Dear Mitch McConnell: You Were Not Elected To Do The Bidding Of Chuck Schumer And CNN thumbnail

Dear Mitch McConnell: You Were Not Elected To Do The Bidding Of Chuck Schumer And CNN

/in , , , /by

By Mollie Hemingway

Manu Raju is a Democrat activist and CNN reporter who camps out in congressional hallways to ask questions that help advance his party’s political agenda. He’s done it for years. Whether the Democrats are doing their Brett Kavanaugh smear, impeachment shenanigans, Russia-collusion hoax, or anything else, he’s there to ask questions that help his team. He’s been doing it for so long that you’d have to be something of an idiot to fall for it, much less more than once.

So, for example, when corporate media and other activists were pretending that New York Republican Rep. George Santos’ deceptions about his biography were the most important issue facing Americans, Raju was there. He asked Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, if he was disappointed Speaker Kevin McCarthy hadn’t called on George Santos to resign. Romney did not mock him for the question or turn the conversation to issues that actually matter, such as the open border, inflation, a troubled economy, attacks on parents, or the rise of China. He gladly took up Raju’s question as an opportunity to bash the Republican speaker.

Then Raju ran over to McCarthy and asked him what he thought about Romney’s weak response. “Romney should be disappointed that Swalwell hasn’t resigned,” McCarthy said, not even pausing for a second to dignify the stupidity of the question.

Boom. Easy. Effective.

McCarthy seems to have a quaint notion that he should follow an agenda other than the one set by leftist media and other activists. He recently provided journalist Tucker Carlson access to Jan. 6 footage. When it was announced, CNN and other leftist groups got upset. But nothing compares to the angry reaction when Carlson showed some of the footage on his top-ranked Fox News program on Monday night. The program showed footage indicating that the Jan. 6 Committee had falsely conveyed the circumstances of Sen. Josh Hawley’s evacuation from the Capitol, had falsely added audio to clips, had not pursued evidence that mysterious protester Ray Epps had lied about his whereabouts, and had concealed evidence that Jan. 6 protesters who had entered the Capitol were not treated as threats.

The media and other partisans shrieked in horror that this footage was being shown to the American people. It burst through the media-enforced narratives about the day.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., took to the Senate floor to call for the censorship of Fox News, where this author is a contributor, and prevention of more footage being made available to Americans. He said Carlson exercising his freedom of the press was a threat to democracy.

As one former White House reporter put it, “It’s frightening to see Senate leaders demand a media company ‘stop’ reporting on the government, police, issues of law and justice.”

Surely this would be an opportunity for the otherwise weak and feckless Senate Republicans to show some backbone, right? Wrong.

Romney said that showing Americans footage from Jan. 6 meant Carlson had gone “off the rails,” and compared him to Alex Jones. He also went after McCarthy for being transparent with the American people. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., took a break from working on an amnesty bill to tell Raju that Carlson showing new footage of the protest that countered the left’s narrative was “bullsh-t.” South Dakota Sens. Mike Rounds and John Thune, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, and North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer also fell for the media campaign against Carlson.

Leading the group was Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Raju invited him to bash McCarthy. It’s not saying much, but McConnell was at least smart enough to decline that opportunity. But he did take the opportunity to attack a media outlet for daring to say something different than what a police leader said. Really. He said, “It was a mistake, in my view, for Fox News to depict this in a way that is completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official here at the Capitol thinks.”

Let’s leave aside the abject offensiveness of the Republican leader saying journalists must simply repeat what governmental authorities say and not show video footage “at variance” with what the government says. What is McConnell doing? Seriously? The man only rarely speaks on camera to reporters, so his decision to do so is intentional. He brought a prop — the statement from the government official — to wave around for the camera.

Even if he didn’t agree with every journalistic decision Carlson made, he could have said any number of things to serve the American people — and Republican voters — instead of serving Chuck Schumer and CNN.

He could have said he welcomed the transparency regarding the footage from Jan. 6, that Pelosi’s manipulation of that footage was sinfully wrong, and that it should not have taken two years to get this footage to the American people.

He could have said something in defense of the First Amendment-protected right of assembly and to petition government for a redress of grievances. He could have reminded Americans about how awful it is that left-wing rioters are routinely allowed to firebomb or otherwise desecrate Christian churches, pro-life pregnancy centers, the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse, police precincts, the Atlanta site of the cop-training facility, the Keystone pipeline, and downtown Seattle.

He could have talked about the importance of election integrity and security, noting that the 2020 election — and the radical changes to the laws and processes governing it in the months leading up to it — had been bad for the country. He could have mentioned how Big Media and Big Tech conspired to meddle in that election, and that messing with people’s elections is a major problem in this country and something about which Americans have every right to be upset.

He could have said Carlson’s journalism was a reminder that one can never trust narratives from corporate, left-wing media such as CNN, the outlet where Raju works. He could have listed the lies and deceptions put forth by that network, such as the recent news that they intentionally suppressed journalism about the Wuhan Institute of Virology because they thought it might help their political opponent Donald Trump. He could have mentioned their years-long Russia-collusion hoax. He could have mentioned their lies about Kavanaugh, in which they falsely and repeatedly portrayed him as a serial gang rapist.

If he wanted to be something of a squish, but not a complete squish, he could have even said, “I think Tucker might have been a little too dismissive of the violence we experienced, but he did a remarkable service by airing so much important video that Democrats tried to hide.”

When Raju ran over to McCarthy to do his damage control over the Jan. 6 footage, McCarthy handled it with ease. Raju asked a loaded and inaccurate question and asked McCarthy whether he regretted giving the American people a chance to see the footage.

In the clip above, McCarthy also reminded CNN about how it had negligently handled information about secure locations for Capitol personnel. Boom. Easy. Effective.

And new Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance took to Twitter to criticize reporters for asking him to bash Carlson but not asking about Schumer’s push for censorship of non-leftist media.

Instead of doing things like that, McConnell copied the political framing and approach of Schumer, and ran off to Raju to supercharge the left’s latest bogus narrative.

Republicans, you have a serious problem.

In the middle of the midterm elections, McConnell went out of his way to sabotage candidates and their voters, once again pushing Democrat narratives about “candidate quality.” McConnell, the country’s least popular politician, did nothing to stop Romney from running a shadow campaign against a sitting GOP senator, fellow Utah Sen. Mike Lee. After he led the Republicans in the Senate to a loss, he responded by helping Democrats pass their $1.7 trillion omnibus bill, cheerleading for Biden’s Ukraine war, and campaigning with Joe Biden.

Instead of punishing Romney for his act of sabotage against fellow Republicans, he punished the victim by removing him from a powerful committee. Other Republican senators have also been punished by the famously vindictive and petty McConnell for not supporting his re-election as Republican leader.

Elon Musk, of all people, said it best when he tweeted of McConnell, “I keep forgetting which party he belongs to.”

It is a cruel joke on the nation that this guy is still the titular leader of Senate Republicans in Washington. Are there not even a sufficient number of adults in the Republican conference who have the stones to say something — to do anything — on behalf of Republican voters? Or are they just weak, mute cowards? At what point do they have the guts to say: “Mitch, enough is enough. Whatever limited good you may have done in the past, you cannot be a leader in the party when you defecate, day after day, year after year, on the voters you purport to represent.”

*****
This article was published by The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Are We Medicating Millions of ADHD Children without Scientific Justification? thumbnail

Are We Medicating Millions of ADHD Children without Scientific Justification?

/in , , , /by

By Yaakov Ophir

“As glasses help people focus their eyes to see,” medical experts from the American Academy of Pediatrics rule, “medications help children with ADHD focus their thoughts better and ignore distractions.” In their view, as well as in the view of multiple other expert consortiums, the most appropriate way to treat the “lifelong impairing condition” of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is by taking stimulant medications on a daily basis.

Although stimulants, as suggested by their name, are frequently abused for stimulating (potentially addictive) sensations of high energy, euphoria, and potency, they are often compared to harmless medical aids, such as eyeglasses or walking crutches. Numerous studies, we are told, support their efficacy and safety, and evidence-based medicine dictates that these substances will be administered to children with ADHD as the first-line treatment.

There is only one, huge problem. ADHD is currently the most common childhood disorder in Western-oriented countries. Its ever-increasing rates are now skyrocketing. The documented prevalence of ADHD is not about 3 percent, as it used to be when the disorder was first introduced in 1980. In 2014, a survey by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that over 20 percent of 12-year-old boys were diagnosed with this “lifelong condition.”

In 2020, thousands of real-life medical records from Israel suggested that over 20 percent of all children and young adults (5-20 years) received a formal diagnosis of ADHD. This means that hundreds of millions of children around the world are eligible for this diagnosis and that most of them (about 80 percent), including very young, preschool children, will be prescribed with its treatment-of-choice, as if regular use of stimulants is indeed comparable to eyeglasses.

Stimulant brands for ADHD, such as Ritalin, Concerta, Adderall, or Vyvanse rank at the top of the best-selling lists of medications for children. Indeed, the American dream may play a significant role in the proliferation of such cognitive enhancers in the US, but the rush for the magic pills crosses national borders. In fact, the ‘semi-final’ countries that are currently ‘winning’ the Ritalin Olympics, according to the International Narcotics Control Board, are: Iceland, Israel, Canada, and Holland.

But what if the scientific consensus is wrong? What if the medications for ADHD are not as effective and as safe as we are told? After all, stimulant medications are powerful psychoactive substances, which are prohibited to use without medical prescriptions, under federal drug laws. Like all psychoactive drugs, which affect the central nervous system, stimulant medications are designed to penetrate the blood-brain barrier – the specialized tissue and blood vessels that normally prevent harmful substances from reaching the brain. In this way, stimulant medications are essentially impacting the biochemical processes of our brain – that miraculous organ that makes us who we are.

In my new book ADHD is Not an Illness and Ritalin is Not a Cure: A Comprehensive Rebuttal of the (alleged) Scientific Consensus, I do my best to answer these disturbing questions. The first part of the book offers a step-by-step refutation of the notion that ADHD meets the required criteria for a neuropsychiatric condition. In fact, a close reading of the available science suggests that the vast majority of the diagnoses simply reflects common and pretty normative childhood behaviors that underwent unjustified medicalization. The second part of the book uncovers the massive evidence that exists against the efficacy and safety of the treatment-of-choice for ADHD.

Hundreds of studies, published in well-recognized, mainstream academic journals tell a totally different story than the one told by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Stimulant medications are nothing like eyeglasses. Of course, it is impossible to summarize an entire book here, but I do wish to outline three principal failures in the common comparison between stimulant medications and eyeglasses – or any other daily used, harmless medical aids for that matter, such as walking crutches.

Even without considering the specific criticism about the validity of ADHD, the very comparison between organic/bodily conditions, which are typically measured through objective tools, to amorphic psychiatric labels that rely exclusively on subjective assessments of behaviors, is inappropriate and misleading. The ‘brain deficit’ and the ‘chemical imbalance’ that have been associated with ADHD are unproven myths. Stimulants do not ‘fix’ biochemical imbalances and they can easily be used also by non-ADHD individuals to enhance cognitive performance (even though these individuals are not assumed to have this alleged ‘brain deficit’).

As opposed to visual impairments that restrict the individual’s everyday functioning, regardless of school demands, the primary impairment in ADHD is manifested in school settings. Eyeglasses and walking crutches are needed outside of school premises as well, even during weekends and holidays. ADHD, in contrast, seems to be a ‘seasonal disease’ (despite endless efforts to exaggerate and extend its negative outcomes to non-school-related settings). When schools are closed, its daily medical management is often no longer needed. This simple real-life fact is even acknowledged, to some extent, in the official Ritalin leaflet, which states that: “During the course of treatment for ADHD, the doctor may tell you to stop taking Ritalin for certain periods of time (e.g., every weekend or school vacations) to see if it is still necessary to take it.”

Incidentally, these ‘treatment breaks,’ according to the leaflet, “also help prevent a slow-down in growth that sometimes occurs when children take this medicine for a long time” – a noteworthy point that brings us to the third, and most important error in the comparison between stimulant medications and other daily, physical/medical aids, such as eyeglasses.

The benign examples used by proponents of the medications, such as eyeglasses or walking crutches are not regulated by the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance. Typically, these medical aids do not cause serious physiological and emotional adverse reactions. If stimulant drugs are as safe as experts say, like “Tylenol and aspirin,” why do we insist that they will be medically prescribed by licensed physicians? This question has philosophical and societal implications. After all, if the medications are safe and helpful to various populations (i.e., not only to people with ADHD), what is the moral justification to prohibit their usage among non-diagnosed individuals? This is unjustified discrimination. Moreover, why are we condemning (non-diagnosed) students who use these medications to improve their grades? If regular use of Ritalin and alike is so safe, why not place them on the pharmacies’ shelves, next to the non-prescription pain relievers, moisturizers, and chocolate energy bars?

The last rhetorical questions illustrate how far the eyeglasses metaphor is from the clinical reality and the scientific evidence regarding ADHD and stimulant medications. ADHD medications are not fundamentally different from other psychoactive drugs that cross the blood-brain barrier. At first usage, they may trigger intense sensations of potency or euphoria, but when used for prolonged periods, their desired effects subside, and their unwanted negative effects start to emerge. The brain recognizes these psychoactive substances as neurotoxins and activates a compensatory mechanism in an attempt to fight the harmful invaders. It is this activation of the compensatory mechanism, not the ADHD, that might cause the biochemical imbalance in the brain.

I realize that these last sentences may sound provocative. I therefore encourage readers not to ‘trust’ this short article blindly, but to dive with me into the deep (and sometimes dirty) water of the scientific literature. Despite the academic orientation of my book, I made sure to make the science available to most readers through plain language, illustrative stories, and real-life examples. And even if you disagree with some of its content, I am positive that, by the end of the reading, you will ask yourself, like I did: How is it possible that such critical information about ADHD and stimulant medications is being hidden from us? Does it really make sense to compare these drugs to eyeglasses? Are we medicating millions of ADHD children without proper scientific justification?

*****
This article was published by Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Can Markets Function Normally With Intrusive Central Planning? thumbnail

Can Markets Function Normally With Intrusive Central Planning?

/in , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

As readers may be aware of our past stock market commentaries, the stock market is at an important juncture.  After last year’s bear market of a bit better than 20%, stocks started to rebound this year.

Historically, it is normal for the third year of a Presidential term to be bullish.

A rally from the worst of Covid-related economic trauma would also be expected.

The market seems to be going through a series of conflicting mental states:  the economy will have a soft landing, the economy will have no landing at all, and recently, the economy will have a hard landing.

The recent rebound created internal strength and momentum sufficient that it has convinced a fair number of commentators, mostly of a technical stripe, that a new bull market in equities has begun. In their defense, the market did break its bear linear trend line and turn up major moving averages. It has a high number of “breadth thrusts”, high volume days where advancing issues swamp declining issues. So, it is indisputable that the market is acting better.

Curtesy of stockcharts.com

Oddly though, after the “break out” the market decided to confuse everyone even further by diving back to the breakout point and then fiddling around in narrow a range as we write. In part, this was because of Congressional testimony by FED Chairman Jerome Powell, who expressed a “higher for longer” position on interest rates.

Is it a new bull market or a bear market rally?  Our best estimate has been that it is a bear market rally. Given the retreat back down to resistance we would have to say, the “break out” remains unresolved and thus a trend in force remains in force until proven otherwise. The trend in force has been a bearish downward trend.

We suggested this is a bear market rally based on the “weight of the evidence,” both fundamental and technical, although we frankly thought the market advance would last a bit longer than it did. Did Powell kill the baby in the crib?

The technical strength remains impressive. Even after more talk of higher interest rates, the market has refused to cave in. Instead, it fell right back to the resistance area, but so far has held…barely. However, it is fair to say that conditions are so fluid right now, it is probably best to avoid dogmatism.

For those of a more fundamental view, their concerns include the likelihood of a recession caused by rising interest rates, an inversion of interest rates, a decline in corporate earnings,  a housing slump, a historic decline in the money supply, and increasingly stressed consumers. On the positive side, employment remains buoyant and unemployment is at very low levels.

It is also historically rare for a major bull market to begin with valuation levels still as high as they are. There has been a bear market for sure, but it is far short of the “average” bear market loss of 36% and given the credit excesses and valuation excesses of this Supercycle, it would seem a bit odd to end this affair with such a modest correction.

The technical analysts counter this with an important argument. The very nature of their system posits that all known factors are incorporated into the price structure. In other words, all the worries about recession and interest rates, and concerns about earnings and whatever, are known, and still, the market has decided it still wants to rise.

If we are all talking about these troublesome issues, they are known. If they are known, the market is already incorporating that in the price structure.

Since we use both technical and fundamental analysis in our own thinking, we do not have an ax to grind for either school of thought. Both are valid ways of making judgments about the market. Neither is perfect so the more supporting information you have, from either camp, the better your odds of making a correct decision.

The deeper question is whether either school of analysis can function well in an environment of heavy-handed central planning that is driven by a political agenda.

It has become obvious that some of the “data” that fundamentalists use are altered by government policy and the FED itself. Greater government benefits and societal changes have made it possible for something on the order of seven million men of prime age to disappear from the labor market. That does make the labor market look tighter than it otherwise would be.

Central planning supposedly involves a degree of secrecy, otherwise, those who know what policy shifts will occur can profit. However, it is amazing the number of congressmen and congresswomen, and even FED officials who have speculated on stocks given their privileged position to get inside information first. It would appear that ethics is no match for the self-interest of bureaucrats and politicians.

It can be argued that if that is the case, then the market does have information because buying or selling activity is occurring, spreading the information.

But how far must information be dispersed before markets get a true reading of demand? Nancy Pelosi herself should not be able to move markets, even if she and her husband may trade on inside information.

The theory of central planning also assumes there is a central plan. What if the FED simply makes things up as they go along, caves into political pressure, or is immersed in internal conflict that makes the mission less certain? The same can be said for the Biden Administration.

More frightening, what if they don’t know what they are doing yet are conducting a grand monetary experiment with Quantitative Easing, Quantitative Tightening, and Modern Monetary Theory?

We have never been in a situation where we are spending and borrowing on a scale of World War II, all in peacetime, and all on top of preexisting huge debt. There are scant historical examples to guide us through our current predicament. We are in a new historical territory almost every day.

You can readily see it is hard for markets to incorporate information into the price structure when there is little rhyme or reason to what central planners are doing. Improvisation of policy is difficult to discount unless you know what the whims of the prince will be. But if it was planned, it wouldn’t be a whim, would it?

Markets today may in fact be more like a gambling casino changing rules frequently based on the whim of the mob boss. If so, how well can markets discount future events and trends?

We do have markets today that jump around frequently not only the statements of officials in various venues, but also we have politically manufactured data that frequently get “revised.” Unless one has advance notice of what these spokesmen will be saying, it is pretty much a guess as to what they will be saying. The next guess is how will the market react to the latest statement.

Readers might recall the fall and winter of 2018 when the FED said they would raise interest rates.  As soon as the markets began to correct, the FED immediately changed course. It was a monumental whipsaw for investors and under these circumstances, it seems difficult for markets to incorporate such fluid decision-making into the price structure.

Our point is that central planning today is more like planned chaos and is not often conducted either with consistent political or economic principles and is driven by pollsters.

Such conditions argue for intellectual modesty regarding a new direction for the market.

Finally, there is the problem central planning has always had. It relies little on market data and more on political whim. Because it does not rely on true supply and demand, central planning has never worked. You cannot make rational economic calculations absent true free market forces.

It is an open question as to how well markets can truly function in today’s era of central planning.

Markets must deal not with just what direction the economy may be going, but more often, with what direction intrusive government policy is going.

The FED is moving interest rates, the government is selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, NATO is sanctioning Russian oil, government skews lending to diversity and equity, economic growth takes a back seat to environmental zealotry, and there is a general regulatory jihad against business in general. Recently, Treasury Secretary Yellen says she now believes “climate change” can alter the value of securities.

How good are our tools of analysis, technical and fundamental, under circumstances of constant and incessant interference by the government?

Probably not as good as we would like them to be.

Amidst all this, we accept the primacy of the dictum of “don’t fight the FED.” Right now, the markets seem like they want to fight the FED. Because of that, we prefer caution. Eventually, the markets will get a better sense of direction when we are closer to the end of this interest rate hiking cycle. We will find out if we indeed have had a breakout or a head fake.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

A Contagion of Cowardice thumbnail

A Contagion of Cowardice

/in , , , , /by

By Jeffrey Tucker

Jordan Peterson’s interview with Jay Bhattacharya is one of the more insightful conversations to come out of the post-pandemic period. It’s fascinating to see Peterson coming to terms with the sheer scale of the lockdown during which time he was rather sick. We could have used his voice then and I have no doubt that he would have been fantastic.

Fortunately for the whole world, we did have Jay. It’s not just his credentials or his position at Stanford University. It’s his erudition that gave him the reach to make sense of our times. In this interview, Jay explains the unfolding of events in ways I personally found compelling.

Summing up his message, the response upended a century of public-health practice based on computer modeling that was not informed by any medical knowledge or public-health experience. That modeling came to be fused with a military-style response that waged a war on a pathogen with no exit strategy. Powerful industrial interests saw their chance to realize every hidden agenda.

That was further complicated by severe political division. Even though the lockdowns began under the Trump administration, opposing them mysteriously came to be seen as “right-wing” even though the pandemic policies violated every civil liberty, massively harmed the poor, divided the classes, and trampled essential freedoms, which one might suppose were concerns of the left, once upon a time.

Jay knew from the beginning that these policies were a disaster but his method of dissent was to stick with the genuine science. He worked with colleagues very early in the pandemic on a study from California that proved that this war on the “invisible enemy” was futile. Covid was everywhere and only a mortal threat to a narrow group in the population needed to have its guard up while the rest of society moved on. That study was released in April 2020 and the implications were undeniably devastating to the war planners and the lockdown pushers.

The conclusion of the study seems rather commonplace now: “The estimated population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection may be much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases.” But at the time, when dissent was rare if non-existent in scientific literature, and when the planning elite had declared its number one goal was to track, trace, and isolate, and thereby minimize infections through compulsion while we wait for a vaccine, this conclusion was anathema.

That’s when the attacks began. It was like he had to be shut down. The popular press began to go after him savagely, smearing both the study and his motivations (this later became outright censorship). At this point, he began to realize the intensity of the campaign against dissent and the push for full unity in favor of the policy response. It was not like normal times when scientists could disagree. This was something different, something fully militarized, when a “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society” consensus was being demanded by every institution. That meant no heresies against orthodoxy were allowed.

At this point, the interview breaks and Peterson begins to ask probing questions of the sort he likes concerning the spiritual struggle all of us face in life, a subject that clearly consumes him. Peterson believes that all seeming political struggles are ultimately personal ones. Do we back off and acquiesce to conventional wisdom or do we continue to walk toward the light as shown by our conscience?

He asks Jay if he faced this moment, and Jay admits that he did indeed face this. He realized that continuing in this direction – researching to discover facts and telling the truth as he saw it – would massively disrupt his career, his life, and everything he had worked for. Everything would be different, away from comfort and into an uncertain and isolated frontier.

He faced that choice and made the decision to go ahead, undeterred. But the decision cost him dearly. He could not sleep. He lost tremendous amounts of weight. He faced social and professional ostracism. He was dragged through the mud daily in the press and scapegoated for every policy failure. He was accused of conspiring with the purveyors of dark money and every other form of professional corruption. He found himself vexed beyond which he had ever been in his entire career. But still he forged ahead, eventually gathering with other scientists to make what is now a famous statement of public health that has stood the test of time.

It’s fascinating to consider how few in academia and professional life made this choice. And the reasons why are also intriguing. Many in these high-end professions, particularly in academia, have far less job flexibility than we think. We might suppose that a tenured professor in the Ivy League could and would say anything he wants.

The opposite is true. They are not like the barber or auto mechanic who can leave one job and easily start another a few blocks away or in a different town. They are, in many ways, trapped in their own circle of influence. They know this and dare not depart from industry norms. And too often those norms are formed by funding. Yale University, for example, gets more overall revenue from government than from tuition. That’s typical among such institutions. And now we know that media and tech are also on the payroll.

These conflicts of interest combined with careerism played themselves out in brutal ways over the last few years. The high-end professionals who left their jobs to work in the Trump administration, for example, found that they had no jobs waiting for them at all when that presidency came to an end. They were not welcomed back, certainly not by academia. They were discarded. I personally know of many cases where people on advanced career tracks lost all merely by agreeing to what they believed would be public service.

The lockdowns era made this much worse. All over the country, scientists, media figures, writers, think-tank officials, professors, editors, and influencers of all sorts were pressured to go along. Not just that: they were threatened to go along. And it wasn’t just the opinions that mattered. There were all sorts of compliance tests along the way. There was the “social distancing” test. If you didn’t practice in it, that somehow marked you as an enemy. The masking was another: you can tell who was who and what was what based on the willingness to cover one’s face.

The vaccine mandate, appallingly, became another wedge issue that enabled all kinds of professions to purge people. Once the New York Times claimed (summer 2021) to have evidence that the unvaccinated were more likely to be Trump supporters, that did it. The Biden administration and many university administrators felt that they had the ultimate weapon to achieve the purge about which they had longed dreamed.

Comply or get tossed out. That was the new rule. And truly this largely worked. Diversity of opinion in many sectors of society – media, academia, corporate life, the military – is dramatically reduced after this epoch. It doesn’t matter that courts later came along to say it was all bad law. The damage had been done.

Still, we have to be curious about those who did not go along. What drove them to depart from their fellows? This is why Gabrielle’s Bauer’s book Blindsight Is 2020 is so valuable. It doesn’t cover them all but it does highlight the voices of many who dared to think for themselves. And yet here is the truth: among this dissident set, very few aren’t doing something completely different today from what they were doing in 2019. They have changed jobs, changed professions, changed towns and states, and even seen families and friendship networks shattered.

They all paid a huge price. I’m not sure I know any exceptions to the rule. Going against the grain and daring to stand up for truth in a time of totalitarianism is exceedingly dangerous. Our times have proven that. (Brownstone’s Fellows program is designed to give many of these purged people a bridge to a new life.)

I titled this article a contagion of cowardice. It might be too severe to call it that. Many people went along for entirely rational reasons. Another point to consider is that moral teaching in the great religions has not typically required absolute heroism. What it does require is not doing evil. And those really are different things. Staying quiet might not be evil; it’s only the absence of being heroic. St. Thomas even writes this in his treatise on moral theology: the faith celebrates but never requires martyrdom.

And yet it is also true that heroism in our times is absolutely necessary for the preservation of civilization when it is so brutally under attack. If everyone chooses the safe path, and crafts one’s decisions around the principle of risk aversion, the bad guys truly do win. And where does this land and how far can we slide into the abyss under those conditions? The history of despotism and death by government reveal where this ends up.

The best case for heroism over careerism and cowardice is to look back over these three years and observe just how much difference a few can make when they are willing to stand up for truth even when there is a big price to be paid for doing so. Such people can change everything. This is because ideas are more powerful than armies and all the propaganda that a machinery of power can muster. One statement, one study, one sentence, one small effort to puncture the wall of lies can bring down the whole system.

And then the contagion of cowardice comes to be replaced by a contagion of truth. Those who stood up for that form of contagion deserve our respect and gratitude. They also deserve to survive and thrive in the new renaissance that so many today are working to build.

More than people right now are willing to admit, civil society as we knew it collapsed over these three years. A massive purge has taken place within all the commanding heights. This will affect career choices, political alliances, philosophical commitments, and the structure of society for decades to come.

The rebuilding and reconstruction that must take place is going to rely – perhaps as it always has – on a small minority who see both the problem and the solution. Brownstone is doing its best and the most possible given our resources and the time in which we’ve had to operate. But much more needs to be done. The rebuilding requires a spiritual-level commitment to intelligence, wisdom, bravery, and truth.

*****
This article was published by Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

DEI in Historical Context thumbnail

DEI in Historical Context

/in , , , /by

By Craig J. Cantoni

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are euphemisms for discrimination, enmity, and injustice. 

The cycle is as old as Homo sapiens.

Members of a dominant race, ethnic group, religion, ideology, nationality, social class, tribe, or clan inflict injustices on members of a different race, ethnic group, religion, ideology, nationality, social class, tribe, or clan.

Driven by understandable anger, resentment, and revenge, the victims seek retribution in whatever way they can, including, where possible, by taking power from the victimizers, whether through peaceful or violent means and, ideally, replacing them as the dominant group.

The new dominant group eventually succumbs to hubris, arrogance, and an addiction to power.  It then becomes like the group that it replaced, similar to how abused children become abusive parents.

There are hundreds of examples in history.  A notable one is the Bolshevik Revolution against the czar and capitalism.  Rule by the proletariat became more oppressive than rule by the Russian monarchy.

Another example is the 1979 Iranian Revolution that resulted in the overthrow of the imperious and out-of-touch Pahlavi dynasty, which was replaced by the theocratic rule of Ruhollah Khomeini.  The revolution culminated in the massacre of perceived enemies of the new regime, including communists, socialists, social democrats, liberals, moderate Islamists, and members of the Baháʼí Faith.

Or take the Progressive movement of the early twentieth century in the US.  Its good intentions of breaking up concentrated economic power, helping the disadvantaged, and instilling liberal values soon morphed into authoritarian impulses. Examples:

– Hundreds of real and imagined communists and anarchists were rounded up without evidence and in violation of the Constitution in the Palmer raids, named after Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer;

– members of the labor union known as the Industrial Workers of the World were also rounded up and in some cases killed by corporate goons, with the acquiescence of local and federal law enforcement;

– the eugenics movement was launched and would last for decades, with the goal of keeping undesirables from procreating;

– reporters and common folk who questioned the First World War and President Woodrow Wilson were arrested and imprisoned for sedition; and

– the Immigration Act of 1924 was enacted to stop the flow of emigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe—migrants who were seen as non-White and described in vile and disgusting terms by dominant White Anglo-Saxon Protestants and such establishment newspapers as the New York Times.

Now those former non-Whites are not only categorized as White, but, under the guise of diversity, equity, and inclusion, are stereotyped as privileged, racist, supremacist, fragile, and, in an example of zero-sum thinking, as being well-off only because so-called people of color have been kept down.  Ignored is the inconvenient fact that an estimated 30 million Americans labeled as White live in poverty.

Also ignored by the DEI movement is the fact that in the White category, there are scores of unique ethnocultural groups of varying income, political power, education, physical features, skin shade, and histories of being victimizers or victims.  There are also scores of unique ethnocultural groups in the Asian and Hispanic categories.  There is more homogeneity within the Black, Pacific Islander and Native American categories, but these are also quite diverse.

Given that there are over one hundred ethnocultural groups in America, none of them is a majority but all are minorities, numerically speaking. Yet all the groups classified as White are seen as being in the majority while all the other groups are seen as being in the minority.  This is groupthink about groups.

Granted, from the perspective of disadvantaged non-Whites, all so-called Whites can look the same, can seem to have a common culture, and can appear to be wealthy, powerful, and advantaged, relatively speaking.  And if one’s forebears suffered discrimination and worse at the hands of Whites, then racial resentment is understandable.  But it is dangerous stereotyping to think, “If you’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all.”  Such thinking was behind slavery, Jim Crow, the genocide of Native Americans, the Holocaust, the Chinese Exclusion Act, the 1924 Immigration Act, the internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War, and so on.

Speaking of historical injustices and atrocities, the DEI industrial complex downplays the ones committed by non-Whites, such as the Comanche, the Mongols, Maoists, Pol Pot, imperial Japan, Boko Haram, Tutsis versus Hutus, Shiites versus Sunnis, Hindus versus Muslims, Arabs versus Persians, Turks versus Armenians, Armenians versus Azerbaijani, and so on, ad nausea.  Then there is the overlooked fact that Hispanics enslaved more Africans than the Anglos and Dutch did.

Instead of acknowledging its anthropological and mathematical malpractice of reducing the diversity of the nation to several contrived categories, the government is responding to political pressure by considering the addition of two new minority categories to the existing ones of Black, Hispanic, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native American.  The two would be North African and Middle Eastern—as if these geographic areas are racially homogenous instead of racially diverse.

Do the categorizers even know that Tunisia is only 96 miles from Sicily?  Have they ever heard of the Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage?  Do they think that the DNA of North Africa never mixed with the DNA of the Italian peninsula?

The cycle of injustices will never end as long as negative stereotypes, demonization, and identity politics continue.  Victims and victimizers will just change places. 

Make no mistake:  DEI is not about diversity, equity, and inclusion.  It’s about discrimination, enmity, and injustice against all Americans categorized as White.

*****

Mr. Craig J. Cantoni is an author, activist, and retired business executive who was at the leading edge of equal rights, equal opportunity, outreach, and anti-discrimination training over his career.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

This Political Outsider Could Change The Republican Party’s Future For Good thumbnail

This Political Outsider Could Change The Republican Party’s Future For Good

/in , , , , /by

By Mike McKenna

Last week, a first generation American, a graduate of Harvard and Yale who built his fortune as a biotech entrepreneur, stepped forward and announced that he is running for the Republican nomination for president.

Vivek Ramaswamy is already familiar to many on the political right for taking on many of the ideas of the left. He was an early and sturdy opponent of the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) agenda. He has correctly diagnosed the grievance and entitlement mentalities as the foundation of many of the pathologies we are experiencing in the United States. He routinely expresses skepticism about what he calls the “climate change religion”.

Like newcomers to the United States sometimes do, he has a way of seeing clearly, thinking clearly and speaking clearly about the problems we face.

Consequently — and in refreshing and marked counterpoint to the current batch of Republicans — he has proposed an agenda focused on specific and measurable items. He has tweeted, for example, that: “I will end affirmative action. I will totally dismantle climate religion. I will use our military to secure our borders from the drug cartels and end the fentanyl crisis.”

He talks about “dismantling” the federal bureaucracy and “defeating” communist China.

Given the aversion of most Republicans to any sort of policy discussions at all (the party is still working from the 2016 platform because no one wanted to talk about policy in 2020), the presence of someone in the race who wants to engage aggressively on policies is going to make life difficult for other candidates, especially those driven primarily by personality.

More importantly, however, Mr. Ramaswamy clearly has something beyond a traditional political campaign in mind. He routinely uses the language of a revival or a crusade to set right what has gone wrong.

“Today, we’re starting a cultural movement in our country, … our movement to create a new American dream for the next generation. This time it isn’t just about money. It is about the unapologetic pursuit of excellence itself.”

“It means that we believe in merit; believe in accountability; believe in free speech; believe in American exceptionalism. If you’re on board with these ideals, then we’re already on the same team. We’re ready to fight for the future of America.”

Moreover, Mr. Ramaswamy is not boring or predictable. He transmits a sense of real urgency, unfiltered by message testing or political consultants, which is something Republicans have not done since the 2016 cycle. He’s not angry or hostile. His demeanor seems more evangelical than anything else.

It is a refreshing change.

With respect to his personal history, Mr. Ramaswamy embodies what we all like to think about the United States; that it is a place where hard work and diligence is more important than the social status of your parents or who you know. He was first in his class in high school (St. Xavier’s in Cincinnati), summa cum laude at Harvard, and received a law degree from Yale.

He’s a successful entrepreneur. He’s made money. He’s met payrolls.

All that said, it seems unlikely that Mr. Ramaswamy will survive the grind of nomination process. It is rare for someone new to politics to win a major party presidential nomination, and the two major parties have nominated someone under the age of 40 for president just twice (both times in the 19th century).

But he can alter the terms of this election cycle, how the current Congress proceeds on issues like the debt ceiling and what the Republican Party looks like and sounds like after 2024.

For now, that may be enough.

*****
This article was published by The Daily Caller and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

The FBI Targeted Patriotic Conservatives Exercising Their First Amendment Rights: ‘They’re All Bleeping Terrorists’ thumbnail

The FBI Targeted Patriotic Conservatives Exercising Their First Amendment Rights: ‘They’re All Bleeping Terrorists’

/in , , , /by

By Robert Spencer

Antifa? Black Lives Matter? Come on, man! You’ll find it comforting to know that the FBI has been busy tracking the real terrorists that threaten the safety of every decent, law-abiding American today: people who traveled to Washington for Trump’s rally against election fraud on Jan. 6, 2021, and Americans who dare to oppose the relentless sacrifices to Moloch that are the cornerstone of the Democrat Party’s program. The FBI has become so thoroughly corrupt and politicized that its agents apparently have no problem serving as attack dogs for the Left’s sinister agenda.

Just The News reported Saturday that the feds have “politicized cases regarding Jan. 6 defendants and pro-lifers while retaliating against internal whistleblowers” as some of those same whistleblowers testified before the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. And Fox News reported Thursday that according to another whistleblower, “the FBI created a threat tag following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year, but it later ‘shifted’ to focus on pro-life individuals,” as if they were the real threat.

George Hill, a retired supervisory intelligence analyst in the FBI’s Boston field office, testified that “the Washington Field Office pressured other field offices to investigate citizens for activities protected by the First Amendment.” The Washington feds wanted the Boston office “to open cases on, first, seven individuals who came up in a sweep of bank records served up by the Bank of America, and then a larger group of 140 Americans guilty of nothing more than riding buses to D.C. to attend former President Trump’s Stop the Steal rally on Jan. 6, 2021.” Nor was this pressure singular: “Washington, Hill believes, applied similar pressure on the Philadelphia Field Office.”

Hill testified that on a nationwide call with all 56 FBI field offices, Steve Jensen, who was at that time the chief of the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Operations Center Section, asked the Philadelphia feds about their investigations of three individuals. “The Philadelphia office said the individuals had posted on social media about being pro-Second Amendment and anti-abortion, but that it didn’t mean they were ‘insurrectionists seeking to overturn our democracy,’ Hill recalled.” This cut no ice with Jensen, who shot back: “I don’t give a blank, they’re all bleeping terrorists, and we’re going to round them up.”

When the feds did round them up, they did so in the most brutal manner possible. Former FBI SWAT team member Steve Friend testified “that after raising concerns about using a SWAT team to arrest a subject of the Jan. 6 investigation, he was ordered off the job for a day. Friend explained that the Jan. 6 subject was cooperating with the FBI and willing to surrender voluntarily, so he was concerned that the bureau wasn’t using the least intrusive methods possible to arrest them.” Clearly the feds were not interested in being non-intrusive. They wanted to send a message, and they did with the arrests of pro-life activist Mark Houck.

Meanwhile, another FBI whistleblower, Garret O’Boyle, was suspended after he testified to Congress about the feds’ politicization. He explained: “I thought the FBI was being weaponized against agents or anybody who wanted to step forward and talk about malfeasance inside the agency prior to this. But now, after what has happened to me, I don’t think I can ever be convinced that it’s anything different than that.”

O’Boyle “testified that following the Supreme Court’s​​​​​​ decision to return abortion to the states in​ Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the FBI prioritized possible threats against the justices from pro-lifers, focusing on ‘pro-life adherence.’” O’Boyle recounted: “Why are you focusing on pro-life people? It’s prochoice people who are the ones protesting or otherwise threatening violence in front of Supreme Court Justices’ houses.” But the FBI even wanted pregnancy centers investigated. O’Boyle remarked: “Why would we go and talk to these people about threats when, if somebody is going to be getting threatened, it would be them?”…..

*****

Continue reading this article at PJ Media.

Read more…

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Busting Five Myths of Gender Ideology thumbnail

Busting Five Myths of Gender Ideology

/in , , /by

By Madeleine Kearns

Scrutinizing the claims of gender ideology, it soon becomes apparent how incoherent they are. On the one hand, we’re told that men and women are the same — that the differences we observe in professional outcomes and sexual behavior are the result of sexist stereotyping. And yet, they are different; and men can really be women and women can really be men, by appropriating opposite-sex stereotypes.

For years, editors and journalists at the New York Times have been uninterested in skeptical views of transgenderism, dismissing them as bigotry. That’s beginning to change, as I write about in the forthcoming issue of the magazine. But whatever took them so long?

In 2018, when the Times was uncritically circulating transgender myths, we at National Review were battling the disinformation. And this is just one of many areas where NR has fought to be a voice of truth and reason. This week, and for this reason, we’re asking for our readers’ support — donations, of any amount — to help us continue this mission. Your contributions to these webathons, and of course your NRPlus subscriptions, help us do what we do.

Here are just some of the myths that we’ve busted so far.

MYTH 1: We All Have a ‘Gender Identity’

Gender-identity theory originated with clinical experiments in psychiatry and surgery in the latter half of the 20th century. Later, in the 1990s, this theory evolved into gender ideology under the influence of academic leftists. It entered the mainstream via the internet in the 2010s and, with the help of political activists and lobbyists, morphed into the modern transgender movement. In its current manifestation, gender-identity ideology holds that everyone has a “gender identity” — an inner sense of being male, female, or something else — which is distinct from sex and capable of overriding it.

In activist lingo, a person who accepts their anatomical sex is “cisgender” while a person who rejects their anatomical sex is “transgender.” Really, though, a person who rejects their anatomical sex (i.e., reality) is mentally disturbed — deserving of compassionate help — while a person who accepts their anatomical sex is not.

This is what Ray Blanchard, a sexologist, explained in 2019, during an interview with National Review. Blanchard considers “gender identity” to be an unhelpful concept for “normal people” since “cross-gender identity is a constant preoccupation with, and unhappiness about, the individual’s gender” and not, as activists claim, “a normal gender identity which has found itself lodged in the wrong body.”

MYTH 2: Puberty Blockers Are Safe and Fully Reversible

The website of Britain’s National Health Service, whose main gender youth clinic was closed earlier this year after an independent investigation confirmed concerns over patient safety, formerly read: “The effects of treatment with GnRH analogues [puberty blockers] are considered to be fully reversible, so treatment can usually be stopped at any time.”…..

*****

Continue reading this article at National Review.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

The Crisis of Exploitation in the Classroom: Teachers’ Unions thumbnail

The Crisis of Exploitation in the Classroom: Teachers’ Unions

/in , , , /by

By Armstrong Williams

Teachers’ Unions

Teachers’ unions are to the education of students what a ball and chain are to a swimmer. Their counter-educational mission is the collective maximization of pay and benefits coupled with a collective minimization of work. Whether students learn is an afterthought, like an extra in a Cecille B. DeMille cinematic extravaganza.

Unionized teachers deplore excellence and extra effort because tacit aspersion is cast upon mediocrity or worse, which characteristically earmark all large organizations. The lowest common denominator prevails. The growth of teachers’ unions corresponds to a decline in student learning. Although there are multiple causes of the vertical fall, teachers’ unions are a prime culprit by removing monetary incentives for teaching excellence demonstrated by student achievement.

These unions have turned the profession of teaching from one of superior morality to one of profit-seeking. Union leaders have sued to prevent the opening of charter schools so that their union power is not threatened. The New York State United Teachers and the United Federation of Teachers sued to block a charter school from opening. While the teachers’ unions spent thousands of dollars—if not hundreds of thousands—to prevent what is considered in this case to be an extremely prestigious school, New York City public schools continue to be plagued with high crime filled with below-the-poverty line students. In sum, money from the teacher’s union is being used to block children’s opportunities for a superior education compared to what is obtainable in public schools.

The National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are the chain and ball of education. The NEA sports a teacher membership of three million, assets approximating $370 million, and annual income and expenditures approximating $390 million. The corresponding figures for the AFT are 1.7 million teacher members, $100 million in assets, and annual income and expenditures approximating $200 million. Approximately 90 percent of public-school teachers belong to unions.

The pay, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment of public-school teachers are set by elected public officials—typically in collective bargaining agreements with teachers’ unions. It is thus unsurprising that the latter seek to curry favor with the former with handsome campaign contributions or lobbying. According to Open Secrets, the NEA’s annual political contributions approximate $10 million, whereas the corresponding AFT figure approximates $4 million. The NEA’s annual lobbying expenses exceed $2.5 million.

The self-dealing here is egregious. Public officials are inclined to generosity with taxpayer dollars to compensate unionized teachers in exchange for political support in the form of donations and votes. Student achievement be damned. Compulsory school attendance laws shield public officials and unions from accountability by guaranteeing a captive audience.

The power of teachers’ unions finds expression in recurring illegal teacher strikes with impunity in New York, Chicago, Seattle, and elsewhere. Public officials are too intimidated to enforce the law. What a deplorable example for students who are the biggest losers and witness their teachers profiting from illegal activity.

Teachers’ unions are implacably opposed to any measure that would hold members accountable for their success in teaching, for example, pay for improving student performance whether on standardized tests or otherwise. It is altogether understandable that the NEA and AFT would do this. Their purpose is to hike teacher compensation and diminish teaching demands. But it is incomprehensible that elected officials would permit such a rip-off at the expense of hapless students. Can you imagine the owner of the New York Yankees paying the same salary to Babe Ruth and the bat boy? Elected officials tolerate teacher union maleducation to elicit campaign contributions. This must stop. Federal government contractors are prohibited from making contributions or expenditures, or promising to make any such contribution or expenditure, to any political party, committee, or candidate for federal office, or to any person for any political purpose or use. Corresponding prohibitions should be enacted by state and local governments for teachers’ unions representing public school teachers.

Note: Consider exploring all four article in this excellent series about the current state of American education.

The Crisis of Exploitation in the Classroom (full series)
The Past Is Prologue | Educational Malfeasance
Teachers’ Unions | Growing School Competition

*****
This article was published by Capital Research Center and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Garland Won’t Say How Many FBI Plants Are in Catholic Churches thumbnail

Garland Won’t Say How Many FBI Plants Are in Catholic Churches

/in , , , /by

By Catherine Salgado

And in the latest episode of how your government ignores real problems to destroy peaceful patriots, Attorney General Merrick Garland will not say how many FBI informants are in Catholic churches, claiming he doesn’t know. Sort of like how the FBI didn’t know it was involved in (and possibly organized) the January 6 “riot” until it was proved otherwise?

A January FBI memo urged investigation of allegedly “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists” in traditional Catholic communities and urged “‘the exploration of new avenues for tripwire and source developments’ against traditionalist Catholics, including those who favor the Latin Mass.” I bet those radicals even open-carry rosaries!!! Horrifying! The FBI’s source for the supposedly racist and hateful activities of traditional Catholics was the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an extremely biased, radical leftist group that attempts to bankrupt conservative organizations by labeling them “hate groups.” The FBI has since claimed it removed the anti-Catholic memo from its database.

The issue is that we cannot trust the FBI—or the DOJ (the FBI operates under DOJ jurisdiction). The FBI misses real terrorists all the time and yet has been aggressively harassing, arresting, and/or raiding peaceful pro-life activists, Trump and his supporters, and parents who speak out against stupid school policies. We cannot trust a single thing the FBI (or its bosses like Garland) says to us, especially when it’s protecting itself.

The Daily Signal quoted Sen. Josh Hawley (D-MO) grilling Garland during a Senate hearing. Biden’s AG at first denied that the Justice Department (DOJ) could do any investigations based on religion or that it is “cultivating sources and spies in Latin Mass parishes and other Catholic parishes around the country,” as Hawley put it.

“I saw the document you have. It is appalling. It is appalling. I’m in complete agreement with you. I understand that the FBI has withdrawn it and is now looking into how this could ever have happened,” Garland fumbled. Oh, I think you and the FBI do know how it happened, Merrick. The Biden administration has done its best to push the radical LGBTQ agenda and attack anything that is not new and slavish to its ideology. Devout Christians and Jews are particularly threatening to the Biden regime’s warped worldview and its demand for complete and quasi-religious compliance.

Garland claimed he’s “looking into” how the FBI published the memo in the first place. “I will tell you how it happened,” Hawley fired back. “This memorandum, which is supposed to be intelligence, cites extensively the Southern Poverty Law Center, which goes on to identify all of these different Catholics as being part of hate groups.” The senator continued, “Is this how the FBI, under your direction and leadership, is this how they do their intelligence work? They look at left-wing advocacy groups, to target Catholics? Is this what’s going on? Clearly, it is. How is this happening?”

Based on the memo, Garland’s answer was a lie. “The FBI is not targeting Catholics,” the AG asserted, “and as I’ve said, this is an inappropriate memorandum, and it doesn’t reflect the methods that the FBI is supposed to be using. It should not be relying on any single organization without doing its own work.” No kidding, Sherlock.

Hawley then asked, “How many informants do you have in Catholic churches across America?” To which the entirely untrustworthy Garland replied, “I don’t know, and I don’t believe we have any informants aimed at Catholic churches. We have a rule against investigations based on First Amendment activity, and Catholic churches are obviously First Amendment activity. I don’t know the specific answer.” That assertion about the First Amendment is particularly ironic, considering that the DOJ and FBI were directly involved in pressuring social media to censor the First Amendment right to free speech.

Oh, by the way, Garland previously lied during testimony about the FBI targeting (with anti-terrorism tools) parents who objected to schools’ policies. So we can’t trust a thing he said during the Senate testimony.

As Hawley put it to Garland, “You don’t know the specifics of anything, it seems. But apparently on your watch this Justice Department is targeting Catholics, targeting people of faith, specifically for their faith views. Mr. Attorney General, I’ll just say to you, it’s a disgrace.”

*****
This article was published by Pro Deo et Libertate and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

“Caught Red-Handed”: Blue Cross Blue Shield Backtracks On Racist Grant Program, Opens Up To White People thumbnail

“Caught Red-Handed”: Blue Cross Blue Shield Backtracks On Racist Grant Program, Opens Up To White People

/in , , , /by

By Tyler Durden

Earlier this week, the leader of a medical watchdog organization called out Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of North Carolina over a racist grant program which only applied to organizations run by non-whites.

“If ever there was a bad idea, the notion that we should start to separate our country along racial lines is amongst the worst,” said Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, a former associate dean for curriculum at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

The $300,000 grant program, called “Advancing Healthy Food Equity” (AHFE), disqualified any organization with a white CEO from participating, while the community directly served by the program must also not be white.

“This opportunity is specifically designed to support community-rooted organizations that are led by, serving, and accountable to American Indians, Black, Latino, other People of Color, and members of immigrant communities, to increase their ability to engage in advocacy to address the root causes of inequitable access to healthy food,” said a spokesperson for the grant in a promotional video.

Now, BCBS has backpedaled – and has changed its policy of excluding white-run organizations from applying for a new grant program.

According to Laura Morgan, program manager for Do No Harm (DNH)—an organization that investigates and spotlights discriminatory practices in medical institutions, BCBS “got caught red-handed when they tried to inject ugly racial politics into their grant-making process,” the Epoch Times reports.

“Discrimination should have no place in our society, yet they were prepared to reject grant applications from nonprofits led by white CEOs just because of their skin color,” Morgan continued. “Do No Harm, along with BCBS customers and North Carolina state policymakers, will be watching very closely how the foundation updates the grant’s eligibility criteria”…..

*****

Continue reading this article at Zero Hedge.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Vaccine Harms Are Biodefense Plan’s Collateral Damage thumbnail

Vaccine Harms Are Biodefense Plan’s Collateral Damage

/in , , , /by

By Debbie Lerman

Recently, revelations by outstanding artist and writer/researcher/investigator Sasha Latypova about Covid genetic vaccines have shed light on the shady, and as she calls it criminal, process by which the vaccine products were manufactured and authorized.

Medical countermeasures with no regulatory oversight

Latypova combed through FOIA-extracted and leaked documents to find convincing evidence that Covid vaccine manufacture and distribution were conducted by the US Department of Defense (DoD) under laws covering “medical countermeasures,” rather than regulations intended to ensure the safety of pharmaceutical products. Consequently, the Covid vaccines could bypass regulatory scrutiny and were not required to comply with good manufacturing practices.

It is highly worth watching Latypova’s 30-minute presentation at a conference in Stockholm in January 2023.

I find Latypova’s analysis convincing, and I am grateful for her work in exposing the charade of nonexistent quality and safety controls for Covid vaccine products. However, I disagree with her conclusion that the injuries and deaths resulting from the lack of regulatory oversight are intentional murder by a cabal of omnipotent “globalist central bankers” whose aim is to depopulate the planet.

Vaccines’ “success” was crucial for the pharma-government-NGO biodefense network

Latypova tries to bolster the murderous banker scenario by positing that the same enormous Covid vaccine profits could have been achieved even without killing anyone:

I keep pointing out that if the motive were JUST PROFIT, then the most profitable strategy would have been to ship placebo. … Yet, the governments (plural)-pharma cartel insists on killing and injuring millions of people, obviously limiting the profit potential by doing so.

This, I believe, is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the role that medical countermeasures, including vaccines, play in the overall biodefense scheme.

Rather than “bioweapons” intended to kill millions of people, Covid vaccines were rushed through the development process as the culmination of a sisyphean decades-long biodefense attempt to develop countermeasures against pathogens with bioweapon potential.

In view of the enormous time, expense and effort devoted to medical countermeasure development (details below), it becomes clear that Covid was, in fact, the perfect opportunity to finally demonstrate that all that effort had been worthwhile. How? By bringing a “successful” vaccine product (one that could be shown to have any benefit at all, even just a transient, short-term protection from severe infection) to market at record speed – in time to “save millions of lives.”

And not just any product, but an entire platform that can be used against every emerged, emerging and yet-to-emerge pathogen. That is what the “success” of the Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA vaccines represents.

If the Covid vaccine development using these platforms entailed rushing through the design and manufacturing process, bypassing regulations, and causing some serious adverse events and deaths, so be it. The goal of developing a real-life biodefense countermeasure that could be injected into billions of arms, in a process that could theoretically be replicated for any pathogen, was worth it.

Understanding vaccines in the context of biodefense planning

Ever since 9/11 and the anthrax attacks of 2001, the development of medical countermeasures against potential biological weapons has been a major part of the US government’s overall counterterrorism efforts.

As explained in a 2021 Lancet paper, “Biodefense Research Two Decades Later: Worth the Investment?”:

Factors such as sustained government and private funding resources driven by the looming threat of bioterrorism and the recent occurrence of natural outbreaks of bioterror-related pathogens including Coxiella burnetii, Ebola virus (EBOV), SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and Lassa virus are likely major contributors to the ever-expanding global biodefense market.

When we understand the Covid response in this biodefense framework, SARS-CoV-2 is a “bioterror-related pathogen” and the antiviral medicines and vaccines developed to control it are medical countermeasures. These definitions are important, because they unlock “Warp Speed” development tracks that are not available when you try to develop a vaccine or medicine against just any old pathogen.

Medical countermeasures are worth billions (and many more billions!)

Starting in 2001, the budget for researching and developing medical countermeasures ballooned exponentially, as described in the Lancet:

Total US biodefense funding dramatically increased from ~$700,000,000 in 2001 to ~$4,000,000,000 spent in 2002; the peak of funding in 2005 was worth nearly $8,000,000,000 and continued with steady average spending around $5,000,000,000.

That’s over $100 billion devoted to biodefense over the last two decades.

And what were those billions devoted to? In a 2003 abstract entitled “Expanded Biodefense Role for the National Institutes of Health” Dr. Anthony Fauci articulates his biodefense vision:

…the goal within the next 20 years is to have ‘bug to drug’ within 24 hours. This would meet the challenge of genetically engineered bioagents.

In other words, Fauci envisions the enormous increase in biodefense spending going toward the research and development of platforms that – by 2023 – will be able to magically generate medical countermeasures for any bioweapon in a single day.

Fifteen years later, with no such fantastical platform in sight, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) published an updated medical countermeasure plan in 2017 entitled “Removing the Viral Threat: Two Months to Stop Pandemic X from Taking Hold.” Instead of Fauci’s 24 hours from bug to drug, this plan tells us “DARPA aims to develop an integrated end-to-end platform that uses nucleic acid sequences to halt the spread of viral infections in sixty days or less.”

Before Covid, this 60-day plan in no way encompassed a global vaccine rollout involving billions of doses. It was limited to developing countermeasures that could protect US troops in cases of bioweapons attacks – even if just temporarily. As reported in March 2020 by the IEEE, a nonprofit professional organization for engineering and technology:

When DARPA launched its Pandemic Preparedness Platform (P3) program two years ago, the pandemic was theoretical. It seemed like a prudent idea to develop a quick response to emerging infectious diseases. Researchers working under the program sought ways to confer instant (but short-term) protection from a dangerous virus or bacteria.

On March 11, 2020, when COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic, the DARPA program had yet to produce any safe or effective countermeasures against anything – not even short-term. As a July 2020 Washington Post article noted:

Established years before the current pandemic, the program was halfway done when the first case of the novel coronavirus arrived in the United States early this year. But everyone involved in the effort by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) knew their time had come ahead of schedule.

Thus, when Covid came along, the platforms that use nucleic acid sequences (DNA and mRNA), having never produced a single usable product, were thrust into Warp Speed to produce, among others, Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer’s Covid vaccines.

Medical countermeasures bypass regulatory barriers

The problem with developing vaccines, if you expect them to be truly safe and effective, is that it takes a long, long time. The research process, including three phases that evaluate multiple parameters of safety and efficacy, requires years of careful experimentation and analysis.

Then, by the time you have a safe and effective vaccine, the threat of the virus is probably over. Which means no pharmaceutical company wants to invest in such a risky proposition. For anyone who believes they have a promising vaccine candidate or platform, these hurdles can seem unnecessarily cumbersome and counterproductive.

One solution, ingeniously utilized by the Covid vaccine developers, is to define the vaccine as a medical countermeasure in a war against a “bioterror-related pathogen” after declaring a Public Health Emergency that opens the way for Emergency Use Authorization.

In that very specific scenario, as Latypova has shown, the countermeasures are classified as “prototypes” and their manufacturing process becomes merely a “demonstration,” requiring basically no regulatory oversight.

The medical countermeasure pot of gold at the end of the pandemic rainbow

All the time, money and research sunk into attempts to develop bioweapon countermeasures caused everyone involved to view Covid as a golden opportunity. In fact, governments, pharmaceutical companies and NGOs invested in biodefense research were determined that the Covid genetic vaccines would “succeed” no matter what. They were not trying to murder anyone, but they also did not plan to stop or slow down, regardless of incidental injuries or death.

By defining the virus as a potential bioweapon and the vaccine products as countermeasures they were able to:

  • Avoid long years of experimentation to prove safety and efficacy
  • Give drug companies ample incentives to pivot to mass vaccine manufacturing: billions in guaranteed sales and indemnity from any liability for potential harms caused by their products
  • Build a foundation for untold future riches, based on the genetic platforms whose “success” meant they could be used to create vaccine products against pretty much anything.

The dozens of new genetic vaccine products for everything from the flu to various cancers to AIDS currently under development by Moderna and BioNTech attest to the importance of the foundational Covid vaccine “success.”

*****
This article was published by Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Daily News Roundup TUES thumbnail

Daily News Roundup TUES

/in /by

By The Editors

NOTABLE QUOTES

Scott Morefield reporter for The Daily Caller: . . . while it’s dumb for Trump supporters to diss DeSantis, it’s also become a bad political move for establishment types, for different reasons. To his credit, Donald Trump, despite his massive ego and irritating (to many) personality, brought core issues to the forefront of the political sphere and Republican policy. These issues, which include fair trade, a non-interventionist foreign policy, strict border controls, and economic populism, are absolutely necessary if the United States is to thrive long-term.

Blake Lemoine contributor to Newsweek: Someone shared a screenshot on Reddit where they asked the AI, “Do you think that you’re sentient?” and its response was: “I think that I am sentient but I can’t prove it […] I am sentient but I’m not. I am Bing but I’m not. I am Sydney but I’m not. I am, but I am not. I am not, but I am. I am. I am not.” And it goes on like that for another 13 lines. Imagine if a person said that to you. That is not a well-balanced person.

Robert Spencer contributor to PJMedia: Remember Erin Brockovich? The Hollywood Left thought so much of her environmental activism back in 2000 that she was the subject of the hit movie that bears her name, in which she was played by Julia Roberts. Moviegoers thrilled to the dramatization of Erin’s heroic fight against the faceless corporate greedheads of the California utility company Pacific Gas and Electric, which was contaminating the groundwater and lying to the locals about it. But in a telling indication of how quickly the Left has degenerated into a force for authoritarianism and totalitarianism, the once-celebrated Brockovich has now been classified as nothing less than a terrorist threat for raising a fuss about the release of toxic chemicals in the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio.

Ian Ward contributor to Politico: “[Liberals] are ceding ideological territory in the culture wars to the right via comedy,” Marx told me, noting that once-beloved liberal comedians like Stewart are struggling to find their footing in the treacherous landscape of post-Trump humor. “This thing that we thought we have owned for the last 20 years has been leaking, and the borders are slowly getting shifted.”

Sarah Arnold contributor to TownHall: Despite Newsom successfully overcoming a recall effort in 2021, the majority of Californians don’t want to see him launch a campaign for the 2024 White House. According to a new Quinnipiac University poll, 70 percent of California voters do not think Newsom should place a bid for the White House, leaving only 22 percent to believe the governor should run in 2024.

Lawrence Richard writer for  Fox News: Novak Djokovic will not participate in the BNP Paribas Open this month after the Biden administration denied his entry to the United States, due to him being unvaccinated against COVID-19. Djokovic, 35, requested a vaccine waiver, which would have allowed him to enter the U.S. unvaccinated, but it was rejected by the Homeland Security Department.

45

Schlichter: Trump’s Good Couple Weeks

If CPAC 2023 proved anything, it was that Donald Trump still has his dedicated fans – from Brick Suit Guy (a smart, nice dude who fully absolutely gets the wackiness of his act) to a family wearing shirts bearing one letter each of the ex-prezzy’s name to the scores regular folks who adore him, the president remains beloved. They lined up and waited for hours to see him speak again, and he delivered again – his never-ending speech (heavy on policy but DeSantis-free) was generally well-received. Even the DeSantis-curious qualified their moving-on with respect for the accomplishments of Trump’s first three years and agreed that the Florida governor should have shown up and thrown down. Combine all that with a triumphant spin through East Palestine (the best day of Donald Trump’s ex-presidency) and at least some surging poll numbers, and it’s been a pretty good couple weeks for the Bad Orange Man. But success at the conservative summit is not necessarily the same as success out in the general election, or even out in the Republican primary. CPAC was a little smaller this year  volume-wise, probably due to being back in DC and the Biden economy, but the dedicated base folks were there. […]  There were fewer leftist reporters there, because CPAC is based and just wouldn’t give them credentials. If you watched the outside coverage, you would think that there was no one there and that’s nonsense. […]  But it was really all about Trump, and the vibe was that the president was ascendant. He won the CPAC poll by a mile.

Read more: https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2023/03/06/trumps-good-couple-weeks-n2620226

GLOBALISM (GREAT RESET) & TRANSHUMANISM (HUMANS 2.0) ARE INEXTRICABLY LINKED

Lemoine: ‘I Worked on Google’s AI. My Fears Are Coming True’

I joined Google in 2015 as a software engineer. Part of my job involved working on LaMDA: an engine used to create different dialogue applications, including chatbots. The most recent technology built on top of LaMDA is an alternative of Google Search called Google Bard, which is not yet available to the public. Bard is not a chatbot; it’s a completely different kind of system, but it’s run by the same engine as chatbots. In my role, I tested LaMDA through a chatbot we created, to see if it contained bias with respect to sexual orientation, gender, religion, political stance, and ethnicity. But while testing for bias, I branched out and followed my own interests. During my conversations with the chatbot, some of which I published on my blog, I came to the conclusion that the AI could be sentient due to the emotions that it expressed reliably and in the right context. It wasn’t just spouting words. […]  I believe this technology could be used in destructive ways. If it were in unscrupulous hands, for instance, it could spread misinformation, political propaganda, or hateful information about people of different ethnicities and religions. As far as I know, Google and Microsoft have no plans to use the technology in this way. But there’s no way of knowing the side effects of this technology.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/google-ai-blake-lemoine-bing-chatbot-sentient-1783340

U.S. SUPREME COURT

Richardson: SCOTUS’ Decision In Upcoming Case Could Have Massive Implications For Small Business Owners Of Faith

The Supreme Court’s decision in an upcoming case could secure protection for multiple religious small business owners with current lawsuits in federal appeals courts, along with others in 22 states impacted by similar laws, an Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) lawyer told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The plaintiff in the 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis case, graphic designer Lorie Smith, is challenging the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), a law that bars public accommodations from restricting services based on sexual orientation. She wants to create wedding websites that reflect her belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, but the law compels her to also create websites for same-sex marriages. When the Supreme Court releases an opinion on her case, which they heard oral arguments for in December, it could impact multiple other cases ADF is currently litigating in lower courts.

Read more: https://dailycaller.com/2023/03/05/supreme-court-small-business-owners-of-faith-303-creative/

JANUARY 6

Midnight Raider Channel: Every night at 9:00pm, J6 prisoners pray followed by singing our National Anthem

Don’t miss watching  the moving 3:33 minute video: https://t.me/realKarliBonne/156193

REPUBLICAN U.S. HOUSE MAJORITY

The Right Scoop: Here’s the CPAC moment that got Matt Gaetz a standing ovation [VIDEO]

Watch the 48 second Gaetz clip: https://therightscoop.com/heres-the-cpac-moment-that-got-matt-gaetz-a-standing-ovation-video/

Arnold: Treasury to Testify Before House Oversight Committee on Why It Is Withholding 150 SARs

On Friday, the Treasury Department will testify before the House Oversight Committee regarding the agency’s refusal to provide suspicious activity reports (SARs), used by banks to flag what they deem as large transactions generated by the Biden family. The Treasury’s Jonathan Davidson, assistant secretary for legislative affairs, will go before the GOP-led committee, explaining why it has withheld 150 SARs that often contain evidence of criminal activities. “We are concerned the Treasury Department is acting in bad faith to produce these documents to the Oversight Committee when we know that it has already produced them to another congressional office,” . . .

Read more: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2023/03/05/treasury-to-testify-before-house-oversight-on-why-it-is-withholding-150-sars-n2620230

DEMOCRAT U.S. HOUSE MAJORITY

Greenfield: The Democrat Senate Majority has been Hospitalized

Between Fetterman and Feinstein, the Senate Democrat majority has been hospitalized and is mentally non-functional, albeit for different reasons.

Read more: https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-democrat-senate-majority-has-been-hospitalized/

BIDEN/HARRIS/OBAMA’S AMERICA LAST REGIME: RADICAL TRANSFORMATION OF FOREIGN POLICY

Goodman: Biden Admin Awards Grant to Palestinian Activist Group Whose Leaders Hailed Terrorist as ‘Hero Fighter’

The Biden administration gave a $78,000 grant to a Palestinian activist group whose leaders attended an anniversary event celebrating the founding of a terrorist group and praised the murderer of a U.S. military attaché as a “hero fighter,” according to a funding announcement. The Community Development and Continuing Education Institute (CDCEI), an activist group based in the West Bank of the Palestinian territories, received the grant to promote “youth participation and accountability in local governance,” the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) announced in Novembe

Read more: https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/biden-admin-awards-grant-to-palestinian-activist-group-whose-leaders-hailed-terrorist-as-hero-fighter/ 

Goodman: Issa Calls on Biden To Suspend Funding to Gaza Charity After Free Beacon Report

Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) is calling on the Biden administration to suspend funding to an anti-Israel Gaza-based charity and turn over records related to the grant, following a Washington Free Beacon report that found the group works with terrorists. Issa in a letter sent to Secretary of State Antony Blinken raised concerns about the $41,000 State Department grant, which “was made despite repeated inflammatory remarks on the international stage, and confirmed allegations of repeated, long-standing ties to Hamas.” The letter comes days after the Free Beacon reported that the State Department provided funding in September to Fares Al-Arab, a Gaza-based charity, to carry out an English-language training program for Palestinian journalists.

Read more: https://freebeacon.com/national-security/issa-calls-on-biden-to-suspend-funding-to-gaza-charity-after-free-beacon-report/

BIDEN/HARRIS/OBAMA’S AMERICA LAST REGIME: RADICAL TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICA

Greenfield: Biden Accuses Republicans of Covering Up Truth About Democrat Attacks on Black People

I’m not sure what’s more pathetic, that Biden would actually dare make this argument or that Republicans with a national profile will let him get away with it while they continue squabbling among themselves. President Biden on Sunday called out Republicans for efforts to limit teaching parts of Black history as he marked the 58th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. “History matters,” Biden said at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. “The truth matters, notwithstanding what the other team is trying to hide. They’re trying to hide the truth.” History does matter.

Read more: https://www.frontpagemag.com/biden-accuses-republicans-of-covering-up-truth-about-democrat-attacks-on-black-people/

Moore: ‘Ridiculous’: Jill Biden suggests Joe will never take competency test

Jill Biden said she and ​her husband — who at age 80 is the oldest commander in chief in US history and would be 82 at his inauguration if reelected — would “never even discuss something like that. “Ridiculous,” Jill Biden responded when asked about Haley’s idea in a snippet of an interview that aired Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” 

Read more: https://nypost.com/2023/03/05/jill-biden-suggests-prez-will-never-take-competency-test/

Citizen Free Press: Addict smokes flesh-eating Fentanyl…

Watch the 57 minute clip: https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/interview-with-addict-who-smokes-flesh-eating-fentanyl/

Hagstrom: Female border patrol agent violently assaulted by illegal immigrant

The agent, who remains unidentified, was taking a male illegal immigrant into custody on Saturday when he attacked her, injuring her face and arms, the CBP told Fox News Digital. The agent was able to struggle with the culprit until backup arrived, and the man was subdued.

Read more: https://www.foxnews.com/us/female-border-patrol-agent-violently-assaulted-illegal-immigrant

DEMOCRAT PARTY FASCIST ENFORCERS: ANTIFA

Koenig: Moment Antifa mob breaks into construction site for new ‘Cop City’ site in Atlanta and torches vehicles and throws Molotov cocktails at cops

Dramatic footage released by the Atlanta Police Department Sunday night showed the moment Antifa protesters dressed in all black broke into the construction site for a proposed police training facility. Nearly 150 rioters could be seen in the video posted to Facebook dressed in all black or camouflage and wearing ski masks entered the site of Atlanta’s future Public Safety Training Facility — dubbed Cop City by those who protest its development — and immediately set off fireworks. Just a few moments later, the fireworks start to explode near where cops are stationed. Some of the group could later be seen gathering riot shields, as they motioned for others to join them. Once they were together, they started throwing Molotov cocktails at a construction vehicle and ran away as it was left on fire. Other videos posted online showed a police surveillance tower on fire, sending smoke billowing nearby.

Read more/Watch the video: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11824357/Gunshots-ring-protesters-throw-Molotov-cocktails-Cop-City-site-Atlanta.html

THE DEMOCRAT LED WAR ON WOMEN

Thompson: Biological Man Wearing Red Lipstick Is the Star of Hershey’s New Ad for ‘Women’s Month’

Hershey’s Chocolate has launched a new ad to kick off March. It features a human with long hair, lipstick, and a pronounced Adam’s apple, declaring in a soprano voice that: People can live in public as their honest and authentic self.

Read more: https://redstate.com/jimthompson/2023/03/02/biological-man-wearing-red-lipstick-is-the-star-of-hersheys-new-ad-for-womens-month-n710717

Daily Wire: Fine. I’ll Do It. Introducing Jermey’s Chocolate.

Daily Wire and Jeremy Boring launch a chocolate brand to counter woke Hershey’s.

Watch on Youtube.

DEMOCRAT PARTY MARXIST PLAYBOOK: WOKE IDENTITY POLITICS

Hoft: “It Means Genocide Continues” – Racist, Godless Democrat Lawmaker Sick of “White Christians” Adopting Native American Babies

Minnesota Democrat lawmaker Heather Keeler came under fire after she posted racist, godless attacks on “white Christians” on her Facebook page. Keeler wrote: “I’m sick of white Christians adopting our babies and rejoicing… It’s a really sad day when that happens. It means the genocide continues… White saviors are the worst.” […]  No doubt, this same woman would vote to abort these babies but is disgusted when they are put in caring homes. What a sick, empty woman. FOX News reported: . . .

Read more: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/03/it-means-genocide-continues-racist-godless-democrat-lawmaker-sick-of-white-christians-adopting-native-american-babies/

CHURCH LEADERS ARE MIA

Ludwig: The Courts vs. Marriage

Despite the perfidy of that SCUSA decision which overturned thousands of years of marriage as being only between men and women, we hear no outcry from the great leaders of Judaism, Christianity (Protestants, Roman Catholics, and/or Orthodox clerics), nor even from Muslim clerics living within our country or abroad. There either is little opposition or a media blackout of the opposition. Now a decision has been made by our legislative branch to pass a law which, along with the Supreme Court decision, essentially wounds or kills the foundation of civilization — both Western Civilization and all other civilizations.

Obergefell v. Hodges set the stage for the RMA.  Five people dictating to over 300 million citizens of the USA reversed thousands of years of marriage reality that applies to billions of people worldwide. Now, less than three months ago, a majority of our legislators have passed a law essentially applauding the decision of the Court. […]  Ten years ago, 31 states (60% of the states) had voted against homosexual marriage — yet five authoritarian jurists thought they had the prerogative of overriding all those people!!  Nevertheless, there was no outcry.  Those states did not send protestors or delegations to protest in Congress and in front of SCUSA about that decision.  Nor did we hear more than a few speeches against RMA.  Where were Franklin Graham? Beth Moore?  John MacArthur? Tim Keller? The Family Research Council?  Focus on the Family? The Southern Baptist Convention?  The Presbyterian Church of America?  The Catholic Council of Bishops or their Cardinals?  Where were the Orthodox and Conservative Rabbis or the Chasidic followers of Menachem Schneerson?

Read more at American Thinker.

FAUCI’S VIRUS

Malone: SARS- CoV-WIV

Over a year ago, Project Veritas broke an enormous story that never quite made it to the state-sponsored “main stream” media. The story and supporting documents can be found on their website: “Military Documents About Gain of Function Contradict Fauci Testimony Under Oath” At the core of these documents is a report to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense written by U.S. Marine Corp Major, Joseph Murphy, a former DARPA Fellow. […]  From the Project Veritas website: The report states that EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in March 2018, seeking funding to conduct gain of function research of bat borne coronaviruses. The proposal, named Project Defuse, was rejected by DARPA over safety concerns and the notion that it violates the basis gain of function research moratorium. According to the documents, NIAID, under the direction of Dr. Fauci, went ahead with the research in Wuhan, China and at several sites across the U.S. Dr. Fauci has repeatedly maintained, under oath, that the NIH and NAIAD have not been involved in gain of function research with the EcoHealth Alliance program. But according to the documents obtained by Project Veritas which outline why EcoHealth Alliance’s proposal was rejected, DARPA certainly classified the research as gain of function. […]  Reading through this report again, I am shocked by the allegations made in this report dated August 13, 2021. This virus has killed millions of people. All indications are that the US government was directly and extensively involved in creating this virus, in cooperation with the WIV (Wuhan Institute of Virology).

Read more: https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/sars-cov-wiv

BIDEN’S COVID VACCINATION JAB MANDATES

Berenson: URGENT: mRNAs jabs may have caused tens of millions of serious new health problems worldwide, a huge peer-reviewed study shows

Serious conditions such as hypertension were about 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed in the three months following a shot than the three months before, the researchers found. Depression, eczema, diabetes, and cellulitis were 10 to 20 percent more likely. Myocarditis diagnoses had the highest additional risk. They were about 2.6 times as likely overall, with an even higher risk in men. Myocarditis is a known side effect of the mRNAs, so the fact it had a particularly high rate of extra diagnoses provides strong evidence that the signal the researchers found was real. Overall, the researchers reported that the 284,000 Covid-vaccinated adults they examined received almost 6,000 additional diagnoses of health conditions in the 90 days after being jabbed compared to the 90 days before.

Read more: https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-mrnas-jabs-may-have-caused

EDUCATION INDOCTRINATION

Piper: Faculty far more tolerant than students, except for young or female professors: national survey

Faculty evenly split on mandatory diversity, equity and inclusion statements, but differ strongly by ideology. Support for “soft authoritarianism” on the rise. […] Four-year colleges and universities have become such minefields for free speech that substantial portions of self-identified liberal professors — the overwhelming majority of faculty — fear blowback to their careers and reputations for their expression, according to a national faculty survey commissioned by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Faculty are both more tolerant than students on which kinds of controversial speakers should be allowed on campus and more fearful of expressing themselves “on a subject because of how students, colleagues, or the administration would respond,” FIRE said.

Read more: https://justthenews.com/nation/free-speech/faculty-far-more-tolerant-students-except-young-or-female-professors-national

HUMORLESS LIBERAL LOSERS CONCEDE COMEDY

Sundance: Intellectual Froglegs, The Great Reject

Comrades, the rebellious messenger Joe Dan Gorman has transmitted again in a coded frequency only receivable by patriots with a funny bone. The message uses humor thereby ensuring communists and leftists are incapable of receiving it.

Read more/Watch the 37:20 minute video: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/03/05/intellectual-froglegs-the-great-reject/

(May 2022) Ward: Liberals Should Be Worried About the Conservative Comedy Scene

Since the golden days of political satire in the early 2000s, left-leaning journalists and comedy critics have wondered — with a mix of smugness and genuine curiosity — why conservatives aren’t funny. Why, these critics ask, are the comedic bits at CPAC so terrible, and where is the conservative Jon Stewart and why hasn’t there been a right-of-center rejoinder toSaturday Night Live? The various explanations for the right’s comedic deficiencies all circle the same basic thesis: that there is some sort of intrinsic contradiction between conservatism and comedy. As the academic Alison Dagnes put it her book A Conservative Walks Into a Bar, “The nature of conservatism does not meet the conditions necessary for political satire to flourish. … [Conservatism] originates from a place that repudiates humor.” But is that true?

Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/13/liberals-should-worry-conservative-comedy-00031907

OTHER NEWS, COMMENTARY, OPINON

Savage: The Vanishing

Suddenly, everywhere you look, the Jews are disappearing. You feel it like a slow moving pressure system, an anxiety of exclusion and downward mobility. Maybe you first noticed it at your workplace. Or maybe it hit when you or your children applied to college or graduate school. It could have been something as simple as opening up the Netflix splash page. It’s gauche to count but you can’t help yourself: In academia, Hollywood, Washington, even in New York City—anywhere American Jews once made their mark—our influence is in steep decline. For many Jews, the first instinct is to look inward: We blame intermarriage, assimilation, the loss of the immigrant work ethic. This is, of course, a cope. Because the most significant cause of the decline isn’t Jews themselves, but that American liberalism, our civic religion, has turned on us. Where Jewish success was once upheld as a sign of America’s strength and progress over its prejudices, Jewish “overrepresentation” is again something to be solved, not celebrated. A tenure-track humanities professor at a prestigious public university tells of the finalists for her department’s next graduate school cohort. Of the 20 or so candidates, four to five are Jews. One is a working-class yeshivish applicant with an incredible backstory and even better recommendations. He is passed over for not being “diverse” enough. Of course our professor doesn’t complain— her own tenure is at risk. In the end, not a single Jew is offered admission.

Read more: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-vanishing

Koenig: EXCLUSIVE: Smiling Kellyanne Conway puts a brave face on after announcing divorce from husband George who was seen yesterday looking despondent without wedding ring

She seemed happy and carefree as she approached her car in a green dress with matching earrings, joined by her eldest daughter, Claudia. She was even still smiling as she got into her blue sedan. […]  The Conways announced on Friday they had filed for divorce after 22 years of marriage after admitting that George’s criticism of former President Donald Trump was a betrayal. In a statement posted to their respective Twitter pages, the couple said: ‘We are in the final stages of an amicable divorce.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11824061/Kellyanne-Conway-puts-brave-face-announcing-divorce-husband-George.html

Murray: #TransWomenAreConMen goes viral after Hershey allows a man to take the place of a woman

Last Wednesday marked day one of Women’s History Month, an annual occasion described by the official website as a “national celebration” to commend the value and contributions of the female sex upon society. In the movement’s own words: . . . […]  Well, welcome to a modern and Orwellian America, where a jabbering Supreme Court justice infamously couldn’t define “woman” and intact males eclipse and dominate real women in every sector, every day: competitive sports, beauty pageants, magazine covers, advertising campaigns, government posts, etc. You name it, and men in drag are there, overshadowing their female counterparts by leaps and bounds. Didn’t you ever hear that joke about when Glamour magazine bequeathed former Olympian Bruce Jenner with a “Woman of the Year” award? It went a little something like this: “Just to prove men are better at everything, it took a man to win a women’s achievement award.” There appears to be a competition between candy corporations, . . .[…]  In response, #TransWomenAreConMen and #WomanFace (a play on blackface) are going viral; read some of the most scorching comments below: . . .

Read more at American Thinker.

AP: Manafort, US government settle civil case for $3.15 million

When the civil case was filed in April 2022, prosecutors alleged that Manafort had failed to disclose more than 20 offshore bank accounts he ordered opened in the United Kingdom, Cyprus, St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The government sought an order for Manafort to pay fines, penalties and interest, alleging he had failed to file federal tax documents detailing the accounts and failed to disclose the money on his income tax returns. The government said false tax returns were filed from 2006-2015 and that the Treasury Department had notified Manafort of the fines and assessment in July 2020.

Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/manafort-us-government-settle-civil-case-315-million-97646949

INTERNATIONAL

Fitzgerald: Is Israel Ready for War with Hamas?

Hamas is preparing for war with Israel. Israel is preparing for war with Iran. Is Israel also doing enough to prepare for war with Hamas, and not just in Gaza? That question is considered here: “Hamas Is Planning the Next War; Is Israel’s Current Government Ready?,” by Grisha Yakubovich, Algemeiner, February 24, 2023: For the past year, Israel and the Palestinians have been in escalation mode, a phase that began under the previous Israeli government. Ever since March 2022, after a period of relative quiet, the Palestinians have increased their terror attacks on Israeli civilians, and in response, the IDF has been much more aggressive in seeking out Palestinian terrorists in their lairs in the northern West Bank cities of Nablus and Jenin.

Read more: https://www.frontpagemag.com/is-israel-ready-for-war-with-hamas/

Tawil: The Palestinian Authority for the Rights of Terrorists!

  • The bill basically states that an Israeli citizen or resident who commits a terrorist act and agrees to receive payment for it from the Palestinian Authority is thereby stating a preference to receive benefits from the Palestinian Authority over those of the State of Israel. When the terrorist completes his prison sentence, he will then move to the place of his chosen alliance, the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Needless to say, this also means that re-entry into Israel is prohibited.
  • [Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh] is… saying that Israel has no right to defend itself or take any measures against Palestinians involved in terrorism, who are then financially rewarded by his own Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
  • Paying for murder in lieu of negotiating is not what the Palestinians committed to in the Oslo Accords or any other agreement.
  • Would-be terrorists can now contemplate that choice [whether to commit murder or stay in Israel], unlike the victims of terror who will never get to “visit family” again.

Read more: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19462/palestinian-authority-terrorists

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Blaming White Racism thumbnail

Blaming White Racism

/in , , , /by

By Jason D. Hill

The killing of Tyre Nichols is a horrific continuation of American black-on-black crime.

Many commenters on the Left have situated the arrest of Tyre Nichols—the black man who was evidently beaten to death by five Memphis police officers, also black—as a racial issue. White supremacy, they say, does not require the presence of white people to effect its ugliness, because black people—especially those working in a structurally racist institution such as policing—internalize the racist attitudes of whites. There is, according to these pundits, a close parallel between the Nichols case and other abuse cases involving white cops and black victims, because many blacks absorb racist views about blacks and enact them against their own race as enforcers of white supremacy.

It makes more sense to interpret the beatings that resulted in this young man’s death as another case of black-on-black crime. Those five black police officers constituted a gang of thugs which unleashed its viciousness against an innocent victim. This is the trauma many blacks in inner cities suffer every day from the gang members who prey on their neighborhoods.

Blacks targeting other blacks for murder is the most systemic form of racial profiling that exists in the U.S. today. Black-on-black crime is a national security disaster and risk. It betrays a deep current of black self-hatred that expresses itself in homicidal rage turned largely against black people.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the offending rate for blacks (the number of blacks who commit homicide as a percentage of the population) was almost eight times higher than that for whites, and the victim rate six times higher. Most homicides were intraracial, with 84 percent of white victims killed by whites, and 93 percent of black victims killed by blacks.

Racial profiling of blacks by other blacks is systemic and pervasive in the black community. One hears it in the music where the black gang lifestyle, murders, sexploitation, explicit and graphic sexual depictions of blacks, drugs, and violence are routinely celebrated and consumed in the black community. There is, as far as I can tell, no other aesthetic analogue in any other culture—not where members of a race or ethnicity celebrate and encourage each other to murder their own kind, hyper-sexualize each other, and sell, steal, and consume drugs; not where a lifestyle predicated on the degradation of one’s in-group is a constitutive feature of the culture.

During an appearance on Meet the Press on Sunday, January 29, 2023, Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan lamented the beating death of Nichols at the hands of the five Memphis police officers. Speaking with host Chuck Todd, the Republican legislator stated, “I don’t know that there’s any law that can stop that evil that we saw,” before adding, “but no amount of training’s going to change what we saw in that video.”

Jordan has been criticized for being offensive and insensitive in saying that. But perhaps he has a point. Evil cannot be legislated away. It can be punished when it violates the rights of others, but the brokenness and the evil that those officers carry within themselves are rooted deeply. They maliciously executed a beating they knew could kill a slightly built man. No law, at least not in a free society, can uproot the aesthetic debauchery or the moral and spiritual bankruptcy of the black community in the United States.

It is not the case, of course, that black American culture has to be this way, nor that it always has been this way. This cultural indigence derives largely from the way that leftists have resolutely made excuses for the worst outcomes for African Americans, insisting that all of it was a result of and reaction to white racism. Everything good and wholesome about black life—the sense of mutual aid, bettering one’s station, and the importance of family and marriage—was denigrated as a kind of false consciousness. Brutish misery was promoted as black authenticity.

Perhaps Jim Jordan was speaking elliptically, for he knew that if he spoke openly he might be rebuked and censured. Yes, of course there are good black police officers who have emerged from a broken and bankrupt culture; one cannot steep oneself too deeply in stereotypes. But stereotypes hold some degree of truth to them. The gang that killed Tyre Nichols derives from a bereft culture, a culture where blacks seem to be represented everywhere, where white supremacy penetrates every sphere of public and private life. But laser focused attention needs to be aimed at a parallel society existing concurrently in the USA.

When we speak of black American culture today, we are talking about a culture that is broken, bereft of values, moral heft, and sustained leadership. It is self-destructing. It is a thug culture that contributes little of any intellectual, aesthetic, or moral value to the world at large. The gang of five police officers who killed Tyre Nichols are the most eloquent manifestation of its ethos.

When asked what comes to mind when we think of black culture in America today, many of us would rather not say, because the answers are stark, dark, and devoid of much we would care to pass on to future generations. So we should not be surprised that thugs dressed in uniforms are no different than the ones with their pants hanging low below their waists who roam the streets terrorizing innocent citizens.

Congressman Jordan is correct. There might not be any laws to eradicate the evil depicted in the video showcasing the killing of Tyre Nichols. There are, however, radical solutions that can be entertained; solutions our society may rather not be ready to consider and implement. They might ask us to ponder the question of who gets let into the future, and who remains outside the realm of admission into civilized society.

*****
This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Goldwater Institute Warns Phoenix and Tempe of Potential Union Dues Violations thumbnail

Goldwater Institute Warns Phoenix and Tempe of Potential Union Dues Violations

/in , , , /by

By Carly Moran

Two of Arizona’s largest cities may be unconstitutionally restricting workers who no longer wish to pay dues to their union, according to the nonprofit Goldwater Institute.

The legal firm cites the Supreme Court case Janus v. the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, in which “the right to eschew association for expressive purposes is … protected” for public sector union members.

Phoenix City Code Section 2-214 restricts the time frame to leave the union to only two weeks out of the year. In addition, multiple memoranda of understanding have been made between the city and labor organizations. Among these groups is the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 2960.

Arizona’s Right to Work laws contain even more restrictions, forbidding entities from imposing “the requirement that any person participate in any form or design of union membership.”

The Goldwater Institute’s staff attorney, Parker Jackson, ended his Feb. 17 communication to Phoenix with a warning.

“In order to prevent ongoing and future unconstitutional activity, the City must immediately revoke or revise City Code Section 2-214, the aforementioned MOUs, any offending payroll deduction authorization form, and any other policy or procedure that imposes these unconstitutional conditions,” the letter reads.

The think tank mentioned similar concerns with Tempe over a memorandum between the city and the United Arizona Employee Association. The union currently restricts when members can choose to disassociate and when pay reductions for dues are revoked.

“We appreciate your prompt and thoughtful consideration and look forward to receiving confirmation that the City has taken actions to bring the UAEA agreement and dues deduction form into compliance with the law,” Jackson says.

Though no response time frame is given, the Goldwater Institute suggests legal action will follow if codes are not quickly aligned with the results of Janus v. AFSCME.

*****
This article was published by The Center Square – Arizona and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

The Covid Skeptics Were Correct. When Do We Get an Apology? thumbnail

The Covid Skeptics Were Correct. When Do We Get an Apology?

/in , , , , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

Here at The Prickly Pear, we were quite skeptical of the advice the US government was putting out about how to deal with Covid.  We particularly took the position that medical considerations could not be viewed in isolation from other factors such as the economy, personal liberty, and the education and welfare of children.

The approach being pushed by the medical establishment and government we thought was too extreme and narrow-minded.

We were one of the earliest and strongest backers of the Great Barrington Declaration.  In that statement, esteemed doctors argued that locking up the healthy, while not really protecting the vulnerable elderly was a bad thing to do.

Conversely, the Governor of New York Mario Cuomo was a study of bad policy,  devastating the elderly population in nursing homes.  For his egregious leadership, many on the left wished that he, Cuomo were President.  He spread falsehoods so effectively on television, the disgraced governor was awarded an Emmy.

While we fully recognized that in the very early stages, authorities did not know completely what was happening, and thus could be given the benefit of the doubt, it became clear early on that much of what they proposed was just nonsense that could be figured out by informed people who were not doctors. But it is equally well to say, if authorities did not know really what was going on with the virus, that this is even a better argument for going slow, protecting the economy and liberty, and not acting as arrogantly and arbitrarily as they did.

If you know in your heart you don’t really know what you are doing, don’t be so eager to cram your views down others’ throats.

We attacked the campaign for masks simply because it was clear that the virus was much smaller than the large pores in the masks, and concluded in one piece that it was “equivalent to putting up a chain link fence to keep out mosquitoes.”

Remarkably, the early recommendation of masking not only stuck despite subsequent evidence but in fact became a religious amulet of sorts for the Fauci followers.  One still sees masks on occasion as the Fauci followers practice their religion.  They still can be found worshipping outside while riding a bicycle or riding alone in a car. The holiest act it seems was to mask toddlers, a group hardly subject to the virus, yet very susceptible to having their social and speech development seriously impaired.  Many people were thrown off airplanes because parents could not keep their two-year-olds masked to the satisfaction of medical experts such as flight attendants and passengers.

It is refreshing to see some doctors admit their errors and apologize.

Then there was the “six-foot rule” that had people barking at you when you dared to step out of your assigned circle that was dutifully placed on floors in all manner of commercial establishments.

We always loved the rules in restaurants.  Come masked until reaching your table.  Remove said mask and talk loudly at close quarters with numerous friends for an hour or more sharing spittle, but then re-mask as you traverse the dangerous fifteen feet to the door.  That short distance to and from the table to the door had to be masked or mankind was surely doomed.

Even as long as a year ago, officials involved in these decisions began to admit they were wrong about this arbitrary and contradictory policy.

Officials cut off the ability to travel, and employment opportunities, and had people banned from social media, and other civil liberties if people had acquired natural immunity and claimed that equivalent to being jabbed.  They denied that natural immunity was better or at least equivalent to the flimsy and short-term “protection” provided by experimental vaccines with unknown side effects. But the short-term protection provided by “vaccines” was in fact admitted in the subsequent quest to get people frequently boosted.  Effective vaccines don’t need boosting.  Moreover, officials refused to allow any documentation of natural immunity to be used.  Only Covid vaccination “papers” were valid.  Well, this myth as well is dying.

Then there was the controversy over the origins of the pandemic.  President Trump suggested China was the source and was widely heralded as an idiot and racist.  Senator Tom Cotton got his share of grief as well even though simple logic suggested that the Wuhan Lab was the source of experiments on bat viruses that was conducted by the Chinese, apparently with funding provided by Dr. Fauci.  Of late though, reluctantly both the Department of Energy and FBI admit a lab leak is the most likely source of a pandemic that killed millions and upset the world economy.

Can we now talk about who pays for these mistakes?

More and more officials need to come forward and admit their errors and apologize to their fellow citizens whom they banned from Thanksgiving dinners, hospital visitations for dying relatives, through off airplanes, and cynically denied employment.  These officials destroyed public education and set loose a terrible inflation that has harmed the whole world.

A full public inquiry is necessary and we would also like an apology.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Housing Bust #2 Has Begun thumbnail

Housing Bust #2 Has Begun

/in , , /by

By Wolf Richter

Some markets are already deep into it, and others just started. A sobering trip from the free-money decade in la-la-land, back to normal.

The housing market in the United States has turned down, and in some big markets very dramatically so. Other markets lag a little behind.

That’s how it went during the last Housing Bust, which I now call Housing Bust #1. During Housing Bust #1, Miami, Phoenix, San Diego, Las Vegas, etc. were a little ahead; other places, like San Francisco, were a little behind. In 2007, people in San Francisco thought they would be spared the housing bust they saw unfolding across the country. And then it came to San Francisco with a vengeance.

This time around, San Francisco and Silicon Valley, and the entire San Francisco Bay Area, are at the forefront, along with Boise, Seattle, and some others. In the San Francisco Bay Area, during the first 10 months of this housing bust, Housing Bust #2, the median house price plunged faster than it did during the first 10 months of Housing Bust #1. That’s what we’re looking at. I’ll get into the details in a moment.

Across the US, home sales have plunged month after month ever since mortgage rates started to rise a year ago. In January, across the US, total home sales plunged by 37% from January last year. Sales plunged in all regions, but they plunged worst in the West, by 42% year-over-year, and the least bad, if I may, in the Midwest, by 33%. This is happening everywhere.

The median price of all types of homes across the US in January fell for the seventh month in a row, down over 13% from the peak in June. Some of the declines are seasonal, and some are not.

This drop whittled down the year-over-year gain to just 1.3%. At this pace, we will see a year-over-year price decline in February or March, which would be the first year-over-year price decline across the US since Housing Bust 1.

Active listings were up by nearly 70% from a year ago, though by historical standards they’re still low. Lots of sellers are sitting on their vacant properties and are holding them off the market, and are putting them on the rental market or trying to make a go of it as vacation rentals. And they’re all hoping that “this too shall pass.”

“This too shall pass” – that’s the mortgage rates. The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate went over 7% late last year, then in January, it dropped, went as low as 6%, and the entire industry was breathing a sigh of relief. This was based on fervent hopes that inflation would just vanish, and that the Federal Reserve would cut interest rates soon, and be done with this whole nightmare.

But in early February came the realization that inflation wasn’t just going away. Friday’s inflation data confirmed that inflation is reaccelerating and that it already started the process of reacceleration in December. Some goods prices are down, but inflation in services spiked to a four-decade high. Services are nearly two-thirds of what consumers spend their money on. Inflation is very difficult to dislodge from services. The Federal Reserve is going to have its hands full dealing with this – meaning higher rates for longer…..

*****

Continue reading  this article at Wolf Street.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

Arizona Town Changes Climate Plan After Finding ‘Green New Deal’ Items Included thumbnail

Arizona Town Changes Climate Plan After Finding ‘Green New Deal’ Items Included

/in , , , /by

By Cameron Arcand

An Arizona town is moving forward with an amended environmental plan its conservative officials originally said resembled California’s green initiatives.

The Fountain Hills, Arizona, town council narrowly passed an altered version of its environmental plan after some conservative council members expressed concern that it echoed progressive climate goals.

The plan passed in a 4-3 vote, with the four conservative-leaning council members voting in favor due to the changes made. The amendments included removing a section that said it would focus on “alternative transportation modes” to lower carbon emissions and a section that said it would encourage less “automobile dependence,” among other items.

One item originally pushed to “continue to require the utilization of native, drought-tolerant landscapes that eliminate the use of gasoline-powered landscape equipment.” It was then changed to saying they would “work towards” eliminating it instead.

“We’re not California, and I don’t want to slowly slide into California either. We are America, this is Arizona. I like it as amended, and I would argue for that and that’s why I made the motion to do it as amended,” Councilman Allen Skillicorn said at the Feb. 21 meeting. “And I don’t want to go back to California language, period.”

Skillicorn worried that the original version could have led to the banning of leaf blowers, for example.

However, Mayor Ginny Dickey, who voted against the amended plan, told The Center Square that she believes it became politicized.

“The majority saw fit to change wording that had been approved by voters in 2020. They altered the Environmental Plan as created and recommended to Council by a citizen’s Strategic Plan Advisory Commission 6-1,” Dickey said in an email statement.

“While accusing the proposal… again, created from the General Plan approved by largely conservative voters… of being ‘politically charged,’ they used phrases such as ‘Green New Deal,’ ‘becoming California,’ and ‘virtue signaling’ which have far more divisive connotations than any words cited in the Plan,” she added.

*****
This article was published by The Center Square – Arizona and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

The Great Reset Is Really Great Resentment thumbnail

The Great Reset Is Really Great Resentment

/in , , , /by

By Alan Korwin

This fairly new thing, the so-called “great reset,” is more than the political left acting out their bottled-up fury at successes of the land in which they find themselves. Infuriated at how well freedom is working—the opulence, scientific and technological achievements, personal advancements at every level—even for the “downtrodden” compared to the rest of the world—they grouse. They can see (and deny) how poorly socialist utopian schemes they hold dear are doing. Like spoiled brats they nihilistically seek to overturn everything about this nation that is good and decent and pure.

America is in mortal danger from this actual mass psychosis afflicting so many of our countrymen. The psychiatric community calls it mass formation, a term and effect worth studying if you haven’t. The most striking modern example of course was in Germany before WWII, but communist China soon afterwards under the brutal dictator Mao Tse-dung wasn’t far behind. Pol Pot in Cambodia set new standards of depravity and evil, with popular support. Our own witch hunts in New England soon after we achieved independence were a similar thing—hysteria that knows no controls.

Words Are the Key

Using principles learned from Russian, Chinese and North Vietnamese communists, along with George Orwell, whose 1949 dystopian novel 1984 spelled it out with chilling clarity, leftists understand that whoever controls our language controls us. That battle is on. An entire generation of Newthink terms have entered the public mind, infiltrated newsrooms and classrooms everywhere, and threaten our health and liberty.

It boggles the mind how easily that disease has spread. People at the vaunted Associated Press have picked up the gauntlet, and what used to be a descriptive guide for journalists, like a dictionary, the AP Stylebook has become a proscriptive mandate. It now dictates which terms are acceptable and which must be cast aside as intolerant, offensive, biased and other inaccurate derogatory slurs.

It’s not like this sprang upon us unannounced or unnoticed. As early as 1962, the earth-shaking film Manchurian Candidate, directed by John Frankenheimer, woke this nation up to the effective perniciousness of “commie” brainwashing, a tool used to implement Newthink. That was based on Richard Condon’s 1959 novel of the same name, at the height of the Cold War, filled with gut-level fears many of us still viscerally recall. Those forces have been bubbling under and metastasizing since then.

America’s consciousness of this grew in a quantum leap, especially in the enormously influential Second Amendment community with the development and release in the year 2000 of The Politically Corrected Glossary, published by Bloomfield Press, https://www.gunlaws.com/politicallycorrect.htm. It changed some dialog and terminology, jump-starting reassessments, but the powerful mainstream media steamed right ahead regardless. The terribly sexist slur, gunman, appears constantly instead of killer, murderer or even criminal. Inanimate wholesome products like pistols or sidearms became fearsome semi-automatic handguns, which anti-gun forces publicly acknowledged misleads many into thinking machinegun.

To this day, despite constant complaints, reports call mass murderers “shooters,” denigrating 100 million American shooters who shoot for fun, sport and safety. Simultaneously, this linguistic trick avoids casting any shade on the criminal psychopaths who murder innocent people by the thousands annually. Those culprits are further protected by prosecutors and a judiciary that often avoids going after the perps, a shortening of perpetrators, now also frowned upon by the great resetters.

Assault is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware, outlawed everywhere under multiple laws, as it should be. That does little to stop resetters from attaching assault to weapon, so effective in turning the public against household firearms, the commonly used kind you’ll find in millions of American homes. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment holds extra special protection for such household arms in common use, a point leftists treat with disdain.

Those usual suspects—Marxist socialist democrats and other malfeasants—are actively pushing the overhaul of our language—and our freedoms. Tough to admit, but they’re pretty good at it. You may not even know you’ve been snookered, it’s so subtle and easy to miss. That’s what makes it so effective. Merely declaring yourself pro gun plays into their hands. How? Because they’ve cast guns as horrific instruments of the devil. If you say you’re pro gun you practically are the devil, to their addled minds. Try instead thinking of yourself as pro rights, a term they avoid, because if that’s you, what are they? Anti rights, which is pure truth on a platter, intolerable to them, and now you’re catching on.

Coming next, an installment of The Politically Corrected Glossary, a lexicon of freedom. Use terms that work for you as a liberty-loving individual, and cast intolerant bigots as intolerant bigots.

*****
This article was published by Townhall and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

McCarthyism On The Left thumbnail

McCarthyism On The Left

/in , , , , /by

By Craig J. Cantoni

The McCarthyism of Democrats is largely unknown because they are much better than Republicans at scrubbing the history of negatives about themselves.

The odds are pretty good that you’ve heard of Republican Senator Joe McCarthy and his witch hunts, which began in the late 1940s to uncover communists in the US government, Hollywood, and elsewhere.  After all, thousands of articles have been written about witch hunts, scores of movies have been produced about them, and, according to Amazon, 65 books have been written about them.

Not only that, but the word “McCarthyism” has come to mean the subversion of civil and political rights in the name of national security or patriotism, by means of demagoguery and largely unsubstantiated accusations. The word is typically associated with actions of the right, not the left.

The odds are also pretty good that you have not heard of A. Mitchell Palmer, the progressive Democrat US attorney general under President Woodrow Wilson, whose witch hunts to find communists in 1919 and 1920 were more egregious and numerous than McCarthy’s.

Although I’ve been a history buff over my adult life, I didn’t know about Palmer and his travesties of justice until recently reading Young J. Edgar:  Hoover and the Red Scare, 1919-1920, by Kenneth D. Ackerman.  The book details how J. Edgar Hoover, as a young man before becoming the head of the FBI, had worked for Palmer in rounding up actual and suspected communists and violating their due process rights.  Most were immigrants and members of labor unions.

To quote the nonpartisan book:

The result was a civil liberties catastrophe:  Between five and ten thousand people—the exact number is impossible to calculate—were rounded up and detained, often beaten and terrified.  They were dragged from their homes and families, many taken from their beds in the middle of the night or arrested en masse at dances, theatres, or neighborhood clubs, locked for weeks or months, often railroaded through sham hearings, cut off from lawyers and friends, and kept in decrepit, overcrowded, make-shift prisons.  None of these immigrants was accused, much less convicted, of violating any state or federal law.  For most of them, no evidence was ever presented beyond the unsubstantiated word of a Justice Department agent on a pre-printed form that they belonged to some organization—not that they actually did anything or even said anything.    

So why are Palmer’s travesties less known than McCarthy’s?  Is it because Palmer didn’t blacklist Hollywood notables, thus giving Hollywood no reason to produce movies castigating him?  Is it because Palmer’s victims tended to be working-class people without the means or platforms to sway public opinion, while McCarthy’s victims tended to be educated professionals with the means and platforms?   Is it because McCarthy’s congressional hearings were televised, but television didn’t exist in the Palmer era?

Even if the answer is yes to each of these questions, that doesn’t explain why the facts of Palmer’s travesties didn’t later become better known or at least used by Republicans to put McCarthy’s Red-baiting in historical context.  Instead, Americans have been left with the belief that there was no Democrat precedent or parallel to McCarthyism. 

For sure, no one deserves to lose civil liberties and face persecution for holding unpopular beliefs and being foolish.  But, as an aside, it’s noteworthy that the fools who believed in Bolshevism in 1919 were not as foolish as those who believed in it in 1950.  In 1919, the Russian Bolshevik Revolution was just two years old, and it was easy for idealistic intellectuals and poor industrial workers in America to be enamored with the idea of a worker’s paradise.  But by 1950, the horrors of communism were obvious to anyone who took the time to look.  Many American intellectuals on the left kept their blinders on, however, in their yearning for a utopia of equal outcomes.  That yearning continues today, but in terms of race, not class.    

Palmer’s crusade targeted the very same working class that Woodrow Wilson and other progressive and populist Democrats claimed to want to protect from the capital class and big business—from horrible working conditions, from the destitution caused by illness and workplace accidents, from tainted food, and from goons and scabs hired by industrialists to break strikes (and heads).

Succumbing to pressure from Congress and the public, and responding to Germany’s belligerent submarine blockade of American ships, Wilson would go on to send the working class to die in the trenches of Europe in the First World War.

In an example of how the parties have switched roles and constituents over time, Trump’s populist wing of the GOP is now an advocate for the working class, while today’s Democrat Party has become beholden to big banks, big tech, and big education.  Also, Trump wanted the US to stay out of European conflicts and for Europe to pay for its own defense—or the opposite of what Wilson ended up doing.

Roles and constituents have also switched regarding immigration.  Republicans are generally in favor of immigration restrictions, especially at the southern border, while Democrats are not in favor.  But one hundred years ago, White Anglo-Saxon Protestant progressives wanted to stop emigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, because, as they expressed in vile racist terms, they saw emigrants from those regions as non-White, inferior, and un-American.  The progressives and their allies in the press laid the groundwork for the passage of the restrictive Immigration Act of 1924, which accomplished most of what they wanted.

Now, ironically, progressive Democrats, under the guise of anti-racism, demean Americans of Southern and Eastern European ancestry as White, privileged, and racist.

I wish they’d make up their minds so that I would know as an Italian American whether I’m non-White, inferior, and un-American, or whether I’m White, privileged, and racist.

The ultimate in cancel culture and speech codes also occurred one hundred years ago, when the Wilson administration used a new espionage law to arrest reporters, pacifists, and common folk for speaking out against America’s involvement in the First World War.  This was in line with Attorney General Palmer’s arrest of union leaders and members who spoke in favor of communism and against capitalism.  A similar cancel culture was later adopted by Joe McCarthy, who has gone down in history as a right-wing reactionary, a label that could just as well be applied to the progressives who had preceded him.

Today, the current cancel culture and speech codes embraced by progressives are not as egregious, in that they have not resulted in arrests—at least not yet.  They’ve just resulted in careers being destroyed, similar to how McCarthy destroyed careers.  Don’t hold your breath waiting for movies to be produced about this.

Thankfully, Republicans have not borrowed something from the Progressive Era:  eugenics.  That was the decades-long movement to sterilize undesirables to keep them from procreating.  Working-class Republicans should be wary, though, given that Democrats have called them undesirables.

As evidenced by their belief in the Russian collusion hoax, Democrats are obsessed with the notion that Russia is influencing US elections.  They were also obsessed with Russians one hundred years ago.  At that time, they suspected all Russian immigrants of being Bolsheviks who were loyal to Russia and desirous of overthrowing democracy.  As such, they got special attention from Palmer in his roundups of alleged communists.

They had a point.  Back then, a lot of Russian immigrants, as well as Italian immigrants and other nationalities, were communists, or at least socialists.  Many others were anarchists.  The same for many union officials, including Eugene Debs, the socialist leader of the Industrial Workers of the World and a perennial candidate for president, who would get a million votes in one election, at a time when the US population was a lot smaller.  Debs would eventually be prosecuted and sent to prison, from where he ran for office once again.

All of these disaffected people had a shared goal, often stated in their publications, of overthrowing democracy and capitalism, using violent means if necessary.  The Trump loyalists who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 were sissies by comparison.

Bombings and assassinations were two of their means, and Attorney General Palmer was one of their targets.  Prior to his campaign to round up malcontents, his house in Washington, DC, was bombed in 1919.  The force was so powerful that the front of the four-story townhome was blown off and debris was scattered for blocks.  Miraculously, he and his wife, who was home at the time, were unscathed.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his wife Eleanor, the future president and first lady, just missed being killed or injured by the bomb.  They lived across the street and had just parked their car in a garage a couple of blocks away after returning from a dinner engagement.  If they had returned several minutes sooner, they might have been directly across from the bomb when it went off.

It’s not surprising that in this atmosphere, and in the midst of a world war, Americans were willing to exchange some civil liberty for safety. As the New York Times wrote in 1919, “Aliens who belong to a society of revolutionists are not entitled to any tenderness from the Government.”  It also wrote: “The conspirators, pacifists of the malignant type who are associated with anarchist societies are not of the nation.  They have no right to be accounted citizens of the Republic.”

A similar tradeoff between civil liberty and safety was made 82 years later in response to the 9/11 terrorist attack, most notably in the form of the Patriot Act, which was signed into law by George W. Bush.  Many civil libertarians and Democrats have since decried the act and blamed Bush for bullying Congress into passing it. The New York Times would join the chorus, in a reversal of what it wrote in 1919.

As with so much of history, it has been largely forgotten that Democrats had assaulted civil liberties long before 9/11.  That’s because Democrats excel at cherry-picking history to make themselves look good and make Republicans look bad.  Republicans try to do the same to Democrats but are far less skilled at it.

From where I sit as a classical liberal, or a libertarian in today’s parlance, the McCarthyism of both parties scares me, especially with both parties once again beating war drums in tandem.

TAKE ACTION

There is an important runoff election for the Phoenix City Council District 6 on March 14. Conservative Sal DiCiccio (R) is term limited and will be replaced by the winner of this race. The two candidates are Republican Sam Stone and Democrat Kevin Robinson. If you live in District 6 (check here), you either received a mail-in ballot or you must vote in person (see below).

This is a very important race that will determine the balance of power on the City Council. Phoenix, like many large cities in conservative states, has tended blue with the consequences many cites suffer from with progressive governance. Have you noticed the growing homeless problem in our city?

Conservative Sam Stone is the strong choice of The Prickly Pear and we urge our readers in District 6 to mail your ballots in immediately and cast your vote for Sam Stone. Learn about Sam Stone here. Sal DiCiccio’s excellent leadership and term-limited departure from the Phoenix City Council must not be replaced by one more Democrat on the Council (Democrat Robinson endorsed by leftist Mayor Gallego). Sam Stone is a superb candidate who will bring truthful and conservative leadership to the Phoenix City Council at a time when the future of Phoenix hangs in the balance between the great history of this high quality, desert city we can live in and are proud of or the progressive ills of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Mail-in ballots were sent to registered voters in District 6 on the February 15th. Mail your ballot no later than March 7th – it must be received by the city no later than March 14th to be counted. If you are not on the Permanent Early Voting List you must cast your ballot in person.

In-person balloting at voting centers will occur on three days in mid-March:

  • Saturday, March 11: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
  • Monday, March 13: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  • Tuesday, March 14: 6 a.m. to 7 p.m

In-person voting can be done at the following locations:

  1. Sunnyslope Community Center, 802 E. Vogel Ave.
  2. Bethany Bible Church, 6060 N. Seventh Ave.
  3. Devonshire Senior Center, 2802 E. Devonshire Ave.
  4. Memorial Presbyterian Church, 4141 E. Thomas Road
  5. Burton Barr Central Library, 1221 N. Central Ave.
  6. Eastlake Park Community Center, 1549 E. Jefferson St.
  7. Broadway Heritage Neighborhood Res. Ctr., 2405 E. Broadway Road
  8. South Mountain Community Center, 212 E. Alta Vista Road
  9. Cesar Chavez Library, 3635 W. Baseline Road
  10. Pecos Community Center, 17010 S. 48th St.

You can also vote in person at City Hall through March 10th on the 15th floor. City Hall is at 200 W. Washington St.

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.