ricotta - arugula - sun-dried tomatoes and olives on a whole wheat, gluten free, thin crust?
What? I detest vegetables.
Your cholesterol is not good, sir.
How the hell do you know?
Well, we cross-referenced your home phone number with your medical records. We have the result of your blood tests for the last 7 years.
Okay, but I do not want your rotten vegetable pizza! I already take medication for my cholesterol.
Excuse me sir, but you have not taken your medication regularly. According to our database, you only purchased a box of 30 cholesterol tablets once, at Drugsale Network, 4 months ago.
I bought more from another drugstore.
That doesn't show on your credit card statement.
I paid in cash.
But you did not withdraw enough cash according to your bank statement.
I have other sources of cash.
That doesn't show on your last tax return unless you bought them using an undeclared income source, which is against the law.
WHAT THE HELL?? !!!
I'm sorry, sir, we use such information only with the sole intention of helping you.
Enough already! I'm sick to death of Google - Facebook - Twitter - WhatsApp and all the others!! I'm going to an island without internet - cable TV - where there is no cell phone service and no one to watch me or spy on me !!
I understand sir - but you need to renew your passport first. It expired 6 weeks ago!!
Which experience illustrates that there is little profit in using one's time watching standard churn-'em-out-by-the-dozen cop dramas.
An uncondensed audiobook of one of Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes adventures would be FAR more entertaining AND profitable!*
*(In teaching logical thinking.)
Reply was to Craig's 5:59 PM
Anon 6:13, 6:15,
Well, at least it, in part, contradicts the BELIEVE HER narrative, as even L&W, SVU illustrates that women sometimes lie about sexual assault/impropriety.
I don't recall the original source, but I saw on one vlog a cartoon depicting three women with BELIEVE HER signs and a man next to them pointing to the blindfolded lady justice (with scales), saying, "I believe HER". Very well-put-together illustration, juxtaposing 3 irrational, emoting women with the lone man suggesting fairly evaluating evidence.
Craig 5:59 PM,
Last night I watched Luke Cage lose a fight with a Satanic martial arts expert from the West Indies and nearly drown in a river, but begin to reconcile with his estranged reverend father. That was after reading a scientifically realistic bedtime story about a boy who goes to the moon and back.
You’re reading too many Facebook memes Christine.
J,
I think you may have missed one of my implicit points. The Kavanaugh hearing centered on allegations of sexual assault that are assumed true by many, while I think they are false given the evidence. Art imitated life to an extent, when the man in the episode was accused of sexual assault initially (assumed true), but was later vindicated by some new evidence clearing him (though I didn't get to see what that was).
Craig,
Yes, I got that.
I was responding to the end of your post, "I gave up after that."
I couldn't tell whether you liked the themes of art imitating life or disliked them. Your last comment seemed to imply disgust.
It is not worth arguing about.
It is ironic, though, that you kept on hitting theme after theme in which art imitates life, after trying to find some escapism.
J, 1:46 PM
Re:I will have to hope it's true he will try to maintain a balance, although the very concept of "balance" seems already too weak to me, intuitively. If balance is off, how does an individual restore it? If the state pushes the balance too far to their side, what can an individual do in response? I see that as the primary problem.
But the state HAS pushed the balance too far to the LEFT since about 1934 when Franklin D. Roosevelt set out to pack the courts with left-leaning judges who could be counted on to approve his "New Deal."
Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937
_____________________________________________________________________
This Is How FDR Tried To Pack The Supreme Court
https://www.history.com/news/franklin-roosevelt-tried-packing-supreme-court
_____________________________________________________________________
The recent confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh seems to have changed things.
Brett Kavanaugh Confirmed, Possibly Most Conservative Supreme Court Since 1934
The Supreme Court has not had a conservative majority since 1934, when the New Deal took hold and the Court moved to the left, giving the federal government vast new powers over economic issues. The Court massively broadened federal powers over commerce, taxing, and federal spending.
The Court abandoned the original meaning of several key constitutional provisions during the 1930s: in 1934, the Contracts Clause (Blaisdell); in 1935, the Appointments Clause (Humphrey’s Executor); in 1936, the Spending Clause (Butler); and in 1937, the Commerce Clause (Jones & Laughlin Steel). These radically expanded the role of the federal government in people’s lives.
A conservative majority on the Court has been considered within striking distance since 1993, when two moderate justices were the swing votes on almost every issue that divided along philosophical lines. In 2006, conservative Justice Samuel Alito replaced one of those moderates, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.....
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/10/06/kavanaugh-confirmed-possibly-most-conservative-supreme-court-since-1934/
_______________________________________________________
If the balance is off and if the state pushes the balance too far, the solution is exactly the one we just implemented in November, 2016.....which is to get out and vote for a presidential candidate and for legislators who will restore the balance by appointing constitutionalists to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is why President Trump is telling people over and over at all the recent rallies...."get out and vote Republican." We need more Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate so that if there is another SCOTUS appointment, it won't be such a squeaker.
It may take a while for President Trump to undo damage done by his more liberal predecessors, but in addition to the things he has already accomplished in less than two years (i.e. the economy ) President Trump has also appointed two conservative judges to the U.S. Supreme Court and has been quietly appointing conservative judges to the lower Federal Courts. Therefore, IMHO, he is off to a good start.
Susanna,
I don't think we disagree with each other. My context of the word "balance" was not left-right balance. It was state-individual balance, and my concern was the fourth amendment. I don't think it's likely that Kavanaugh will be able to unilaterally impose fourth amendment interpretations. Anyway, it's too late. The Patriot Act is already law. I think it's more likely Kavanaugh's confirmation will be able to end judicial activism. For that I am grateful. I read that Breitbart article yesterday. It's a good article.
This is what some Leftists want to try next. They would like to add two more seats to the Supreme Court.
Rage at the End of Justice Kennedy's Camelot
Avenatti: 2020 Dem presidential candidate must demand the Supreme Court add seats
How the Democrats Could Thwart Trump’s Supreme Court Takeover
J, your message to Christine is right on although she puts out things that are outright crazy. When she wrote of how her mother attempted to possess her by entering through her mouth and she had to expel her through her anus was a bit too much for even Constance to tolerate. Add to that her chakras, vampire feeds, her long term shack is holy, etc., etc. you’ll get the sense she’s crazed.
Anonymous10:07 PM
Thank you.
You just spoiled dinner.
; )
Pat Buchanan asks the pointed question, then answers it, "Are Republicans Born Wimps?"
http://buchanan.org/blog/are-republicans-born-wimps-130269
http://www.dcclothesline.com/2018/10/08/2-u-of-southern-maine-professor-offered-students-course-credit-to-harass-sennator-susan-collins-on-kavanaugh/
https://pjmedia.com/trending/study-boys-more-likely-to-be-victims-of-dating-violence-than-girls/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/05/02/false-rape-accusations-may-be-more-common-than-thought.html
"The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all nations that forget God."
- Psalm 9:17
This is what happens when the insane policies of the radical left take root and are allowed to flourish without restraint:
https://www.wral.com/life-on-the-dirtiest-block-in-san-francisco/17900648/
San Fransicko isn't the only Democratic conclave that is in deep decay due to liberal social policies. As time goes on, these types of problems will only increase, leading to the spread of disease. According to a number of health experts, we are not that far away from seeing the spread of contagious diseases that could morph into epidemics or even possible global pandemics.
This was written with the author's leftist assumptions and value judgements showing. But the article is at least informative about the upcoming cases that will be tried before the Supreme Court.
Five Reasons Why the GOP Rushed to Confirm Kavanaugh
Why the rush?
"The Republican Party and Donald Trump wanted Brett Kavanaugh on the U.S. Supreme Court before the November 6 midterm elections because if the Democrats had achieved a majority in the Senate, there may not have been sufficient votes to confirm him.
But the real hurry to get Kavanaugh confirmed had more to do with the several cases on the Supreme Court’s docket: Republicans are hoping to ensure the outcome of several hot-button cases, including those involving double jeopardy, immigration, age discrimination and the Endangered Species Act. Moreover, there is the possibility that the Supreme Court could also decide to take up additional cases affecting gerrymandering, gay and transgender rights, and the separation of church and state."
Michelle Malkin: The TRUTH About FALSE Rape Allegations
Is it 2%? Or is it more than that?
Francis blames devil for pedophilia. Pray the rosary!
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-08/pope-francis-divisive-devil-responsible-catholic-pedophile-epidenic
Anon @ 8:14 AM ...
The Pope said that the church was under attack by the "great accuser," i.e. the Devil. I wonder if he was attempting to associate ANYONE and EVERYONE that makes legitimate accusations of pedophilia with the Devil? Or could he have someone specifically in mind, such as Vigano? After all, Vigano "accused" Francis of complicity in the pedophilia/homosexual scandals and went so far as to call for his resignation.
It's been quite awhile since Francis uttered his "I will not speak one word" regarding Vigano's 11 page indictment. He has remained true to his word as he continues to refuse any comment on Vigano's statement. I wonder why? Could it be that he has no defense?
Study examines rape, race and wrongful convictions
"Most rapes are intraracial. The vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators and black victims are usually assaulted by blacks.
But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
Self-Described Redneck Calls Out White Privilege in America
This is a short YouTube video, in a white man's own words.
"White people are racist. Not all of them. But white culture is."
J,
Wuhl, if ol’ boy JimBob sez it, then it dang well mus’ be true!
Sure, there are individual areas in the US that are racist: white, black, Hispanic, etc. But, Jay Fayza, a black man, makes the case that whites are by far the most tolerant and accepting of other races:
Why whites aren't the most racist people
Debunking White Privilege: The Economic Reality
Debunking White Privilege (Political Reality)
And, let’s not forget how Asians are systematically discriminated against for entrance into “Ivy League” colleges, due to Affirmative Action (favoring blacks and Hispanics—which discriminates against whites, as well). See the current case against Harvard.
Dave Rubin (Rubin Report) interviews Larry Elder (a black man--NOT "African-American"), who dispels many myths regarding racism against blacks, black crime, police shootings, etc:
Black Lives Matter, Racism: A Conservative Perspective (Larry Elder Interview)
A white, Libertarian man's opinion about the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process:
"In reality, of course, the political 'debate' in this country is ludicrously restricted, and those participating must adhere to laughably narrow guidelines. Battle over gay marriage and transgender bathrooms all you want. But don’t talk about the perpetual wars, bombings and occupations, or the top secret intelligence agency budgets. And never, ever mention anything about the Federal Reserve, or the counterfeit nature of our fractional banking system.
So this 'debate' is perfect for America 2.0. Screams, profanities, and threats of violence over a claim alleged thirty six years after it happened. And even if it is true, why wasn’t the underage Kavanaugh (who was seventeen at the time) a 'victim' here, too? I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent. But it’s impossible for anyone perceived to be associated with Trump to be considered a victim of anything, under any circumstances. As the establishment 'liberals' love to say now: 'punch a Nazi in the face' and all that.
I thought the selection of Brett Kavanaugh was stupid, much like all of Trump’s appointments have been stupid. It was clearly yet another capitulation on his part to a conservative, neocon establishment that opposed his candidacy and continues to oppose any real reforms he may attempt. But the phony debate taking center stage now is beyond stupid; it is state-sponsored theater for the dumbed-down masses. It’s hard to imagine a more fitting example of 'bread and circuses.'"
J,
Regarding your 8:37 PM post (in part):
"Most rapes are intraracial. The vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators and black victims are usually assaulted by blacks."
This is a VERY misleading statement. Of course the "vast majority of white victims are assaulted by white perpetrators." Why? Because of the fact that the White population (and hence, criminals) is far greater than the Black population, which makes up only 13% of the U.S. population. This disparaging fact obviously translates into more crime by the numbers. A far more telling statistic is to look at the percentages of crimes committed by the various racial groups. According to FBI crime statistics, year after year, Blacks commit a much higher percentage of crime than do Whites. In fact, by percentages, they commit the majority of crime in America! Blacks also commit an incredible amount of crime upon their own people, which has fostered the "Black on Black" crime groups that campaign against this criminal behavior. On a personal note, I have always felt that these groups are sending out a racist message, because they aren't standing firm against ALL crime, but concentrate their activities against crime perpetrated against Blacks by Blacks! The underlying message seems to be; if you're going to commit crime, do it against someone else other than Black people!
J,
Regarding your 9:55 PM post:
I don't think using an ignorant, vulgar, self-confessed "redneck" is a very good source for establishing his (or your) claim that "all Whites are racist."
An honest, Christian Harlem Pastor James David Manning preaches on "Blacks are the Most Racist People."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YA4irxFEzE
PS: This Pastor stands against the vast majority of race baiting "pastors" that live off of the hatred that they spew from their "pulpits." Speaking the truth against this tide of lies and hatred is a revolutionary act!
Concerned new age healing technique opened 'door to Satan'...
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/bishop-to-set-up-exorcism-ministry-as-he-warns-of-the-evils-of-reiki-37403224.html
I stumbled upon this article a while back totally at random, as it popped up below another article I was viewing. I kept it in a Word doc in case a proper time might come to post it. Now is that time:
New studies show Black women have been receiving degrees at a higher rate for years.
OK, this is a good thing. However, I’ve heard that educated black women are finding it increasingly difficult to find a suitable black partner, or a partner of any race—because, as with most women, they are hypergamous, i.e. they want to date and marry individuals who makes more money than they do. Or at least as much money.
From the article:
According to findings compiled in a study by the National Center For Education Statistics, Black women have been obtaining degrees at a consistently high rate for the last eight years and counting. Information collected about the higher education among African-Americans between 2009 and 2010 shows that Black women accounted for 68 percent of associate's degrees, 66 percent of bachelor's degrees, 71 percent of master's degrees and 65 percent of doctorate degrees awarded to Black students during that time frame.
All this is saying is that there are more black women relative to black men obtaining degrees—a LOT more. This is certainly not good news for black men, unfortunately (which is also be bad news for black women wishing to marry within their race). But then the need for self-victimization kicks in:
However, while the study does shed light on many positive aspects of Black women and education, some of the overall statistics are still immensely troubling. For example, as of 2012, only 15 percent of students enrolled in college were African-American, a drastically low number relative to that of the 60 percent of white students enrolled.
“Only 15 percent”?! According to the latest US Census, blacks make up 13.3% of the total population, while whites make up either 76.9% (whites plus Hispanics) or 61.3% (white non-Hispanics). This means there are more blacks enrolled relative to whites, with most of these black women. So, what’s the problem?
Additionally, while Black women continue to pursue higher education at increasing rates, they make up only eight percent of private sector jobs.
Assuming the ratio of females to males in the 13.3% black population is the same as in the larger US population at 50.8%, this would make black women roughly 6.76% of the total population. So, black women holding 8% of the jobs in the private sector means that they disproportionately hold more jobs. Again, what’s the problem?
This sounds like, in SJW lingo, black female privilege to me, as opposed to SJW claims of “white privilege” and “male privilege”.
RayB,
This was the part that concerned me. We have been discussing wrongful rape conviction and statistics. Nobody registered any objection to that. So therefore why the objection to this:
"But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
In fact, remember, the last time a conservative nominee for the Supreme Court was smeared with sexual allegations, it was a black man who called it a high tech lynching -- Clarence Thomas.
So this is quite a relevant topic to this blog discussion thread.
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?
Galatians 3:28 King James Version (KJV)
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
I don't want in the Republican club. I don't owe loyalty to any politics. My loyalty is to Christianity.
I am an independent. I reject all ideology.
The problem with ideology is that it gets people re-arranging cliches. To do that is not to think.
But no matter how well you think, if you have not love, it is all for nothing. No matter your politics or race or sex -- if you have not love, you are nothing.
1 Corinthians 13
1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 13And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
As regards my immediately preceding comment, I don’t have her raw data, but if we assume the 15% enrollment figure she provided remained consistent through to graduation, and if we take ~68% as degree holders of all the subgroups she listed, then we can arrive at an approximate figure of 10% of college graduates that are black females. With that, we might be able to assume the 8% of private sector jobs held by black women is lower than their graduation numbers. HOWEVER, how many are in the public sector? Not only that, what are these degrees in, and how would any disparity between degree holders and jobs compare with other races’ disparity between degree holders and jobs? Without this crucial data, we don’t have much of anything. Except someone wishing to play the victim…
J. @ 1:59PM, most particularly this:
...So this is quite a relevant topic to this blog discussion thread.
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?...
This is a straw man. If one chooses not to engage in a specific topic, that hardly means one is racist or complicit in racism.
So, by your statement, should all readers here assume that your "coming from self-professed Christians" is intended to apply to all readers here?
Craig,
You could analyze statistics in a skeptical and sophisticated manner that well any time you choose. Apparently you only choose to do so when it is statistics about false accusations and convictions of black men.
I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now.
I don't want to go around in circles arguing with you. Besides, I'm sure you have a lot of work to do and have little time to argue about this topic.
Excuse me, I am going to go read a book called, Love Without Hurt: Turn Your Resentful, Angry, or Emotionally Abusive Relationship into a Compassionate, Loving One.
J, regarding your post (in part):
"But when the victim is white and the perpetrator is black, the risk of a wrongful conviction rises dramatically. An informative new article here by researchers Matthew B. Johnson, Shakina Griffith and Carlene Y. Barnaby at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice sheds light on this problem and what can be done about it."
J,
This is one of those types of statements that when read causes moral outrage from the left. Yet, it is misleading. Why? Because the fact remains that Blacks commit far more violent crimes percentage wise than do Whites, so naturally, the "risk of wrongful conviction" would rise dramatically.
Here is an illustration to consider: if you know statistically that Pit Bull dogs tend to attack people at a far higher rate than do, say, Beagles, and an attack occurred in your neighborhood, which species would you tend to "suspect" more? Beagles or Pit Bulls? Now, the Beagle very well might have bitten the victim, but which species would you probably concentrate your investigation upon?
Not mentioned in this statement as well is that, more often than not, those that have been "wrongfully convicted" also had very long rap sheets that would influence the investigators in a manner that would be against the suspect in question.
I served 13 weeks as a vice foreman on a felony grand jury. I can assure you, there are very few "one time" criminals out there. Most have rap sheets as long as your arm, and they all claim their innocence! Hence, the tendency is to NOT believe anything they say based upon their past track record.
One more huge point; this has NOTHING to do with a lack of "love." It has everything to do with the truth. I kind of feel a little insulted (but will survive) that you would insinuate that my, or Craig's posts would be influenced upon "hate."
Undercorrection is wrong, and so is Overcorrection, J.
You need to be careful because you might be assuming, much.
My personal experience along with observations leads me to conclude that Blacks are their own worst enemies. I feel an intense sorrow for the many good Black people that are every bit of a victim of the criminals in their community because it causes many people to "suspect" them of the same type of behavior.
It is often claimed that White people do not want to see Black people move into their neighborhoods because they are "racists." That is not true. They fear the influx of Blacks because of their justifiable fear of the increase in crime.
Here is just one of many examples I can cite: I grew up next to a suburb that was, by my standards, very affluent. This thriving city had all the extras, including services, better schools and recreational facilities, etc. that my town did not have. They also had a state of the art shopping mall that they were proud of. It was also well known as a VERY safe town with a minuscule crime rate.
Back in that time period, the spirit of "diversity" along with a very heavy dose of egalitarianism was very popular. Liberal Democratic administrations in this city began to seek out developers (and offering tax abatement incentives) for building apartment complexes with the intent to purposely attract low income renters in order to create a more "diverse community." Once the apartments were built, Black people began to move into this previously all White community. At first, there were no problems at all and the liberal politicians celebrated the success of their "diverse" community. As time went on, the Black population began to increase in the areas of the low income apartments. Unfortunately, crime also began to spike dramatically. Home robberies, car thefts, etc. rose at a high rate. Customers were accosted and robbed in parking lots of previously safe retail businesses. Car-jackings also rose dramatically ... I personally survived an unsuccessful, violent attempt by two Black males while driving through this area one early summer evening.
(continued)
As crime continued to increase, businesses in this area began to close. A newer "Super K-Mart" was forced to close due to the dramatic increase in crime, both in their parking lot and inside the store. The newer Mall also had a very high increase in crime and retailers saw a loss of Whit customers, which further led to store closings. Eventually, the entire Mall was abandoned and torn down!
In what was once a thriving, appreciating housing market, home prices began to plummet, with values losing as much as 75% off their previous highs. The city today has a Black population of about 80%. Crime, including drug related violence continues to be rampant. Whenever the town comes up in conversation, most people just shake their head in disbelief as to what happened to this once peaceful community.
Now, Blacks have "taken over" a new Walmart in a neighboring town, where they make up 90% of the customers. Crime again has spiked dramatically, both inside and outside of this store. I was told personally by a very good source that the store had lost $1 Million in theft in 2016. The figure doubled to $2 Million in 2017! Employees are told to "not confront anyone" regarding theft. Cashiers are hired and fired often within one week. Why? Because they are routinely caught ringing up their "friends and relatives," severely under charging them. Often, the theft amounts to hundreds of dollars for just one of these "customers."
Again, Blacks are their own worst enemies. They need to clean up their own communities and quit playing the "race card" for all of the bad things that people attribute to them.
I could cite a lot more of these types of examples ... but will stop here.
Re: Black Issues
There have been accounts of how the Black community was (allegedly) deliberately targeted for the introduction of drugs.
There have been accounts of the Black music industry (allegedly) being deliberately targeted for the (introduction of)/(supplanting by) more radicalized music at the expense what was then the standard(s).
There have been accounts of what was then typical relatively close-knit Black homelife (allegedly) being deliberately targeted to be broken up.
There is an interesting book out called "Mr. T: The Man with the Gold: An Autobiography" in which he says that the area known as "The Projects" in Chicago were quite safe UNTIL THE SAFEGUARDS WERE WITHDRAWN.
We must be careful and cautious in drawing conclusions as we must take into account the possibility of deliberate social manipulations by the "puppet masters" to cause divisions amongst us.
Rather than point the finger at a particular race in any such matters we would be far better served by focusing on the SOCIAL CONDITIONS which differentiate us from one another to our loss.
A loss for ONE of us is a loss for ALL of us!
https://youtu.be/cFL6k5yOAFM
J @ 2:32 PM,
You wrote: You could analyze statistics in a skeptical and sophisticated manner that well any time you choose. Apparently you only choose to do so when it is statistics about false accusations and convictions of black men.
First, I’m going to assume you meant to negate the 2nd sentence (using “not”). Second, you mentioned above the case of Clarence Thomas in your response to RayB, and when taken with your assertion that this particular topic [of the OP] never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men [your emphasis] is proven false by the following: (1) I specifically mentioned Clarence Thomas in my very first comment in this very thread in quoting someone who referenced him; (2) in one of my comments on Camille Paglia, I specifically mentioned Anita Hill (and Paglia’s position on her), which, of course, is a reference to the Thomas-Hill ordeal; (3) I referenced a video by Janice Fiamengo in which she made the case that women make false rape accusations and profit from such, using Anita Hill as her primary example; and (4) I specifically referenced the case of Brian Banks (10:24 PM)—though I didn’t mention race at all, as I didn’t think it was germane—in which he, a black teenager in high school, was falsely accused by a white classmate, reluctantly took a plea deal, and was jailed. He was later set free by the California Innocence Project. I finished my comment with these words:
“Banks’ plea deal also exemplifies how broken our legal system is. Judges STRONGLY encourage plea deals, and most ordinary plebs don’t have the funds for a protracted criminal trial anyway. Thus, this innocent man was forced to accept a plea. Moreover, many jurors side with the woman accuser out of misguided empathy rather than impartially judging the merits of the case. Sad.”
I skimmed through the 20 page pdf referenced in your comment about the higher percentage of false rape convictions of black men when the accuser is a white woman, but I didn’t make any comment because it would have taken quite a bit of time to read the entire document in order to make a proper assessment. I don’t like to make any comments unless I understand the argument, AND I check to see if there’s any sort of authorial bias. Thinking about this, though, did the authors check every single case of all convicted men, black, white, and other races? If not, how would they know if there aren’t innocent white men accused by white women and falsely convicted at just as high a rate as those of black men accused by white women? In other words, is it possible that there are just as many white men falsely convicted (by percentage) whose cases have not yet been appealed?
Now, that’s not to say there wasn’t some sort of racial bias in (some of) the courts in which these black men were falsely accused.
You have no idea who I am. I do not reveal all of my identity, just like you don’t, as I prefer a measure of anonymity. Perhaps it might surprise you if I told you that the large majority of my relationships with significant-others has been with non-white women. I could go on, but I suspect no amount of words on my part will appease you, as your mind is apparently made up, given your comment:
I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now.
Your quoting of the love chapter, 1 Corinthians 13, is quite disingenuous, as you did so while pointing the finger accusingly at others. All I’m hearing is a clanging cymbal.
Sometimes I wonder about "J" and whether she might not be just another visitor to this blog...
I must make a correction. Banks’ accuser was black, not white. I went by memory, apparently conflating this account with another—I’ve watched many different videos of false rape cases over the past two years. In any case, here’s a synopsis of the case after her recanting:
Brian Banks: #FalseRape Accuser Recants
Wanetta Gibson should be put UNDER the jail! [I’m being hyperbolic, for those easily ‘triggered’.] All that money she, in essence, extorted from the school based on her false allegation… Her name needs to be as well known as and synonymous with Tawana Brawley and Nikki Yovino.
DO NOT JUST “BELIEVE HER”.
Here we go...
Anita Hill calls Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings a 'disservice to the American public'
The way the sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh were handled “was a disservice to the American public,” says Anita Hill, nearly three decades after she was put through the wringer for making similar claims.
Hill, 62, spoke on the high-profile case Wednesday at a talk at the University of Pennsylvania, and noted that not much has changed in the years since she testified that then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her in the workplace.
Hill called it a “tragedy” that the Senate Judiciary Committee did not give Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Blasey Ford time to prepare her testimony, and failed to interview all available witnesses before moving forward with Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote, according to the Guardian.
“Those were all the things that I experienced in 1991 and it was what I experienced in 2018 – that failure to really help the public understand very significant issues and to understand that those issues, and seeking truth in those issues, aligned with the interest of having a supreme court that people have confidence in, they have faith in, they believe in the impartiality of and they believe in the integrity of,” Hill reportedly said.
Anita Hill lost credibility when she said Thomas tried to entice her by placing a pubic hair on her can of Coke. I don't believe any man would think that would be a turn on.
Though I don’t always agree, I like this guy’s perspective on things, generally:
Kayne Meets Trump and the World Explodes
The following is a good observation by a commentator to the vlog:
David H: It is interesting that Jim Brown was also at that meeting and isn't given the same degree of heat that Kanye is receiving. This is also about the platform that Kanye possesses. Socialists and globalists have teamed up to take down our constitution. They have successfully taken over academia and most of the media. A person like Kanye who has a huge platform to speak on and is followed by mostly young people is extremely dangerous to them. Having a guy like Kanye tell young people to start thinking as an individual and speaking out against socialist programs and their effects on the black community is a nightmare scenario. It is to be expected that globalists would unleash the media on Kanye in an effort to discredit him.
Pope Francis Says "Abortion is Like Hiring a Hit Man," But Repeatedly Praises Abortion Advocates ...
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-says-abortion-is-like-hiring-a-hitman-but-has-repeatedly-prais
The Origin Of Marxist Feminism
A reprint of an article by Marjorie Millett, sister of Kate Millett. Kate Millett wrote Sexual Politics, a very influential second wave feminist manifesto. Marjorie Millett had a front row seat and tells us what she saw!
The author was moved to reprint this on News with Views after viewing the behavior of the activists during the Kavanaugh confirmation process.
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of a friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked
“To make revolution,” they answered
“What kind of revolution?” she asked
“The Cultural revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural revolution?” she demanded
“By destroying the American family?” they answered
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch:?” she replied
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution, and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Everyone must be permeated with ‘The Revolution:’ the media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches, and even the library system.”
I liked this biographical information about the influence of the Clarence Thomas hearings on Andrew Breitbart. I liked that he was against racism but became a conservative after he saw that liberals were not protecting Clarence Thomas from racism.
I personally could not be against racism and be either a liberal or a conservative, but I respect that Andrew Breitbart meant well and was sincere in his convictions. He seems genuinely not to have only been playing games and seems genuinely not to have not only cared about other white men like himself.
Kirk: Clarence Thomas’s ‘High Tech Lynching’ Awakened Andrew Breitbart; What will the Kavanaugh Witch Trial Produce?
"Andrew was raised in California and was a product of that reflexively liberal climate. He admits to taking being a liberal for granted until, in his early 20’s, he witnessed a horrific national event:
The confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas and the random insertion of Anita Hill into the process.
Andrew watched and wondered what was going on. He couldn’t understand how the NAACP would stand by and let a black man be accused of something like this and not stand up to protect his rights. He couldn’t understand why the National Organization for Women would blindly support someone coming forth so late with accusations.
Andrew thought those groups were supposed to be about fairness and protecting the rights of the underdogs.
Silly Andrew.
Once awakened, Andrew Breitbart became curious, he became informed, and he became active. Boy did he become active! Today, Breitbart News stands virtually alone in presenting an uncompromising exposure of Team Left tactics and giving a large platform to the works of James O’Keefe, John Nolte, and others."
I like this picture of Kanye West and Trump hugging. I think it is political theatre, but at least it is not divisive political theatre for a change. I think it is strategy, but at least it is ethical strategy for once. I personally care about this for more reasons other than just making Democrats look like they are hypocrites and racists. And I hope that some conservatives feel the way I do, too.
Kanye West Brings ‘4D Chess’ to the White House: ‘We Have to Release the Love’
I signed the pledge for Mom's March for America last year, and I noticed they sent some members to Washington, DC during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. Some of them held pro-Kavanaugh demonstrations. I was glad to see that, although I have decided that personally I don't want to be controlled and homogenized and am not a joiner.
Concerned Women for America also had some members on the pro-Kavanaugh side visiting senators' offices and holding pro-Kavanaugh signs. I'm not a member, and I don't think I'll join, after reading what Penny Nance had to say about Ivanka Trump's drive to get more employers to offer paid maternity and paternity leave. What Penny Nance had to say did not strike me as sincere and realistic. It struck me as hypocritical. She said it would make it harder for women to compete in the workplace.
I worked for years before getting pregnant, and my company offered maternity leave under state law for short-term disability leave. Men also used short-term disability leave for a variety of reasons, from colon cancer to throat surgery. Men also used FMLA leave for a variety of reasons, from coping with a daughter's cancer to coping with their own cancer. They also worked at home sometimes when dealing with unexpected family crises.
Because of my experience, it did not ring true at all for Penny Nance to say her reason for coming out against maternity leave is that women would not be able to compete as well in the workplace. I can't really say that it surprised me, either, that a conservative spokeswoman for other women would be heartless about the struggles of other women and would be aiming to please corporate men.
I mean it when I say heartless. When I was pregnant, I belonged to an online due date club, along with about thirty other women whose babies were due in January. Half of these women didn't know how they were going to keep on paying their bills after they had their babies. Some of them were temps. Some worked for employers without any maternity leave policy.
It was stressful on their husbands and boyfriends as well. Just as it would have been stressful on my husband to lose my income during my maternity leave, given our budget and income at the time. Just as it would have been hard on my son to have a stressed out mommy at the very beginning of his life, when bonding is so important and sets the stage for parental relationships from that time forward.
I can respect Penny Nance and Concerned Women for America for standing up to Leftist women and supporting Kavanaugh. Now if only they would ever stand up for other women. Because there is nothing wrong with doing unto other women as you would have them do unto you. In fact, in my Bible, it's a good thing. (And I also don't recall it saying anywhere in the Bible to love your enemy only if they are not Leftists.)
RayB 3:09 PM,
I just think we should care equally about black men who are wrongfully accused of rape. Is that controversial to you?
Craig 8:59 AM,
You never subjected the statistical claims about false rape convictions for men in general to the very tortuous analysis that you went through, when it was about black men, and not just about men.
I want to say something about the article by Marjorie Millett. It frightened me when I read it.
If you read the very beginning, you will see that the two sisters, Marjorie and Kate, started out Catholic. Then they turned communist and atheist after their university education.
This is about a battle for the mind and soul.
It is one religion vs. another.
It is not just about "logic". It is about world views. It is about beliefs.
To concern oneself with logical arguments is to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic.
Jesus Christ never said a word about logic. He talked quite a bit about love, though.
Oops, it's Mallory Millett, not Marjorie Millett. She has a web site:
http://mallorymillett.com/
She has another interesting article on her web site about her sister.
My Sister Kate: The Destructive Feminist Legacy of Kate Millett
"Feminist icon Kate Millett passed away recently in Paris at the age of 82. Her 1970 book Sexual Politics, called 'the Bible of Women’s Liberation' by the New York Times, had a seismic effect on feminist thought and launched Millett as what the Times called 'a defining architect of second-wave feminism.' In a cover story that same year, TIME magazine crowned her 'the Mao Tse-tung of Women’s Liberation.' Fellow feminist Andrea Dworkin said that Millett woke up a sleeping world.
Kate’s sister Mallory, a CFO for several corporations, resides in New York City with her husband of over twenty years. In a riveting article from a few years back bluntly titled, 'Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives,' Mallory revealed what she saw of the subversive undercurrent of her sister’s passionate radicalism.
Asked for her thoughts on Kate’s legacy, Mallory shared her very personal responses, which follow."
J said to RayB @ 3:04 PM:
RayB 3:09 PM,
I just think we should care equally about black men who are wrongfully accused of rape. Is that controversial to you?
J,
Why would you think that would be "controversial" to me? I care equally about ANYONE that is "wrongfully accused of rape," be it a Black man, a White man, or whatever. Kind of like my answer to "Black Lives Matter" is "ALL Lives Matter ... including Cops." If you think that type of attitude is "controversial," so be it.
J @ 3:11 PM,
I’m not exactly sure what you mean, though I understand some your statement, and it’s this part I will answer: because black men are a subset of all men (“just men”, as you state), meaning that black men are included.
In any case, I did make a statement about the 20 page document you sourced being both long and requiring a significant amount of time to analyze. Perhaps you could do it, since you are the one who brought it up.
Nevertheless, as I skimmed once more, I decided to jump to the conclusion. In it I found almost exactly what I remarked in my 8:59 AM comment regarding incomplete data; i.e., one would have to look into EVERY rape case in order to come to any kind of even tentative conclusions. The authors concede this very thing:
Our analysis involved a review of confirmed cases of African Americans who were wrongfully convicted of sexual assaults against Whites and an examination of the factors associated with the wrongful convictions. Our findings, coupled with the cited literature, suggest that African Americans
face unique vulnerability related to cross-racial identifications, all-White juries, and interrogation practice. We regard this as a tentative conclusion, however, pending review and analysis of the broader picture of wrongful convictions in sexual assaults that contrast all race/ethnic configurations of defendants and victims. Stated differently, our analysis disaggregated the subset of Black defendant/White victim cases from the larger group of all wrongful convictions in sexual assault cases. Further research is warranted to assess the comparative role of various risk factors among a more diverse sample of wrongful convictions (p 290 / 16 pdf).
It should be noted here that this data is culled primarily from 1982-92; that is, it is over 25 years old. In addition and more importantly, how can ANYONE, besides God Himself, possibly know with any certitude how many others are languishing in prison due to wrongful convictions (by false allegations, mistaken identity, etc.), regardless of the race of the perpetrator or victim?
Perhaps you could offer comment on this:
Pasquale Mirra meets Hamid Drake
RayB 7:06 PM,
I didn't say anything about Black Lives Matter. I thought we were talking about the statistics about wrongful rape convictions for all men vs. for black men.
Craig 7:48 PM,
Why don't you summarize "Pasquale Mira meets Hamid Drake" or say what its central point or claim is, if you want me to comment on it.
African American Wrongful Convictions Today (Innocence Project)
"For Black History Month, I wrote about five historical cases of African Americans wrongfully convicted in the Jim Crow era. In today’s follow up, I’ll examine how contemporary wrongful convictions compare. While triumphant present-day innocence stories are all notable successes, and it’s always remarkable when an innocent person finally gets his or her day of justice to be released from hollowed prison walls, the majority (63%) of those exonerated through DNA evidence are African American."
Innocence Project New Orleans Client Exonerated After 46-Year Fight for Freedom
"Yesterday, Innocence Project New Orleans (IPNO) client Wilbert Jones was exonerated in Baton Rouge after a 46-year fight for his freedom. Jones was wrongly convicted in 1973 for the October 1971 kidnapping and rape of a nurse at Baton Rouge General Hospital. He was sentenced to life in prison."
This story makes me feel like crying. And just look at his picture. No bitterness in his face. Amazing.
I dunno, but Hamid Drake can play him some drums.
Yowzah.
J,
I cannot believe you don't like Hamid Drake!
paul,
You should see him in person. Absolutely amazing! As one who enjoys most any kind of music, IMO he is in the very top tier of drummers of any genre (and this includes any rock drummer one can name). And he makes it look easy!
Craig & Paul,
Check out the INCREDIBLE piano playing here!
https://youtu.be/ooyUiVRR1ss
J said @ 8:53 PM (in part):
"... the majority (63%) of those exonerated through DNA evidence are African American."
J,
Again, another misleading statement. What percentage of the 63% had previous criminal records? Would you think if they did, it might prejudice the investigators?
Again, the reason African Americans would have a higher exoneration PERCENTAGE is due to the fact that PERCENTAGE wise, Blacks commit a much higher PERCENTAGE of crimes than any other race. FBI statistics show that, although Blacks make up only 13% of the U. S. population, over 80% of all violent crime is committed by Blacks. That is not a racist statement, it is a fact.
It stands to reason that due to the much higher crime activity rate, higher wrongful prosecution along with a higher exoneration rate would be expected.
The bottom line is that human error, which effects all facets of life, is the culprit, and not some "get the Blacks" conspiracy.
(continued)
What you are really impugning here is that, the entire Justice system in America is prejudiced against Blacks. This is one of tactics of the radical left that constantly seeks "victims" in order to cause division and chaos, all designed to help bring about their communist dream of revolution.
Remember Michael Brown's "friend?" He emphatically proclaimed that his "gentle" friend was on his knees when he said "hands up, don't shoot" and the officer "just shot him dead in the back." I wonder if you believed that at the time, J?
I didn't. I knew Cops don't go about just murdering people. THEN, in spite of all the "witnesses" to the contrary, the autopsy PROVED, beyond any doubt, that the robbing thug Brown was attempting to wrestle the gun away from the Cop when the gun discharged, hitting Brown in the front, killing him. The liberal media had the whole country (not me) believing in their lie, and to this day, many people still believe it.
(continued)
Just another quick example of the radical left's lies regarding the "biased Justice" system that constantly works to wrongfully persecute "innocent" Blacks.
When Trayvon Martin was shot and killed, in self defense, by George Zimmerman, ABC News showed photos of Zimmerman as he entered the police station for questioning. Unbelievably, they edited out wounds to the back of Zimmerman's head, later proven to have been inflicted by Martin as he, while on top of Zimmerman, banged the back of his head upon the concrete pavement. ABC also edited out key words out of Zimmmerman's "911" call, making it appear that Zimmerman was saying that Martin was "up to something" because he was "Black," when in reality, he was providing a description of suspicious behavior of a man walking in an area that had experienced break ins.
The media also reported that Zimmerman was a "white male," when in fact, he was Hispanic, obviously playing the "white vs black" bias game. With all this, the media constantly posted photos of a "young" Martin in his football uniform. Obama added fuel to the fire stating is he "had a son, it would be Trayvon Martin." What the media never posted were screen captures of Trayvon with his "gold grill," menacingly holding a semi-auto handgun, giving the "one finger salute" to the camera, etc. .... all indications of him not being this "innocent little boy," but, what he really was, a young gansta street thug. Missing too was the report that Trayvon was expelled from school for possessing criminal burglary tools inside of his "book bag." There's more, but we'll stop here.a
Let's not forget the other "victims" in all of this; the policeman that shot Michael Brown (forgot his name) and George Zimmerman ... both lives ruined for doing nothing wrong.
J, you are being played by the liberals that seek to control you through your emotions.
Yes, J's advocacy is lacking a lot of other important factors for the information that corresponds to this subject.
Maybe her thinking that she is more merciful to people she considers downtrodden (than say you RayB) to promote the numbers she sites, but instead does real injustice to any person caught up in that web regardless of color. What needs honest review is how much of the problem lies at the feet of criminals who happen to be black. The numbers are disproportionate for a host of reasons, but mainly because people make horrible choices and that is not a race issue. It is a people issue. People issues are all over every issue because people are flawed, so at times it is those out on the street and at times on jury panels and courtrooms, etc, too.
Sometimes people lend themselves to appear more merciful (fair and just) than others to further the slant of their point of view, but fairness and the truth should be on the same page. Her take has one view in the room and the other standing out in the hallway. That is not helpful, no matter how well intentioned.
Men commit violent crimes much more than women do; yet you still had compassion for falsely accused men when it was "all men" -- just not black men.
"I knew Cops don't go about just murdering people."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_police_officers_convicted_of_murder
https://www.duckduckgo.com/cop-convicted-of-murder
https://www.duckduckgo.com/stop-police-brutality
Anon 12:24 AM,
If you want to use a descriptor like “INCREDIBLE”, I’d have to say Cecil Taylor fits that bill. Advance warning: his music is very dissonant. And for those who think he’s haphazardly pounding the keys, observe that he returns to the same motifs. I don’t think there’s anyone else on par with Taylor in ANY genre, including Classical:
Cecil Taylor - Jazz Ost-West Festival 1984 (fragm.)
Much of his music is actually rooted in the call-and-response of Blues.
J,
Perhaps by now you’ve figured out why I posted the Hamid Drake video. I predicted your response, and you followed as expected (though I was ready if you actually viewed it first). Obviously, my comment @ 9:49 PM is a non sequitur—just as much as your response to my initial non-comment of your post on “Study examines rape, race and wrongful convictions”, along with your implicit charge of racism attending it.
I have a love of music going back as far as I can remember, and I have an extensive collection of records (vinyl and cds). The large majority is Jazz. Are you aware that at one time Jazz was recognized as the only American original art form? (Nowadays, others claim there are other American art forms, but I demure.) Some have called it Black Classical Music. A question was posed on Quora: “Where did the idea that jazz is the only original American art form come from?” Answer by Ricky Schultz, former Record Label Executive, Producer and Consultant:
“Jazz has long been recognized around the world as America’s original art form, because it was created and formed here. A new musical language was forged. It’s elements of freedom, creativity and imagination are frequently associated with America and the American spirit. The 20th Century is often referred to as The American Century and The Jazz Age. Jazz was once the “pop” music of the land. The words “art form” have taken on a more fluid meaning so I won’t comment as to whether jazz is the only one. Jazz is also referred to as Freedom Music. Decades before the Civil Rights movement took hold, it was jazz musicians who began breaking down the barriers and planting the seeds of the 1960s [my bold].”
Maybe you know the meaning behind the famous, haunting Billie Holiday song “Strange Fruit”—it moves me every time I hear it. Perhaps you’ve heard/heard of Max Roach’s “Freedom Now Suite” from 1960? And perhaps you know that Thelonious Monk had his cabaret card taken away under dubious circumstances, which prevented him from playing live for a time in the ‘50s. Maybe you’re aware that the late Art Blakey had a steel plate in his head due to a severe beating he received by apparently racist cops.
[cont]
[cont]
In the movie Jerry Maguire, there’s a historical inaccuracy that I noted on first viewing. When the character (don’t recall his name) gives Cruise a cassette of jazz music (as a seduction tool), he comments about it containing the last concert of Miles Davis and John Coltrane playing together and it being from 1961 (’62?), when it was actually in 1960. Later in the bedroom scene with Rene Zellweger there’s an intro to a tune being played, upon which Cruise exclaims, “What is this sh*t!”, to which I actually said out loud (I was at a friend’s house watching it), “Are you kidding?; that’s Charles Mingus!” (the tune is “Haitian Fight Song”).
There’s a Dirty Harry movie in which Clint Eastwood walks into a black-owned barber shop with all black patrons, along with his rookie female officer/partner, with Eastwood replying to one man, “That’s mighty white of you.” Such a comment would NEVER pass today, and if modern day SJWs were to hear it, they might try to get the movie censored/censured. But it was a joke; and this was back when folks could make/take a joke, because many were not perpetually offended. While I don’t recall his name, there is one black actor who appeared in a number of Dirty Harry movies—a few times as a villain, and once as a police officer friend of Harry’s—because Eastwood liked the guy. Eastwood himself is a jazz fan, having directed Bird, the story of Charlie “Bird” Parker, as well as Straight, No Chaser, a documentary on the great Thelonious Monk. I recall my profound sadness when I went to see the latter as one of a relative handful of attendees. Doesn’t the larger public KNOW who Monk is?!
And maybe you’re familiar with the somewhat popular Donald Byrd jazz tune from ‘63 “Cristo Redentor”, which means Christ, the Redeemer? Jimmy Smith’s “The Sermon”? (My grandmother played the Hammond B3.) Or perhaps Lee Morgan’s “The Sidewinder”?
With the exception of the specific Ricky Schultz quote, all the foregoing was written off the top of my head. I posted the Hamid Drake video because I’ve long enjoyed his music and I saw him in a show in Austin, TX about ten years ago. Hands down it was the best performance I’ve ever attended. For the record, for the racially-sensitive, the quartet—headed by William Parker (hear O'Neal's Porch)—was three blacks and one white (somewhat ironically, the lone white is named Rob Brown). As I recall, all (or most all) attendees were white or Hispanic—to my disappointment. Though I watched the entire show intently, my focus was mostly on the amazing Drake, who had this perpetual smile as he played, seemingly effortlessly.
It truly saddens me that I’ve yet to meet any black who comes anywhere near my appreciation of Jazz (though there are obviously some out there). This is something to be proud of!
And you might be surprised to find out that my name is referenced in a biography of a black jazz artist. I found this out well after the book came out, and I’m not even exactly sure why I’m included, though I have an idea. In any case, I’m both honored and humbled that the author would have done so.
I’m offended that you would make an implicit claim that I’m racist against blacks merely because I didn’t reply to your earlier comment. Maybe you’ll walk back your comment now?
J,
Did you watch either of the Brian Banks videos I posted? When he lowers his head after being exonerated, a tear came to my eye.
Did you also note that at least one of the two men falsely accused by (white) Nikki Yovino was black?
Craig,
No, I don't want to watch YouTube videos, but thank you for summarizing.
Only you and God know if you are racist or not. I never called you racist. I only called for compassion for black men who are falsely convicted.
Then I immediately noticed how much more controversial it was to talk about falsely convicted black men -- as opposed to falsely convicted "all men".
Albert Popwell co-starred alongside Clint Eastwood in five films, starting off as "Wonderful Digby" in Coogan's Bluff (1968). The next four occasions were entries in the highly popular "Dirty Harry" films, firstly as the wounded bank robber at the receiving end of Eastwood's now legendary, "Do you feel lucky, punk?" speech in the opening minutes of Dirty Harry (1971). He was back as a sadistic pimp who murders a greedy call girl with a can of drain cleaner and is later executed by a vigilante motorcycle cop in Magnum Force (1973), and he was still on the wrong side of the law as a "Black Power" activist named "Big Ed" Mustapha in The Enforcer (1976). For his final appearance alongside Eastwood, Popwell was on the right side of Clint for once as a fellow detective in Sudden Impact (1983).
Popwell passed away on April 9, 1999, from complications arising after major surgery.
https://m.imdb.com/name/nm0691620/bio
This study that I downloaded from the U of M law department web site cites the following statistics for wrongful conviction for sexual assault:
Blacks accounted for 22 percent of convictions but 59 percent of exonerations for sexual assault.
The executive summary of the study states:
"African Americans are only 13% of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated. They constitute 47% of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations (as of October 2016), and the great majority of more than 1,800 additional innocent defendants who were framed and convicted of crimes in 15 large-scale police scandals and later cleared in 'group exonerations.'
We see this racial disparity for all major crime categories, but we examine it in this report in the context of the three types of crime that produce the largest numbers of exonerations in the Registry: murder, sexual assault, and drug crimes."
Puppet-Masters no doubt looove race debating because it can go 'round-and-'round FOREVER.
IDEA: Let's acknowledge that racism is stupid on move on.
"After Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in 1968, school teacher Jane Elliott wanted to teach her third-grade class about racism. Rather than a lengthy discussion about it, she decided to show the 8-year-olds what racism is all about in a famous "experiment":
With King shot just the day before in Memphis, Elliott encouraged her third-graders to discuss how something so horrible could happen.
"I finally said, 'Do you kids have any idea how it feels to be something other than white in this country?' "
The children shook their heads and said they wanted to learn, so Elliott set the rules. Blue-eyed children must use a cup to drink from the fountain. Blue-eyed children must leave late to lunch and to recess. Blue-eyed children were not to speak to brown-eyed children. Blue-eyed children were troublemakers and slow learners.
Within 15 minutes, Elliott says, she observed her brown-eyed students morph into youthful supremacists and blue-eyed children become uncertain and intimidated.
Brown-eyed children "became domineering and arrogant and judgmental and cool," she says. "And smart! Smart! All of a sudden, disabled readers were reading. I thought, 'This is not possible, this is my imagination.' And I watched bright, blue-eyed kids become stupid and frightened and frustrated and angry and resentful and distrustful. It was absolutely the strangest thing I'd ever experienced."
https://www.neatorama.com/2009/03/27/jane-elliotts-blue-eyesbrown-eyes-experiment-on-racism/
https://study.com/academy/lesson/group-prejudice-jane-elliotts-brown-eyes-vs-blue-eyes-experiment.html
J, you wrote to me:
No, I don't want to watch YouTube videos, but thank you for summarizing.
Only you and God know if you are racist or not. I never called you racist. I only called for compassion for black men who are falsely convicted.
Then I immediately noticed how much more controversial it was to talk about falsely convicted black men -- as opposed to falsely convicted "all men".
Let’s be clear: it was YOU who made this subject controversial. And, while you expect the readers here to view your comments in this regard—lest you get offended—YOU decline to read/view others’ contributions, by your own admission? Hypocrite.
No, you never outright called me racist, but you certainly implied it—as I’ve already stated. That is, unless you can explain how this means anything else:
It's amazing how the the beatings on the dead horse of this particular topic never stopped until suddenly I mentioned black men.
It is very disappointing coming from fellow self-professed Christians. Do we literally need to add the phrase, "there is neither black nor white" to get the point of the below?...
…I stand by everything I said. I know exactly why I said it, and I bet you do, too. It was the most satisfying thing I ever said to anybody in my whole life, and I am at peace now [my bold].
And you’ve absolutely refused to acknowledge that I’ve brought up cases involving blacks falsely accused (Clarence Thomas, Brian Banks) in this very thread before you posted your inflamed, accusatory comments. That’s not to mention that I’d posted the case of false accuser Nikki Yovino, and by extension the falsely accused black man (or men) in that case, months ago—though maybe before you began reading here.
It’s been my experience that the one who makes the charge of racism, whether implicitly or explicitly, is usually the one who is the racist—most especially when the individual denies their implicit or explicit charge when challenged on it. If that shoe fits…
Anon 12:04 PM,
Thanks for posting. I purposely wanted to write my comment without 'cheating' by doing any sort of online search, in order to make my larger point.
I like this scene: Dirty Harry (Sudden Impact) Target Practice.
Of course, I like the character's "I gots ta know" comment in the other movie.
We all know that "all white people are racists," and that the entire Justice system in America is at war "against black people," right? We also know that when black people claim to be a "victim" of race, we should always believe them. Well, real life is a little more complicated than the ultra-radical, left wing loony bin
fantasy "everyone is a victim" world they want to believe in.
Here's an "inconvenient" example that may lead thinking people to question what they are being told:
Here is the testimony of a President of a local chapter of the NAACP accusing this "racist" Cop of "PROFILING" him because he was "driving a nice car in a nice area." What he didn't realize is that his lies were about to be exposed due entirely to what Black people had been calling for ... Body Cams on Cops:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re30eyNKMuc
PS: Funny thing happened on the way to the installment of Body Cams ... the Cops are being proven over and over again to be innocent of these "police brutality," "unjustifiable use of force," etc. charges .... AND .... there's an awful lot of lying going on out there!
Craig,
Do you have a comment on my 12:09 PM post? Or Anoymous's 12:33 PM post? I would prefer to have your responses to those entries before writing a response to your 1:00 PM post.
J,
Given that your implicit charge of racism (unless you can illustrate how it's not) well-precedes these comments, I shall decline unless and until you acknowledge your charge.
RayB,
You referenced experience with a housing project of apartments that allowed black people to move into a neighborhood you lived in, in the past. I just want to point out that when blacks own homes, they take care of their neighborhoods. Homeownership vs. renting makes a difference in how well people take care of their property and even in how invested they are in their own community. Renters tend to be more transient and to vote less and move around more. Their kids are more likely to go from school to school. Overall they are less invested in their community.
I'm sure that the law-abiding black people were the primary people harmed by their criminal neighbors.
I had an experience of living across the street from a rural rental area comprised of trailers and shacks. My parents got a deal on a horse property right across the street. They paid no interest on their mortgage due to a homesteaders program of some kind. So we lived across the street from these folks. The owner, RJ, kept them all drunk and took their welfare checks. They were mostly rural black people. Sometimes Hispanic people lived there very briefly.
In all the years I lived across the street from those folks, I never knew them to make my family or any white families a victim of their crime. They were quite violent with each other at times. Once a man had his eye stabbed out, and my father had to take him to the emergency room in the back of the car in the morning while I was waiting for the school bus. Once I sat up in a tree in the front yard and watched several men beat up a little boy while his mother screamed in the doorway. I never had anything happen to me other than one time a drunken man tried to grab the reins of my pony while I was riding in an empty field adjacent to the property. I easily evaded his grab and went my way.
I'm sure many innocent black people were victimized while living there. The little boy who was beat up by several grown men is an obvious example. The man who had an eye stabbed out is one more example. I'm sure I don't even know the half of it.
Continued...
I had one more experience with black people that really stood out in my experience. My son attended a magnet school, an arts academy in a black neighborhood. He was in kindergarten at the time. Before he went there, I researched crime statistics and noted a high rate of theft but no violent crime. So he went there with about 25% white kids and the rest other races, mostly black.
All the children at that age are beautiful in their spirits. They are just kids, not angels, but they are not egotistical yet. They love to be helpful. They all accepted my son although he had autism and sometimes even kicked or hit them (very lightly because of his hyptonia -- and not in malice but from misunderstanding appropriate touch -- and enjoying the attention he received from acting out. It was a phase he got over after kindergarten.) The kids forgave him and hugged him. They pushed him on the swing, they took turns on the jumping stones and held his hand to help him. They engaged him in "zombie ring around the rosie" and "zombie tag" games. If he had any frustration about anything, from his shoes coming undone to opening a package, twenty kids jumped up eager to help him.
The kids touched my heart for their compassion to a white boy with autism and their eagerness to draw him out and get him to play with them.
Two things bothered me about the kids. One thing that bothered me was that their school went from a failing school to a successful school to a failing school again. What made the difference? Federal funds for after-school homework help.
The other thing that bothered me was how negative their environment was. They had 75% negative communication from adults and only about 25% positive. It was the most negative environment of all the schools I've been in. I've been in a lot. I was there and involved in the beginning a lot due to my child being functionally non-verbal at the time (with only me understanding his word approximations). So I know what all the environments were like. The mostly white schools gave the kids much more positive communication and a lot less negative communication.
I don't know how all the kids in the magnet school will turn out. But I know how they started life. They started life beautiful, bright and innocent in their minds and hearts.
Continued...
Of course I've had many other more casual experiences, including working with blacks, some of whom were my friends and some who were not.
When I think of black people, I don't just think of one kind of person. After all, white people are not just one kind of person.
Yes, I do know of black people doing bad things. White people also do bad things.
When black people do bad things, it accrues to their individual sinfulness, not their collective blame. Isn't it he same for white people? If individual white people do racist acts, does that accrue to the collective blame and shame of white people? Or does it accrue to their individual sin?
We are all sinners. The world is a messed up place, with lots of man's inhumanity to man and woman, and woman's inhumanity to man and woman, and the inhumanity of both to children. Sinners come in all races.
To project more sin collectively onto a race of people is to scapegoat that people. What does God think of that? Would God look into the heart and prefer more individual humility about one's own sin?
I notice that my post (the one which included mentioning Mr. T's comments in his autobiography) has been deleted.
Hmmm...
J,
I agree with your latest posts.
Not too long ago, I had a 2+ hour, one on one conversation with a highly educated and successful Black man that is a business associate of mine. We had an honest discussion about race, which all began with his stated assumption that "the only reason whites opposed Obama was because of race," to which I responded that I opposed Obama because of his policies and that alone. This opened up an opportunity to share with him some of my experiences in life to which he was quite surprised to hear. Actually, he was stunned by what I had to say.
Here are just a few of the points that I made:
I informed him that unlike the Black community, Whites are not united, but in fact, are often severely divided along ethnic, social, political, religious and economic grounds. I told him that ethnic groups often hate each other and that all hate is as a result of "the fall" when sin entered into the world. I relayed a true story about when I was in high school and had an interest to date one of the Italian girls in my class. I was threatened that "I better not" by the Italian boys from the neighborhood. He was stunned to hear this. I also told him that the Whites that I have known in my lifetime do not talk about race and that I can honestly say that I have known VERY few actual "racists," but they tended to be the ignorant jerks that hate just about everyone. I emphatically stated that the vast majority of White people do not hate Black people, but fear the crime that is often associated with them moving into neighborhoods, to which he did not argue that point.
I also related a true story concerning my then future wife. We had discussed marriage, but were both going through very trying economic times during a very bad recession. To make a long story short, my future wife ended up briefly working, way below her abilities I might add, for her businessman uncle at commercial laundry that he owned. Among the 20+ workers, she was the only white girl, the rest were all Black. Her and a Black young single mother soon became very good friends and would always eat lunch together. One day, the Black girl told her that she "could no longer be friends with her" because the rest of the Black girls were putting too much pressure on her! That was the end of their friendship. Tragically, this girl soon died in an auto accident. We went to the wake and were the only Whites their aside from her uncle. To say that we were treated coldly is an understatement.
(continued)
I gave my friend more illustrations ... One that really hit home. I said "if my wife and I went out to eat and at the next table the people were loud and vulgar, we would move." If they were White people, they would think nothing of it. However, if they were Black, they would probably immediately think we moved because we are "racists," and not because they were acting obnoxiously.
I also told him that I have known many Black people that I would love to have as neighbors, but also, many that I would not, and that it had nothing to do with the color of their skin. The same is true for White people. I've known many obnoxious types that I would not want living on my quiet street!
To make a long story short, my friend repeatedly stated that he had "never had a conversation like this" in his entire life! Quite a statement coming from a 60+ year old man.
(continued)
The bottom line is this J: I agree with your recent posts. I am all about truth and refuse to be influenced by groups that seek to cause hate and division based upon misleading "studies," that all seem to have one goal in mind: advance hatred by entire groups of people towards other entire groups of people. The people that are behind a lot of this have an agenda, and it is often political, all too often they are the beneficiaries economically as well.
I have another story that I may choose to share with you ....
RayB,
What a wonderful conversation! It's not often a black and white individual have a heart to heart conversation like that.
It's been my observation that rural and small-town whites in the Midwest don't mind international students coming into their small university towns, because the students are so quiet and polite.
I sympathize with your wife. I worked in a factory third shift with mostly black people. The two black women who worked next to me were never rude and never caused me problems -- but never, ever talked to me. One (younger) would speak to me if I spoke to her first. The other (older) would just look at me, and then the other one would talk. The younger one didn't resent me but didn't want anything to do with me. The older one seemed vaguely either distrustful or resentful. There was a wall up. I couldn't read her mind. It was embarrassing to me, because they worked circles around me, talking to each other the whole time. I tried to keep up.
P.S.
To my 2:34 PM
Still there, my bad!
Rob Shimshock: Teacher Resigns After Calling For Kavanaugh Assassination
Craig,
Here is a comedy selection that you will find especially appealing, I think: https://youtu.be/flk9XrGMUIw
For those who haven't seen this, this is hilarious!
Christine Blasey Ford's Fake "Vocal Fry" Voice MOCKED By Star Wars Star. Kavanaugh Hearing
My sister and I had a similar experience to yours wife's, RayB, when we lived near an Indian Reservation during our high school years. I, a white girl, would be ganged up on 7 to 1 by the Indian girls during dodge ball games in P.E. class (and not just there). They did everything short of really hurt you to take you out of the game, or make you feel their presence and want to leave.
My sister befriended an Indian girl and they would hang out at lunch period but it didn't take long (after a few months) and the Indian girl called off their friendship because she was beaten up by other Indian girls for having a white girl friend. What I, and my sister, were glad to find out years later, was that particular Indian girl went on to get an education and left the reservation. She is a successful person in the supposed "white people's world" and still goes back to the reservation to participate in the festivals because she still loves the people and culture she was raised in.
Anon 6:08 PM,
Sorry, not my cup of tea. Of that group Ron White is the funniest. Not to mention Engvall goes further than necessary at the end, though I understand it’s not Christian comedy. I do like Foxworthy’s word redefinitions, though (like “initiate”, with a meaning akin to an’-then-she-ate). A while back I had an eye infection, with the doctor calling it blepharitiso—which I immediately recognized as from the Greek (the verb blepō)—and I responded, “shouldn’t that be called psoriasis” (sore-eye-asis)?
In the clip you reference, the slang use of awesome annoys me, frankly. What about the song “Our God Is An Awesome God”? #s 1 & 2 below reflect the meaning I prefer, as reflected in the Christian song. In fact, I recently posted a blog article in which I wrote “feelings of awe”, wondering if readers would understand the meaning, given the prevalent slang use of awesome.
awesome:
adjective
1. causing or inducing awe; inspiring an overwhelming feeling of reverence, admiration, or fear: an awesome sight.
2. exhibiting or marked by awe; showing reverence, admiration, or fear.
3. Slang. very impressive: That new white convertible is totally awesome.
^blepharitis (no "o" at the end)
Craig 6:51 PM,
I hadn't listened to that in years and had forgotten about his randier definitions, sorry about that.
And I certainly agree with you that RW is the funniest!
-Had you said LTCG I would've been stunned! ; )
Yeah, but, I've quoted him, I do believe, on this very blog: "I don't care who are you are, that's funny right there".
Well, I found LTCG's FIRST Blue Collar Comedy Tour appearance great. After that, not consistently up to that standard. That being said, he certainly has his moments.
Personality Type and Political Affiliation
I think this is fascinating. Democrats are heavier on Ps. Republicans are heavier on Js. Democrats are slightly heavier on Fs. Republicans are slightly heavier on Ts.
Of course if you look at the breakdowns, what I'm describing is only a tendency. All the personality types have representation among Republicans, Democrats, middle-of-the-roaders and more categories.
Most likely to be Democrats:
ENFP
ENTP
ESTP
ESFJ
ENTJ
ISFP
ISFJ
Most likely to be Republicans:
ESFP
ENFJ
ESTJ
INTP
INFJ
INTJ
ISTJ
Most likely not to be political:
INFP
Most likely to be middle-of-the-road:
ISTP
Popes act like politicians, talk like politicians and create a "public" persona like politicians. They are also masters at the art of talking without really saying anything that has any real meaning or applicable substance.
Here's another example of more nonsensical gibberish from this pope ...
https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2018/10/13/pope-francis-beware-well-mannered-demons/
Constance,
Although it may be uncomfortable to contemplate getting an upgraded blogspot please do so.
Although I am not Catholic by any means, I am tired, quite frankly, of the endless stream of posts by RayB on that particular topic. Tired too of the endless stream of lengthy academic posts between Susanna &/or Craig &/or J. Tired too of the super-lengthy stream of topic informational posts by Susanna. Tired too of J's post after post after post. (As one poster put it "Jsays Jsays Jsays Jsays Jsays".) You HAD an incomparably more severe such problem with MCE until you stepped in. All this is NOT AT ALL to say that Susanna, RayB, Craig and J DON'T make significant contributions to this blogspot, they MOST certainly DO! I, for one, like many of them. It's just that it's a Royal Pain I.T.A. to have to wade through all of that verbiage to see what else there might that I REALLY would like to see IF that current verbiage does not happen to be of interest. I do NOT suggest limiting them like you did MCE but INSTEAD upgrading your blogspot to be able to go DIRECTLY to BOTH authors AND topics IF one so desires! So you would KEEP the current stream format BUT ADD the ability to go to JUST topic or author! This is not about RayB, Susanna, Craig, or J, per se, NOR should it be construed as such, but about unnecessarily (with the currently available technology) having to wade through voluminous verbiage. One may be tired of a certain topic/author, let time go by during which they partake of others, then GO BACK to that topic or author. This way ALL are served better!
USA Today asked black feminist writer Ijeoma Oluo to write an article saying that she does not believe in due process for men who have been accused of sexual harrassment. She refused.
I'm not so much interested in her opinions in her article on Medium that I linked to. I'm interested in the fact that the editors at USA Today would ask a writer to write an article about a specific opinion -- and such a pernicious and divisive one at that. Advocating against due process!
(And this will be my last post in this thread Anonymous 11:43 AM. I will try to limit myself to just one or two posts per thread from now on.)
"I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent." Because of the violence involved you can charge a minor with murder and with theft and with battery why not charge with rape? Also, to in this case bypass the legal fiction (lies, idiocy) that would allow such horror to be done with impugnity. but this is NOT ABOUT A CRIMINAL TRIAL this is about vetting someone's character. IF he had been charged, convicted and punished back then, being a minor he would have no record of it now anyway. so this vetting would still have to happen. I AGREE SHE'S LYING ditto the rest, I'm addressing the issue raised. A distinction should be made between jail bait (physically mature but illegal) and pubescent or pre pubescent. statue of limitatins makes all "due process" you ignorant people demand impossible, in terms of criminal trial at least, most civil also out, but that is more likely true than not standard. Same as the investigation.
"The underlying message seems to be; if you're going to commit crime, do it against someone else other than Black people!"
you really don't get it. a lot of people don't mind oppression by their own family, tribe, race, nation but can't stand it from outsiders. This is against that and saying that a black person bleeds as much from damage by a black as by a white and freedom to be oppressed only by fellow blacks not whites is not freedom.
http://shoebat.org/2018/10/10/major-protestant-organization-the-john-templeton-foundation-is-financing-and-funding-eugenics-and-a-sinister-scientist-who-is-using-aborted-fetuses-for-human-experimentation/
pubic hair on can of coke - that was NOT TO BE A TURN ON but an accusation she had done it to him as A MODE OF VOODOO love spell casting, that he might ingest it with the drink. he accused her of doing this as I recall, though of course he did it himself. Frankly, I don't recall any grabbing or groping or threats so I don't see that his alleged behavior was really horrible but it was really inappropriate.
The Kate Millet article - this is NOTHING like what original feminism was about. most in fact were demanding the same standard of chastity for men as well as for women, only one high profile type was into "free love" and even she eventually admitted that monogamy is how people would settle out after a time of experimentation. Most if not all were anti abortion or considered it a necessary evil and by product of abusive male supremacy society
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fanea5kcfg think new age ab used quantum physics and quantum mechanics? now the gay freaks are doing it Paul Joseph Watson describes and denounces this.
Anonymous posted to Constance @ 11:43 AM (in part):
Constance,
"Although it may be uncomfortable to contemplate getting an upgraded blogspot please do so."
"Although I am not Catholic by any means, I am tired, quite frankly, of the endless stream of posts by RayB on that particular topic."
Anon,
Although it may be "uncomfortable to contemplate" for you, the American Catholic Church is now under investigation by 13 STATES regarding their alleged role in the crimes of PEDOPHILIA, i.e., sexual abuse crimes against innocent children, along with the subsequent enabling of pedophilia criminals and the ensuing obstruction of justice by the RCC cover-ups.
The main stream media continues to play down this incredible scandal involving the lives of innocent children. The Papacy as well, mainly through the pope, continues their propaganda scheme of deflection and denial, along with an all out attack upon those that are attempting to righteously expose these crimes, such as Archbishop Vigano.
I feel genuine sorrow for you if you don't see the importance in exposing this criminal behavior that effects directly the lives of innocent children. What subject, may I ask, do you think should take precedence over this? Should we just ignore all this Anon because you are "tired" of it all?
On a side note, Anon, if you don't like the posts of myself, Susanna, Craig, J, Paul, etc., etc. why don't you just ignore those posts, instead of attempting to pigeon hole all of us into silence?
J said (in part) @ 1:50 PM:
(And this will be my last post in this thread Anonymous 11:43 AM. I will try to limit myself to just one or two posts per thread from now on.)
J,
Don't allow an "Anonymous" to silence you. I may not always agree with you, but I have found your posts to be an intelligent, thoughtful contribution to this blog.
If you have something to say ... say it! "Anonymous @ 11:43 AM is just one opinion, a disgruntled one at that!
RayB 10:37 AM,
Don't try to twist my post into what you try to make it.
It was making the case from a regular readersr perspective as to WHY Constance should actively pursue upgrading her blogspot.
THAT was the point.
You seem to like to have a chip on your shoulder and will manufacture a knocking off of it if necessary.
I was abundantly CLEAR on NOT limiting your postings but you totally ignored THAT. No, it HAS to be that I don't care about the awful crime of pedophilia.
That's truly pathetic.
Anonymous 11:08,
Do you have a link to a web page that covers upgrading a Blogger blog? A search I did brought up nothing.
Is it possible that you could have upgrading Blogger, confused with migrating a blog to different platform (like WordPress)?
I don't think I've ever seen any blog that functions in the way you describe. Is it possible you are confusing blog comment threads with discussion boards?
I'm sorry; I don't know you at all, and I don't know how sophisticated you are about computer stuff. I've known many intelligent people to get easily confused about things like this. I hope I don't offend you.
If you take issue with anything I've said, the easiest way to dispel it to please just provide a link to examples of what you are talking about. Thanks.
I'm truly not trying to start something. I really just don't know what you are talking about. I used to make web pages for a living, and I know WordPress very well. I have limited experience with Blogger from years ago. So I'm just thinking if I don't know what you're talking about, then I wonder if Constance does, either.
J 2:02 PM,
I was going by Marko's comments some time back. By upgrading I meant switching to a more advanced platform if necessary.
That would mean exporting the archives and importing them into a new platform. It would also mean a new URL. The links in the sidebars would need to be re-created. Constance would need to learn the new platform. She would have to redirect them from this blog to the new one. There is quite a bit of time and hassle involved in all of this.
Well, perhaps she knows someone who would donate their time to help pull such a thing off. But if not, so be it. In such a case we'll have to make do.
Shame though, if so.
This blog could be so much more.
P.S.
J, I meant to thank you for your courteous tone at 2:02 PM
Michael Voris of the Church Militant emphatically states that the "establishment" Catholic news agencies are part of the RCC cover-up and cannot be trusted. These agencies refuse to report on anything that is remotely critical regarding the homosexual (mainly) fueled pedophilia scandal.
On a personal note, just one example ... I used to visit the site CNS News, until I noticed that it never reported on anything related to the numerous controversial statements by Pope Francis, along with a virtual news blackout on the clergy/pedophilia scandal.
This shouldn't be too surprising, when you consider that one of their mainstay contributors is none other than Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League, a $500,0000 (plus benefits) per year paid propagandist for the Catholic Church establishment. He is the same guy that immediately did a hit piece on the PA Grand Jury investigation, along with attacking AB Vigano's scathing 11 page indictment which ended by calling for the resignation of Pope Francis.
Here is the video by Church Militant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnm1tgEx3DU
Ray B
Just watched the above Michael Voris video
Thanks
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/up-to-9-5-million-net-neutrality-comments-were-made-with-stolen-identities/
https://www.prisonplanet.com/eric-holder-hillary-clinton-finally-admitted-democrats-think-its-okay-to-cheat-to-win.html
The Story Of David And Goliath Gets Archaeological Evidence Backing It Up!
https://www.dailywire.com/news/37279/story-david-and-goliath-gets-archaeological-hank-berrien
I don’t really know much about The Economist, but, just by its name, I’d assume it’s business-oriented, with a focus on economics. Yet I would be wrong. It looks to be just another social justice/political/anti-‘conservative’ rag. The article’s title, its subtitle, and the title of the chart as well as the statements that respondents were to respond with a ‘yay’ or a ‘nay’ in this chart accompanying the article are all set in loaded language—and just before the mid-term elections. And note that it’s split by gender and Trump vs. Hillary voters.
After a year of #MeToo, American opinion has shifted against victims
Survey respondents have become more sceptical about sexual harassment
Victim blaming
United States, % of adults agreeing
Now let me fix it:
After a year of #MeToo, American opinion has shifted against automatically believing accusers
Survey respondents have become more skeptical about claims of sexual harassment
Trends in opinion
United States, % of adults agreeing
The first query posits a bad dichotomy: “False accusations of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported assaults”. I don’t think anyone would suggest that one who has been victimized should not report the incident(s). How about “False accusations are increasing” (Y or N)?
The second one is just horribly worded: “Women who complain about sexual harassment cause more problems than they solve”. How about: “False claims can make it more difficult for real victims to come forward”.
The last one is a bit better: “Men who sexually harassed women 20 years ago should not lose their jobs today”; but, let’s change it to “Men who are accused of and and found guilty of sexual harassment of women 20 years ago should not lose their jobs today” (Y or N).
I have a friend in HR who outed two different false accusers at two different jobs! All he did was go by guidelines set forth by the government in investigating sexual harassment claims, forming them into individual questions. The first woman recanted (jilted lover seeking revenge). The second one’s claims could not be substantiated, and there was reasonable suspicion for her claims (plus, the accused, her boss, had a spotless record), so she was moved to another division within the company with a no-nonsense female superior. Shortly after she was transferred something else came up, casting more suspicion on her (and she quit six months later).
35 Times Men Were Falsely Accused Of Sexual Assault
Check out #35 and its ramifications on Roe v Wade. Of course, this is a sample of known cases; how many others didn't go far enough along because they were dismissed as false before they ever gained any traction, because of recantings, and how many other falsely-accused men languish in prisons?
Anon @ 12:47 AM ...
While these stories are somewhat interesting, I don't put much "faith" in them because already have infinitely better evidence that the account of David and Goliath actually occurred as a factual event. It's found in I Samuel chapter 17.
No amount of archeological proof will turn a true skeptic into a believer in Christ. The reason being is that people do not reject Christ due to a lack of evidence or for intellectual/philosophical reasons; they reject Him because they "love darkness, because their deeds are evil." John 3:19 All human beings are born skeptics, because their focus is on the only thing that ultimately counts to them; themselves. Christ demands to reign over them as Lord and King, which means, that they must give up their sins and follow Him. This is the precise reason why mankind is in a state of rebellion against God, and we all inherited it through the fall in the Garden.
The bottom line is that we don't need secular evidence to verify what we believe in. The Bible is all we need for all matters concerning doctrine and how we conduct ourselves in life, thru of course the gift of faith and grace as granted by God. Ephesians 2:8,9
Uighur Americans Speak Against China Internment Camps. Their Relatives Disappear...
https://www.wral.com/uighur-americans-speak-against-china-s-internment-camps-their-relatives-disappear/17924910/
China says internment camps are 'free vocational training'...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-says-internment-camps-free-vocational-training-041630032.html
China Internment Camps Swell; Widens Dragnet...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-uighur-camps-swell-as-beijing-widens-the-dragnet-1534534894
Craig,
Interesting post. Many years ago, when I was a young believer and single, my then girlfriend and future wife were attending a church in our area. After the service, it was customary for the younger adults to gather and just socially talk in an area that provided coffee, etc. I have never forgotten one of my experiences. As our group engaged in casual conversation, I began to talk with one of the young ladies that stood next to me. All of a sudden, completely out of nowhere, she loudly admonished me in front of the entire group that she "was married" and was "not interested in me!"
This happened without even a hint of any type of flirting, etc. on my part! Whatever the motive it was that moved this nutcase to act in the manner she did, I never found out. Perhaps she was attempting to "prove" to her husband (who was standing in the group) that he should be lucky to have her because there are a lot of other guys that wish they were in his place? Who knows? From that point on, I avoided her like the plague.
I had a similar incident like that happen one evening while shopping in a supermarket. That time, I didn't even talk to the woman. The husband approached me in the parking lot claiming that I "was trying to hit on his wife." He obviously recognized by my reaction that the charge was complete fiction. He meekly said "well, that's what she said" and walked away. I tend to doubt that the wife actually thought that her skinny little husband was going to come over and approach me, instead of just driving away with the thought that she was a real prize that should be appreciated!
The point to all this is that there are obviously women out there that are suffering from some type of deranged syndrome! Many of these women make completely fictional claims against men for a variety of reasons. Of course, some are credible, and that cannot be denied. But they ALL should not be believed simply because a woman is making the claim.
I finally found this one that I’d been looking for:
How to Ruin a Mans Life over $13
And though the women’s allegations are refuted, they got off scot free.
-------
And this false accuser works in Human Resources!:
Bodycam footage shows woman falsely accused cop of sexual assault | New York Post
Her attempt at shifting the blame backfires. Since men routinely lose their jobs over allegations of this sort--whether proven true or not--then I sure hope this woman lost hers over her proven false allegation.
-------
Video from 8 years ago:
Feminism Explained
@ 2:46:
Man: So tell me about the work you do.
Woman: We fight for abortion rights.
Man: How?
Woman: We watch the Supreme Court and hope Roe vs. Wade isn’t overturned.
Man: But nothing’s changed in decades.
Woman: We keep watching just in case.
Man: What else do you do?
Woman: Well that keeps us pretty busy.
…Man: So what other work does your feminist organization do?
Woman: We tell people to vote for Democrats.
Man: Always?
Woman: Yes.
Man: Even if the Democrat mistreats women?
Woman: They would never do that.
Man: What if a woman accused him of doing so?
Woman: She’s probably just trying to get attention.
Man: What if other women backed up her claims?
Woman: Women are liars. You have to stand by your party.
City of Atlanta reaches $1.2 Million settlement with former Atlanta Fire Chief who was fired for holding to his Christian convictions. Several years ago, the Chief had written a book detailing the Bible's teachings on marriage being between one man and one woman, along with a brief reference on Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. For this, he was eventually fired, which resulted in a lawsuit brought upon by Fire Chief Cochran. Atlanta city council voted to settle, with the Mayor's signature pretty much a sure thing.
The ramifications of this case is huge, and marks another pivotal defeat for the radical left regarding its quest to silence and destroy all Christian influence upon society.
Listen to Dr. Steve Turley's encouraging comments regarding this matter ... and more:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uVF4B-MK-w
Hi RayB,
Its all classic "silence through fear" tactics.
Love it when it backfires because a righteous man stands up to them.
CHINA BROADENS ITS PROPAGANDA DRIVE TO HEARTLAND AMERICA
October 20, 2018
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — China's propaganda machine has taken aim at American soybean farmers as part of its high-stakes trade war with the Trump administration.
The publication of a four-page advertising section in the Des Moines Register has opened a new battle line in China's effort to break the administration's resolve. U.S. farmers are a key political constituency for Trump, and Beijing has imposed tariffs on American soybeans as retaliation for Trump's tariffs on hundreds of billions in Chinese imports.
China regularly disseminates propaganda in the West through its China Daily newspaper to try to influence public opinion. But the advertorial in the Register was unusual for deploying not a national publication in New York or Washington but a newspaper in the farm state of Iowa.
---
Stanley Chao, a business consultant who has written a book called "Selling to China," said it's not entirely surprising that China would try to take its trade arguments directly to American farmers, whose crops have been hit by Beijing's retaliatory tariffs.
"This is the norm for the Chinese propaganda machine," Chao said.
Chao noted that when a Chinese dissident won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize — chosen by the Norwegian Nobel Committee and an embarrassment for Beijing — China responded by placing propaganda ads in Scandinavian newspapers.
In addition to its connection to the tariffs China imposed on American soybeans and other crops, Iowa is also home to Terry Branstad, a former governor of the state who is now the U.S. ambassador to Beijing. And in the past, President Xi has visited Iowa, whose caucuses serve as the first contest in every presidential election year.
Trump tweeted a photo of the "China Watch" edition that ran in the Register, calling it propaganda and asserting that Beijing was trying to interfere in U.S. elections...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/chinese-broadens-propaganda-drive-heartland-132238597.html
The ever evolving luminescence of the Barbara Marx Hubbard
The culmination of all knowledge, technology with the human is god!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RupWYbPYi0
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-20/latest-provocation-beijing-us-plans-new-warship-passage-through-taiwan-strait
Here's an outside-the-box idea to (eventually) put an end to all of the saber-rattling as well as to mutually highly benefit both of these particular countries:
See about whether the people (there and here) would like the peaceful, industrious, sovereign island of Taiwan to become the 51st state.
And if so, do so!
U.S. Justice Department has opened an investigation regarding the massive amount of sex abuse of children by Catholic clergy in Pennsylvania. This marks the first time that the Federal government has become involved in the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, and it could involve RICO violations, due to the conspiratorial nature in covering up these crimes.
With 13 states (and counting) currently running their own investigations, look for the Feds to expand into more states.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-church-abuse-pennsylvania/justice-department-probes-catholic-church-sex-abuse-in-pennsylvania-idUSKCN1MS327
Church Militant provides their take on the Federal Prosecutors investigation of the PA dioceses. Also, be sure to watch the video that covers the "silencing" of a whistle-blower priest that was about to expose the "under reporting" of sex abuse within the diocese of Buffalo. A day before he was to go public, the priest suddenly "committed suicide" by allegedly shooting himself TWICE in the back of the head!
The people involved in Pedophilia are driven by their master Satan ... and they don't play around with anyone that seeks to end their evil pleasures!
Read it ... see it ... here:
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/breaking-federal-govt-launches-criminal-probe-into-catholic-church-in-pa
This is not for the faint at heart ... Dr. Dave Janda and Greg Hunter discuss, at length (1hr., 43 minutes) the REAL problems of our debt driven economy, along with the machinations of the deep state. If you want to know the real situation we are in, how we got here and who "dunnit," this is a very good primer, all based on truthful information!
Make a pot of coffee, pay attention, and THINK!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fogcY-NNDg
To add to what RayB said at 1:35 PM
https://www.duckduckgo.com/federal-reserve-conspiracy-pdf
Also, type in:
"Federal Reserve Expose" at
https://www.youtube.com
https://www.real.video
Stand therefore having your loins girt about with truth.
BREAKING BLOCKBUSTER NEWS ...
NJ Senator Cory Booker, probable candidate for the Democratic nomination for President, has been accused of sexual assault. The alleged victim is a liberal homosexual male that makes the serious charge that Booker assaulted him in a men's room back in 2014.
Booker was extremely nasty during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, staunchly claiming that "victims of sexual assault need to be believed." Well, Senator, now what do you have to say?
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-21/spartacus-falls-cory-booker-accused-sexually-assaulting-man-restroom
Hi Dan, it's interesting that Barbara Marx Hubbard caught your eye too! I posted the following observations a few months ago back in Constance' Pope Francis Earth Charter blog post comments:
---
FINDHORN Co-Creatives - David Spangler, Barbara Marx Hubbard
It's been quite some time since I posted in Constance' comments but after looking at Findhorn's website recently, I wanted to share a couple of the bizarre events that they've planned for later this year and are promoting quite enthusiastically. Findhorn seem to be returning to their fairy days in an attempt to push a new 'New' agenda forward.
- In October, David Spangler will be heading up a week long conference at Findhorn entitled. "Co-Creative Spirituality Shaping Our Future with the Unseen Worlds." Scheduled activities for the week include collaborating with the fairies (Sidhe), angelic realms, techno elementals and other beings!
https://www.findhorn.org/programmes/co-creative-spirituality/
Prior to David's week, Findhorn will be working with Barbara Marx Hubbard on 'The New Story' online video-conferencing teaching programme which will spread itself thinly over eight months. "... as part of our evolutionary new story, Homo sapiens is giving birth to a new species — Homo universalis (universal human) — a higher conception of humanity that co-evolves with nature, co-exists with high-tech genius, co-creates with spirit and leads with love."
http://newstoryhub.com/
Maybe Findhorn are trying to get folks hooked in to Global Ecovillage Network type projects, I do wonder, especially as Ken Wilber was speaking about 'Transformational Communities of Tomorrow' at Findhorn about a year ago. https://www.findhorn.org/programmes/transformational-communities-of-tomorrow/
https://ecovillage.org/. GEN is registered as an international charity in Scotland.
Interestingly, Lucis Trust mention GEN (amongst others) in their Newsletter 2016 #2 - Agents of the Future. https://www.lucistrust.org/world_goodwill/newsletter_2016_2_agents_of_the_future
The buzz word seems to be Co-Creatives / Co-Creation and I'm also noticing a subtle use of the lotus blossom in some logos and video graphics.
---
~ K ~
Post a Comment