“The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations.” —George Washington (1796)
IN TODAY’S DIGEST
On the eve of the Senate’s second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump, here’s a look at his legal team’s defense.
The first and most important point Trump’s lawyers are expected to argue is the unprecedented and unconstitutional nature of the Democrats’ impeachment gambit. Trump’s legal team asserts, “The Senate of the United States lacks jurisdiction over the 45th President because he holds no public office from which he can be removed, and the Constitution limits the authority of the Senate in cases of impeachment to removal from office as the prerequisite active remedy allowed the Senate under our Constitution.” Call it the “By what authority?” defense.
Responding to the Democrats’ claims that the Senate still has constitutional authority to try a non-sitting president, Trump’s defense points to Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution. It states, “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy an office of honor.”
The Democrats’ primary charge is that Trump is guilty of “incitement of insurrection” against the United States for his remarks ahead of the Capitol riot and for the two post-election months in which he refused to concede defeat while contending the existence of massive voter fraud. They claim that means he should therefore be forbidden from “hold[ing] any office … under the United States” according the the 14th Amendment. Trump’s legal team denies that the president is guilty of any such charge.
Pointing both to Trump’s actual rhetoric and his First Amendment right to express his views regarding the outcome of the 2020 election, the defense states, “Like all Americans, the 45th President is protected by the First Amendment. Indeed, he believes, and therefore avers, that the United States is unique on Earth in that its governing documents, the Constitution and Bill of Rights, specifically and intentionally protect unpopular speech from government retaliation. If the First Amendment protected only speech the government deemed popular in current American culture, it would be no protection at all.”
The Democrats’ “incitement of insurrection” charge is yet another classic example of stretching definitions beyond their clear, original, and legal meanings to suit the Left’s own politically expedient purposes. As “evidence” to support their “incitement” charge against Trump, the Democrats note his statement at the January 6 rally: “If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Of course, the Democrats conveniently ignore the fact that Trump also said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard today.”
Regarding the dubious “incitement” charge, Mollie Hemingway cogently recalls Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) just last year speaking to a mob of protesters outside the Supreme Court building and saying, “I want to tell you, [Neil] Gorsuch, I want to tell you, [Brett] Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” She notes that just 17 months prior at Justice Kavanaugh’s swearing ceremony, “hordes of protesters broke through a police barricade and attempted to beat down the 13-ton bronze doors of the court.” Moreover, “Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, who attended Kavanaugh’s immediate swearing in, were hit with water bottles and tomatoes when their car left the court afterward. Some 164 people were arrested in that protest.”
In fact, Schumer is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Democrat hypocrisy on “violent” political rhetoric, and Trump’s legal team as well as Senate Republicans plan to hammer this point hard. Senator Rand Paul (KY) said on Sunday, “I think if we are going to criminalize speech and somehow impeach everybody who says, ‘Oh, go fight to hear your voices heard,’ really we ought to impeach Chuck Schumer then.” Pointing to other Democrats, Paul continued, “If people want to hold President Trump accountable for language, there has to be a consistent standard, and to my mind it’s a partisan farce because they’re not doing anything to Chuck Schumer, not doing anything to [Ilhan] Omar, not doing anything to Maxine Waters.”
This week’s trial, of course, will prove to be little other than political theater, as there is little legal or constitutional support for the Democrats’ vindictive actions. But, for them, the theater is the point.
We know what you’re thinking: Screw the NFL and every other repulsively woke professional sports league. And we can’t disagree. But for a moment, can we agree to set all that aside and celebrate Tom Brady, a singular American athlete, the likes of whom we will never see again?
Would it help if we told you he was a supporter of Donald Trump?
Okay, then. Last night, the 43-year-old Brady, who until this year had played his entire NFL career with one team, the New England Patriots, took a 7-9 Tampa Bay Buccaneers team and willed them to a 15-5 record, an eight-game winning streak including three straight road playoff wins, and a 31-9 win in the 55th Super Bowl over the favored Kansas City Chiefs — a win that, as luck would have it, was played at home in Tampa Bay.
There, in front of 25,000 football fans and 30,000 ridiculous COVID cutouts, the old man who many thought represented the NFL’s past squared off against a 25-year-old quarterback, KC’s Patrick Mahomes, who everyone agrees is the NFL’s future. And the old man won, resoundingly, and earned his seventh Super Bowl ring and his fifth Super Bowl MVP trophy.
Before Brady arrived, the Buccaneers were perennial losers. But for a short-lived shining moment when they won the 2003 Super Bowl, the Bucs had amassed the worst career winning percentage among professional sports teams. Brady, for his part, is the individual athlete with the best winning percentage in team sports.
Obviously, something had to give. And it wasn’t Brady. His teammates bought in to Brady’s will, his work ethic, and his culture of excellence. This is how we win, Brady seemed to say. And he made it so.
For a sense of what Brady achieved last night, consider this: One of his teammates, Antonio Winfield Jr., is the son of a former NLFer who Brady competed against both in college and as a pro. Or consider this: Mahomes, the quarterback he beat, was just six years old when Brady won his first Super Bowl, and Mahomes’s dad is just seven years older than Brady. Or this: Brady’s offensive coordinator, Byron Leftwich, began his NFL quarterbacking career three years after Brady did, played nine years in the league, and still retired nearly a decade before Brady will one day hang ‘em up.
As for the record books, Brady has pushed all the meaningful numbers beyond reach. For example, only two other quarterbacks — Hall of Famers Terry Bradshaw of the Pittsburgh Steelers and Joe Montana of the San Francisco 49ers — have even four Super Bowl rings. Indeed, Brady the individual has won more Super Bowls than any other NFL team, and has won more Super Bowls than 18 NFL teams COMBINED.
Brady’s individual stats are every bit as eye-popping, even if they’ve never been what drives him. What drives him is winning, and no one in team sports — with the possible exception of the Boston Celtics’ great center, Bill Russell, who played in an NBA league with far fewer teams and therefore a far greater chance of winning championships — has ever done it better than Brady.
The seeds of greatness were there to be seen back in the 2000 Orange Bowl when, as a senior quarterback at Michigan, he twice brought the Wolverines back from 14-point deficits to beat an excellent Alabama team. Still, nobody in the NFL wanted Tom Brady. Really. Tom Brady, the guy who is arguably the greatest athlete in the history of American team sports, wasn’t the first quarterback picked in the 2000 NFL Draft. Nor the second. Nor the third, fourth, fifth, or sixth. Tom Brady was the seventh QB and the 199th player picked in that draft. (“The Brady 6” is a superb sports documentary and a fascinating glimpse into what makes Brady who he is. If you’re in a big hurry, skip ahead to the 40-minute mark and watch the next two minutes.)
Brady has taken some shots during his career, perhaps none of them cheaper than the one thrown around regularly by hate-filled leftists and mainstream media types. These tiny folks can’t seem to accept the fact that Tom Brady is a friend of former President Donald Trump, and he has been since around 2002. When Trump first campaigned in 2016, Brady was seen with a MAGA hat in his locker, and the intolerant Left has never let him forget it.
Those who admire both Brady and Trump must’ve taken special satisfaction at the way last night’s event played out.
When asked last Monday about whether “being white” had given him a pass for the offense of being a friend of Trump, Brady said, “I’m not sure how to respond to [a] hypothetical like that. I hope everyone can — we’re in this position like I am to, again, try to be the best I can be every day as an athlete, as a player, as a person in my community, for my team and so forth, so yeah, I’m not sure what else.”
It reminds one of the thoughtfulness with which he answered a question many years ago about his relative physical limitations — his lack of strength, his lack of foot speed, his poor vertical jump, and his average arm strength. Back then, Brady said, matter-of-factly, “It’s not really what my skill set is, but fortunately for me, that’s not what quarterbacking is about either.”
Clearly, it isn’t. But Tom Brady is as mentally tough as any athlete ever. Let’s celebrate his unparalleled greatness while we can.
George P. Shultz retired, permanently, on February 6 — the day we celebrate the birth of his former boss and friend, Ronald Reagan. In no way do I mean any disrespect by referring to his death as “retirement.” It’s just that over the course of his 100 years, he was unstoppable.
While proper protocol would be to refer to George Shultz as “Secretary” given his remarkable service as President Reagan’s secretary of state, on the few occasions I crossed paths with Secretary Shultz in the Reagan years (the last being in 1987 after our Moscow embassy was compromised), I found myself more like a student in awe of his quiet and unassuming yet extraordinarily powerful intellect. I always thought of him as “Professor.”
Shultz was born in New York and grew up in New Jersey, and he was all American. He was a graduate of Princeton and earned a PhD from MIT. His education was interrupted by his service as a Marine in World War II as an artillery officer in the Pacific theater. He taught economics at MIT, served in Dwight Eisenhower’s administration, and was the dean of the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, where he sharpened his free market economy views as shaped by Milton Friedman. He went on to serve as Richard Nixon’s secretary of labor, director of the Office of Management and Budget, and then as treasury secretary in 1972.
In the wake of disastrous foreign policy decisions by Jimmy Carter’s administration, Shultz accepted President Reagan’s call as secretary of state, serving from 1982 to the end of Reagan’s second term in 1989. He masterfully crafted Reagan’s relationship with Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and our overall policy with the USSR — leading to the implosion of the Soviet Union in George H.W. Bush’s first year in office.
In an interview 20 years later, Shultz noted: “Détente said, ‘We’re here, you’re here, that’s life, the name of the game is peaceful coexistence.’ Reagan said, ‘No, they have a very unstable system, and it’s not going to last. It’s going to change.’” Indeed it did for the better of all mankind. Shultz memoir, Turmoil and Triumph, is a primary resource on the end of the old Cold War and how Reagan won the Cold War.
Shultz went on to serve as an adviser to George W. Bush, crafting his doctrine of using preemptive and overwhelming force after the 9/11 Islamist attack on our nation, the result of Bill Clinton having largely ignored the emerging Jihadistan threat over the previous eight years.
Shultz mentored Bush’s second-term secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, but the only secretary of state who has approached his impressive foreign policy record was our most recent, Mike Pompeo, who also relied on his wisdom.
Shultz was one of only two men to have held four presidential cabinet positions. He spent his last years as an active intellectual force with several think tanks — primarily as a distinguished fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution — but he was also an influencer with the Institute for International Economics and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He will be missed, especially by those who knew him more casually at Bohemian Grove’s Mandalay Camp.
Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger wrote of Shultz in his own memoirs, noting: “I met no one in public life for whom I developed greater respect and affection. Highly analytical, calm, and unselfish, Shultz made up in integrity and judgment for his lack of the flamboyance by which some of his more insecure colleagues attempted to make their mark.” Kissinger concluded, “If I could choose one American to whom I would entrust the nation’s fate in a crisis, it would be George Shultz.”
What does one get when one combines a U.S. Postal Service in self-admitted chaos with a record number of mail-in votes? A nation where millions of American no longer have confidence in the integrity of the election process.
A red banner at the top of the USPS website says it all: “USPS is experiencing unprecedented volume increases and limited employee availability due to the impacts of COVID-19. We appreciate your patience.”
Remarkably — or is that predictably? — the media make irreconcilable claims about the agency teetering on the brink of bankruptcy for nearly a decade. On one hand, we’re told that people are receiving utility bills and bills for mortgage payments that are already past due, while sent packages are piling up and being delivered weeks late — if they’re delivered at all. Moreover, chaos ostensibly reigns because of 664,000 postal service workers nationwide, 39,383 have tested positive for COVID, and as of January 22, as many as 14,500 postal employees were in quarantine.
Nonetheless, the same NPR that states the postal system has been battered by the impacts of COVID-19 “for much of the past year” assures us the very same reality didn’t affect mail-in voting. “By all accounts, the Postal Service made good on delivering ballots in a timely fashion,” it states.
By all accounts, the USPS is an agency that is being eviscerated by far more competent competition such as UPS, FedEx, and Amazon. Furthermore, millions of Americans have turned to email and other electronic transfers of information that negate the need for traditional mail. Yet despite the fact that revenue is down 9.4% from the previous fiscal year to the current one, and that it lost another $9.2 billion, the agency is, as MSM Microsoft puts it, “immensely overstaffed” with 496,934 career employees and 136,174 non-career employees who manage 31,322 retail post offices in the United States, many of which are in “small towns and rural areas and handle very little mail at all.”
And despite being one of the worst-run agencies in the nation, former Postmaster General Megan J. Brennan made $291,650 in 2019, and current Postmaster General Louis DeJoy reportedly pulled in $303,460 the following year.
Last August, the USPS warned 46 states and the District of Columbia that their absentee voting rules were “incongruous” with the agency’s delivery standards and could result in uncounted ballots. Ironically, Postal Service General Counsel Thomas Marshall was especially concerned about Pennsylvania and Michigan, due to their short deadlines (one week and four days, respectively) between requesting absentee ballots and having them show up in time to be counted. “As a result,” he wrote, “to the extent that the mail is used to transmit ballots to and from voters, there is a significant risk that, at least in certain circumstances, ballots may be requested in a manner that is consistent with your election rules and returned promptly, and yet not be returned in time to be counted.”
DeJoy was called to testify before Congress, where he was accused of deliberately sabotaging USPS operations ahead of the election. This was likely because DeJoy was reportedly a “Trump ally” and thus could not be trusted to do his job.
Despite that concern, the election proceeded and voters cast a record-setting 65 million ballots by mail, or approximately 41% of the total vote.
Democrats, under the guise of eliminating voter “suppression,” would like to make mass mail-in voting a permanent part of the electoral landscape. “The For the People Act of 2021” is a well-strategized effort to make a complete mockery of anything resembling election integrity. It requires states to permit voters to register on the day of a federal election, or during early voting, and limits their authority to remove registrants from official lists of eligible voters based on interstate crosschecks of voter registration. It also prohibits the use of returned, non-forwardable mail as the basis for removing registered voters from the rolls, eliminates rules requiring witness signatures, and prohibits states from imposing restrictions on an individual’s ability to vote by mail. It also requires states to allow voters to sign sworn affidavits to vote — in lieu of presenting photo ID.
That the bill would supersede states’ constitutionally guaranteed rights to set their own election laws? For far too many Democrats, the Constitution is not a guideline for American government and society. It is instead an “impediment” used to enshrine “systemic racism.”
And when Republicans fight back? “Although most legislative sessions are just getting underway, the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy institute, has already tallied more than 100 bills in 28 states meant to restrict voting access,” the AP reports. “More than a third of those proposals are aimed at limiting mail voting, while other bills seek to strengthen voter ID requirements and registration processes, as well as allow for more aggressive means to remove people from voter rolls.”
Decent Americans might ask themselves a simple question: What’s wrong with any of those proposals? As our Mark Alexander reminds us, “Democrats are not interested in election integrity. The only way to ensure the integrity of our election process is to require in-person voting, requiring the voter to present proper identification, and perhaps resorting to paper balloting.”
Ironically, even dedicated leftists know it. Despite the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post championing mail-in voting, Jeff Bezos-owned Amazon is less enchanted with using mail-in voting to determine whether or not the retail giant will be unionized. “We believe that the best approach to a valid, fair and successful election is one that is conducted manually, in-person, making it easy for associates to verify and cast their vote in close proximity to their workplace,” the company said in statement.
The most daunting part of this transparent disconnect? Our ruling class elites no longer feel even mildly compelled to hide their rank hypocrisy. We have reached a perilous point where wholesale corruption is justified by a media that automatically labels any calls for voter integrity as “racist” — even though there’s nothing more racist than automatically assuming that minority Americans are somehow fundamentally incapable of procuring the very same voter ID everyone else is capable of procuring. (Those very same minorities, by the way, have procured ID necessary to board planes, visit a doctor’s office, apply for a mortgage, etc.)
Last week, in a Time Magazine article, “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election,” columnist Molly Ball crowed about how Big Tech, BLM, organized labor, and big business colluded to “save” America from a Donald Trump reelection. “Mail in voting was a critical component of their strategy,” she writes. “In the end, nearly half the electorate cast ballots by mail in 2020, practically a revolution in how people vote.”
It is a revolution Democrats wish to make permanent — just like their grip on power. Republicans can either wise up and fight back or face a simple reality: People who have no faith in the system will not participle in it.
For the GOP, that means de facto extinction. Even worse? That extinction will be self-administered.
If you’re an American who prefers independent thought, and if your thoughts, speech, and behavior stray from the edicts of the governing elite, prepare to be publicly shamed, marginalized, canceled, and, in some cases, unemployed, silenced, and essentially ground to powder. Let’s look at a few examples of these elite asserting their power.
In a Tennessee middle school, a black female principal sent a school newsletter to parents announcing the theme of Black History Month. Christy Caldwell Drake is the daughter of Dr. Virgil Caldwell, the late pastor and prolific author serving at a prominent African American Church in the Brainerd Community of Chattanooga. She hoped to increase the participation in the month-long commemoration but instead lit the fire of controversy — even in a county public school system where 35% of the students are black, 27% are white, and 36% are Hispanic. Ms. Caldwell Drake, inspired by a mural in the school’s entrance that read, “Where Every Child Matters,” thought to lead her incredibly diverse middle school to greater unity by announcing February’s theme to be “All Lives Matter.” For that she has been written up in the regional printed paper, featured on area TV news outlets, discussed on talk radio, and forced to apologize and return to the “Black Lives Matter” declaration.
For another example, look at Wall Street’s anger from the well-heeled investment funds after the Reddit group, WallStreetBets, reversed the fortune of the GameStop stock, causing a halt in trading to stem the losses of the Big Firms. NBC News distills it down to be a financial power struggle between a major hedge fund and a group of amateur stock traders who air grievances on the Internet. This group seriously messed with several companies — GameStop, Bed Bath & Beyond, and AMC Theaters — but the establishment media doesn’t seem as interested in the underlying question: Who gets to influence the financial markets in America? Is it so surprising to see the average amateur grow tired of the mistreatment?
Finally, making a statement of fact has ended as expected for a Christian news website on Twitter. Daily Citizen, operating under the umbrella of Focus on the Family — whose mission statement is to have “redeemed families, communities, and societies worldwide through Christ” — had its social media account suspended for acknowledging that the nominee of President Joe Biden to serve as the assistant secretary of health at the Department of Health & Human Services is a biological male. The Daily Citizen (@FocusCitizen) tweeted on January 19: “On Tuesday, President-elect Joe Biden announced that he had chosen Dr. Rachel Levine to serve as Assistant Secretary for Health at the Department of HHS. Dr. Levine is a transgender woman, that is, a man who believes he is a woman.” Deemed “hateful” rhetoric, this comment caused the offending Christian site to be canceled and silenced for posting a photo of a biological male (born Richard Levine) dressed in women’s attire, using what appears to be facial cosmetics. According to FactFiles.com, Levine attended a boys’ prep school, graduated medical school as a male, and identified as such until his “transition” in 2011, followed by the divorce of his wife and mother of their two children in 2013.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, brilliant conservative author and the Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, in his book The Vision of the Anointed spoke of “the mindset of many of the people in academia, among the media elite, and in politics.” This elitist mindset is prevalent “particularly among those who think that various solutions should be imposed from the top down on the way people live their lives.” Why? Well, he explains, “They think they’re just so much smarter than other people.” Dr. Sowell notes that the anointed elite view those who disagree with them as civilly, even morally, wrong, assuming the moral high ground each time.
In 2021, scientific fact, social standards, and moral decisions are all in the hands of the “anointed,” holding power for the purpose of eliminating competition, silencing the little guy and gal, and reconstructing the world of facts as we know and need it. Beware!
The title itself tells us it must’ve come from either The Onion or The Babylon Bee: “False Accusation: The Unfounded Claim that Social Media Companies Censor Conservatives.”
Except it came directly from neither satirical source. Instead, it came from the NYU Stern School of Business. But why would an ostensibly respectable business school — a school ranked fourth worldwide in one recent survey of MBA programs — defile itself with a claim that on its face is thoroughly ridiculous?
Search us. Maybe for the money? Because NYU certainly can’t be arguing — at least not with a straight face — that the industry that colluded to block the sharing of a bombshell influence-peddling story about Joe Biden’s son just days before the election, and then colluded to silence a sitting U.S. president shortly after the election, isn’t guilty of censorship bias.
Please, NYU, tell us you don’t think your audience is that stupid.
As Fox News’s Tucker Carlson rightly noted, “[The paper] almost reads like a press release from Silicon Valley, and that’s because it is. This so-called academic study was, in fact, paid for by Big Tech. It was funded by a man called Craig Newmark [founder of the online marketplace Craigslist], one of the many Silicon Valley billionaires who paid for the Joe Biden for President campaign. Now he’s paying for this.”
The study’s lead author is Paul Barrett, the deputy director of the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights — an entity whose very name ought to arouse suspicion among those paying big bucks to learn about business at NYU. “In September,” as Carlson points out, “Barrett released another study on why we should be very nice to Big Tech, as well as deeply respectful and always obedient. That study was also funded by Craig Newmark as well as by George Soros.”
Of course, it’s merely a coincidence that these studies, both funded by Big Tech, arrive at conclusions favorable to Big Tech.
To read the 24-page paper is to be force-fed the word “disinformation,” which appears 14 times in the document. Each time, it’s accompanied by a stylistic sneer, like this one: “The false bias narrative is an example of political disinformation, meaning an untrue assertion that is spread to deceive. In this instance, the deception whips up part of the conservative base, much of which already bitterly distrusts the mainstream media. To call the bias claim disinformation does not, of course, rule out that millions of everyday people sincerely believe it.”
Going forward, those of us who rail against the censorship of Big Tech and Big Media can expect to see the word “disinformation” used against us almost reflexively. After all, who could possibly be against reducing the amount of disinformation out there?
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley points to a passage that exposes the paper’s folly: “The question of whether social media companies harbor an anti-conservative bias,” the authors write, “can’t be answered conclusively because the data available to academic and civil society researchers aren’t sufficiently detailed. Existing periodic enforcement disclosures by Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are helpful but not granular enough to allow for thorough analysis by outsiders.”
Ah, so buried on page 20 of the paper, under the header of “Conclusions and Recommendations,” the authors call on Big Tech to “release more data for researchers.” And yet despite this dearth of data, the paper’s authors have nonetheless concluded that the claim by conservatives of censorship bias is without merit.
As Turley concludes, “This study is neither conclusive or particularly compelling. It read more like an extended, 20-page opinion editorial. It does seem itself to have a pronounced bias, particularly in declaring allegations of bias as ‘false’ and ‘disinformation’ while quietly noting that it cannot conclusively say whether there is bias.”
It’s not for nothing that, since 1996, we’ve been labeling the propaganda produced by the mainstream media — and now social media — as the real dezinformatsiya.
In the wee hours of Friday morning, the Senate finally adopted the Democrats’ budget resolution on a strict party-line vote, 51-50, with Vice President Kamala Harris providing the tiebreaking vote. That allows them to push through their COVID relief bill without needing 60 votes. Given the completely unrelated pork stuffed into it, it’s no wonder they needed that resolution.
Earlier on Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell led Republicans in a “vote-a-rama,” a marathon voting session that effectively forced Democrats to go on the record on a variety of issues that have little to do with COVID relief but serve to expose where senators stand. The approved resolution is not the final bill, though the House likewise passed a resolution Friday setting up the final bill.
Of most immediate interest, however, is where various Democrat senators landed on several of the amendments Republicans proposed. The Republicans filed 749 amendments, of which just 41 were voted on.
Some amendments passed easily. For example, passing with a 97-3 margin was the amendment to support keeping the U.S. embassy in Israel in Jerusalem, and an amendment that opposed defunding the police passed unanimously, 100-0. Good. Those should be easy.
However, many of the amendments failed on a strict party line. Those included support for the border wall, prohibiting infringement on religious freedom, opposing stimulus checks for people in prison, opposing Joe Biden’s moves against the oil and gas industry (specifically the Keystone pipeline), opposing ending the “Remain in Mexico” asylum policy, opposing a federal carbon tax, supporting funding for border security and enforcement of all immigration laws, and, tellingly, an amendment against packing the Supreme Court. The vote result on that last amendment may be a troubling indicator that Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) is wavering on his commitment to stand against packing the court.
Republicans were successful in getting the $15 minimum wage boondoggle removed from the legislation. Senator Joni Ernst stated, “I got the entire Senate — Democrats and Republicans — to agree not to hike the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour during a global pandemic, which would kill jobs and destroy small businesses.”
Notwithstanding the strong-arm majority tactics, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was quick to slap the “bipartisan” label onto the Democrats’ massive spending bill. “Many bipartisan amendments were adopted,” he declared, “so this was a bipartisan activity.” Of course, he’s unlikely to see any Republicans vote in favor of the final “bipartisan” legislation, and the coming days will show if Schumer actually has all Democrats on board.
If you want to understand what makes black people do the things you see in mainstream America, look no further than our souls. Black people are a soulful people. A people full of passionate energy. On the surface, this sounds innocent at best, and it can be. However, if you look a bit deeper, you see that when we’re driven by soulful emotions, oftentimes exploitation is around the corner. In any game, you exploit the weaknesses of your opponent. It’s so easy to use black people moved by soulful attitudes. Easier than taking candy from a baby. According to Webster, soulful means “full of or expressing feeling or emotion.” The mystery of black people is deeper than the history. I will explore religion, sports, and politics. Follow me.
Analyze how black people worship in church. Much soul, but much over-exaggerating. Powerful preaching, but also embellishing. Mighty voices, but also overdoing. The thing about black people is we are going to do the most regardless. Take my words in this article, for example. I am telling the most and doing the most. Why? Because in order to match the elaboration of the general black community, I must match the hype with “hype.” The hype in my words, however, is meant to bring reasoning and critical thinking. My words have a sobering agenda and I know it.
Furthermore, examine how black people play sports. Total domination, but much bragging. Athletically inclined, but much swagger and swank. Physical prowess in basketball, football, or track and field, but much showboating. Conversely, my favorite black athletes were known by their game, not their flame. Michael Jordan, Barry Sanders, and Carl Lewis were all the best at their craft. (Side note: Jordan still is.) These three athletes knew how to crush you with a straight face. Sanders would take it to another level. He would leave you in the dust, shake and break your ankles, and score a touchdown like nothing happened. Afterwards, he would literally avoid celebrating and give the referee the football and walk off the football field. As a kid watching him, I was in awe. I would look at my dad in amazement and ask, “Did you just see what he did?” Are you still following the mystery?
I am the first one to admit that I express soul in my laughter, my facial expressions, and my personality. If you haven’t been under a rock and read my articles, you feel my soulful words. I want to tap into your soul as you read. I am not being controlled by my passions, but they do influence who I am, as they should.
However, black people focus everything on the soul. Even politics. Look at the last election, or the past 50 years of elections for that matter. Republicans don’t appeal to the soul of black people because, to them, politics really isn’t about emotions. The Republican Party was originated to abolish slavery and was successful. What’s cool about that? The Emancipation Proclamation is boring, right? Frederick Douglass, a former slave, advising four presidents just doesn’t “do it” for most black people.
Regardless, the liberals got it down pat. For starters, that’s why Democrats use black athletes, preachers, and rappers to further their agenda. All that soul comes together in a political party of an emotionally driven voter base.
Make black people feel like you like them, support them, or finance their soulful ideas and you’ve got them. Black people in general do everything that moves their moods. Soul food is yummy yet not healthy for the tummy. Soul music feels good but typically sells debauchery. It doesn’t matter, because whatever touches our SOUL usually gets our attention. Liberals touch black folks’ souls (emotions) by making them feel like victims in need of rescue, help, and sympathy. Black people ironically love the feeling of victimhood because it erases any responsibility to face the man in the mirror since problems are everybody else’s fault.
My sister from another color, Romesa Edwards, recently posted: “The problem isn’t racism. The problem is telling whites that they are ‘racist but they just don’t know it and can’t help it.’ They were born white, so they are racist and need to feel guilty about it. The problem is telling blacks that they are victims, oppressed, and suffer under an invisible obstacle that keeps them from succeeding. Keep repeating ‘the white man is to blame’ and you can guarantee no accountability or personal responsibility for one’s bad choices.”
This is the mystery of black history. Racism is being attached to the souls of black people. It’s a distraction from reality. The history is being misrepresented, creating the mystery and misery of black people. Do you now understand the Black Mystery?
President Joe Biden is steadily flicking the pen as he drafts dozens of executive orders, including a transgender policy that would create further division among the American people. The new administration recently made its move to advance the “LGBT+” agenda with a policy that would permit “transgender” girls (read: biological boys) to participate in girls’ sports. Democrats — the same party that demands that we all “trust the science” — are in full, unanimous support of this motion. As if they received the same memo, each progressive liberal I meet echoes the same words: “Transgender women are women.”
Not only do these people never cite a single study suggesting this notion to be true, but they act completely oblivious to what we all learned about human biology. Everyone — and I mean everyone — learned that sexual beings are those possessing only two genders, male and female. (Perhaps some folks fell asleep in science class?) But because the TV and mainstream media say “transgender women are women,” otherwise rational adults are willing to throw actual biology out the window — all in the name of inclusivity, of course. It matters more to them that people who feel like women are recognized as such, just like I feel like a millionaire and expect a check in the mail very soon.
One woman in an open forum on my social media claimed that women and men are the same and that being “transgender” shouldn’t matter. If that were true, then why would a man or woman feel the need to change at all? The very fact that a biological male would feel a type of dysphoria about his own body would suggest that he feels something should be different about him, that something does not match. This logic alone reinforces the fundamental fact that men and women are different. The operation is called a “sex change,” after all.
If that isn’t enough, then let’s envision a scenario. Meet my eldest son. At 16 years of age, this athlete has hit over 50 home runs and set a record of nine touchdowns in a single game. He squats 350 lbs. Few, if any, actual full adult women can achieve what my son can, and he has much more growing to do. They may try, but the majority will fail. So to introduce a male athlete possessing the same stats as my son does to a team of girls with a fraction of the strength and endurance would be asking for injuries like we’ve never seen before. Parents, cover your eyes. Because you will not want to see your daughter get dunked on, tripped up, or tackled by a “transgender” female basketball player.
This isn’t to mention the competitive losses and the scholarship awards that would be snatched from girls who thought they were playing a fair game. Did the feminist movement bring this upon itself? Did it mean for women to be disenfranchised by men? Do they who claim to have an unfair shot in society stack more odds against them? What exactly are we trying to prove?
This social experiment has gone too far. For a policy supporting this trend to reach the White House means the very end of girls’ sports as we know it. It could spell the end of other achievements for women, too. “Transgender” women in music, film, fashion, and beyond could further push real women out of the picture. Female empowerment is close to turning into female embarrassment as society watches this gender take a back seat. We’ll have regressed instead of progressed. Perhaps that’s what some people want to see.
Top of the Fold
- Better late than never: SCOTUS blocks enforcement of some prejudiced COVID rules for California churches (USA Today)
Government & Politics
- Joe Manchin and Jon Tester curiously flip-flop on Keystone pipeline, thwarting GOP bid to save it (Daily Signal)
- Top Democrats pushing massive tax credits in stimulus plan; some want them to be permanent (Fox News) | On the other hand, Joe Biden casts doubt on $15 minimum wage hike in relief package (Politico)
- Maxine Waters disingenuously tries walking back violent rhetoric against Trump (Fox News)
- Death-obsessed Senate Democrats defeat bid to protect abortion survivors (Free Beacon)
- Fox News, sued for $2.7 billion by Smartmatic, cancels highly rated “Lou Dobbs Tonight” (NBC News)
- Liz Cheney becomes latest GOP lawmaker who voted to impeach Trump to get censured in home state (Examiner)
The Latest on COVID-19
- Daily COVID cases fall below 100,000 for first time in three months (Daily Mail)
- What you need to know about side effects and risks of the vaccines (Examiner)
- Implicit threat of insurrection? BLM and antifa threaten to “burn down” Washington (Blaze Media)
- We’re shocked — shocked! UN finds “evidence of undeclared nuclear activities” in Iran (Disrn) | But hey, at least the U.S. won’t lift sanctions until Iran halts uranium enrichment (CBS News)
- Antony Blinken revokes Mike Pompeo’s terror label on Yemen’s Houthis (Politico)
Business & Economy
- Amazon loses effort to halt Alabama union drive; voting begins today (CNBC)
- U.S. goods and services trade deficit increased to $679 billion in 2020 — highest since 2008 (Politico)
- Nancy Pelosi will not be fined for violating her own security rules (Disrn)
- Biden flies home for Super Bowl weekend despite his administration’s warning against travel (Disrn)
- Same publishing company that axed Senator Josh Hawley will publish Hunter Biden book (Disrn)
Around the World
- Myanmar police warn tens of thousands of protesters to disperse or face force (Reuters)
- “The goal of these people was to make an attempt on my life”: Attempted coup foiled in Haiti (AFP)
- 95-year-old German woman charged with complicity in over 10,000 murders in WWII (Disrn)
“Non Compos Mentis” Award
- Jill Biden says in Super Bowl ad that you owe it to your dog to wear a mask, “even when walking” them
And she would know — she’s a “doctor”!
- Policy: The case for boycotting the 2022 Winter Olympics in China (Reason)
- Policy: In age of “reality czar,” preserving religious freedom more important than ever (Daily Signal)
- Humor: First female Super Bowl referee throws flag on play but won’t say what’s wrong (Babylon Bee)
For more of today’s editors’ choice headlines, visit Headline Report.
The Patriot Post is a certified ad-free news service, unlike third-party commercial news sites linked on this page, which may also require a paid subscription.
Publisher’s Note: Patriots, regarding our Disqus comments section on our website, in January we removed that platform due to liability and privacy concerns. However, at the bottom of every article, the “Comment” button will now take you to a page where you have the option to leave a comment for publication. We have reconstituted a “Reader Comments” section for Tuesday and Thursday on our homepage and in email editions, and our editors will review and select a few comments that best add to a topic conversation. Keep it civil, thoughtful, and brief.
Black History Myths Promoted by the Left — Thomas Sowell exposes revisionist black history perpetuated by people on the left.
Wealth Flight — States with high taxes and regulation are losing rich folks to low-burden states.
Leftmedia Attacks Tom Brady Over His Friendship With Trump — Sports journalist Clay Travis blasts USA Today’s garbage opinion piece excoriating Tom Brady for his “white privilege.”
Standing Up to the Mob? Count the Cost! — Baylor University professor Dr. Christina Crenshaw has come out against the Rainbow Mafia.
Antifa Unmasked: Inside America’s Anarchy — Andy Ngo is a journalist who has been on the front line exposing just what antifa is.
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.
Insight: “A man’s admiration for absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him.” —Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859)
Political futures: “If it feels now as though the post-Trump GOP will never arrive, American politics moves quickly. Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, leaving the GOP in utter disarray — and yet Reagan won a landslide six years later. The Tea Party sprang to life from nowhere in 2009 and had disappeared by 2016, subsumed into the Trump phenomenon. … The temptation to splinter from the GOP might be alluring to elements of both the populists and the Republican traditionalists, but this a dead end. The Republican Party is the only plausible electoral vehicle for any sort of right-of-center politics in America. It is worth fighting over, and it will be. That struggle is sure to be toxic and unpredictable — except for the fact that at the end of the day the Grand Old Party will still be standing.” —Rich Lowry
Observations: “Do you know who the most conspicuously absent critics of this transgender madness are? America’s fathers. Where are they? Where are the fathers who are willing to stand up and fight for their daughters to be able to compete in school sports with other girls? So far they’re AWOL. But unless millions of fathers — and mothers — unite in their anger, in five years there’s liable to be no female sports at all in our public high schools or colleges.” —Michael Reagan
For the record: “[Marjorie Taylor] Greene’s treatment stands in stark contrast to how Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat majority dealt with Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) repeated anti-Semitic outbursts. You may recall that even after a series of outrageous statements, House Democrats were unwilling to condemn Rep. Omar directly. They passed a meaningless resolution that condemned hate generally and never actually referenced Omar by name or her offensive statements. Anyone reading the resolution would have had no idea why it was even necessary. To be clear, intolerance and bigotry have no place in Congress. Period. But justice must be fair and equal. There should be no double standards.” —Gary Bauer
Upright: “The system of government that we have in this nation is not systemically racist; in fact, it is not racist at all. To say that this is a racist nation — that is not true. And when we write standards that point to that direction in any way, we are doing our students a disservice.” —Mark Robinson (R-NC), the state’s first black lieutenant governor
Non sequitur: “We know now we must confront and defeat political extremism, white supremacy, and domestic terrorism. For so many in our nation, this is a dark, dark time. So where do we turn? Faith.” —Joe Biden (Except “wokeness” and political theater don’t mix with faith.)
Fox guarding the henhouse: “I know sometimes we get consumed by numbers. It’s going to be $2.1 trillion, $1.9 trillion, $1.7 trillion. That is not the issue.” —Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders
Non compos mentis: “Even after vaccination social distancing, wearing masks are going to be essential.” —White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki (“The 15 days to slow the spread somehow turned into the rest of our lives.” —Lisa Boothe)
And last… “Just ask Brian Williams if AOC was at the Capitol. He was there with her!” —Ryan Fournier
For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.
For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.
“The Patriot Post” (https://patriotpost.us)