SPECIAL: POTUS Trump’s Executive Order 5

On 27 January, 2016, came the “Executive Order: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry to the United States” or, colloquially, the one that started “it” all. In one sense, the public outcry stemming from the order was much ado about nothing. Now, before the effervescent heroes of the broadly-dented left take their gleaming axes back from the grinder and turn them on me, kindly allow me to explain further. In another sense, the outcry was somewhat justified.

In the actual order itself, only one nation was mentioned by name, that state being Syria. Reducing the number of migrants allowed into America as relief from the staggering humanitarian crises in the (clearly) failed state from 110,000 annually to 55,000. While not exactly specified, given the paragraph that it follows the POTUS was referring to Syrian refugees. That, right there, the fact that I had to connect the dots for myself and then for our readers, summarizes the chief problem that emerged from this order. Again, take this assurance, I will explain all of this in full.

As I stated previously, there’s one nation (aside from our own) mentioned specifically in this order, and it’s Syria. The others are implied and later revealed via list from the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security as inferred by the order. That, again, is a problem because if the POTUS is going to take such a step, one that he and everyone this side of the grave knows is going to gain worldwide attention, he/she needs to specify who (exactly who) is being banned from entry and for what reason, for how long and how and when the situation may be remedied. Some of that information is there but you gotta really piece this together yourself or, as is your case, my dear reader, you may opt to permit one of the half-dozen or so halfway conscionable journalists alive today to reel the details in for your perusal. And here we are.

Protests of the “Travel Ban” at UC-Berkeley

No mention, in spite of what you may have heard elsewhere, is made of religion. Not Islam, not Buddhism, not Christianity, not money nor Roger Goodell and the NFL. And you know Goodell thinks he’s some sort of divine variant or another. While the leftist media and their equally-frenzied pawns at UC-Berkeley and the Ivy beleaguered fellows and ladies are wrong in their implication that the POTUS banned Muslims, they are right in the sense that by banning individuals from places like Syria and Iran, for instance, one is banning (primarily) Muslims. This is no different, in a sense, than saying that a ban on Western and Central Europe (to include, say, England, France, Germany and Italy) is a ban on Christians. While one could also argue that this is a ban on the Jed Clampett variant of humanity, it would be more appropriate to surmise that than to infer that any significant number of Christians would be affected coming from Germany. That’s far too low a metric to be of any real concern. But I digress (every day).

The point in this sense is well-taken that, yes, Muslims constitute the majority of those banned due to their being a majority of the populations in the affected nations. Yet Whitney, we have a serious problem with all the gnashing of teeth (all four not rotted out by that crack-rock) and the rending of garments (wardrobe dysfunction) over charges that this order by the POTUS is “racist”: Islam is not a race. It is not an ethnicity. To be Muslim is to belong, if you will, to a religion, to adhere to a certain faith, et al. But banning Muslims (if that were the intent of the order, in fact) is no more racist than banning all Christians would be because, again, neither constitutes a race. Notice a trend in my abnormally-extended commentary here? That’s because the first several Executive Orders issued by President Trump required little due to their simple, nearly self-explanatory nature as well as the media not going off the grid in their frenzied application of their more disingenuous talents. In the case of this order, both elements of the prior framework changed mid-game: this Executive Order can be labeled ambiguous for reasons I’ve stressed (namely having to decipher what is actually intended; not a good look at all) and, for their part, both the mainstream media and all stripes and walks of left-leaning groups of action1 took what was clearly several open fields of daylight (given the lack of clarity) and took it miles down the road. In short, the regulars on President Trump’s “Enemies List” smelled blood in the linguistic water and exploited the confusion and Eureka! Henceforth was found this Philosopher’s Stone, their Great Work called “Chaos” was loosed and directly convinced tens of millions (I’m being low-key here) that the very fabric of the Federal system, even the Republic itself, was on the verge of collapse.

In addressing the emergence of special circumstances for the potential need for circumventing the effects of the order, the POTUS further directed that “The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest.” That phrase, however, about the “national interest” came off as sufficiently vague to warrant considerable angst by my media colleagues on the left-handed path/side of the isle. Of note, conversely, is the respective lack of angst (and preference for use) in uttering the equally-ambiguous “greater good.” Sounds like marketing to me…

…at any rate, there’s one other section that came to be of primary concern to the primordial urges running riot on the Left and that was the rather bizarre yearning to make this order appear to benefit Christians to a degree equal to the harm it was allegedly meant to inflict upon Muslims. How so? Well, the POTUS informs the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State of the discretion he is deliberately positioning them to wield in order to “make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.  Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.” What’s interesting about this portion of the order and the grossly-inflated screams of panic here is that, yet again, the POTUS makes no distinction amongst religions here. Yet again, however, the inference by the Left is technically accurate in that the religious minorities of those nations affected by these (temporary) “bans” are extensively Christian, notably.

Regardless, I’d like to make a note of my own here (and then we’re move on to a final point and then a conclusion) and that is that the mainstream media is doing all the concluding for everybody here to include filling in the blanks for “bans” relating to nations that are known breeding grounds for terrorists (I’ve heard zero arguments made that Iran, for example, poses no threat to America) by saying it’s a ban specifically of Muslims and, in this portion, going even farther to say that it’s Christians being persecuted. The truth here is that, yes, while Christians are among the minorities in the affected nations they’re not the only religious minority in those nations affected. Fortunately for all of the vociferous hatemongers of right-wing derivation salivating at the chance to send ballistic projectiles into the skull of anyone dark enough to be Muslim, the mainstream media has kindly connected the dots for them (which the POTUS failed to) to let them know, by their own, surgically-precise admission, that Christian minorities are being persecuted by Muslim majorities. Again, see this point and see it well: the POTUS wanted to lend further time for vetting immigrants from nations that have been mills for the production of terrorists. Those are facts, not rumors. What did the MSM (mainstream media) do? They told everyone it was an Executive Order directly designed to punish Muslims who are (let’s recap) a religion, not a race. So that’s a major swing and a miss that still resonated strongly. Then, the MSM also spread another contorted talking point, being so sweet as to connect another brutal dot for the extremists on all sides, but especially for the benefit of Neo Nazis: “Hey, kids! In those poor, banned, majority-Muslim countries, do you know who the President of the United States (POTUS) is saying we can make exceptions for because the mean-but-banned Muslims are persecuting them? CHRISTIANS! And that too is racist, it’s profiling, and it’s wrong!”

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” Sounds about right right about now, doesn’t it?

Print it, slap a label on it and it’d better read “The Dot Connection” because damn it, if the MSM doesn’t have a third swing-and-a-whiff (not of grapeshot, as it were) en route then…wait, yes, here it comes: the MSM has painted this as permanent (it wasn’t, as all nations other than Syria were given specific timeframes for reporting and conference betwixt, specifically, the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security to include recommendation of specific remedial legislation) and mean-spirited in banning Muslims (again, it was a ban on nationalities, not religions) and benefitting only Christians (Christians aren’t the only religious minorities in the countries affected) and, last but not least, downright hateful. Oh, well then let’s review the text of this central tenet of the Executive Order at hand (aside from the protection of the American people). since apparently the MSM cared only for creating labels and insinuating half-truths or presenting their own “alternative facts.” Yes, the same alternative facts they so relentlessly deride our inarguably-imaginative POTUS & Co. for.

Brace yourself.

“The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law.  In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.”

No words can measure how heavily these evil people need to be held to account for this outrage.

Notice anything missing here? Yet again, those so desperately opposed to the POTUS they’ll say anything (if it means hurting his aims and insulting those who support him) have come out and filled in the alleged “gaps” here and said that President Trump is talking about Muslims.

Again, the intent of the order is clearly to bring a strong hand of vetting here to prevent the influence of concepts not endorsed by the mainstream of Islamic orthodoxy (Sharia Law, for instance) but still wreaking havoc. For the benefit of Mr. Kite (and other Leftist pals of Sir Paul McCartney & Co.), I provide you with the following, terrifying article from Vice (a left-leaning publication) depicting accused homosexuals being tossed off a building and an alleged adulteress being stoned to death.

Via CNN’s public reporting mechanism, a woman stoned to death…accused of using Facebook

Now, the uproarious circle calling me a fascist and a [expletive deleted] ass-kisser of the POTUS is complete, even replete with that which is heard at the last: “But that article is about ISIL! ISIS! Whatever you call them, but them! Obviously the most extreme ones and yes, they’re throwing condemned homosexuals off of buildings among other barbaric acts but they’re the extreme ones!”

Recall how I related earlier that the order places an indefinite (but not permanent) ban on only Syrian immigration and merely institutes timeframes for all other inferred (and later specified) nations? Yes? Good! Because that’s exactly the element being put under the scythe from the immigration rolls here: the extreme element that have no regard for the LGBTQ or Pan-Sexual communities beyond watching them die for no greater crime than the lifestyle our laws permit them to take for granted as Americans; the extreme element that is stoning a woman accused of adultery while a man stands by proudly holding the ISIS flag, the end frame showing her battered body in the fetal position amid a pile of rocks as one final rock is hurled against her corpse for good measure; the extreme element that, according to this CNN article (not exactly a conservative news outlet), has children preferring death to their future.

While the US Marine Corps has dispatched artillery to aid in what one hopes is a possible, expedient military solution to the humanitarian crisis in Syria, that is an entirely different matter altogether. Americans might say they want to go to war in Syria (just as even the New York Times supported war early on in the George W. Bush presidency but this war-weary land would quickly regret that decision and blame the POTUS (no matter what their name is).

That’s not what this Executive Order is about, and therefore that’s not what this article will end talking about. The POTUS issued an order, since struck down in court and since followed up with another order (which we’ll get to in due time as we go down the list in this series) that may or may not suffer a similar fate.

The bottom line here? This Executive Order is more complicated than anyone wanted it to be. Part of the blame for that goes to the Administration, and not just the POTUS. Those around him he entrusted to help craft this order (he admits he’s no politician, and everyone is quick to recall that, love him or hate him) allowed the ambiguity and then followed it up with an equally-awkward announcement (since when did we prefer the term “rollout”? Only in DC…) created the environment of confusion which everyone and their brother who hates this administration gleefully churned into pure, magickal chaos. Yet the complication goes beyond the ineffectual manner in which the order was issued and implemented (or not) in that the issue itself is complex. As Americans we’re playing the game we hate the most, that of the “zero-sum” variety. Everyone’s not going to win in a scenario where a country suffering from the most severe humanitarian crisis the modern globe has ever witnessed (Syria) at the hands of a group “barbaric” doesn’t begin to describe (ISIL, ISIS, et al) and their own government (Assad and his thugs) who is being aided by the head of state of the former arch-enemy of America (Vladimir Putin of Russia) whose very name has enveloped and bookended every day in the current news cycle it would seem with its stench and potential tainted touch on our politics.

How do you do American sensitivities justice whilst admitted the hungry and fear-stricken, huddled masses from abroad per our custom and simultaneously maintain the rule of law during a broadening sense of crisis that (the more you listen to the world around you) starts feeling like a series of existential crises gnawing at the very fabric of our humanity with its undignified, ruthless maw of savagery?

The only way to win is not to play. For better or for worse, that’s what the administration tried to do here, albeit in an ultimately ineffective manner. Perhaps in discussing the latest “Travel Ban” Executive Order we’ll finally gather some sense of our collective bearings and find some middle ground between our long-running tradition as a beacon of hope to the aforementioned helpless victims of foreign tyranny and in preserving our own safety and vitality as a people in accordance with the rule of law and ensuring our way of life and our standard of living, not merely in economic terms, but as Americans, living in the American Republic, our Federal system…

UC-Berkeley…making such a strong statement

…perhaps we will find that middle ground somewhere down the road. While I must apologize, in closing, for the lengths which it took me, somewhat listlessly by the end, to come to my conclusion. After reviewing the multimedia evidence of the horrors being inflicted upon innocent human life, I fear the more necessary apology is in leveling with anyone still paying attention a far harder truth: that seeming nirvana of middle ground, that lofty respite from the list of horribles contained within that zero-sum nightmare that “someday” we hope to find?

That day is not today.

Gonzo State: [Untitled]

“Victory is ‘The Absence of Defeat'”

“Bentley! Bentley. I suggest…I suggest that you do something different with your life right now.” This instruction was delivered by my boss (at the time) to his unruly Huskie, but it might as well have been given to my entire generation.

As always, the day had given way to night and my mind had wrestled with itself long enough. I needed sanctuary, strong drink and a blank expression with which to watch the news on screens behind the heads of the locals. With the mind of a fried pie I careened my car down a thoroughfare of an unincorporated town in West Virginia, roughly sixty miles from Washington D.C.

“Babylon,” I came to call D.C. as a Sailor stationed in Bethesda, which was appropriate enough that no one cares to question the nickname. It was by a sense of awe, despair, disgust and reverence that I came by it the hard way some years ago.

The Christmas lights around Arlington had shone brightly on my most sentimental evening, awash with history and the sort of romance that saw my Army counterpart’s cheek against mine, her words in my ear accompanied by my kiss on her neck.

Then, the other shoe dropped and zang! I’m departing the parking garage of Target near P.F. Chang’s, a sudden desperate attempt to keep a fellow servicemember alive and out of trouble, and barely having arrived in Rockville, Maryland, found myself in the company of a remarkable amount of police officers. While all was eventually sorted out (one way or another), I did discover that being handcuffed, face down on the pavement amidst a soft rain gave me an amazing opportunity to learn and reevaluate the nonsense I’d allowed a foothold in my life. “Teachable moments,” I’ve come to call such events with a wince oft confused for a smile, and rightfully so.

“It’s an acquired taste.”

Let no good deed go unpunished.

“It was all downhill from there,” I uttered to my glass and coaster on the bar, awaiting another potent haul of ethanol. “Or is it, ‘down on the bed’ from there? Not nearly as catchy.” The general uproar that passed for ambience as karaoke loomed large made my private social commentaries a non-factor.

“Hell,” I continued, mulling over the equal parts glory and horror of yesteryear, “if I was a woman they’d’ve labeled me a slut.” This was most certainly true, as I had responded to the eventual collapse of the genuine, heartmelting romance that blossomed in Arlington by carousing. I went on to live up to the archetype of heathen in the Navy, only I hadn’t needed a new port. D.C. had an endless supply of trysts for me to temporarily bind the wound of heartbreak with. I had largely imploded things with she myself, but damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead, aye?

“Aye, got it!” I said, louder than intended as my libation arrived. Few noticed, none cared. But I digress.

Every single horror of the corruption of public life crept its way into Walter Reed the two years I’d been there as the primary Army and Navy hospitals merged there in Maryland. It was a handful of miles from the epicenter of our Federal Republic, our Representative Democracy. Whatever label you prefer, the genuine, tender romance and the unnecessary legal crucible were equal parts of the same story.

So it was yesterday and is today and will be tomorrow. Wars and rumors of wars will abound along with the usual ugliness, while the bountiful opportunities, resplendence, and monuments sacred to America and Her Republic will ring hollow for any looking for that chapter. However, for those with a soul not set for self-destruct, there was the beauty and elegance and love that I discovered in Babylon. For my part, I vacillated between the cauldron of brutality and the essence of hallowed humanity.

Lucifer and a third of his fellow angels rebelled (at least in part) over the perception that God valued something fashioned from dirt over them; we hamstrung ourselves with our humanity during that time (2011-2013) in Bethesda, both our frailties and our strengths.

Did we make the case against humanity with our failures? I’m not so sure. The defeatism and Apocalypticism of the admittedly conflicted era that was the “new” Walter Reed circa 2011-2013 stands apart from now in several ways. Without the deflating drudgery of rattling them all off, at the very least one could look their friends and enemies in the eye. Betrayal and intrigue might be lurking around the next corner (per the modus operandi of Babylon and the government circuit as a whole) but those seeming eons ago politics was still the art of compromise. Then-POTUS Obama (D-IL) and then-House Speaker Boehner (R-OH) can hardly be soberly accused of engaging in the politics of blood sport we’ve now.

Now? Depending on their background, looking one’s enemies and/or friends in the eye might get you flagged on any number of social media platforms and could very well get you labeled with some sort of “-ism”, as one type of “-ist” or another. A whole decade ago Section 230 was applied within the spirit of its creation, lending the happenings online a sort of Wild West vibe when juxtaposed to the great cosmic gag-reel taking place now.

“What is Section 230?” one might ask. This, too, is a well-placed and unscripted question, but it makes little difference when Louis Farrakhan can spit his vile verbal excrement at hapless passerby on social media, but not Donald Trump. No, indeed. Hardly an avid defender of the former POTUS, I nonetheless present our Federal support and protections for our Silicon Valley overlords as Exhibit A for the how/why (either/and/or) the Federal Communications Commission has adequate pretext to cry foul. This is tantamount to “collateral censorship”, or censorship by proxy. That’s the biggest item George Orwell didn’t foresee in my favorite novel, “1984”: private enterprise conducting the censorship, and not the state itself.

Since I’ve likely lost anyone who hates The Donald for my defending his First Amendment rights, I might as well toss a grenade in this burgeoning dumpster fire. Wouldn’t Joe Manchin lead off that way?

“The wind only blows sometimes.” “He’s exactly right!”

While hardly the binary option both the Communists of the Far Left and the Fascists of the Far Right want all the Sheeple to give an “Amen!” and believe, the conflict between being a John Locke liberal in favor of largely laissez-faire capitalism (not the crony kind) with a strong, (but) limited Federal government and in wanting a respectable return on our investment in Section 230 protections granted Silicon Valley (and company), it is amusing on a perverse level.

“Afterall,” I told myself, “everyone hates a centrist, so you might as well enjoy it, Jack. The good news is, only White elitists are storming off after closing your column a few paragraphs back. They can kick rocks. There’s surely a Mother Jones article or athletic mutant defecating on the very flag that enables their miserable existence out there, somewhere, that they can flee to. Still miserable, but they showed me! No First Amendment for the people who make us think and shit.”

It was only at the end of this paragraph that I realized I wasn’t just thinking this as I tapped it into a note on my phone for later insertion into this very diatribe. I was muttering much of it out loud.

“Ignore the madness of a world that has made this swashbuckler appear normal. Ignore the celebutante-rejects aghast at those not absorbed in Chinese spyware ‘social’ apps available on any mainstream App Store.”

And why not? Afterall, the Communists now want the populace to swallow the latest swill their Thought Police have puked out, and nod slowly, basking in the wisdom of the notion that Black children being taught mathematics is racist. Conversely, the Fascists want the citizenry at-large to embrace their latest, unintelligible Reductio Ad Absurdum that beating cops to a pulp while shouting racist terms at the non-White officers is okay as long as they’re patriots. Thin Blue Line and all. “Thin Blue Line”, you ingrates? Put the straw down.

“In God We Trust.” Mhmm.

“Dear God Almighty,” I mumbled into my Long Island Iced Tea, nearly gone due to the urgent need to anesthetize myself. No reply, and not because He wants us to forget He exists, but because it’s the pizza we ordered, and it has arrived with all the trappings. Whose fault is that?

The lunacy in the former example is in those on the Far Left who by proxy think the Black intellect is so dormant, psyche so timid, that there need be no Black doctors, economists, engineers, et cetera, in the future. Mathematics is a rather integral part of the process of those career paths. Who’s holding who back with racist ideology again, exactly?

The madness in the latter example is at least as vivid and particularly poignant from people on the Far Right who think cops can do no wrong. You say The Filth went too far in Example X? “I say they didn’t go too far enough!” some neo-Successionist will bleat with the fervor of a patriot, by God. Just a patriot to another country, and not this one. But why quibble about it? Sure, seems reasonable enough to pass muster on “Squidbillies.”

Imitation being the highest form of flattery, the method to the unorthodoxy of this publication has never been less necessary. Both extremes in the sadly binary world of Castro and Mussolini neophytes demand the long-term vision, the sort of engaging in politics (again, “The Art of Compromise”) as a year-round endeavor that there is no app or “hack” for. The marathon, not the sprint, is what is at hand. I’d rather flatter the Edward Brooke III, the Alexander Hamilton, the Barbra Streisand, the Hunter S. Thompson and even the Master Shake with imitation than embrace the intellectual suicide of either Irredeemable America or Exceptional American Unilateralism.

Whichever clown car takes the stage from either extremist wing of discourse, they both will assure us that we’d feel so much better if only we’d embrace their brand of groupthink. Tsk, tsk, I know, but such is the rot of the putrescence we’ve inexplicably opted to wallow in.

“Soylent Green is people.”

What both teams of malcontents mean is we’ll feel much better carrying all of our favorite shows with us on all of our devices as they continue embezzling and funneling money to the duopoly in Babylon. The royalty on Capitol Hill will then reward our wholehearted faith with continued malignant governance and further insolvency on every level (social, fiscal, geopolitical, et al).

“Who knows?” I mumbled with a shrug. “With any luck, the dead will walk again and we’ll have an existential reason to disallow the Neanderthals in Congress from fucking the same coconut over and over while saying they’re carrying out the people’s business. All, naturally, with a straight face. And pursed lips. Can’t forget the ‘duck face.’ Gotta meet my fellow Millennials halfway.”

“You say something, Hun?”

The bartender had taken notice of my glass being devoid of strong drink, and grew concerned. Animals entering sexual congress with fruit, however, passed muster.

‘Of course it did,’ I thought, but could only reply with a low rasp as I exited my barstool.

“Yes, Ma’am. Check please.”

Read More

Six Degrees of Knowin’ Nothin’: [Untitled]

And on the 8th day, God made bears. Lots and lots of bears.

Does this era need introduction? Or, rather, may a suitable introduction be written? I report, you deride.

1: In any rational era, the sudden appearance of lurid photographs of well-known public figures tends to happen without the consent of those captured in the images. Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, Anthony Weiner, et al. Notable exceptions to this are of the celebutante variety who sport last names such as Hilton and Kardashian, but then, their deliberate release of self-incriminating material isn’t indicative of a rational era.

That there’s a Stairway to Heaven but a Highway to Hell is indicative of expected traffic volume.

The great Jerry Falwell, Jr., well his undeniable greatness as an Evangelical Christian minister and university president is so ineffable, so vast, that he was no longer able to be confined by any notion of modern decency. If that’s still a thing, that is. Either way, the photograph posted containing the erstwhile head of Liberty University (and descendent of the late and decent Jerry Falwell) is disturbing on several counts. Let’s take a look:

Now, I’m not sure if it’s the ghastly attempt at humor (yeah, “black water”, haw haw haw!), the self-caricature of the gut and the unzipped pants combined with the awful rug on his counterpart (who is not his wife, for those keeping score at home), the fact that students of said Evangelical university get expelled for drinking and/or extra-marital sexual encounters, or that this wasn’t a leak at all that makes this such a disgrace. He could’ve just said it was a faux Black Dog in his glass and been done with it.

The man (so-called) “leaked” it via his own social media aperture, and then delivered a truly abysmal mockery of an apology on-air, and I quote: “I’ve promised my kids I’m going to try to be…I’m gonna try to be a good boy from here on out.” Rock and Roll, Jerry!

Oh and Mrs. Falwell, when your marriage does end, remember: you [expletive deleted] your rebound, and that’s it. You don’t permanently abscond from reality and keep [expletive deleted] them long-term and/or marry them. Especially, I might add, if you plucked them from the extras of “The Walking Dead.”

Silly me. But seriously, though: booze and Evangelicals and social media shouldn’t mix.

2: At times, the headlines write themselves. In their own attempt to swing loose with reality, as it were, Iran has a fabricated aircraft carrier resembling one of those wielded by the United States Navy. “Why”, you ask? An entirely unscripted and well-placed question. For their own propaganda purposes that is, until the entire experiment blew up in their faces. Living out their own version of “delirium tremens”, Iran was so successful in this charade that their accidental destruction of a prop US Navy aircraft carrier poses a threat to a major thoroughfare in the oil trade. Posing an existential threat to traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, and things apparently unbeknownst to Iran such as tides can shift the wreckage, endangering oil tankers.

Give the Ayatollah our best. Speaking of “the best”, if you’re going to challenge the world’s preeminent naval power, you’d better come correct. The Battle of Evermore this is not.

3: Biden must face Trump in debate(s). Yes, it’s answering a “double dog dare” from the POTUS and no, you don’t want to give in to the whims of a bully. But if you don’t follow through then it looks like you’re hiding in a basement and afraid to face Donald J. Trump on the stage. What’s the worst that could happen? They then “triple dog dare” one another to a lindy hop dance-off to the “Misty Mountain Hop” or hand out four sticks (one to both members of each ticket) to swing with? Why would you be afraid of that if you’re in the Biden camp unless, per the Trump camp’s assertions, the former Vice President will be unable to remember whether he’s going to California, or another, “y’know, the thing” that the Founding Fathers said? The great equalizer is the human ego. They’ll debate.

This is an event waiting to go wrong. Don’t hang out with bears. [image credit to Daily Caller & Barstool Sports]
4: Meanwhile, the National Park Service has posted a warning urging American adventurers not to confront bears but, if they do, to not take advantage of their slower companions. And no, this is not made up. Nor is the response of a pack of humans, recently, to a bear arriving in their midst. They didn’t flee or otherwise attempt to discourage the bear; instead they took pictures of their merry band whilst feeding the bear. Good call, ‘Murica.

5: Bill Barr’s appearance was a disgrace for everyone except the Attorney General. For committee chairman Nadler, to open the hearing with that statement was an outrage; and Jordan, thanks for the monologue on things that happened before Barr was back on the job and for God’s sake put your damn coat on!

6: Stat of the Week: the POTUS’ campaign is knocking on 1 million doors a week; the former VPOTUS’ camp is knocking on 0. As in ZERO. Z-E-R-O. This sort of nonsense only seems like nonsenseuntil the time when the levee breaks. Underestimate the mad media genius of The Donald at your peril.

Y’know what? Let’s just cancel everything. If everything’s priority one, then nothing is priority one.
Read More

Contrast: Black Lives Matter v. All Lives Matter (et al)

Black Lives Matter: Let’s cut through the fat together, shall we? Yes or yes? Good. With that, we have a problem in America. Several, actually. We live in a police state, for one thing, and for another, paramount now, is said police state taking a particular interest in African Americans.

Let’s also consider the unbelievable, highly-classified powers of FISA courts to spy unopposed on our own people without their knowledge indefinitely, the ability of the Federal government to suspend the Constitutional rights of American citizens suspected of terrorism via the Patriot Act and the inexplicable repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act (which forbade the Federal Government from using propaganda on American soil). Are you drinking what I’m pouring?

With no malice in my heart toward the many fine police officers across the land (a few I’ve known personally), I say again: we live in a police state.

Over the past decade alone, we have seen increasing examples of the use of excessive force on a disproportionate number of black Americans. Data clearly shows that Whites compose 76.5% of America’s citizenry while Blacks make up 13.4% of it, the former were shot to death by police 370 times versus 235 for the latter.

For those who want to bring out FBI data displaying prevalence of crime amongst inner city black neighborhoods, recall the negligible difference in drug use between whites and blacks and the parity in gun culture between the two.

America glorifies violence, and that crosses ethnic lines. Don’t believe me? Look at what I call “Dollar Voting”, in essence, what we value and spend our money on. What does our art and culture reflect? If we’re being real, it ain’t peace. Does hip hop culture lend itself to violence? Listen to the top ten hits of the genre and get back to me; but before you get back to me, let me know what Johnny Cash, Waylon Jennings, Jerry Reed and “The Dukes of Hazzard” were all about while you’re at it.

As for the movement itself, “Black Lives Matter” is driving home a simple point: yes, every house in the neighborhood matters but only one of them is on fire.

We hardly need a hashtag for Blue (Police) Lives Matter; they roam about largely unopposed, vested with a badge and lethal weaponry, and we provide a safety net (union, pension, et cetera) and, in general, blanket support to include the high probability that bad actors aren’t held accountable in court.

All Lives Matter? Do they? Maybe I’d be more decisive in answering these questions if every new episode of “Death By Cop” didn’t always star a black man.

– Jack DeViney

*************

 

New Orleans Police Department preps for ongoing confrontation and protest throughout downtown.

All Lives Matter(?): Two things can be true at once. In fact, very few things in our world are mutually exclusive of themselves. One can, for example, be in favor of the events in the George Floyd case never happening again and find the phrase “Black Lives Matters” offensive. They are not mutually exclusive. Both can be true. This depends on your definitions of words. Words matter. Words have meaning. Facts matter. Facts have meaning.

If by any definition, one is not a racist, but they will not stand shoulder to shoulder with Black Lives Matter signs, or they won’t kneel down in front of a mob of protestors, they become….what? Insensitive? Divisive?

To be true to this point, I believe “All Lives Matter” or “Blue Lives Matter” are equally asinine. We don’t protest on things we agree upon. We don’t stand outside and shout “the sky is blue”!

Are things worse now than the mid-1960’s? Or do we see public discord in 3D now? We report, you deride.

The assertion that a black man can not step from his home without fear of imminent death from a racist ‘Mericuh is as equally preposterous as the media’s “1619” narrative that America is as systemically racist as at any time in our history. Really? Where’s the poll of young, black men asking them if they’d rather live in 1865, 1965 or 2020? I must’ve missed that astute revelation.

Instead of regurgitated statistics that the left/media refuse to acknowledge anyway, how about we come at this from a novel approach. [So] what is your suggestion? I mean, with all of the statistics stating the exact opposite of your point, what are we doing wrong? Are our hiring standards too low? Is training being swept aside to fast-track officers onto beats? Do we provide immunity to officers that is unnecessary and counter-productive? Let’s get to the “nut cutting” as they say.

If we want to turn this into another narrative where the right just refuses to admit there is a substantial issue and is instead hiding behind years of conservative practices…show me! Where are the statistics that support any of this nonsense? That show America is systemically racist and prejudiced against black Americans? Where are the politicians that you are particularly citing as responsible for these aggressions? Or is it just “orange man bad”, with his “basket of deplorables”?

“You’re killing your father, Larry!”

Once again, the left/media have overplayed their hands. We were told millions of Americans would die if we didn’t shut the world down indefinitely. Now if you have a small business and want to re-open smartly so that you don’t lose everything, you’re killing grandma! We were told that if we would just allow LGBT marriages, all examples of bigotry would be history. Now if you’re a Millennial male that won’t go out with a trans-woman (a man by all scientific facts and definitions), you’re a homophobe! And now, if you won’t march to the beat of this drum, well, you’re just a racist. Or worse, an “Uncle Tom.”

It’s tiring. It’s divisive. It’s unnecessary. This issue is one we must agree on, or we don’t have a country. You cannot have law and order if one group is being systematically hunted down and killed by those sworn to protect us.

Facts matter. Statistics matter. Two things can be true at once.

– Michael R. DeViney, Jr.

Read More